This concise video reveals key evidence the main-stream media isn’t telling you about Syria, and exposes the weak argument that the Obama administration is making to drag us into another war. A war that will be paid for by borrowing money from the Federal reserve, and repaid by future generations of debt slaves.
The complete transcript follows
In this video we’re going to show you evidence that the Syrian government was framed in the chemical weapons attack of August 21st 2013. We’re going to explain why they were framed, and we are going to propose a course of action.
Use of chemical weapons on civilians in the Syrian conflict was a crime against humanity. As such, it should be the subject of real criminal investigation, and those responsible should be brought to justice. However, if the US and the NATO have their way, that’s not gonna happen. In their book, a simple accusation is as good as a conviction. And therefore, there’s no point providing any real evidence. Let’s just skip right to the missile strike! Shall we?
This isn’t really surprising to anyone who has been paying attention though. The United States has had Syria and Iran in their crosshairs for long time. The plans for these wars have been in works for over a decade.
Wesley Clark, 4-Star General: March 2, 2007
About 10 days after 9/11 I went to the Pentagon and I saw secretary Rumsfeld and Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz. I went downstairs just to say hello to some of the people on the joint staff who had used to work for me and one of the generals called me in and he said, “Sir you gotta come in and talk to me a second. I said, – “We’ll you’re too bus.!” “No, no” he says, “We’ve made the decision we are going to war with Iraq.” This was on or about the 20th of September. I said – “We’re going to war with Iraq? Why?” He said, “I don’t know.” (Laughter) He said, “I guess they don’t know what else to do.” So I said, “well did the find some information connecting Saddam to Al Qaeda?” He said, “No, no,” he says, “There’s nothing new that way. They have just made the decision to go to war with Iraq.” He said, “I guess it’s like we don’t know what to do about terrorists, but we got a good military we can take down governments.” And he said, “I guess if the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem has to look like a nail.” So, I came back to see him a few weeks later, and by that time we were bombing in Afghanistan. I said, “Are we still going to war with Iraq?” And he said, “oh it’s worse than that.” He reached over on his desk- he picked up a piece of paper, and he said, “I just got this down from the upstairs” meaning the Secretary of Defense office, “today.” And he said, “this is a memo that describes how we are going to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and finishing off Iran.”
There are three primary psychological techniques that the powers of any given era use to build up public support needed to take a country to war.
1. Create the impression that the aggressor is actually acting in self-defense or in defense of a helpless nation. This can be done by exaggerating the danger posed by an enemy, fabricating an attack and blaming it on enemy, or intentionally provoking the enemy into a response.
2. Build up a crusade mythology, one that presents that aggressor as fighting for a higher ideal or for the good of all humanity. In our current era, the meme of spreading democracy, fighting terrorism or defending human rights are the most commonly used.
3. Dehumanize the enemy. War is mass murder. Therefore, presenting the enemy as evil, barbaric or subhuman is essential unless you want your citizens or soldiers questioning the morality of their actions. This pattern is often supported and augmented by sense of cultural or racial superiority. The way Islamophobia is capitalized on to build moral support for this phony war on terror is a perfect example. The US government has a long and illustrious history of using these techniques, and they keep using them because they work.
Patrick Clawson, Washington Institute: September 21, 2012
I frankly think that crisis initiation is really tough, and it’s very hard for me to see how the United States president can get us to war with Iran, which leads me to conclude that if in fact compromise is not company, that the traditional way of America gets to war is what would be best for US interest. Some people might think that Mr. Roosevelt wanted to get us to World War II, as David mentioned, you may recall we had to wait for Pearl Harbor. Some people might think Mr. Wilson wanted to get us into World War I; you may recall he had to wait for the Lusitania episode. Some people might think that Mr. Johnson wanted to send troops to Vietnam; you may recall we had to wait for the Gulf of Tonkin episode. We didn’t go to war with Spain until the USS Maine exploded. And may I point out that Mr. Lincoln did not feel he could call out the Federal army until Fort Sumter was attacked, which is why he ordered the commander of Fort Sumter to do exactly that thing which the South Carolinians had said would cause an attack. So, if in fact the Iranians aren’t going to compromise, it would be best to somebody else started the war. One can combine other means of pressure with sanctions. I mentioned that explosion on August 17th. We could step up the pressure. I mean look people, Iranian submarines periodically go down. Someday one of them might not come up. Who would know why? (Laughter) We can do a variety of things if we wish to increase the pressure. I am not advocating that, but I am just suggesting that this is not a either/or proposition- it’s just sanctions have to succeed or other things. We are in the game of using covert means against the Iranians. We could get nastier with that.
