Syrian False Flag Planned?

By Stephen Lendman

Never bet against Washington’s imperial plans. New tactics follow failed ones. Efforts to oust Assad continue. Proxy killers can’t do it alone. They’re no match against Syria’s superior military strength. It’s committed to rout them.

Expect NATO intervention anytime or perhaps post-US November elections. Libya 2.0 looks increasingly likely. What better way to finesse it than by staging a false flag attack blamed on Assad.

America’s false flag history suggests it. In 1898, Spain was falsely accused of blowing up the USS Maine in Havana, Cuba harbor. The Spanish-American war followed.

Roosevelt manipulated Japan to attack Pearl Harbor. South Korea was used to instigate war on the North. Lyndon Johnson wanted war on Vietnam and got it.

Fake threats sent US marines to Grenada. Manufactured incidents precipitated America’s Panama invasion.

Saddam was head-faked into invading Kuwait. The Gulf War, two decades of sanctions, another war, and occupation followed.

September 11, 2001 was the mother of all false flags. It’s the big lie of our time. Eleven years of imperial wars followed. One segues to another without end. Syria is Washington’s latest. Iran is next. Proxy wars always rage. Media silence makes pretexts unnecessary.

On August 20, Obama perhaps signaled US intervention intentions. He told reporters:

“I have indicated repeatedly that President al-Assad has lost legitimacy, that he needs to step down. So far, he hasn’t gotten the message, and instead has double downed in violence on his own people.”

“I have, at this point, not ordered military engagement in the situation. But the point that you made about chemical and biological weapons is critical.”

“That’s an issue that doesn’t just concern Syria. It concerns our close allies in the region, including Israel. It concerns us. We cannot have a situation where chemical or biological weapons are falling into the hands of the wrong people.”

“We have been very clear to the Assad regime, but also to other players on the ground, that a red line for us is we start seeing a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around or being utilized.   
That would change my calculus. That would change my equation.”

“We have communicated in no uncertain terms with every player in the region that that’s a red line for us and that there would be enormous consequences if we start seeing movement on the chemical weapons front or the use of chemical weapons. That would change my calculations significantly.”

These comments signal possible intervention. The New York Times said Obama’s warning advances things “a step closer to direct American intervention.”

Syrian Foreign Ministry Jihad Makdissi clearly said chemical weapons won’t be used internally. Nor will they be used against other nations except in self-defense.

Of course they won’t. Why would Assad give Washington and other NATO countries reason to intervene?

Continue reading