At the moment this is being written, the whole world is poised to see what President Obama will do concerning the situation in Syria and the use of chemical weapons. Most of the world has warned Obama not to use any military force against the Syrian government and that doing so could result in harsh retaliation. The British parliament voted not to take any action against the Syrian government because there was no smoking gun evidence against them.
Yet, Obama has continued to strut around and crowed like the only rooster in a hen house. On Friday, it was revealed that the US claimed to have irrefutable proof that the Syrian government launched the chemical weapons that killed some 1400 civilians. Our government claims that US spy agencies were monitoring the Syrian government. The spy agencies supposedly documented the preparation of the chemical weapons, the loading of the chemical weapons into the rockets and then the launching of the rockets onto the civilian citizenry.
This documentation is considered to be part of the key evidence that Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry will use to defend their decision to take military action against the Syrian government for the use of chemical weapons. They are willing to take ill-advised actions that could lead to World War III and the possible destruction of America.
But how reliable is the US intelligence information that Obama and Kerry are relying on?
On Saturday, a number of sources ran a story that the US supported rebels have taken responsibility for the chemical weapon attack. According to at least one report, Syrian rebels obtained the chemical weapons with the help of Prince Bandar bin Sultan, the Saudi Arabian Intelligence Chief. The rebels mishandled the chemical weapons, resulting it their dispersal and the mass deaths.
So who is telling the truth? If the rebels are not accepting the blame for the chemical attack, then what does that say for the accuracy of the intelligence supposedly gathered by our spy agencies. Either the information is blatantly wrong or it is as made up and phony as Barack Obama’s personal background. This also begs one to ask why he would go to such lengths to fabricate evidence just to go to war against his half-brother’s employer, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.