well, the proof does not really sound like proof and might actually prove just the contrary.
Fact is that this is coming out, and the UN inspections are allowed to run.
So there is some sensible push back in the American system.
And I think Iran and Syria made it clear that they will fight, not hold still.

Posted by: somebody | Aug 28 2013 5:25 utc | 3

From Pepe Escobar on Facebook:
BREAKING NOW.
VERY interesting. According to Egyptian TV, Pinochet Sisi – the House of Saud protege – is NOT allowing US and UK warships to pass through the Suez Canal; they will, obviously, attack Syria. Cairo is AGAINST Obama’s Tomahawk war.
Allain Jules reports on this already.
ALERTE INFO. Syrie : Le général Abdel Fattah al-Sissi ferme le Canal de Suez et dit NON aux Ricains

Posted by: Petri Krohn | Aug 28 2013 6:12 utc | 5

Like we all knew, the Israeli made recording is the biggest “evidence”.
As Toivos/Richard Silverstein made clear here
http://www.moonofalabama.org/2013/08/at-a-complete-loss.html#c6a00d8341c640e53ef01901f086e67970b
And its not the first time Israel provide audio recordins and then it have been doctored with..
http://www.moonofalabama.org/2013/08/at-a-complete-loss.html#c6a00d8341c640e53ef0192acc7a904970d
Rather this proves nothing.

Posted by: Anonymous | Aug 28 2013 6:34 utc | 7

#4
that’s interesting. I can imagine what the evidence that the warmongering PR guys are going to present will look like. Video recordings of the rockets being fired from special unit barracks. And it’s probably going to work out, too 🙁
#6
I was thinking that this might be just a massive campaign to see who will jump ship now. Many a propaganda comment in the comment sections aims at this (“Assads family fled” etc.). But on the other hand, why make so much noise and not bomb something, too. No one can do anything about it anyway.

Posted by: peter radiator | Aug 28 2013 6:40 utc | 9

6) Agree, the assumption is Assad will fold. They are talking themselves into such a corner though that they will have to act if he does not fold.
I guess this is about having some rebels left in the country when “negotiations” start. So the UN investigators are used as a second track – cease fire whilst they are investigating.
A lot is going on behind the scenes. Syrians, Russians, Hezbollah must have some knowledge/prove of what was going on in the attack.
It is clear there is a US/Russian agreement on Syria. It is also clear the Obama administration has been trying to coopt Iran. Maybe Saudi and Israel are freaking out about the possibility of a US/Iranian agreement. Whatever they do for the US it is lose lose.

Posted by: somebody | Aug 28 2013 6:57 utc | 11

It was good that Zeroehdge had an article reminding the Wikileaks cable released on Syria where most of what was planned is exposed. To see the bigger picture, one should remember that is expressely stated that it was after the withdrawal from Iraq that this would be the next step to take.
Then, they should certainly also give the cables from the Gulf discussing Iran. This was probably the main reason behind what we see and the reluctance for Syria, Russia or Iran to publish the evidence. After the Gulf was caught red hand telling the zusa that its main enemy was Iran, it became impossible to organize fake Hamas/Plo reconciliations gathering in Mekka, or have a few ministerials meetings with the Iranians one in a while to brainwash the umma into the existence of an.. umma.
To get the MB away from the road to Damascus was probably urged by the fact no one wanted to see one million djihadists boasting on FB about how many Christians they had killed. They have enough with the videos showing European djihadists, or Libyan and Tunisian boasting of atrocities. The end of the MB is a good news for people on the ground, women who were afraid of going out, people fed up of kidnappings and mob lynchings, and the elite having no option but emigration because they were witnessing their country falling down. The Saudis badly need the Egyptian immigrants to work twice as much as they will ever be able to, and that’s another reason KSA there are common interests between the two.
Angry Arab has these yesterday:
http://angryarab.net/2013/08/27/egyptian-tamarud-movement-on-possible-us-attack-on-syria/
http://angryarab.net/2013/08/27/this-is-the-clearest-and-most-honest-expression-of-american-goals-that-the-us-aims-at-prolonging-the-syrian-civil-war/
http://angryarab.net/2013/08/27/sixty-six-former-u-s-government-officials-and-foreign-policy-experts-sent-a-letter-to-obama-urging-war-on-syria/
http://angryarab.net/2013/08/27/flash-msf-doctors-without-borders-as-a-tool-of-us-foreign-policy/
What it all say is that US, and now UK/France, are so bankrupt that they just take their orders from the Gulf (among others).

