It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Kerry: Chemical Weapons 'Undeniable'

page: 4
15
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 12:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by cass1dy09
Kerry & Assad with their wives in 2009, how the times have changed.


Kinda reminiscent of a scene out of Animal Farm.

I hope that server hocked loogies in all of their drinks.
edit on 27-8-2013 by MrInquisitive because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 01:13 AM
link   
Kerry is a joke.

Then again anyone in his position is a joke... they wouldn't put someone there who was honest.

He's just a tool for distraction. Another empty voice to make everyone talk about what they want us talking about.

Edit: yeah and i watched the video, almost couldn't keep on watching but, just needed to... nothing's changed, nothing at all. Still the same old ketchup for brains he always was.
edit on 27-8-2013 by elcapitano75 because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-8-2013 by elcapitano75 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 01:20 AM
link   
Doesn't congress have to vote on us going to war?I might be a little slow but if we use military force doesn't congress have to approve it or do they get away with it by not decaring war and just calling it a military action?Just curious.

while I am at it are we even going to wait for the un inspectors to do there job or are we going to do john wayne justice shot first and ask questions later.

lastly don't get me wrong I don't have a problem with military action I just want hopefully my president to be a statesmen first and let diplomacy/un do there job first.Basically a man of peace first then if all else fails make it rain with cruise missles.



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 01:35 AM
link   
reply to post by MrInquisitive
 





It's also quite interesting that formerly secret CIA documents have just been released, which show that the CIA and hence the US knew that Saddam Hussein was using chemical weapons, including nerve gas, against its own people and against Iranian forces in the Iran-Iraq war in the years 1983-1984, during the Reagan administration, and yet the US continued to support Iraq materially, financially and intelligence-wise, and that Don 'Rummy' Rumsfeld even went to Iraq and shook the murderous dictator's hand.


I really don't feel like arguing at the moment,

But all of the countries( ALL OF THEM) were right there during the Iran-Iraq war. And both East and West are helping out there IN SYRIA.

Saw that thread which is why I made this comment there:

This post




Wikipedia's article on Iraq's WMDs gives a good rundown of the international contributions:

All told, 52% of Iraq's international chemical weapon equipment was of German origin.
Around 21% of Iraq’s international chemical weapon equipment was French. About 100 tons of mustard gas also came from Brazil.
The United Kingdom paid for a chlorine factory that was intended to be used for manufacturing mustard gas
An Austrian company gave Iraq calutrons for enriching uranium. The nation also provided heat exchangers, tanks, condensers, and columns for the Iraqi chemical weapons infrastructure, 16% of the international sales. Singapore gave 4,515 tons of precursors for VX, sarin, tabun, and mustard gasses to Iraq.
The Dutch gave 4,261 tons of precursors for sarin, tabun, mustard, and tear gasses to Iraq.
Egypt gave 2,400 tons of tabun and sarin precursors to Iraq and 28,500 tons of weapons designed for carrying chemical munitions. India gave 2,343 tons of precursors to VX, tabun, Sarin, and mustard gasses.
Luxemburg gave Iraq 650 tons of mustard gas precursors.
Spain gave Iraq 57,500 munitions designed for carrying chemical weapons. In addition, they provided reactors, condensers, columns and tanks for Iraq’s chemical warfare program, 4.4% of the international sales.
China provided 45,000 munitions designed for chemical warfare



Iraq'a WMD's

Iraq and weapons of mass destruction

The US was NOT the only cook in that kitchen, and the US doesn't make SCUD launchers.

Don't think there is anyone that can prove whose chemical munitions landed on who there.

Spain, and China hell.

edit on 27-8-2013 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 01:39 AM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


You know it all smells like a NWO plot. Honestly, if I am starting to think this, then ATS must be getting to me.



Im surprised Kerry didn't ask Obama for his medals back, so he could wear them while he said this.


edit on 27-8-2013 by sonnny1 because: typo, my 10th one today! LOL



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 01:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by othello
while I am at it are we even going to wait for the un inspectors to do there job or are we going to do john wayne justice shot first and ask questions later.


Well now that the Inspectors seem to be conveniently coming under fire by snipers,

Looks like it's John Wayne to the rescue. And it will be more like, Shoot first, i'm not up for re-election later.



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 01:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by sonnny1
reply to post by neo96
 


You know it all smells like a NWO plot. Honestly, if I am staring to think this, then ATS must be getting to me.



Im surprised Kerry didn't ask Obama for his medals back, so he could wear them while he said this.



I think it is something simple like GREED.

I can't remember the specific thread, but all the action in Syria is over a natural gas line.

Wish I could remember the thread, and post.

Think it is this:

www.zerohedge.com...

edit on 27-8-2013 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 02:10 AM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


We are doomed as a species Neo.

I have some "Natural gas" for them.........

Letting it rip, right now..........






posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 02:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by dominicus
I don't believe a single bit of this. I think it's all smoke and mirrors BS to get attention off of Obama & the Rouge NSA fiasco.

I wonder what Russia has to say about this.

Could be a trigger for WW III. Russia backs Asad, rouge us gov backs rebels


The US dont really support the rebles, that is the smoke screen in this conflict. The US uses the rebles to stage their own goal. And that is to get ridd of Assad.

