Defining the Narrative

Many of us have been questioning the U. S. Government’s “intel” on the Syrian Chemical attacks which had supposedly been perpetrated by the Assad Regime.  One thing that didn’t make sense was the nagging question, what would Assad hope to gain from an attack sure to gain international media attention, and would only serve to harden Obama’s case against the Assad Government.   Assad already has the support of Russia, Iran, and Turkey, and even European nations are slow to support the rebellion, which has obviously been co-opted by Muslim Brotherhood and Al-Qaeda type Islamists.

My opinion is still against US intervention, as I previously posted, Obama’s foreign policy has been, and continues to be a disaster:

The now laughable “Red Line” threat to Syria and ensuing policy there has led to further erosion of American standing in the Middle East.  Now the US Government (including Dem/Rep Congress) is on record as supporting and arming Islamist radicals who butcher their foes like pigs and eat their organs raw, and beheading others including a Catholic Priest.  Not sure how we got to the point that the Russian President Vladimer Putin is questioning the American choice to support such barbarism, giving our arch-rival the high moral ground on the global stage.  I do not advocate supporting Assad but since we waited so long to see where the Muslim Brotherhood was going to be on Syria, can’t we just stay the hell out of one of these?  Israel can take care of itself, and would probably feel much more secure with out this Administration constantly creating “situations” for them.

The latest revelation that the chemical “attacks” were a result of untrained rebels mishandling and accidentally releasing the agent, caused the disaster which has accounted for over 1300 dead, mostly civilians.  My speculation was the Islamist rebels had actually launched the attack on the civilian population in order to frame the Assad Regime and bring the US into the fray, helping to topple the dictator.  (This is not an uncommon tactic by Islamist extremists, from the Intifada against Israel to sectarian violence in Iraq.)  The United States government has been more than willing to get involved during and since the “Arab Spring” and help bring chaos to other countries, so why not take out the last standing dictator in the region.  After all, if the Muslim Brotherhood wants us involved, by all means, let’s do it!

The breaking news posted on Examiner.com is a startling epiphany in the face of an Obama administration trying to rally support for a strike on the Syrian government.  The President is finding few friends in the international community these days and multilateral support is becoming an unlikely premise, and justification for even a “surgical strike” against Assad is leaking like a sieve.  The following excerpt is from the Examiner.com story:

The story is from AP reporter and Middle Eastern journalist Dale Gavlak and appears on the Mint Press News, which is affiliated with AP.

This news should deflate the accusations, against theAssad regime, coming from the U.S., Britain, and France as well as the Arab League.

Since the chemical attacks last week, the Assad government was immediately blamed. On Monday, Secretary of State John Kerry said: That Assad’s guilt was “a judgment already clear to the world,” according

Image published by Examiner.com

to theguardian.com.

As a result of Assad’s government being blamed for the chemical attacks, five U.S. warships are now stationed off Syria‘s coast. These destroyers are poised to deliver cruise missiles in a strike that is due to begin any time now. According to the report on Mint Press there have been several interviews conducted with people in Damascus and Ghouta, a suburb of the Syrian capital.

The interviews conducted of residents, rebels and their families in Damascus and Ghouta are painting a different picture of what actually happened. Many believe that rebels received chemical weapons provided through the Saudi intelligence chief, Prince Bandar bin Sultan. It’s being reported that these weapons are responsible for last week’s gas attack.

To view the rest of the Examiner article click here.

Whether the weapons came from the Saudi’s or were part of a cache taken by the rebels from the Syrian military, an accidental use seems to make the most sense.  If the Saudi’s indeed supplied the weapons, which I am doubtful, but as much as the Saudi’s fear Iran, plausible, then the theater expands even further.

It will be interesting to see how this story develops over the weekend, and we will publish updates when possible if more information comes available.