The United States has been trying to get Iran under its thumb for a long time. In 1953, the CIA and the UK’s MI6 organized a coup that toppled the democratically elected prime minister of Iran, Mohammad Mosaddegh. It then installed the Shah as their puppet. The Shah, who just also happened to be a brutal dictator, ruled until 1979 when he was overthrown during the Iranian revolution. The US didn’t like that, so they tried to take Iran down by arming and funding Saddam Hussein against the Iranians. This is during the Iranian Iraq war, which is also sometimes referred to as the first Persian Gulf war, which lasted from 1980 to 1988. The US continued to support for Iraq even though they knew full well that he was using chemical weapons against Iranians. This now declassified, top-secret memo from November 4, 1983, documents chemical weapons used by Iraq and discusses Iran’s likely reactions. Here’s the second memo written on February 24, 1984 to the director of central intelligence, predicting that Iraq will use nerve agents against Iran. Note that the source of these documents is foreign-policy magazine, which is an extremely pro-establishment publication by any standards. In spite of this, friendly diplomatic relations between the US and Saddam continued. This video of Donald Rumsfeld, then special envoy of President Ronald Reagan meeting Saddam, was taken on December 20, 1983 which was after the first memo. This means that those running the US knew Saddam was killing people with poison gas, and they didn’t care. Taking down Iran was more important to US government than protecting human rights, and it still is. Saddam failed to defeat Iran, so the US switched tactics. For a long time they tried to go after Iran directly by accusing them of building nuclear weapons in order to justify military strikes. However, this line of worn-out propaganda didn’t gain any traction, largely because the US government had lost most of its credibility in their trumped up claims about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction. You can only cry wolf so many times before people start rolling their eyes. Their agenda fell apart completely when elements within the CIA and Mossad came forward stating that there was no evidence that Iran even intended to build such a weapon. Not to be deterred by little details like the truth, these chicken-hawk new cons decided to go after Syria to get Iran. They know that Syria and Iran have a mutual defense agreement, and if NATO forces enter Syria, Iran will be drawn into the fight, and then these little deranged psychopaths in suits will get their war. They still have to maintain appearances though. We wouldn’t want people to think that this is about controlling the world’s oil supply and protecting the petro-dollar, would we? No, no, put those crazy conspiracy theories out of your mind. We’re here to spread democracy and freedom, to protect human rights with 50 caliber machine guns and drone strikes. If it were obvious the US was attacking Syria, it would be very difficult to obtain international or domestic support. So rather than attacking Syria directly, the US and NATO have been running a proxy war, by arming and funding the Syrian rebels. To obscure the source of this support, US allies in the regions of Qatar and Saudi Arabia have been used to purchase weapons and route them to Syria via Turkey. This pattern of arming and funding dictators or extremist groups, to get them to take down non-cooperative governments, has been a key element in America’s foreign policy ever since the creation of the CIA after World War II.
We also have a history or moving in and out of Pakistan. I mean, let’s remember here, the people we are fighting today, we funded 20 years ago.
Let’s not just talk about this in a general sense. Who is running that operation?
US National Security Advisor Brzezinski flew to Pakistan to set about rallying resistance. He wanted to arm the mujahideen without revealing America’s role. On the Afhgan Border near the Khyber Pass, he urged the soldiers of [unintelligible] to redouble their efforts. “We know of their deep belief in god, and we are confident that their struggle will succeed. That land over there is yours. You will go back to it one day because your fight will prevail, and you will have your homes, your mosques back again. Because your cause is right and god is on your side.”