The US set up the Red Line when it comes to their intervention in this conflict. It doesnt matter who crosses the Red Line; Assad is the target.

Only the US have a real motive to cross their own Red Line, because their goal is to take out Assad not to help the rebles.



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 03:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by neo96


The video watch or don't.


In a parallell universe, Kerry is the president and Obama is current Secretary of State. The world is the same, the wars are the same, and the sheeple that grazes on the fertile grass, raised on BS, are the same.


Just saying.



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 03:26 AM
link   
reply to post by johncarter
 


Add Hillary to Bizarro world, and it still would be the same, eh?



Pathetic.



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 04:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by MrInquisitive
 



I really don't feel like arguing at the moment,

But all of the countries( ALL OF THEM) were right there during the Iran-Iraq war. And both East and West are helping out there IN SYRIA.



And here I thought I was agreeing with you to some degree, and you seem to want to keep it an argument -- even if you don't feel like arguing at the moment.


My point about US aid/help to Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war was not that the US was supplying all or even a majority of the chemical precursors and technology for chemical weapons, but that we, the US, were backing a country diplomatically, financially, materially and intelligence-wise that was using chemical weapons. We were giving Iraq agricultural loans (something like $30 million, if I remember correctly), providing satellite intelligence, and covering for it in the UN when Iran accused it of using chemical weapons.

We also sold them weapons from 1983-1988, although it was a very small portion of their arms purchases (about 0.8%):

Wikipedia: SIPRI_Arms_Transfers_Database,_Iraq_1973–1990


But why would we sell any weapons to a country using chemical weapons. In fact, even when they missiled a frigate of ours and killed and wounded some of our sailors, President Gipper was extremely forgiving to ol' Saddam.

My overarching point is that we had no problem with Iraq using chemical weapons and even supported the country in various material ways, but now we are making a big deal out of possible chemical weapon use in Syria and threatening retaliatory strikes against the Syrian government, even though we apparently can't prove which side in the conflict used them. And it is the US that is threatening attacks against Syria now, not the litany of countries you mentioned. It is likely that the two former european empires that are now US lap dogs, i.e. UK and France, will get in on the expending of ordinance upon the Syrian people, but I doubt the other countries you mention want to get in on the action.

You seem to get very defensive when people point out the hypocrisy of the US government and the bad things it has done. In particular you wanted to make sure that I was aware that Germany and a lot of other countries were the ones selling Iraq chemical agents in the 1980's. I was quite aware of that. My point is that we did business at all with a country that was using chemical weapons on its on civilians and on the military of its neighbor at the time, but now we are raising a hue and cry about the fairly small-scale use of it in Syria -- simply because it is convenient for the US's geopolitical and corporate interests.
edit on 27-8-2013 by MrInquisitive because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 12:18 PM
link   



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 12:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by othello
Doesn't congress have to vote on us going to war?I might be a little slow but if we use military force doesn't congress have to approve it or do they get away with it by not decaring war and just calling it a military action?Just curious.

while I am at it are we even going to wait for the un inspectors to do there job or are we going to do john wayne justice shot first and ask questions later.

lastly don't get me wrong I don't have a problem with military action I just want hopefully my president to be a statesmen first and let diplomacy/un do there job first.Basically a man of peace first then if all else fails make it rain with cruise missles.


A formal declaration of war must be approved by congress. However the president does have some power over military operations through Executive Orders.



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 12:36 PM
link   
Kerry is just one of many bought and payed for liars. Just like McCain and Lindsey Graham. You see, it makes no difference what party the deceiver belongs to cause they all are just puppets on strings.

Another War? This is pure madness, these people are absolute lunatics. These arrogant carpet baggers are not even bothering to hide their evil intentions any longer. The majority of Americans do not support any kind of military action on Syria, yet they go about as if we do not even exist.

There are no checks and balances on these mad Men and Women. There is no longer any rule of law. Where are the people with reason? Is there anyone left who has any honor other than Ron Paul, who's no longer in a position to even protest against such insanity. There are no Rebels in Syria, just payed mercenaries that have been armed by the masters of puppets.

Bizarro World is exactly what this all seems like. ~$heopleNation
edit on 27-8-2013 by SheopleNation because: Typo



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 01:46 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 



And the legal chemical weapons they use to kill us here in the USA via Big Pharma isn't a moral obscenity?

People even pay for a slow death via big pharma.



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 11:49 PM
link   
reply to post by spy66
 


yep I agree,
my enemies enemy is my friend, the rebels are just a tool at the right place at the right time to be exploited by the U.S. to help achieve their ultimate goal of getting rid of assad.



posted on Aug, 28 2013 @ 02:19 PM
link   
we are aware that chemical weapons were used. but by whom? we don't even know if it was a free syrian army attempt to get global condemnation or assad him self giving the orders. i would also like to know which chemicals were used to see if the syrian government had the type used?



posted on Aug, 28 2013 @ 04:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by theman1111
we are aware that chemical weapons were used. but by whom? we don't even know if it was a free syrian army attempt to get global condemnation or assad him self giving the orders. i would also like to know which chemicals were used to see if the syrian government had the type used?


Not sure if it's been said yet, but the FSA has used sarin gas in prior attacks.




top topics



 
15
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join