Harley Schlanger, www.LaRouchePAC.com, Drums of War vs Syria with NO EVIDENCE, Trail of False Flags to Keep US Fighting in Syria, White Hats US Support Al Queda, Terror in Russia with WW3 Dangers Putin to Russians, Counterstrike to Ships and Bases Dead Americans Syrians Russians Iranians, Dr Bill Deagle MD AAEM ACAM A4M, NutriMedical Report, www.NutriMedical.com, www.ClayandIRON.com, www.Deagle-Network.com,
TRUMPED UP WAR AGAINST SYRIA – World Affairs Brief Apr 13th Joel Skousen Report >>
–Pun intended! After acting on some good gut feelings that a further US presence in Syria was not in this country’s best interest, president Trump has allowed himself to be fooled a second time into attacking Syria based upon false assurances from US intelligence that Syria ordered a chlorine attack on the city of Douma, which by some reports killed women and children. The city of Douma was, until yesterday, the last bastion of the “Army of Islam” terror group, supported by the US and Saudi Arabia. This week I will cover the extensive evidence that US backed terrorists once again falsified a chemical attack, upon orders from Deep State actors, in order to manipulate Trump into backing away from his determination to pull US troops out of Syria.
Never before have I witnessed such a near unanimous outpouring of war fever by both political parties, despite the utter lack of evidence that Syria has done anything wrong. This is not insanity, nor stupidity, but rather the startling extent of the power of globalist leaders and their media puppets to manipulate a herd mentality among a huge swath of both politicians and political commentators to push their agenda, in complete disregard for the truth.
Not only has Trump reversed his better judgement, but he has become the boastful cheerleader for a new war against Syria, labeling mild-mannered Bashar al Assad an “animal,” and daring the Russians to try and stop his “smart” missiles. In fact, our Tomahawk cruise missiles are not that smart. Only about 50% hit their targets on the Syrian airbase in April of 2017 due to Russian jamming. The US is trying to cobble together a united front against Syria, but Germany and Italy are refusing to attack Syria. Britain and France are joining in this new coalition even though British PM Teresa May says that Britain cannot confirm Assad is responsible, as Breitbart reports.
Prime Minister Theresa May has indicated that more evidence is needed before blaming Bashar al-Assad for the latest chemical attack in Syria and taking military action against his regime. Following phone calls with U.S. President Donald Trump and French premier Emmanuel Macron, No 10 [Downing Street] said the international community “needed to respond” but did not confirm Assad was responsible at this stage.
Let’s be clear. May is telling the world that the West “needs to respond” even before having the evidence to confirm who is responsible. But even her own government would have nothing to do with her diplomatic admissions of no evidence yet: The UK’s Ambassador to the UN, Karen Pierce, openly disagrees with the Prime Minister’s position, claiming: “We as the United Kingdom believe the Syrian regime is responsible for these latest attacks.” Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson attacked Russia’s actions at the UN and also appeared to blame Assad’s regime.
French President Macron claims to have “proof” but he’s simply relying on the statements of Army of Islam allies in the war zone, like the notoriously biased White Helmets group, who helped falsify the evidence of chemical attacks last year.
The claims about this attack are all over the map and are highly exaggerated. They range from 40 victims to over 1000. That’s way too imprecise to be accurate. All of these reports originate from supporters of Islamic terrorists in Douma—the “Army of Islam,” allied with al Qaeda. Rebel groups have falsified videos and photos of victims of chemical attacks before, so everything that originates from them is suspect. According to the BBC, which cites only anti-Assad forces, there were two attacks on Saturday that are claimed to be chemical attacks, amidst mostly conventional bombardments.
Activists [that means biased pro-rebel people embedded within the terrorists] say Douma came under intense aerial bombardment on Saturday.
True. Douma was the last bastion of anti-Assad rebel groups in the suburb of Ghouta. All the rest have been defeated or fled. It was controlled by Jaysh al-Islam (Army of Islam) one of the most brutal of all the Islamic radicals paraded as “moderate” by the US. Jaysh al-Islam has captured and held hundreds of civilian hostages from surrounding areas and used them as human shields against Assad’s attacks and to blame Assad for civilian casualties.
