— ARnews 1936 (@ARnews1936) January 8, 2016
So, US wants to attack Iran???? pic.twitter.com/3ECC7xd9L1
— Max Keiser (@maxkeiser) January 6, 2016
— Cristina Laila (@cristinalaila1) January 8, 2016
— Rubberblon (@Rubberblon) January 8, 2016
— Say No to the TPP (@kencampbell66) January 8, 2016
Entanglements costing trillions of dollars effecting millions of lives.
— Ian56 (@Ian56789) January 6, 2016
— Sputnik (@SputnikInt) January 5, 2016
— Dr. Marty Fox (@DrMartyFox) January 7, 2016
What about MUSLIMS who are raping WOMEN?! SILENCE from this disgusting pig of a woman who claims to be 'pro woman'!! https://t.co/2NdMTNoxyn
— Cristina Laila (@cristinalaila1) January 7, 2016
— pRESIDENT ALIEN (@pRESIDENT_ALIEN) January 7, 2016
The Washington Times has an ongoing FOIA request for information about Syriaâ€™s supposed extensive chemical weapons arsenal. The requests have been denied because of the Defense Departmentâ€™s Defense Threat Reduction Agency. That agencies mission was to remove and destroy Syriaâ€™s supposed stocks of lethal gas components. Part of the information the Times were interested in was the history of Syriaâ€™s involvement with chemical weapons industry.
The Timeâ€™s main interest is what the role of ANY third parties, such a rogue scientists or other countries, in producing and/or acquiring chemical weapons components and weaponzing them in bombs and artillery shells.
They first asked the Pentagon to provide detailed information. They then referred any questions to the U.N. supported Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons. When asked, a spokesman said that as a matter of practice it does not provide these details.
The Times is very interested in an inventory of the chemicals and their origins. They were denied because they were told the request was too broad. So specifically they asked for information on the components handled and their origin, whether it be Syria or third party. This time they acknowledged it had some applicable information, but cited a U. S. law that allows it to withhold â€œcertain sensitive information of foreign governments and international organizationsâ€
So we have information that at one time was the pretense of the United States intervening in a sovereign country and waging was against a duly elected ruler of a country.
Weâ€™ve since determined that there is no actually proof that the Assad regime has used chemical weapons. In fact evidence points that it was actually was the origin of the weapons. Is there a reason Obama choose to draw a red line and not act? Continue reading