Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

texshelters

(1,979 posts)
Wed Sep 4, 2013, 06:50 PM Sep 2013

CounterPunch addresses the lies and fabrications in Obama's war document

Last edited Thu Sep 5, 2013, 05:58 PM - Edit history (1)

From CounterPunch:

Debunking Obama’s Chemical Weapons Case Against the Syrian Government
http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/09/02/debunking-obamas-assessment-of-the-syrian-governments-use-of-chemical-weapons/


The document entitled “U.S. Government Assessment of the Syrian Government’s Use of Chemical Weapons on August 21, 2013”, released in tandem with public statements made by Secretary of State John Kerry, is merely a summary of a manufactured narrative designed to lead the US into yet another criminal and disastrous war in the Middle East. Having been released prior to even preliminary reports from UN chemical weapons investigators on the ground in Syria, the document is as much a work of fiction as it is fact.

<SNIP>

Moreover, based on its own admissions as to the sources of this so-called “intelligence”, very serious doubt should be cast on such a dubious government report. The document explains that:


These all-source assessments are based on human, signals, and geospatial intelligence as well as a significant body of open-source reporting…In addition to US intelligence information, there are accounts from international and Syrian medical personnel; videos; witness accounts; thousands of social media reports from at least 12 different locations in the Damascus area; journalist accounts; and reports from highly credible non-governmental organizations.

First and foremost, any critical reading of this document must begin with the notions of “human intelligence” and “witness accounts”. Such terminology indicates that the US is simply basing pre-conceived conclusions on rebel sources and the much touted “activists” who seem to always be the sources quoted in Western media reports. Secondly, it is obvious that US officials have cherry-picked their eyewitness accounts as there are many, from both sides of the conflict, which directly contradict this so-called high-confidence assessment.

<SNIP>

It seems as if the United States is now using social media, a system over which they have control, to justify their pre-fabricated war narrative. Additionally, the idea that videos constitute a shred of evidence is laughable. As any investigator can tell you, videos are easily manipulated and, even if they are untouched, they cannot be used to assess the culprit of a crime. Videos merely show what is visible, not the underlying motives, means, and opportunity – all part of genuine investigation.

<SNIP>

So, the US is supposed to wage war on a country that has not attacked it or any of its allies based on admittedly unconfirmed evidence? This would be laughable if it weren’t so utterly outrageous and criminal.

The “U.S. Government Assessment of the Syrian Government’s Use of Chemical Weapons on August 21, 2013” is a poorly constructed attempt to justify the politically, militarily, and morally unjustifiable war against Syria. It relies on lies, distortions, and obvious propaganda to create the myth that Assad is the devil incarnate and that the US, with its clear moral high-ground, must take it upon itself to once again wage war for the sake of peace. Nothing could be more dishonest. Nothing could be more disgusting. Nothing could be more American. Let’s hope Congress shuts it down. <end excerpt>


Do what the administration doesn't want you to do. Decide for yourself.

PTxS

9 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
CounterPunch addresses the lies and fabrications in Obama's war document (Original Post) texshelters Sep 2013 OP
A link would be helpful n/t Yo_Mama Sep 2013 #1
Sorry texshelters Sep 2013 #5
So, the answer to unconfirmed speculation is... TreasonousBastard Sep 2013 #2
The article is questioning the facts of the debate from Obama texshelters Sep 2013 #6
some of that too Supersedeas Sep 2013 #9
This is a Russian propaganda piece...can't find it on CounterPunch alittlelark Sep 2013 #3
It's there now texshelters Sep 2013 #7
Link: TacoD Sep 2013 #4
Thanks! texshelters Sep 2013 #8

TreasonousBastard

(43,049 posts)
2. So, the answer to unconfirmed speculation is...
Wed Sep 4, 2013, 07:24 PM
Sep 2013

more unconfirmed speculation from the other side?

A lot of words hiding the complete lack of specifics-- exactly what they are complaining about.

texshelters

(1,979 posts)
6. The article is questioning the facts of the debate from Obama
Thu Sep 5, 2013, 06:00 PM
Sep 2013

Not trying to prove a point one way or another.

The comparison isn't valid.

PTxS

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»CounterPunch addresses th...