Just in case you are thinking this is irrelevant to our current situation, we should point out that Zbigniew Brzezinski is an acknowledged friend and mentor to Barrack Obama.
He has proven to be an outstanding friend and somebody who I have learned an immense amount from, and for him to support me in this campaign and then be willing to come out here to Iowa, is a testimony to his generosity. So everybody could please give Dr Brzenzinski another round of applause.
History proves that these dictators and extremists that the US government installs are disposable. And the very qualities that made them useful against the enemies are later used to demonize them, thereby providing the justification for foreign invasion. This should be taken as a warning to those rebel groups that the US is using to destabilize Syria right now.
Now who are these Syrian rebels, this free Syrian Army the US government vocally supports? Well while the west is trying to paint them as local freedom fighters, the reality is that the conflict has attracted foreign jihadists from multiple countries, many of whom openly declare their intent to replace the Assad’s secular government with Sharia law. Numerous mainstream reports are already surfacing of Sharia-motivated atrocities committed by the rebels. These reports are backed up by a video footage that’s far too graphic for me to show here. If you do a Google search, you can find videos of men being beheaded and women being shot. If the US government isn’t deterred by these details, they still want these extremists to topple the Syrian government. Funny isn’t it- how they require FBI background checks to buy a deer rifle in states, but if you’re a foreign jihadist trying to overthrow a government that Washington isn’t on good terms with, they’ll send you rocket launchers and heavy artillery with no questions asked. And how do you reconcile the fact that the US is fighting religious extremists in Afghanistan, calling them terrorists, while supporting the same groups in Syria, calling them freedom fighters. It doesn’t make sense at all if you take US government’s propaganda at face value.
On March 19, 2013 sarin gas was used in Syria, near Aleppo. Israel and the US promptly blamed the Syrian government for the attacks, even though many of those were killed were Syrian government soldiers. Obama began talking about the event as a red line that has been crossed, and warmongers began sabre rabliting in earnest. However, the UN insisted on investigating the issue themselves, and on May 6, 2013 UN investigator, Carla Del Ponte, went public, stating that evidence from their investigation indicated that it was the Syrian rebels who had used the sarin gas, and that there was no indication that the Syrian government had launched any chemical attacks whatsoever. Russia’s UN ambassador Vitaly Churkin agreed with Del Ponte after Russian experts visited the location where the projectile struck and took their own samples of the material from the site. The samples were then analyzed at a Russian laboratory certified by the organization for the prohibition of chemical weapons. According to the lab results they found that the presence of hexogen utilized as an opening charge, which is not used as a standard chemical munitions, pointed to the attack being launched by the rebels. Rather then cover this development, the mainstream media did what they always do when they don’t want the public to look at something; they simply change the subject. Now of course the fact that the US-backed rebels that attempted to frame the Syrian government in order to build support for a NATO invasion would be bad enough, they were trying to start a war of aggression. But let’s remember, that sarin gas was in fact used, and the United States is supporting those who use it. That makes them an accomplice. You would think that the US would withdraw its support after such an event, but it didn’t. In fact it increased it. In July, the US began openly discussing “kinetic strikes” against Syria as if their lies hadn’t been exposed. This of course brings us to the attack on August 21, 2013 where they attempted once again to frame the Syrian government for the use of sarin gas, and once again they got caught.