Posted by: Mina | Aug 28 2013 7:20 utc | 13

12) Gulf Prince Plays Deadly Regional Game

Subsequently, making any move at this time would be of little use. The matter is settled, and any additional effort would be wasting energy or even causing meaningless losses. This may help explain why all parties at home have been immobile, and why they have been attempting to compensate for their powerlessness by intensifying their language.
But in contrast to this political stalemate, there is movement with “iron and fire,” which is the subject of the second message written with the blood spilled in the bombings. Though in principle a US-Russian agreement on Syria has been reached, the parts of the settlement in question are moving in two different speeds, and between the two, the details of the final solution are crystallizing.
This settlement will be consensual, ranging from a minimum form that follows the Lebanese “confessional” system, and a maximum form that follows Iraq’s federal system. Both models are present in Syria’s vicinity; the choice will be easy, and no one is in hurry yet to implement the solution.
To be sure, Israel is reassured by the protracted negative “draw” in Syria, as the last remaining strong Arab entity on its border is being destroyed.
There, Assad is being exhausted without al-Nusra Front winning. There, Hezbollah is being implicated without Iran prevailing. Everyone is being exhausted in Syria, without losing a single Israeli or Western soldier, as had been case in the previous wars.
But an agreement is now a fait accompli. And just like it has two options to choose from – Beirut or Baghdad’s constitutional models – it also has two political red lines.
It was Michael Morell, deputy director of the CIA, who identified the first red line on August 7, saying that an al-Qaeda takeover of Syria would be the “biggest threat to US national security.”
Then, in a written letter to Congress on August 21, Gen. Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, set the second red line. He wrote that the armed groups in Syria would not back US interests if they took power, and that any US military operation in Syria “would leave the US mired in another Middle Eastern war and offer little chance of peace in a country wracked by ethnic divisions.”
Everyone is being exhausted in Syria, without losing a single Israeli or Western soldier, as had been case in the previous wars.
Against this backdrop, a certain ambitious prince from the Gulf came and proposed another deal to Washington. He said: Give me a grace period with a limited timeframe but a specific goal. I take it upon myself to topple both Assad and Hezbollah. If I succeed, you can reap the rewards without a cost. If I fail, I would still have managed to weaken Damascus and Dahiyeh, even if slightly, and then you can return to your agreement with the Russians, under the same balance of power, at the very worst.
The Americans studied the offer well. They found it very logical. It would cost them nothing. Its political worth was reasonable and had an equal chance for success or failure.
A green light was thus given. The international referee delayed the final whistle, and the bench player that recently went into the field was given overtime.

Presumably the Syrian army has been winning too much recently.

Posted by: somebody | Aug 28 2013 7:35 utc | 15

I don’t know if you’ve seen this piece on 4th Media:
The New York Times Attempts to Bolster John Kerry’s Baseless Claim That the Syrian Government Used Chemical Weapons on Their Own People
But the NYT inadvertently shows the location of the rocket launch as inside rebel-controlled territory.

