Leaked Documents: U.S. Framed Syria in Chemical Weapons Attack

[tinydancer]

Well, we handed them Libya. Perhaps they should have syria too.

Then Egypt. obama's blind devotion to al quaeda will hurt all of us.

This is crazy.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Well, we handed them Libya. Perhaps they should have syria too.

Let's see. Now I may be hungover big time but I can get it.

Obama gave them Egypt. Obama gave them Libya.

And he is hell bent on leather to now give the radicals Syria.

Your president is fucked up. He sides with terrorists.

He's not my president. He's just a narcissistic man who "leads" the US...meet the new boss. Just like the old boss.

 

[Ropey]

Well, we handed them Libya. Perhaps they should have syria too.

With President Obama's mindset?

There's no perhaps about it.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

Damn.

I just KNEW we should never have permitted that scumbag Iraqi dictator, Saddam Hussein, to send his WMDs into Syria.

Now the OTHER fucking pinhead has them and is using them.

Fuck.

This could get ugly.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

Where Did Syria?s Chemical Weapons Come From?

 

[Londoner]

Read the policy statement submitted to Clinton by the "Project For A New American Century" in the 90s. It's called "Rebuilding America's Defenses".

They make it very clear. Based on its energy reserves, and how crippling an oil disruption would be to the US and global economy, the Middle East is the most crucial geopolitical region on the planet. No other place can bring the US economy to a halt.

For this reason, the PNAC (lead by Wolfowitz, Chaney, Bolton, etc.,) implied that a certain amount of instability in the region is preferable because it gives the US a context for military intervention and the expansion of military bases.

The worst thing that could happen to the Rightwing vision of America's future is a reduction in Terrorism. Without The War on Terrorism, it becomes much harder for the US to intervene in a region that is absolutely crucial to its economy and global power.

This is why the Reagan and Bush regimes were built around national enemies. Because national security - saving the world and protecting the homeland - is how superpowers exert influence over foreign territory and assets.

Meaning: Syrian instability is not necessarily a bad thing for a segment of our political community.

 

[Connery]

Moved to proper forum

 

[tinydancer]

Well, we handed them Libya. Perhaps they should have syria too.

Let's see. Now I may be hungover big time but I can get it.

Obama gave them Egypt. Obama gave them Libya.

And he is hell bent on leather to now give the radicals Syria.

Your president is fucked up. He sides with terrorists.

He's not my president. He's just a narcissistic man who "leads" the US...meet the new boss. Just like the old boss.

That tune speaks to truth.

I thought at one point in time GW was going to be different. But then he got lyme disease and daddy took over.

And btw when you go down with lyme its a big deal. Them stepping in and not allowing the power structure to take over as it should scared the bee geeze out of me.

 

[tinydancer]

Read the policy statement submitted to Clinton by the "Project For A New American Century" in the 90s. It's called "Rebuilding America's Defenses".

They make it very clear. Based on its energy reserves, and how crippling an oil disruption would be to the US and global economy, the Middle East is the most crucial geopolitical region on the planet. No other place can bring the US economy to a halt.

For this reason, the PNAC (lead by Wolfowitz, Chaney, Bolton, etc.,) implied that a certain amount of instability in the region is preferable because it gives the US a context for military intervention and the expansion of military bases.

The worst thing that could happen to the Rightwing vision of America's future is a reduction in Terrorism. Without The War on Terrorism, it becomes much harder for the US to intervene in a region that is absolutely crucial to its economy and global power.

This is why the Reagan and Bush regimes were built around national enemies. Because national security - saving the world and protecting the homeland - is how superpowers exert influence over foreign territory and assets.

Meaning: Syrian instability is not necessarily a bad thing for a segment of our political community.

You are a looney tune.

You are insane.

Who's running the Arab Spring you asshole?

 

[The2ndAmendment]

Why is this in conspiracy theory, it's confirmed fact.

 

[dilloduck]

Read the policy statement submitted to Clinton by the "Project For A New American Century" in the 90s. It's called "Rebuilding America's Defenses".