Activists from the Violations Documentation Center (VDC), which records alleged violations of international law in Syria, reported two separate incidents of bombs believed to contain toxic substances being dropped by the Syrian Air Force.
The first occurred at approximately 16:00 (13:00 GMT) and saw a bakery on Omar Ibn Al-Khattab street in north-western Douma targeted, the VDC said. It cited a rescue worker from the Syria Civil Defence as saying he smelt chlorine in the air after the strike, but that he could not determine its source.
This is a telling statement because if it came from the explosion of the bakery, it would have been obvious from what direction the smell was coming from. However, it is a common tactic to set off a chemical explosion at the same time as a convention explosion so as to blame the attacking side.
“We later discovered the bodies of people who had suffocated from toxic gases. They were in closed spaces, sheltering from the barrel bombs, which may have caused their quick death as no-one heard their screams,” he added.
This doesn’t make sense. People in enclosed spaces are not the ones most subject to an airborne release of chemical gases. They are the last to experience the effects and it is gradual enough that none are trapped inside. At the first sign of smell, they tend to flee the enclosure.
The VDC said the second incident took place not far to the east at approximately 19:30, when Martyrs’ Square was hit. At 19:45, more than 500 patients – most of them women and children – were brought to medical facilities with symptoms indicative of exposure to a chemical agent, according to the Syria Civil Defence and the Syrian American Medical Society (SAMS), a relief organisation that supports hospitals.
Both organizations are anti-Assad groups working with the rebels, and the “medical facilities” they mention are makeshift aid stations run by the rebels where it appears only falsified victims have been filmed. Russian specialists at the site had found no traces of chemical weapons or any victims treated for chemical poisoning.
The VDC said 25 people died as a result of the first strike on the bakery and that another 20 died as a result of the second on Martyrs’ Square.
The Syria Civil Defence and SAMS said rescue workers found 42 people dead in their homes. One person was declared dead on arrival at a hospital, and another six died while receiving treatment, they added. Rescuers were prevented from searching for more bodies by strong odours that caused breathing difficulties.
Then the numbers keep changing:
The UOSSM initially reported that 70 people were confirmed dead. On Monday, it revised down the figure to at least 42, but said it was expected to rise.… A joint statement by the medical relief organization Syrian American Medical Society ( SAMS ) and the civil defense, which operates in rebel-held areas, said 49 people had died but different organizations have released conflicting reports on the numbers killed and injured. Pro-opposition Ghouta Media Center (GMC) put the death toll at 75, and said that more than 1,000 people had been injured and some reports from the town suggest that the death toll is in the hundreds.
Why would Assad risk bringing on the entire wrath of the world by using chemical weapons on a Bakery full of civilians? This just doesn’t make sense. And why would there only be 20 victims of a marketplace chemical weapons attack and yet many more (42) in homes which would be more shielded from the gases? This story has all the indications of a fraud. Here are more details from Jake Morphonios on the staging of evidence in Douma:
The al-Qaeda affiliate group, Jaish al-Islam, has admitted to using chlorine gas to massacre dozens of people in Aleppo. This same group killed civilians in Douma. Together with the fake humanitarian group, the White Helmets (which has been caught staging death scenes/videos in the past), Jaish terrorists took the dead bodies of children and staged the bodies in multiple locations to create propaganda photos/video to shock and outrage the public – and to frame President Bashar al Assad and the Syrian military for the crime.
These photos are evidence that the “chemical attack” being blamed on the Assad government to justify western military invasion is not what it seems.
In the above link, he shows two photos of individual dead children, and then a third photo where the bodies have been moved and posed along with a group of other dead children to make a more grizzly scene. David Collins comments on the 3rd photo as follows:
My suspicions were aroused when I saw how closely packed the bodies were. It looks like they were moved to a bombed out building for dramatic effect. The children with wet hair may have actually been used in the medical treatment videos then killed and used in gas attack videos.
Here’s another telltale question that implies staging: Why are there no dead bodies of terrorists who are being bombed and shelled by Assad’s forces? Why no adult male casualties? Is the Syrian army intelligence on targeting so bad that they ONLY target civilians?
