UPDATED BELOW 9/3/13

Continuing the many ways in which the Surveiller-in-Chief is resembling George W. Bush, Obama is now pushing for military action in Syria, using the retread justification of Weapons of Mass Destruction (gasp!).

Someone used chemical weapons in Syria on Wednesday, August 21st — that much seems to be clear. Secretary of State John Kerry argued that the Syrian government was not allowing access to the site by U.N. inspectors seeking to investigate, but reporters who bothered to check with the U.N. found that they had not requested access to the site until Saturday, 8/24 and the Syrian government granted the request the next day.  The reporter, Matthew Lee was quoted as saying

“It’s like everyone is telling Syria to let the police in, but the police didn’t knock on the door. The Syrian government can’t fulfill a request before it’s made. We don’t know what Syria would have said if the request was done on Thursday, but Kerry’s claim that they Syrians delayed is without merit. This episode does not make one question the Syrian ‘regime’s credibility’ as Kerry claims, but rather that of the U.S. and UN.”

So U.N. requests access on Saturday, Syria gives the OK on Sunday, and then the U.S. says “nevermind, it’s too late” and began pressuring the U.N. to abandon their investigation entirely.  The State department argues that fighting in the area had rendered any investigation moot, and that the evidence was surely destroyed so there is no point in looking for any.  U.N. inspectors disagree, saying that they can find evidence “up to several months” after the use of chemical weapons by taking samples from hair, blood, and urine of the victims.  But perhaps evidence (truth) would only get in the way of the storyline being crafted.

Missing from Kerry’s speech is any shred of evidence that might point the finger at the guilty party.  Kerry asserts that it was the Assad government, but again, there has not been a bit of evidence presented.  Simply averring that the weapons were used (by whom? doesn’t matter) seems to be enough for Kerry, and our compliant media has forgotten that the last time such weapons were used in Syria, it was the rebels who used them.

I can’t vouch for the authenticity of the photos, but there are plenty which appear to document chemical weapons in the hands of the rebel forces.  Please also remember that in 2012 a hacker released files from UK company Britam which advertises its management as having a “background in UK Special Forces”, has offices in Iraq and Libya (among others), and touts their expertise working in hostile environments on behalf of the oil and gas sector where “protection of people, assets and reputation is a constant and ever-changing challenge.”  The hacker leaked company emails, one of which apparently discusses a deal being pushed by Qatar and endorsed by the U.S. to create a false-flag chemical weapon attack in Syria, to be blamed upon Russia.  For what it’s worth, Britam acknowledges they were hacked but deny that the email is legitimate.  Which is exactly what you’d expect them to say in any case. [see update below]

Popular blogger Wartard phrased it like this:

 Assad by all accounts is not a stupid man. He attended Western universities. He’s a trained eye doctor. This at least means he’s not a total idiot. Why then would he use nerve gas at a time when the rebel factions aligned against him are fracturing, fighting amongst themselves and losing control of towns? Assad’s forces seem to have gained a slight initiative in this war and now suddenly, just as he begins winning, he breaks out chemical weapons and hands NATO the golden invitation to walk into his country?

It’s amazing to me that anyone treats the U.S. claims with any credibility to begin with.  The very same day as Kerry’s speech, news broke that the U.S.  had assisted Saddam Hussein in his use of chemical weapons during Iraq’s war with Iran. Our outrage at their use then was substantially less robust than it is now, let me tell you. Once our friend Hussein had become our enemy, fabricated claims about weapons of mass destruction (gasp!) led us to a decade long occupation and an ongoing civil war in Iraq, and the achievement of no discernable objectives other than removal of Hussein.  For a reminder of just how certain American officials were about Hussein’s WMD, here’s Colin Powell’s transcript of lies before the U.N. as a refresher.

The U.N. is not even clear on just what the alleged casualties from the Syrian chemical weapons attack might be.  Special Envoy Lakhdar Brahimi was quoted as saying “With what has happened on the 21st of August last week, it does seem that some kind of substance was used that killed a lot of people: hundreds, definitely more than a hundred, some people say 300, some people say 600, maybe 1,000, maybe more than 1,000 people.”   Well, that about nails it, I guess.  Something was done by somebody, and it killed some people.  That’s what we are about to go to war over?  Brahimi continued:

“What we have been told is that this evidence that the Americans, the British, the French say they have is going to be shared with us. It hasn’t been until now,” he said. “And we will be very, very, very interested in hearing from them what this evidence they have is.”

Yes, I would also be very, very, very interested.  Kerry seems to have suggested in his speech that reluctance to investigate marks a guilty party, so what does that say now that the U.S. appears to be blocking the very investigation they claim to desire?

Continuing the contempt for Congress, the U.N., the American people, and the Constitution, Obama seems prepared to launch military action without approval from any of those parties.  When one really examines the situation, it becomes clear that the military option seems to be on the table as a face-saving measure for Obama.  Claiming the use of chemical weapons violates his “red line”, he now appears ready to lash out without even waiting for the evidence.  The punditocracy is giddy with the prospect, claiming that the “credibility” (LOL!) of the U.S. is on the line.  Juan Cole, professor of Middle East history at University of Michigan, provides a typical example:

“This is more about Washington saving face, it seems to me, than it is a consequential intervention in the Syrian conflict. When you’re in a position where it is assumed that the United States must do something, a couple of Tomahawks make a statement.”

A couple final points.  Always remember that the U.S. is supporting the al-Qaeda-affiliated rebels in this fight.  Whenever you hear the word “rebels” used in the Syrian context, replace it with “al-Qaeda”.  In what world does it make sense to arm and train the very enemy we are fighting in another theater?   Indeed, Dennis Kucinich said this week that U.S. airstrikes on Syria would turn the U.S. military into “al Qaeda’s air force.”  I know it’s common to accuse whistleblowers of treason these days, but treason used to mean something.  Namely, aiding one’s enemies in a time of war.  Or specifically, from U.S. code:

Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

Attacking the Syrian government would thus become a clear case of treason on the part of Obama and anyone in Congress who supports such a move.

Lastly, please consider the role of energy in the geo-political landscape.  ZeroHedge has a powerfully convincing analysis which posits that pipeline politics are behind the sudden escalation in Syria over the past few years, just as was arguably the case in Afghanistan.

Such a pipeline would bypass Russia’s current stranglehold on gas supplies to Europe, so it neatly explains their unwillingness to go along with the U.S. ouster of Assad. Russia also worries that victory by the al-Qaeda and Muslim brotherhood rebels would embolden islamic fundamentalists that are causing the Russians headaches in Chechnya and elsewhere.

UPDATE: It appears that the hacked emails from Britam are not legitimate, based on a review of the header information.  Lots of disinformation swirling about from all parties.