The year is 2013 and reports of a Syrian chemical attack starts leaking into the mainstream media….and this was a red line that Obama and his gang drew in the sand….
The reports were unverified and yet it was reported as if it were fact and the US started its involvement in the Syrian civil war…..
The mainstream media narrative claimed the Syrian government under president Bashar al Assad bombed the rebel-held town of Khan Seikhoun with the deadly nerve agent sarin on April 4. Assad “choked out the lives of helpless men, women and children,” claimed President Trump. The U.S. Tomahawk strike targeted Shayrat because that is where the chemical weapons were prepared and loaded onto fighter bomber aircraft. According to Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, “We feel that the strike itself was proportional, because it was targeted at the facility that delivered this most recent chemical weapons attack.”
US mainstream news media uncritically trumpeted the administration’s pretext as fact and that the retaliation was widely supported by the American people. A CBS News survey claimed “57 percent of Americans” approved of Trump’s military strikes. The question ABC presented to respondents (the question is not found within the body of news articles) April 7-9 presumed guilt. “In response to the Syrian government’s use of chemical weapons, do you approve or disapprove of the US launching airstrikes against Syrian military targets?”
Fast forward to 2022 and we have the same tactic used again.
White House claimed without evidence that Russia might use chemical or biological weapons to create a false flag operation in Ukraine. The White House also dismissed Moscow’s accusations that the US is involved in biological weapons research in Ukraine even though there are Pentagon-linked labs in the country.
On Twitter, White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki said to be on the lookout “for Russia to possibly use chemical or biological weapons in Ukraine, or to create a false flag operation using them.”
Then the inevitable accusation once the idea had been planted….
Both US and Ukrainian officials have said they cannot confirm claims from Ukraine’s neo-Nazi Azov Battalion that Russia dropped a “poisonous substance” on Mariupol.
Andriy Biletsky, the leader of the Azov Battalion, which is part of Ukraine’s National Guard, claimed three people had signs of chemical poisoning, although he said there were no “disastrous consequences” to their health.
According to Reuters, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said early Wednesday that it was not possible to draw “100% firm conclusions” about whether or not Russia used chemical weapons. On Tuesday, Secretary of State Antony Blinken said the US was not in a position to confirm the claims.
According to a report from Politico, US officials have raised questions about the credibility of the Azov battalion, noting that they might be eager to provoke a larger confrontation. The claims from Azov came after weeks of Biden administration officials accusing Russia of plotting to use chemical weapons in its war in Ukraine and warning of a response if they are used.
Does any of this sound familiar?
Well it does to me….but then I pay attention to world affairs.
My problem, as with the previous accusations, is that these are unverified but that does not stop the media from helping whip up the lather to get more involved in the conflict.
Remember the non-existent WMDs in Iraq to justify an invasion and subsequent occupation?
Usually when the western governments start quacking about “chemical attacks,” it means they’re planning to take action of some kind — airstrikes in Syria, sanctions on Russia, what have you — and are looking for an excuse.
This doesn’t look like an exception to that rule: Further down in the story, Ukrainian Deputy Defence Minister Hanna Maliar identifies the likely weapon as “phosphorous ammunition.”
That would most likely be white phosphorous, an element not classed as a chemical weapon under the Chemical Weapons Convention. It’s used as a component in smoke, illumination, incendiary, and tracer rounds for everything from small arms to large artillery, as well as in grenades, by most major militaries on Earth.
In theory, it’s illegal to use white phosphorous to attack “personnel,” but acceptable to use it on “equipment.”
That’s a pretty big loophole. As an 81mm mortarman in the US Marine Corps, I often trained on what we called “shake and bake” missions, involving a mix of white phosphorous and high explosive rounds. The justification? We would be firing at the enemy’s “equipment.” That would include their uniforms, canteens, etc. If they chose to stay with that “equipment,” well, that was their problem.
If the weapon in question is indeed white phosphorous, calling the incident a “chemical” attack is neither legally accurate nor novel. It’s nasty stuff — it burns incredibly hot and water won’t put it out — but it’s been in wide use since World War One. Including, probably, by both sides in the Ukrainian conflict.
All this makes me think of those immortal words of Donald Rumsfeld, “If it were true it would not be called intelligence”.
Watch This Blog!
I Read, I Write, You Know
“lego ergo scribo”