The answer may lie in another statement by a Newsweek reporter, quoting the most infamous of false flag, pro-rebel UN NGOs, the notorious White Helmets:
Volunteer rescue service the White Helmets tweeted images showing bodies lying lifeless in a basement. It claimed the death toll was likely to rise. “Seventy people suffocated to death and hundreds are still suffocating,” Raed al-Saleh, head of the White Helmets, told Al Jazeera.
Newsweek goes on to confuse the issue even further by reporting that, “According to the GMC, the victims were killed by nerve agent Sarin, which was dropped in a barrel bomb from a helicopter.”
This doesn’t make sense either. Chlorine gas reactions are completely different from Sarin. So, which is it?
This isn’t the first time the rebels have engaged in falsifying a chemical attack in order to blame Syria. The original gas attack in Damascus in 2013 that was a prelude to the US “no fly zone” order in Syria was also staged.
On January 25, 2013, CyberwarNews published the story of a Malaysian hacker called JAsIrX who posted hacked emails to various file sharing websites from the UK-based private military contracting company, Britam Defence…
In the hacked emails, senior executives at Britam discussed a contract offered to them by Qatari intelligence, who would pay them an “enormous” sum to coordinate anti-Assad rebels to carry out a chemical weapons attack against Syrian civilians. Qatar also wanted Britam to deploy their Ukrainian personnel to impersonate Russians and have them video the victims. The attacks would then be blamed on the Assad government and be used to create a pretext for the Western military intervention against the Syrian regime that we’re seeing now…
Qatari intelligence has been working very closely with the CIA and the Mossad to stoke civil unrest in Syria by arming and coordinating vicious mercenary groups affiliated with al-Qaeda.
As I covered last year in the WAB, the April 2017 chemical attack blamed on Assad (that led to Trump’s first cruise missile attack on Syria, was actually a conventional attack on a rebel held warehouse that contained chemical weapons (unbeknownst to everyone but the Syrians and the Russians). US intelligence helped to later fabricate evidence of what they claimed was a Syrian chemical weapons shell, but military analysts could easily tell this was simply an artillery shell casing in a small crater that had been run over by a truck. Chemical weapons shells explode outward and are never crushed inward as depicted by the photo.
I believe that many of these women and children victims come from the hostages the Douma based terrorists have been holding as human shields—many in underground caves without proper ventilation. They used charcoal burners which give off carbon monoxide which is deadly. Moon Of Alabama is an investigative website that filed this report:
Yesterday’s alleged ‘gas attack’ in east Ghouta likely never happened [at least as claimed]. A video shows a number of presumably dead kids in a basement or dark apartment. Another video shows an undamaged yellow gas cylinder which, we are told, was dropped from some unseen helicopter and crashed through a concrete roof. We do not know when or where these videos were made.
Besides those videos of murky origin we hear claims from two ‘western’ paid anti-Syrian propaganda organizations, the White Helmets and SAMS, which claim hundreds were wounded in a chlorine attack.
Interestingly the MI6 outlet in Coventry, the Syrian Observatory For Human Rights (SOHR), does not confirm a ‘gas’ incident. In its version of events some 40 people died after their shelter collapsed:
The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights issued a higher death toll, saying at least 80 people were killed in Douma, including around 40 who died from suffocation. But it said the suffocations were the result of shelters collapsing on people inside them.
Main stream media, which have quoted SOHR for years, now ignore it and report of a ‘chemical attack’ as if it were a proven reality.
All this happens at a moment when the Syrian army is victorious and Trump had just announced that he wants the U.S. to leave Syria. We noted that something similar happened exactly a year ago when similar illogical claims were made:
We are told to believe that each time the U.S. pulls back from the war on Syria the Syrian government is responding with a ‘chemical attack’ that pulls the U.S. back in.
Over the last month Russia has several times warned that such fake gas attacks were being planned by the so-called ‘rebels’. It also warned the U.S. that any strike it might take in ‘retaliation’ of such a fake attack would endanger Russian troops and installations in Syria. The Russian said they will respond to any severe U.S. attack with a strike against U.S. missile launching platform – be they jets or ships.