They make it very clear. Based on its energy reserves, and how crippling an oil disruption would be to the US and global economy, the Middle East is the most crucial geopolitical region on the planet. No other place can bring the US economy to a halt.

For this reason, the PNAC (lead by Wolfowitz, Chaney, Bolton, etc.,) implied that a certain amount of instability in the region is preferable because it gives the US a context for military intervention and the expansion of military bases.

The worst thing that could happen to the Rightwing vision of America's future is a reduction in Terrorism. Without The War on Terrorism, it becomes much harder for the US to intervene in a region that is absolutely crucial to its economy and global power.

This is why the Reagan and Bush regimes were built around national enemies. Because national security - saving the world and protecting the homeland - is how superpowers exert influence over foreign territory and assets.

Meaning: Syrian instability is not necessarily a bad thing for a segment of our political community.

You are a looney tune.

You are insane.

Who's running the Arab Spring you asshole?

I'm guessing the CIA in conjunction with the intelligence agents from a few other countries. Who do you think is running it ?

 

[Ropey]

hmmm...

Arabs

 

[tinydancer]

Read the policy statement submitted to Clinton by the "Project For A New American Century" in the 90s. It's called "Rebuilding America's Defenses".

They make it very clear. Based on its energy reserves, and how crippling an oil disruption would be to the US and global economy, the Middle East is the most crucial geopolitical region on the planet. No other place can bring the US economy to a halt.

For this reason, the PNAC (lead by Wolfowitz, Chaney, Bolton, etc.,) implied that a certain amount of instability in the region is preferable because it gives the US a context for military intervention and the expansion of military bases.

The worst thing that could happen to the Rightwing vision of America's future is a reduction in Terrorism. Without The War on Terrorism, it becomes much harder for the US to intervene in a region that is absolutely crucial to its economy and global power.

This is why the Reagan and Bush regimes were built around national enemies. Because national security - saving the world and protecting the homeland - is how superpowers exert influence over foreign territory and assets.

Meaning: Syrian instability is not necessarily a bad thing for a segment of our political community.

You freaking liar. And every liar like you. We are your number one suppliers. CANADA.

Your assholes in Washington don't want us to apparently keep supplying you.

You apparently need to keep up the bullshit that you need the Middle East. You dont.

You liberals are such liars it's unreal.

 

[dilloduck]

hmmm...

Arabs

They certainly get a lot of air time. Muslim Brotherhood ?

 

[GHook93]

Leaked Documents: U.S. Framed Syria in Chemical Weapons Attack - YouTube

Just how low the US government will go for war check out this video to find out

I believe it was the rebels that perpetrated this hoax. They used the weapons SPECIFICALLY on civilians and not rebel soldiers! Good PR to show dead women and children.

AAASSSSad didn't need to gas them, but the rebels could compel the Western liberals to scream intervention chemical weapons were used by AAASSSad. ASSSSad had to know this!

 

[tinydancer]

Read the policy statement submitted to Clinton by the "Project For A New American Century" in the 90s. It's called "Rebuilding America's Defenses".

They make it very clear. Based on its energy reserves, and how crippling an oil disruption would be to the US and global economy, the Middle East is the most crucial geopolitical region on the planet. No other place can bring the US economy to a halt.

For this reason, the PNAC (lead by Wolfowitz, Chaney, Bolton, etc.,) implied that a certain amount of instability in the region is preferable because it gives the US a context for military intervention and the expansion of military bases.

The worst thing that could happen to the Rightwing vision of America's future is a reduction in Terrorism. Without The War on Terrorism, it becomes much harder for the US to intervene in a region that is absolutely crucial to its economy and global power.

This is why the Reagan and Bush regimes were built around national enemies. Because national security - saving the world and protecting the homeland - is how superpowers exert influence over foreign territory and assets.

Meaning: Syrian instability is not necessarily a bad thing for a segment of our political community.

You are a looney tune.

You are insane.

Who's running the Arab Spring you asshole?

I'm guessing the CIA in conjunction with the intelligence agents from a few other countries. Who do you think is running it ?

