Emails Reveal ‘Washington Approved’ False Flag Chemical Weapon Attack in Syria?

Posted: January 30, 2013 in Political musings
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Governments understand the role of false flag attacks. Good governments, bad governments, all kinds of governments. Is this story another example, or nonsense?

Governments understand the role of false flag attacks. Good governments, bad governments, all kinds of governments. Is this story another example, or nonsense?

I rarely pass on links to other blogs uncritically, or unchecked, especially when they come from a very definite ideological background. But this one surely deserves “the oxygen of publicity”, at the very least, so that everyone can decide whether it is true or not.

I note that the authors are no friends of the American administration – and, indeed, that they delight in conspiracy theories, often of the most ludicrous kind (in my opinion). Anti-authority, libertarian blog frequently posts stories that appear to be utter nonsense. Conspiracy theory central. Wing nut territory.

But they’re like a scatter gun. Sooner or later one of their crazy stories has to hit a target. And on some levels, certainly enough to prompt interest, this story “rings true” to me. So I recommend you click on the video story from the Infowars author and listen. Just click the link below, then click the video, and read the story under the video.

Long story short – I do believe our Governments frequently engage in “black ops” and “false flag” attacks, as the examples from history are numerous.

false-flag1If you wanted a pretext for an armed intervention in Syria, there couldn’t be a better one than the story that Assad had used chemical weapons against his own population.

The idea is purported to have been promoted from staunch American ally Qatar – if that’s true, then this is called “levels of deniability” or a “cut out”, using other countries to keep such murky matters at arm’s length from ourselves.

So is it true? I really have no idea. Would I like to know if it’s true? I sure would.

If it was true, it would make Benghazi-Gate look like the tiniest radar blip ever seen. That an American administration could countenance deliberately using a chemical weapon – or even transporting one into a conflict arena – to advance a political goal – would be unthinkable.

I think the world’s front-line media need to take this story up, and, using their investigatory resources, to determine its truth, or otherwise.

If – and I repeat, if – this story was true, it would represent the biggest foreign policy scandal in America since, perhaps, the covert bombing of Cambodia and Laos during the Vietnam war.

As you can see below, the story is flying round the extreme right, libertarian blogosphere like a blue-arsed fly chasing some rotten meat. What is needed is some serious analysis from people with real access.

So I would urge my American readers, in particular, to ask their media to make those investigations on their behalf.

Needless to say, the White House will already be aware of this report.

The simplest thing in the world would be for them to deny it. If it is deniable. It will be interesting to see what happens.

  1. Bill Hayes says:

    This report seems to be the “Flase Flag” operation here. This website is run by the Tea Party who are the ones who accused Obama of being a Kenyan National – how can anything else they say be trusted? These people are political zombies, frothing at the mouth, they just keep coming and coming – there will never be anything that government does that will please them. If Romney had become President, they would be feeding on him for falling short of the message. They will turn on eachother in the end. Now you’ve got som,e of their goo on your blog. Better wipe it off.


    • Look, you may well be right, Bill, and I note the ideological bias of their site in the blog. I still think the report deserves investigating – as opposed to most of the stuff they post – and as I said, it would be dead easy for the Administration to deny it, wouldn’t it?


  2. David says:

    Lack of denial is not proof. The administration may decide not to deny because to the frothing conspiracy nuts, an official denial could be seen as evidence that it happened.


    • That’s a fair point, and I agree. But for a story this shocking, a strong denial should surely be the first move an administration should consider rather than let an inaccurate story drag along – that’s if it is inaccurate, of course. What matters is not the opinion of the frothing conspiracy nuts but the rest of us.


What do YOU think? That's what matters. Please comment!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s