Israel immediately tried to further escalate the situation. Last night it hit the T4 airport in Homs with 8 cruise missiles launched from Israeli planes flying over Lebanon. The T4 airport is in the middle of Syria. Some Iranian drones are stationed there next to Syrian planes and helicopters to help in the fight against ISIS in east Syria. The damage was relatively light, but the Israeli strike requires a response. Russia had so far not commented on any Israeli strikes on Syria. This time it was [the] first to condemn the attack. It will no longer hinder Syria or Iran should they decide to launch a counterattack on Israel or its interests.
Douma, where the alleged ‘gas attack’ happened, is now accessible.
That is because the Syrian Army finally took the city back. And the residents had a celebration, so the Jaysh al-Islam group that had kept the city prisoner for months did not have local support except for activists working for the globalist terror agenda. The chemical attack by the rebels was an apparent last ditch move to try and save them from having to flee. That’s likely why many of the hostages were killed, since they couldn’t take them with them, and would be more useful to them as dead “victims” of a chemical attack.
The terrorists of Jaish al-Islam are being evacuated to Idleb governorate. Russian military police entered and did not find any indication for the alleged chemical incident. The OPCW or some other organization could investigate the situation. This would as usual take several weeks.
The Drumbeat of War: It was quite shocking this week to see how strangely unanimous the establishment was in condemning Assad and calling for a full scale war with Syria based on an incident that posed no threat to the United States in any way—even if the chemical claims were true. This had all the signs of a setup. Like lemmings headed for the cliff, all political leaders and pundits on both sides of the aisle were marching to the same drumbeat and demanding war—all based on each one piggy-backing on someone’s else’s unverified claim of Syria culpability.
After Russia vetoed a US draft resolution at the UN Security Council Tuesday that would have established an independent investigation into the suspected use of chemical weapons in Syria, and blamed Assad before the investigation began, US Ambassador Nikki Haley wailed,
“When the people of Douma, along with the rest of the international community, looked to this council to act, one country stood in the way. History will record that on this day, Russia chose protecting a monster over the lives of the Syrian people.”
Russia did so because UN agencies have long been complicit in hiding the evidence of the rebels possessing chemical weapons (courtesy of the Deep State). Why give the UN the go ahead to falsify it again, especially under the pre-determined conclusion that Assad was guilty?
Neocon/globalist Sen. Lindsay Graham has already convicted Assad and called him a war criminal. Democrat Jim Hines, called for a bigger riskier war against Syria, and by implication on Iran and Russia as well.
Even the pretended conservative cable news network, Fox News, was parroting the establishment line. Fox’s Sean Hannity was one of the worst, repeating every false charge against Assad, and bringing on two neocons as yes-men to agree with him, including Oliver North, veteran of earlier conspiracies in government like Iran-Contra. There was one exception to all this war mania and that was the courageous Tucker Carlson, on Fox. He alone stood against the war fever and had a brilliant monologue on why attacking Syria is a bad idea. This verbal essay was repeated for 3 days, with additions each day, after Trump’s vow to attack Syria:
1. How do we know Assad is responsible for the Attack? How could we know that so soon after the attack? Answer: We don’t really know Syria was responsible—the rebels have chemical weapons. (He erroneously says that “both sides have chemical weapons” but the US certified that Assad gave up his chemical weapons under international supervision in 2014.)
2. Why would Assad do this, knowing that it would hurt his own interests? How would it make the US safer by attacking Syria? These seem like reasonable questions, but policy makers are not asking them. They are telling us to “shut up and just obey.”
Tucker has been excoriated by the establishment media ever since, panicking that this second most popular voice on Fox is reaching millions with questions the establishment doesn’t dare confront. Jennifer Rubin of the Washington Post screamed by tweet, “...he is insane. Fox News is not a news organization. That is all.” So, if you don’t tow the establishment line, you aren’t a true journalist. That’s what this is coming to.