Posted by: William Bowles | Aug 28 2013 8:41 utc | 17

evidence of who did th CW attacks and yes its the insurgents
jamse corbett interviews activist in syria
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXLeND1NURI&feature=youtu.be
theyve out the whole thing behind a subscribers waLL TO http://www.boilingfrogspost.com/2013/08/27/bfp-syria-report-satellite-imagery-proves-syrian-chemical-weapons-attack-staged-by-rebels/

Posted by: brian | Aug 28 2013 9:18 utc | 19

19) yep, she describes the narrative of the Syrian government, and talks of the satellite photos Russia supplied, you can google Ayssar Midani on the internet – she is no opposition activist.
Neither the US nor Russia have published their “proof”.
However, what Ayssar Midani/the Syrian government tell sounds plausible: Al Nusrah was caught in Turkey in posession of chemical materials or according to Today’s Zaman with Sarin

Seven members of Syria’s militant al-Nusra group were detained on Wednesday after police found sarin gas, which was reportedly going to be used in a bomb attack, during a search of the suspects’ homes, Turkish media have reported.
Newspapers claimed on Thursday that two kilograms of sarin gas, which is usually used for making bombs and was banned by the UN in 1991, had been found in the homes of suspects detained in the southern provinces of Adana and Mersin. Twelve suspects were caught by the police on Monday. The reports claimed that the al-Nusra members had been planning a bomb attack for Thursday in Adana but that the attack was averted when the police caught the suspects. Along with the sarin gas, the police seized a number of handguns, grenades, bullets and documents during their search. Five of the suspects were released later on Thursday.

But the US/Britain are going to war on dubious Israeli intercepts. Western media is a joke.

Posted by: somebody | Aug 28 2013 9:48 utc | 21

James Corbett interviews Ayssar Midani, Aug 27 (28 mins): This is out from behind the paywall, and I’ve watched it now. It isn’t on YouTube yet. But in fact it does not contain anything radically new. She names the local Jabhat al-Nusra commander, Sheikh Zahran Abdullah Alloush, as having ordered the firing of the two rockets with chemical warheads. In fact, Alloush is the commander of the Liwa al-Islam Brigade, based in Duma. He is a well-known and documented figure. She says the satellite imagery actually shows the rockets being fired, travelling and reaching their targets, and that it has been given by Vitaly Churkin to the UNSC. She does not say whether satellite telephone communications from or to Alloush substantiating the claim were intercepted. The video evidence (and audio evidence, if there is any) has not been released publicly, and this is a typically Russian authoritarian mistake. They will not comprehend the fact that the world public has to be treated as an equal interlocutor in emergencies, not an object to be manipulated by competing rulers. There is nothing else of importance in this video, though of course it is all very interesting.

Posted by: Rowan Berkeley | Aug 28 2013 9:52 utc | 23

well , it is simple , USA find an opportunity to finish of one of the remaining countries who standing against his NEW WORLD ORDER …. so he will use it … they won’t loss this opportunity ….
Russia won’t do anything , he stalled USA and his western puppets till now to get the price of leaving Syria alone … till now , USA didn’t pay the price , so Russia still support Syria , but IMO , they will leave it alone with VAMPIRES ….
and about world opinion !? fuc it … westerns have medias and they will use it to brainwashing people ( well , the remaining ones who are not braindead , yet … )
the plane is simple , and that why it is effective …. without the means you can’t stop it ….
and about Iran , well , we are best when come to betting on loser horse … and we will do it again ( well , and I actually support this decision …. )

Posted by: R.P | Aug 28 2013 10:04 utc | 25

Even if actor x used chemical weapons what right does US have to attack Syria? None its just a made up rule by the US. Obama killed 1000s with drones, does that mean rest of the world could attack the US?
Besides Syria havent adhered to the convention forbidding use of these weapons anyway.

Posted by: Anonymous | Aug 28 2013 11:07 utc | 27

The “evidence” come from Israel, the same regime that fabricated that Iraq had WMD.
Israeli intelligence ‘intercepted Syrian regime talk about chemical attack’
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/28/israeli-intelligence-intercepted-syria-chemical-talk
Actually the “evidence” points away from the government.