I'd run with CIA. I'm not a kinda conspiracy chick (ok ok I love art bell and george) but I only link to alex when he's on drudge.... honest

look something funky is going on here. Assad isn't your average crazy ME thug. I've studied him.

He is a very well educated individual who know what he is up against.

None of this passes the smell test.

 

[dilloduck]

You are a looney tune.

You are insane.

Who's running the Arab Spring you asshole?

I'm guessing the CIA in conjunction with the intelligence agents from a few other countries. Who do you think is running it ?

I'd run with CIA. I'm not a kinda conspiracy chick (ok ok I love art bell and george) but I only link to alex when he's on drudge.... honest

look something funky is going on here. Assad isn't your average crazy ME thug. I've studied him.

He is a very well educated individual who know what he is up against.

None of this passes the smell test.

This is exactly what kind of things that the CIA does. Just like Iran where they finally openly admitted their complicity in installing the shah. Who do you think got young Iranians all wired up just a little while back ?
It's no coincidence that Obama draws some silly red line about poison gas being used and guess what...poison gas gets used. The first few incidents don't create the desired effect, partially because the people killed were members of the Syrian army.
Finally we got enough gas used and enough video cameras in place to make the point.

So now we repeatedly claim that Assad did it and must be punished. Fine. How are we going to do that without causing more suffering to all the civilians ?

 

[MisterBeale]

Why is this in conspiracy theory, it's confirmed fact.

Any time there is a truth revealed that is a threat to establishment truth, you label it "conspiracy theory" to de-legitimize discussion about facts. The only thing that matters is shaping people's perceptions of reality.

THE STATE is the one that gets to establish perceptions.

If you need a refresher course in this, I suggest the books "1984" or "A Brave New World." If you have a problem with it? See a doctor, get your prescription for some SOMA and see a psychiatrist for any the discomfort you are feeling from any cognitive dissonance that may be resulting.

There is always American Idol, the Superbowl, and your local theater to ease your discomfort as well. Otherwise, yeah, this thread is in the right place, it is a conspiracy. Not much of a theory for those who are paying attention though.

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQB2cKVk7lE&list=PL3fO_W74_2eg1o7ft6k0gdLXzQs5x1xPv"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQB2cKVk7lE&list=PL3fO_W74_2eg1o7ft6k0gdLXzQs5x1xPv[/ame]

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dt-BAaPpq-E"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dt-BAaPpq-E[/ame]

 

[dilloduck]

The CIA’s Fake “Arab Spring” Becoming A Long, Hot Summer Of War


Obama Regime Courts World Conflagration: Imperial Overstretch Threatens as US, NATO Wage Five Wars: Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Libya, and Yemen – Are Syria, Iran, Lebanon Next?

Webster G. Tarpley, Ph.D.
TARPLEY.net
June 20, 2011

Washington DC, June 20- With the previously covert US bombing of Yemen out in the open, the Obama administration is now waging illegal wars against at least five countries – Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Libya, and Yemen. Given Obama’s absurd and Orwellian theory that acts of war from the air in the sea do not constitute hostilities under the terms of the War Powers Act, this list may be incomplete, and stealth US attacks may be going on elsewhere as well. As spring turns into summer along the banks of the Potomac, there are signs that Obama’s next move may be a trifecta of aggression – an attack on Syria which would also embroil the US in war with Iran and with the Hezbollah forces of Lebanon. Or, the Obama rampage may strike Pakistan. The “Arab Spring” of color revolutions, military coups, and destabilizations is moving inexorably towards a possible world conflagration whose outlines are already visible

The CIA?s Fake ?Arab Spring? Becoming A Long, Hot Summer Of War « TARPLEY.net

 

[IlarMeilyr]

There is NOTHING at all "confirmed" about the CLAIM that the US "framed" Syria.

The video does not constitute proof.

Indeed, the recent news makes it pretty clear that chemical weapons WERE used.

Of course, I suppose it's POSSIBLE that pinhead Assad muttered the truth when he said that HIS government isn't responsible.

Yeah.

The victims likely did it to themselves.