Noah Rothman of the Left-wing Commentary magazine said Tucker’s statements were “undiluted Russian propaganda.” Carlson confronted Rothman directly Wednesday night on his show and Rothman tried to deny what he said—which Carlson promptly corrected by playing the tape of his tweet. Then Rothman tried to defend the guilt of Assad by citing the bias NGOs above, but Carlson didn’t let him off that easy.
This takes courage to diverge from such a big push among all other pundits and Carlson is certainly going to generate some heat at Fox headquarters to silence him. That will be hard to do since Tucker is careful to not come to any conspiratorial conclusions. He claims he is only asking questions that deserve answers. As Glenn Greenwald pointed out to Carlson, the media, who attacks Donald Trump incessantly, took a 24 hour break from attacks and praised him lavishly after bombing Syria last April. They even called him “presidential” –as if, as he told Tucker, “that’s what presidents do—bomb other countries” that can’t defend themselves. Further Tucker made the following key points:
1. Syria will become as bad as Libya if we destroy the government and allow radical IS terrorists to rule.
2. The timing of this alleged chemical attack is suspicious: There was a [rebel] chemical attack in Syria, days after Trump announced no regime change in Syria. This attack came days after Trump was demanding to pull US troops out of Syria. Last week in the WAB I covered the full court press of his advisors who finally got him to “give them more time.”
That apparently wasn’t enough, so the Deep State gave orders for another chemical attack to be blamed on Syria. The New York Times headline said it all: “As Trump Seeks Way Out of Syria, New Attack Pulls Him Back In.” You can’t tell me this was a coincidence.
All of this rush to judgment is based on the totally erroneous idea that Bashar al-Assad is a vicious and heartless criminal leader, as the UK government spokesperson says:
“[The leaders] agreed that reports of a chemical weapons attack in Syria were utterly reprehensible and if confirmed, represented further evidence of the Assad regime’s appalling cruelty against its own people and total disregard for its legal obligations not to use these weapons… The UK will “continue working closely together and with international partners to ensure that those responsible were held to account”, the statement adds.
This is a tough case to make for those who know Assad. He’s known as a mild mannered, Western trained eye doctor, married to a British citizen. He’s anything but an “animal” or a “monster.” Let me quickly review with you the logic of why Assad would never have done these attacks:
1. Chemical weapons are broad area weapons and have no use in a mixed military-civilian target area. The spread of the chemicals cannot be controlled or limited to a small area.
2. Assad is no fool. How many times has the West used the claim of chemical weapons use by Syria as a pretext for attack? —At least 3 times. Are to believe that Assad would do it again and hand the US the justification to attack his country, especially when the alleged attack failed to kill even one of the terrorists in Douma? No leader is that stupid.
The Big Question: Will the Russian let the US attack with impunity?
Last year, the Russians did not use their high tech missile defenses to defend against the US tomahawk missile strike, though they did use some GPS jamming techniques. They likely wanted to document how those missile would perform if any or all of the 3 guidance systems were partially blocked. Out of the 59 fired, less than 50 reached the Syrian airbase and of those only about half hit their targets precisely—not a good record.
Although the Russians have not made any formal statement threatening an escalation of the war should the US attack, they have likely done so in private communications. One public comment by the Russian envoy to Lebanon, however, was direct and to the point, as RT.com quotes:
The Russian military reserves the right to shoot down missiles and destroy launch sites in the event of US aggression against Syria, Moscow’s envoy to Lebanon Alexander Zasypkin has warned. Zasypkin stressed that “the Russian forces will confront any US aggression on Syria, by intercepting the missiles and striking their launch pads,” al-Manar TV website reported, citing the envoy.
Speaking to the channel, the ambassador also said that the allegations of a chemical attack were being used to justify “offensive acts” in Syria, while “the US and Western escalation against Syria will lead to a major crisis.”
While the ambassador to Lebanon certainly doesn’t have the official authority of Moscow, he wouldn’t have made those kinds of definitive threats if Moscow disapproved. This is likely a “trial balloon” sent up by Moscow to the US indirectly telling Trump that the US wasn’t going to get a free ride on this strike.