Posted by: Anonymous | Aug 28 2013 11:17 utc | 29

@22 this writer has details
http://acloserlookonsyria.shoutwiki.com/wiki/Talk:Alleged_Chemical_Attack,_August_21,_2013
Wikimapia says the launch site is the parking lot of the Headquarters of the special forces (Damascus). This absolutely, without any doubt proves Assad did it!!! (Or then this is all a part of a deliberate, well planned false flag operation.)
Maps published by the pro-Assad blogger Syrian Perspective however show that Special Forces HQ was in FSA / al-Nusra hands on August 16 – or the very least, highly contested. In fact this other Qaboun CC video shows the SAA shelling the area, including mosque, just south of the parking lot with heavy artillery in August 24. — Petri Krohn (talk) 13:03, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Posted by: bangkokian | Aug 28 2013 11:26 utc | 31

William Bowles
You are correct, it proves nothing. And why would rep. for the syrian gov. scream in the radio “WHO DID!?” if the syrian gov. is behind it as west lyingly says? Obviously the gov. is NOT behind this.

Posted by: Anonymous | Aug 28 2013 11:41 utc | 33

Hah, even Fox own expert commentators are as doubting as we are here. Must see video below.
http://www.dailypaul.com/297172/warmonger-bill-oreilly-argues-with-two-military-expertsand-loses

Posted by: Anonymous | Aug 28 2013 12:20 utc | 35

That limited strike sounds like: “Ok guys, the pain will be short and sweet. So you wont retaliate, don’t you?

Posted by: Gregg | Aug 28 2013 13:22 utc | 37

35) they are pretty good actually
“Would you rather be killed by poison gas or tortured by Al Qeida?”

Posted by: somebody | Aug 28 2013 13:29 utc | 39

Quote from somewhere on the Internet: “Sellstrom and the UN chemical weapons investigators in Syria cannot explicitly determine whether the Assad regime or the rebels conducted the attack, but can release information that would strongly implicate one party or the other, allowing U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon to make the actual accusation.”
I hope that sentence means the investigation team has the authority to release all details of their findings. Last year when Robert Mood’s team in Syria was sending daily reports to UN headquarters showing criminal conduct by rebels, UN headquarters was not releasing the reports, and Robert Mood’s team itself didn’t have the authority to release the reports. Just before the bombing of Serbia|Kosovo in 1999, there was a deliberate non-release of pertinent information gathered by Western technical investigators on the ground in Kosovo — the investigators didn’t have the authority release their report, and the report ran contrary to the narrative justifying the bombing, and a political decision was made to not release. In the run-up to the bombing of Iraq, the Hans Blix investigators in Iraq weren’t given the chance to complete their investigation of the “weapons of mass destruction” allegation. In Syria this time, if the UN investigators do get the chance to complete their investigation of the scene of the crime, I’ll be watching out for the potential for non-release by UN headquarters of the detailed information that was gathered.

Posted by: Parviziyi | Aug 28 2013 13:35 utc | 41

David Cameron, 27 Aug 2013, on the evidence of who used chemical weapons in Al-Ghouta: “There is never 100% certainty, there’s never one piece or several pieces of intelligence that can give you absolute certainty.” (ref)
I’m not a cynic, and so I think that if Cameron and Obama go ahead and bomb Syria without waiting for the report of the UN investigators on the ground, they are dumb and rash.

Posted by: Parviziyi | Aug 28 2013 13:50 utc | 43

US Vice President Joe Biden has declared yesterday: “There is no doubt who was responsible for this heinous use of chemical weapons in Syria: the Syrian regime”.
I’m not a cynic, and so I think that he really thinks he has no doubt.
I never ascribe to malfeasance what can be explained by stupidity.

Posted by: Parviziyi | Aug 28 2013 13:58 utc | 45

Adults will soon take over the situation.
NBCNews
UN Security Council to get draft resolution on Syria within hours

A draft resolution authorizing “necessary measures” in Syria will be presented to the U.N. Security Council within hours, British Prime Minister David Cameron announced Wednesday.
The move came as the U.S. and its allies lay the diplomatic groundwork for military strikes, which officials in Washington said could begin as early as Thursday night.
“Britain has drafted a resolution condemning the chemical weapons attack by President Bashar Assad and authorizing necessary measures to protect civilians,” Cameron said on his official Twitter feed.
It sets the scene for a diplomatic showdown with Russia – a key suppliers of weapons to Assad’s regime – and China, which has a veto on the Council and is opposed to military strikes.
“We’ve always said we want the UN Security Council to live up to its responsibilities on Syria. Today they have an opportunity to do that,” Cameron added.
However, U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said inspectors should be given time to determine whether Assad used poison gas against civilians.
“It is essential to establish the facts. The team needs time to do its job,” he said in The Hague on Wednesday.

