Next year will mark the 50th anniversary of the Gulf of Tonkin Incident. It was that false flag event that persuaded Congress to give President Johnson a blank check to retaliate against the supposedly unprovoked attack by North Vietnam on an American warship patrolling international waters off the coast of Indochina. The fraudulent claim by Johnson resulted in the Vietnam War fiasco which claimed the lives of over 50,000 young Americans and produced millions of Vietnamese casualties.
Now Barack Obama is potentially up to his own false flag event in Syria. In an effort to justify U.S. military intervention in the Syrian conflict, the Obama Administration has accused Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad of perpetrating the chemical weapons attack in a rebel-held suburb of Damascus last week. Speaking forcefully, earlier this week, Secretary of State John Kerry stated, “The indiscriminate slaughter of civilians, the killing of women and children and innocent bystanders by chemical weapons is a moral obscenity.” The Secretary chose his words carefully in an effort to rally a war-weary U.S. citizenry for another military adventure on the other side of the world.
Was al-Assad responsible for the attack? The Administration has tried and convicted him before a team of U.N. inspectors has had a chance to finish its investigation. It claims he alone possesses the means to carry out such an atrocity in Syria. At least 4 U.S. warships are sitting off the coast of Syria waiting for Obama to give the order to attack Syrian military and government targets. It seems likely that a U.S. attack on al-Assad forces is imminent.
But there are at least two other possibilities of who may be responsible for the chemical attack last week. In May, members of the Al-Nusra front, an Al-Qaeda affiliated group which many analysts believe to be “the most aggressive and successful arm” of the Syrian resistance, were apprehended by Turkish security forces in Turkey while in possession of 2 kilograms of sarin gas. Thus al-Assad does not have a monopoly on chemical agents in Syria as the U.S. asserts and it is possible that Al-Nusra perpetrated the chemical attack last week to provoke the U.S. into striking the Syrian regime in an effort to help its own cause.
But there may be an even scarier possibility of who was responsible for the chemical attack last week on the outskirts of Damascus – the Obama Administration. Emails from the British-based contractor Britam Defence released in January by a Malaysian hacker showed a plan “approved by Washington” that would fund Syrian rebels to carry out chemical attacks in Syria which the U.S. could use as a pretense for military action against al-Assad.
Is it hard to believe that an American administration could be guilty of such an atrocity? Not really if one looks at history objectively. American history is littered with examples of our government producing coups, assassinations, lies about weapons of mass destruction, and other events that simply didn’t happen in order to accomplish its goals.
Let’s not forget that the current administration’s Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms facilitated the sale of approximately 1400 illegal weapons to Mexican drug cartels in Operation Fast and Furious. Ultimately the program resulted in the death of a U.S. border agent, Brian Terry, and no doubt scores of others caught up in Mexico’s failed war on drugs.
It is possible that Washington could stoop to any depth to carry out its aims. Americans who believe that only other country’s governments are capable of heinous acts are simply naïve.
Of course, it is possible that Bashar al-Assad used chemical weapons against his people. But, knowing that it would provoke U.S. military intervention in Syria, it just doesn’t make any sense for him to do it. On the other hand, just like in 1964 when President Johnson was getting intense pressure from the military-industrial complex to escalate the war in Vietnam, Obama is receiving the same kind of pressure with regards to Syria today. Unfortunately, like Johnson, he doesn’t seem to have the courage to resist it either.