In any case, the media have all picked up on this, and as I write this on Thursday afternoon, the White House is suddenly becoming ambivalent and more cautious about the certainty of a strike—as compared to earlier this week when it was a “done deal.” Now Trump is holding out the possibility at a Syria strike is “not imminent.” Trump tweeted on Thursday that an attack on Syria “could be very soon or not so soon at all.”
That’s a major change from Wednesday, when the US alerted the European Air Traffic Control agency to issue a warning about impending military threats in the Middle East within 72 hours to all affected airlines.
Trump has also toned down his bravado about a Russian response. Just after the RT article surfaced, Trump tweeted: “Russia vows to shoot down any and all missiles fired at Syria,” Trump wrote. “Get ready Russia, because they will be coming, nice and new and ‘smart!’”
But on Thursday, he clearly was not so sure about anything and in a news conference in the White House intimated that “no decision has yet been made.” The US is clearly worried about a Russian response to this threatened attack on Syria and I think the target list is being rapidly revised to limit the strike.
Gen. Mattis also backtracked in his press statement, concentrating only on retaliating for the chemical attack and not attempting to “take sides in the civil war.” Of course, that latter point is a lie since the US long ago took sides on the civil war by pouring millions of dollars into arms and training for the anti-Assad rebels.
The US claims they are going to target Assad’s chemical weapons stockpiles, but since he no longer has them, the US will simply hit some key supply bases and claim they contained chemical weapons. Media pundits on Fox, CNN and others were complaining that Trump already tried hitting a Syrian air base supposedly responsible for the chemical weapons attack last year and it “didn’t do any good.” “It didn’t stop Syria from using them again.”
Notice how they are assuming without evidence that Syria is behind both attacks and not the US-backed rebels. But the implication is that Trump must do something more this time, since the last attack did not deter him.
But that puts Mattis in a tough spot. The US won’t back down completely on this, but it means they will have a tough time hitting more targets than they hit last time, while not crossing the threshold that will trigger a Russian defensive response, and shoot down US cruise missiles and perhaps the ships (launch platforms).
Another complication is the fact that UN inspectors are supposed to arrive in Douma on Saturday to begin their inspection of the claims. That may delay any attacks, at least in those areas around Damascus. What Russia rightly fears is that the Jaysh al-Islam backers of the false chemical attack will be busy training and pushing dozens of witnesses to come forward with testimony about a chemical attack. Of course there will be contradictions which an unbiased investigator would detect, but the team being sent is looking for evidence of guilt and will overlook any contradictions.
I think there will be some kind of cruise missile strike by the US in the next week or so, but it, like the first, will be limited. Earlier this week the CIA and the Pentagon issued a map of 22 of Assad’s key sites, including bases where Shia militias predominate, as well as some Russian troops. But gone are the targets at bases in Humus and Tartus where Russians are located, now that the Russians have warned the US.
In fact, the Russian fleet has left Tartus and dispersed along the coast to avoid being hit in port and to be in a better position to counterattack the US if attacked by US missiles. I suspect the US will concentrate on Iranian militia bases, and Syrian military bases, which may not be able to defend themselves. The target list is reportedly down to 8, and Assad is shifting weapons and aircraft to Russian bases which won’t likely be hit.
I believe the Russians are partially bluffing. They hope to intimidate the US into not striking, but if they do strike, which is still likely, I don’t think the Russians will retaliate beyond jamming and/or shooting down some missiles—nothing that might be viewed as a “casus belli” for WWIII, like directly attacking a US ship and killing sailors. Still, the US is worried enough about what Russia might do that they are rethinking this attack idea.
With it all, this is a sad day in American History when a US president can order an attack on another foreign country without a declaration of war, without any authorization by Congress, and based upon totally fabricated assumptions. The US is saying we have “high confidence,” that Syria did this, but that means “We don’t have any proof, but want to cast blame anyway.” And, yes, the entire establishment world is colluding on this, which tells us how much pressure the globalist controllers can apply across the political and information spectrum of the world. Sure, the Gulf of Tonkin incident was also fabricated to justify the escalation into Vietnam, but at least the enemy was real, and not Trumped-up as in Syria.
Podcast: Download | Embed
Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Android | Email |