The first wave of media coverage tried to pin the attack on the Syrian government, and the US and France instantly came up condemning Assad. By August 24, the Pentagon had already announced plans for missile strikes, but even as they did, the story was already falling apart. The Syrian army came forward that same day with footage to back up their report that they have uncovered a massive chemical weapons cache in rebel tunnels in the Damascus suburb of Jobar. This is the exact neighborhood where the chemical attack took place. Then witnesses came forward with this video footage showing the rebels preparing what appears to be crude chemical weapons rockets for an attack. If you look closely these rockets, you’ll see that the device shown is clearly improvised. This isn’t a mass-produced military-grade munition like Assad would have; this is home made. Reuters acknowledges in this article that photos of this rocket matching description in this clip are currently being examined by experts. These experts say that the rockets and the pictures that they have are “relatively basic with crude stabilizing fins.” They also said they “bear a striking resemblance to devices found elsewhere in Syria in the aftermath of much smaller suspected attacks attacks.” If that’s the case, and if the UN and Russia have evidence that the rebels were ones who were behind the first chemical weapons attack back in March, then what does that tell us? Let’s put this case together as a District Attorney might when deciding who to prosecute for crime. Let’s establish motive, means, opportunity and evidence. Theses are the elements you need to reach a guilty verdict in a court.
Who had motive? Not the Syrian government. The Syrian military has been making strong gains in the past few months. They don’t need to use chemical weapons. Furthermore, they knew full well that the US and NATO were looking for any excuse to invade, so the last thing they would want to do is give them that excuse. The rebels, on the other hand, do have motive. They knew they could count on the western media to spin the story in their favor, and that’s exactly what’s happened. But did the rebels have the means and the opportunity? Actually yes, they did. On May 31, 2013 security forces in Turkey found a 2 kilogram cylinder filled with sarin gas after searching the homes of Syrian militants. On July 7, the Syrian army went public about a chemical lab that they have found belonging to the rebels in the city of Banias. In terms of evidence, everything that has been released to public so far points to the rebels being behind the attack. If the US government has any real evidence to support their side of the story, why don’t they produce it? The so-called intel document that they released on August 30, to justify their position, doesn’t contain any evidence at all. It’s just a statement of opinion. They’re talking about bombing a nation, taking us into a war that will most likely spin out of control drawing in Iran, Russia and China just based on their word. Both Russia and China have openly sided with Syria and Iran and Russia has warned a thermonuclear war could result if the US continues on this path. We are talking about World War III here. This is not a game people. This is by far the most dangerous crossroad we have ever come to in living history. If we let these psychopaths continue taking us down this path, the consequences are too horrific to even contemplate. We’ve been trying to warn people where we are headed and trying to show you that there’s no political solution that will turn the US government around. Voting the bums out is not going to work. The people are going to have to take the power they’ve handed over to these madmen back, directly.
The first stage of the revolution is the ideological revolution. That means our first job is to wake people up. To achieve this we must build networks of awareness. It’s tome to connect the activists groups, the facebook pages, the bloggers, the alternative media. Its time to build lines of communication across these artificial borders of left and right. It’s time to find that common ground, that unifying idea that will enable us to face our common enemy and which will lay the framework for what comes next. We must reach a critical mass awakening because that’s when these networks of awareness become networks of resistance. Our network must reach into every aspect of society, especially the police and military. The police and military are the enforcement arm of this mafia. Without them, the powers that we have no power at all. We must show them that they are being tricked, that they are not being sent to fight for freedom, nor do the American people or the Syrian people want this war. Only 9% of the US population supports strikes against Syria. 91% oppose it. Who want this war? A handful of narcissistic psychopaths and useful idiots. You really want to bleed for them? History will remember the real heroes of this crisis as being the ones that had the courage to face this corrupt chain of command and say no, I will not comply. Some are already making this stand. Don’t leave them standing alone.
Do you want to understand the real reason we’re being taken into these wars? Please watch The road to World War III. A video that we released last year producing a precise chain of events that we are seeing unfold right now. You want to do something to stop this? Watch Revolution: An Instruction Manual and put those instructions into action. Then visit the get-involved section of our website for more information. For more videos like this subscribe to StormCloudsGathering on YouTube. For updates, bonus content, and to influence future videos, follow us on Facebook at facebook.com/stormcloudsgathering. Our twitter handle is @collapseupdates and our website is stormcloudsgathering.com.