The US has lost control of Ban — that’s key.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Aug 28 2013 14:11 utc | 47

I am getting a bit worried that Russia/China wouldnt use their veto but actually just abstain from voting just like Libya resolution.

Posted by: Anonymous | Aug 28 2013 14:17 utc | 49

Plus Russia has interests now, plus motivation to hurt the US, and other evidence apparently.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Aug 28 2013 14:22 utc | 51

While you never can be sure, Russia has every incentive to block any anti-Syrian UNSC resolution. Russian domestic opinion, rise of Jihadists, US/NATO expansionism, the embarrassment of appearing to abandon an ally, and the near certainty that any intervention will go wrong and they will not wish to be associated with it.
Attempts to shame the Russians into compliance seem almost comical. The US/Western media can’t even convince the US public of a need to go to war, much less the rest of the world.
That doesn’t mean it can’t happen, it just doesn’t appear likely.

Posted by: Lysander | Aug 28 2013 14:30 utc | 53

@ Don Bacon | 47
“The US has lost control of Ban — that’s key.”
Unlikely, Ban was 100% subservient up to now, so either:
a) Ban doesnt want regional war on his resume. (Doubt it, he was happy to comply on Libya, Iran, Syria (up to now), etc.)
b) Its just a “good cop, bad cop” tactic. Ban is pretending he is uphelding the UN law, while West’s handpicked UN inspectors results will suit West’s objectives (it already happened with Houla massacre). So attack on Syria will be “according to the International law.”
I hope I’m wrong, or that inspectors will have a will of their own, we’ll see soon enough.

Posted by: Harry | Aug 28 2013 14:42 utc | 55

When we’ll get a Syrian villains deck of cards?

Posted by: Boredpokerplayer | Aug 28 2013 14:52 utc | 57

The Pentagon is leaking all this “national security” information — worse than Mannning/Snowden.
Why?

The New York Times, quoting a Pentagon official, adds that “the initial target list has fewer than 50 sites, including air bases where Syria’s Russian-made attack helicopters are deployed.” The Times adds that “like several other military officials contacted for this report, the official agreed to discuss planning options only on condition of anonymity.”

Posted by: Don Bacon | Aug 28 2013 14:56 utc | 59

@58 The administrator is correct. But a little premature. The jihadis turn will come.

Posted by: dh | Aug 28 2013 15:02 utc | 61

Image of US area military deployments.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Aug 28 2013 15:06 utc | 63

Don Bacon #47 said “The US has lost control of Ban — that’s key.”
I say Ban’s stance is somewhat helpful but cannot be “key”. The problem:

John Kerry, 26 Aug 2013: “As Ban Ki-moon said last week, the UN investigation will not determine who used these chemical weapons, only whether such weapons were used – a judgment that is already clear to the world…. Moreover, we know that the Syrian regime maintains custody of these chemical weapons.” [Including Sarin.]
New Scientist magazine, 28 Aug 2013: “If the chemical agent was sarin, the UN inspectors now in Syria should find it, or its unique breakdown products, in people and the environment. Traces persisted for years at Halabja, the Iraqi town attacked with chemicals including sarin in 1988. Who was responsible for launching the attack in Al-Ghouta is another matter.”

The real problem: What anyone can see in the Western mass media today is: very little or no doubting that the 21 Aug 2013 chemical attack was committed by the government side, very little or no calls for better evidence that it was indeed the government side who did it, very little or no reminders that the rebel side had the ability and willfullness to do the attack.

