Has the Deep State Struck Again?
By WILLIAM MAYER
April 6, 2017 - San Francisco, CA - PipeLineNews.org - While the president remains under relentless attack regarding the absurd and already disproven allegation that he worked with Vlad Putin to hack the election, in part by gaining access to John Podesta’s computer [and thus outing all of the DNC machinations] as if by magic an international crisis has presented itself in Syria where a brutal civil war that has been raging since 2011 has taken hundreds of thousands of lives.
As of today, Syrian president Bashar Assad stands accused and convicted in the leftist media and throughout much of the DC establishment as being this Strangelovian monster who authorized the use of chemical weapons against children in an alleged airstrike in or around the Syrian city of Khan Sheikhoun, south of Idlib a few days ago.
From the statements of U.S. Ambassador of Nikki Haley [not a fan] on the matter, the troubling takeaway is that some form of violent reprisal might be in the offing.
On its face the entire matter fails to pass the most rudimentary of smell tests, primarily because there have already been high-level [though admittedly rocky] talks going on, in two locations, Astana, Kazakhstan [which have concluded after a third round] and in Geneva, Switzerland where the process appears to be ongoing , to resolve the conflict among the principals, though participation by the so-called “good [aka, FSA] rebels” has been simultaneously denied in some publications and hinted at [in after hours consultations] by others.
As a general approach to ending the bloody civil war, the Syrian government has indicated that its position is flexible.
For example, from a January al-Jazeera piece:
“[The] Head of the Syrian delegation to the 3rd round of Astana talks Bashar al-Jaafari stressed keenness on the success of Astana track, and on that the talks will reach the safe side in a way that would serve Syria’s higher national interests whether the armed factions participated in the talks or not.” [source, Al-Jaafari: We Are Very Keen on the Success of Astana Track ].
Assad himself has stated that in the ongoing negotiations, “everything was on the table” [see, Bashar al-Assad: Everything on table in Astana talks - In interviews with French media, Syrian leader says military victory in Aleppo was the "triggering point" in the conflict].
Obviously the conflict has been a disaster for all concerned, except for ISIS and other Sunni jihadi forces. The general feeling among all concerned state parties [Iran, Russia, Turkey and Syria] is that they are seeking some way of disengaging from the seemingly never-ending conflict, a quagmire akin to B’rer Rabbit’s dilemma in Uncle Remus’ tale of the Tar Baby.
The question remains as to how far Assad is willing to go? Would he be amenable to abdication along with his family?
That possibility has been thrown around for years now with the Christian Science Monitor in 2012 writing about Syrian defector [who worked for Bashar al-Assad’s father, Hafez] Manaf-Tlass who appeared at the time willing to step in. But 5 years in the Syrian civil war is just this side of an eternity, though a similar prospect is intriguing as a possible solution, assuming Assad is willing to step down. Hopefully having learned from previous mistakes it really should be the desire of the United States - in the best of all possible worlds [which this is not] - for him to remain to provide some level of stability, our experience with regime change being kind of messy.
As the CS piece correctly notes however, such an idea is replete with difficulties, given Tlass’ potentially compromising associations. Also fresh in the mind of keen observers is the Ahmed Chalabi “affair” in which the supposedly “Westernized,” University of Chicago educated political operative who was probably rightly blamed for some of the more outlandish expectations before the commencement of Operation Iraqi Freedom, to the point of having become enmeshed in an intelligence scandal where he is alleged to have passed compromising information along to the Iranians.
So the question looms, with all of this going on and the Syrian regime at least indicating that it is genuinely willing to press forward, accompanied by vocal support to continue the negotiations by the various major players, how exactly would Assad benefit from what is really a minor [and still alleged] attack using chemical weapons at this time?
Certainly after 6 years of warfare, Assad must be entirely familiar with the highly developed signal intelligence capabilities of the United States. He absolutely is aware of the fact that we continuously have “eyes in the sky” and that the perpetrator of any such attack could rather easily and quickly be determined if the munition was delivered in any conventional manner, say a bomb delivered by a fixed-wing aircraft.
Additionally there was absolutely no tactical or strategic value in such an attack, killing 50 people in a conflict of this intensity would under normal circumstances not even make the news. That someone at Assad’s level would do this reeks of insanity.
So that’s really three strikes against the theory; a gas attack against civilians would rightly be seen as a war crime by the rest of the world and if it was initiated by Assad he would be nailed dead to rights.
Actually there is a fourth strike, that should be obvious.
What group would be the only possible benefactor from such an indefensible action? Obviously the answer is the Sunni jihadis operating in the area who would love to bring Assad down stealthily after having failed to defeat him militarily.
With all of this in mind we are really forced to proceed upon the assumption that Assad isn’t self-destructive, nor is he ignorant of U.S. capabilities, so a Sunni jihadist false flag operation is really only one of two reasonable explanations, as having U.S. bombers level Assad’s palace [for which the increasingly deranged John McCain is lobbying] would only benefit the baddest of the bad guys and thoroughly destabilize what’s left of Syria, which will never be reconstructed in our lifetime...if ever.
There is another possibility, one which we would have previously rejected out of hand, but given the recent developments we are daily witness to at this point in history we no longer have any faith in U.S. intelligence across the board.
None, we don’t care if “all 17 intelligence agencies” sign a declaration in blood, sorry guys you have and continue to betray us.
What has already come to the fore regarding the other false flag operation, the one reverberating as it crumbles around DC - the crack-smoking crazy allegation of some kind of Putin-Trump hack of the election - has brought to light the very dark side of America’s spy network, the entirety of which has been implicated until proven innocent as far as we are concerned.
The capabilities of a thoroughly corrupted, an all-seeing state surveillance system as weaponized by a treasonous Barack Obama are inestimable and the prospect that renegade members of U.S. intel working with agents of the Democrat party/Deep State to draw the new president into exactly the type of senseless foreign war he campaigned against is entirely too juicy to ignore.
For the record we are REALLY getting tired of the Jack [“we have high confidence”] Keane’s of the DC elite world running interference for dark forces whose only allegiance is to the community of crooked spooks. It’s folks like him that allowed the reputation of once hallowed American institution to be sullied in the first place to the point where their claims should, lacking absolute and transparent verification, be treated as horse-shit.
Beware Mr. Trump stay the hell away from this rotting fish and keep your powder dry, not for the Assad’s of the world [who is St.Michael the Archangell compared to your average ME Islamic thug] but fir the conspirators in your very midst who plot the destruction of the American republic.
©2017 PipeLineNews.org LLC, William Mayer. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form or by any means, including photocopying, recording, or other electronic or mechanical methods, without the prior written permission of the publisher, except in the case of brief quota