Logic and Professor Theodore Postol appear to have demonstrated that — the Trump Administration probably lied — about who carried out the alleged Syrian gas attack

© 2017 Peter Free

 

17 April 2017

 

 

False flags — are in the American mainstream

 

Recall President Lyndon Johnson's concocted Tonkin Gulf attack (1964) — you know, the one that justified escalating the already misbegotten Vietnam War?

 

And, more recently, President George W. Bush's much exaggerated allegation that Saddam Hussein was out to get us with stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction?

 

 

Now there's the fake Syrian Government sarin attack

 

Former MIT weapons and military technology scientist, Theodore Postol, recently made cumulatively short work of dismissing the Trump Administration's probable untruths about the Syrian Government's use of sarin gas.

 

You can read Dr. Postol's three assessments — which compare evidence with (evidently false) statements taken from the White House Intelligence Report:

 

 

here

 

denying allegations of a sarin air drop by photographically evaluating the crater-located munition — and assessing the environmental conditions prevailing at the time of the alleged drop

 

here

 

concluding that the publicly available evidence — "indicates that the WHR was probably a report purely aimed at justifying actions that were not supported by any legitimate intelligence"

 

here

 

further suggesting that — "The data provided in these videos make it clear that the WHR made no good-faith attempt to collect data that could have supported its 'confident assessment' that the Syrian government executed a sarin attack as indicated by the location and characteristics of the crater."

 

 

Professor Postol noticed some of the same things that bothered me about the videos that were supposed to demonstrate the use of sarin gas by the Syrian government.

 

Like:

 

 

(a) the allegedly responding medical team's failure to properly protect itself against almost certainly lingering sarin gas,

 

and

 

(b) the team's medically impossible ability to get away with such carelessness.

 

 

Taken with my logic-based doubts (regarding American certainty about who did what to whom) — Dr. Postol's specifically material suspicions about the false flag sarin attribution seem to be reasonably founded.

 

Given that President Assad had nothing to gain (and a lot to lose) by using chemical weapons — one has good reason to doubt American statements regarding his regime's certain culpability.

 

 

But heck . . .

 

Who cares about what's true, when the President can lie about who did what to whom — and then launch a massive missile strike that gets the Democratic Party's equally false "Trump is a Russian puppet" off his back?

 

And who cares what an "expert" (like Professor Postol) has to say in rebuttal?

 

After all, we're Americans. We don't need no stinkin' experts.

 

 

Our cultural penchant for telling lies — just leads to more of the same

 

What (for instance) would Jesus say?

 

Or is that a step too far to ask of the pastors and priests, who supposedly have something to teach us about appropriately Christian behavior?

 

If there is one American hypocrisy that irritates me, it is our claim to exclusively righteous behavior, while demonstrating (at nearly every turn) that we eagerly indulge its antithesis.

 

 

The moral? — Someone's lying about the alleged sarin attack — and it is probably not the Syrians and Russians

 

So much for civilian (Constitution-based) control of American military adventurism.

 

It appears that at least half of Americans are generally on board with dumping integrity in favor of lie-based bellicosity.

 

So what (we apparently think), if a "fib" rained 59 missiles down on someone else and notably heightened tensions between the world's two preeminent nuclear powers?

 

Hmmm?

 

That's good strategy, ain't it?