Posted by: Parviziyi | Aug 28 2013 15:22 utc | 65

Where are obama these days anyway, hes a afraid that his dove-image would be destroyed if he came out as the warmonger he is?

Posted by: Anonymous | Aug 28 2013 15:30 utc | 67

66) more logic
12:08 GMT: Missile strikes against Syria could lead to chemical weapons getting into the wrong hands, said Alexander Yakovenko, Russia’s ambassador to the UK.

Posted by: somebody | Aug 28 2013 15:34 utc | 69

Here’s what General Dempsey probably sees, taken from Information Dissemination.

Sun Tzu wrote, “Strategy without tactics is the slowest road to victory while tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.”
The United States seems to be making a great deal of noise in its preparations for a possible attack on Syria. This latest operation is just another example of the U.S. slide away from strategy toward high operational art as practiced by such well known German generals as Field Marshall Erich von Manstein on the Soviet front in the Second World War.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Aug 28 2013 15:42 utc | 71

@ Don 63

Image of US area military deployments.

Good map Here is one showing not only US but French and British military deployments are well. I think from available data the deployments include:
1) 4 US cruise missile carrying destroyers off the coast of Syria – USS Mahan, USS Gravely, USS Ramage and USS Barry.
2) 2 Aircraft Carriers – French Carrier Charles De Gaulle is docked in the South French port of Toulon on standby, USS Harry Truman is moving South through Suez Canal.
3) 2 Submarines – Britain has a Trafalgar Class Submarine (equipped with cruise missiles), France also has a submarine both South of Italy.
4) F-16’s – After a military drill in Jordan (Called Eager Lion) at the start of summer, the US left 18-24 F-16 Falcon jets in Jordan’s Muwaffaq Salti Air Base. More F-16’s would be available from the base in Bahrain where the USS Nimitz carrier group is currently. Would be in range of Syria but need to go through Saudi and Jordanian airspace.
5) Patriot Missiles – Current Patriot Missiles are deployed in Turkey and Jordan and (try not to laugh) Iron Dome will be deployed in Israel in case Israel decides to fail at shooting anymore rockets out of the sky.
6) Cyprus – A lot of air traffic reported at a British base in Cyprus today. Cyprus under 100 miles from Syria and with large airfields will likely be a British trump card.

Posted by: Colm O’ Toole | Aug 28 2013 15:53 utc | 73

Well , both China and Russia leave the UN summit … that mean YES to attack to Syria …
are you shocked !? well , in Iran everyone except this …

Posted by: R.P | Aug 28 2013 15:59 utc | 75

sorry , I just mean UNSC summit …
look like We should prepare ourselves for a war … sigh …
this is bad that we have a Reformist president in such critical situation …

Posted by: R.P | Aug 28 2013 16:04 utc | 77

Another sign of US slippage.
The US was supposed to attend a scheduled meeting with Russia today at the Hague to discuss Geneva-2, but State has said that the meeting was “postponed” by the US.
Anyhow, RT reports that UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Gennady Gatilov met in The Hague to discuss the UN probe of the alleged chemical weapons use in Syria, as well as the preparations to the Geneva-2 peace conference.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Aug 28 2013 16:05 utc | 79

Mr. P.,
Sure, but what can Russia do in terms of war? Send in jets? Anyway, why didn’t Russia do more earlier? It might become logistically difficult now.

Posted by: Ozawa | Aug 28 2013 16:07 utc | 81

@ Harry – 78
well , we still have USA nukes in Turkey and no Soviet/Russia nukes in Cuba … and back then it was Soviet …
Soviet and Russia only using Stalin legacy … they didn’t add anything to it and only using it ….
the last time Russia was a troublesome opponent for west , was in Stalin era ….
now , Russia is a shadow of his former self that only using Stalin legacy … nothing more nothing less …
well , if we only had 1/100 Russia weapons ( read it as nukes and ICBM ) we could kick western arses from our region in 2-3 years …
in Iran we knew that we wouldn’t rely on Russia in hard days … without their nukes , west could finish them in 1990s ….

Posted by: R.P | Aug 28 2013 16:14 utc | 83

@ 81
at least Russia could Veto any SC against Syria … this would open our hand to freely help Syria and open Syria hand to an harsh response to west ( although , Assad not the man who doing this … hell he almost loose Damascus till our advisers and Hezbollah came and saved it for him !!! )
and his army is full of traitors …. I won’t be surprised that his some of his army give up , and some others join the Wild Syrian Army (so called FSA ) and some other destroying anti air systems and some other rebel against Assad …

Posted by: R.P | Aug 28 2013 16:20 utc | 85

re 82 etc Don. I think you could be right. The US and UK could have difficulty pinning down the UN or any other sort of mandate for action.
Going to war without the justification properly established could have important consequences, like finally reducing the UN to impotence and ridicule. I am not sure the US wants that.

Posted by: alexno | Aug 28 2013 16:26 utc | 87

Russian RIA RU report the same, that russians walked out, however I might missunderstand but this meeting could just have been a meeting on creating a resolution, not actually voting on it. My bad if this is correct.

Posted by: Anonymous | Aug 28 2013 16:34 utc | 89

@Anonymous #89
“russians walked out” of what?

Posted by: Don Bacon | Aug 28 2013 16:36 utc | 91

The fix is in. This from the RT’s live update page:

14:29 GMT: A report by Bloomberg citing an unnamed UN official has claimed that Syrian President Bashar Assad’s brother Maher is suspected of authorizing the use of chemical weapons in the August 21 incident. Assad’s younger brother, who commands the Syrian Republican Guard and the Army’s 4th Armored Division and is portrayed in the report as a “shadowy figure,” may have allegedly ordered the attack without the president’s consent. Should Maher Assad be found a culprit of this “brash action,” a Republican Guard stronghold may become the target of the Western missile strike instead of the presidential palace, the official reportedly said.

It dovetails perfectly with the Mossad plant.

Posted by: William Bowles | Aug 28 2013 16:41 utc | 93

@ 93
Well if the republican guard is the target then it is without doubt an attempt to rebalance in favor if the rebels. That’s the most effective fighting unit. Any acceptance of a “limited” strike is like digging your own grave. Better off throwing everything they have, not on the US, but on Israel and keep firing until the Israelis ask the US to stop. They are the drivers behind the policy and they are the ones who will stop it to save themselves.
Otherwise, best prepare for a humiliating death by a thousand cuts.

Posted by: Lysander | Aug 28 2013 16:51 utc | 95

@ Luca K #94
Citing antiwar.com [!!] that “China is being encircled by US military bases” is bogus US propaganda. There is no such thing. Russia neither. And then I don’t see how you differ from Mr Pragma with your “but.”

Posted by: Don Bacon | Aug 28 2013 16:55 utc | 97

The US is a third-world country, yet has the most military clout. Plus, it has been involved for a long time now in manipulating, controlling, scamming, etc. the world financial system, which it can do because of its military / diplo / etc. grasp and threat. To maintain that status it has to react willy-nilly to at least some world events (not Mali for ex.) even if only with words, but ultimately showing some muscle is mandatory.
Obama is a reluctant interventionist, as he is closer to the Finance, Corp. nexus, also Surveillance World, straight in the line of very tight regulation of society thru expert dominating control, plus, say targeted assassinations. Typical of “Chiefs” more to the left of the aisle. I need not quote any historical names. As compared to his predecessor, who was linked strongly to Big Oil and the military-industrial complex, that is to extraction and pillage and aggression, in an old-fashioned, straight out colonialist, fashion. Obama’s red line (chem weapons) was probably forced, imposed, a concession granted to buy time, on his part. And lo and behold! … the statement lead to the inevitable.
The result (Clinton-Bush-Obama) however, is pretty much the same, repeating the same sick scenarios, with perhaps a some time lag.
Which shows once more that the US president is a puppet, a spokesman.
Congress of course is simply on the take, ineffective, a total joke.

Posted by: Noirette | Aug 28 2013 17:08 utc | 99