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.

 

Intelligence report says U.S. officials knew about nerve-gas attack in Syria three days before it ki

page: 1
13
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 1 2013 @ 10:35 PM
link   

Intelligence report says U.S. officials knew about nerve-gas attack in Syria three days before it killed over 1,400 people


www.dailymail.co.uk

In his press conference yesterday, President Barack Obama said that there was 'overwhelming evidence' Syrian President Bashar al-Assad carried out a chemical weapons attack against rebels in the suburbs of Damascus on August 21.

What he didn't mention was that his administration knew about the alleged nerve-gas attack three days before it happened.
(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
thecable.foreignpolicy.com




posted on Sep, 1 2013 @ 10:35 PM
link   
Really? Nothing was done? Not even a warning? All of this is past the point of ridiculous. What's the point of defense intelligence, spying...if these things are allowed to happen. Oh wait, they are allowed for a reason.

Will let members discuss that,
What do you say ATS?

The main source is foreignpolicy.com, but shared article from DM because you can view it.

www.dailymail.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Sep, 1 2013 @ 10:37 PM
link   
More BS from Obama and Washington DC, that's what I think. This new information is set out to probably help the administrations case for more "proof" it was Assad's forces.
edit on 1-9-2013 by Swills because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 1 2013 @ 10:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Swills
 


At this point wouldn't put it past them on that either.



posted on Sep, 1 2013 @ 10:42 PM
link   
There will be more supporting evidence and character assassination , that means one thing - it is a done deal, just have to see when it will be.



posted on Sep, 1 2013 @ 11:01 PM
link   
What it tells me is the freakin deal didn't fly so Assad (with help) is gonna have to lob a chem attack at Israel or Turkey and hit a summer camp full of children. It's almost Merrie Melodies without the fun.



posted on Sep, 1 2013 @ 11:10 PM
link   
reply to post by dreamingawake
 


I don't know if anyone has mentioned lately that our government lies to us.

They lie constantly, shamelessly, continuously, habitually, pathologically. They stand up, as Kerry did the other day, and tell a fabulous, fantastic lie like a 4-year-old would tell knowing full-well that he'd get his butt blistered for it.

The lies are the only "transparent" thing about this administration. They can't help themselves. They are to be pitied—and their butts blistered at the very earliest opportunity....



edit on 9/1/2013 by Ex_CT2 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 1 2013 @ 11:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ex_CT2
reply to post by dreamingawake
 


I don't know if anyone has mentioned lately that our government lies to us.

They lie constantly, shamelessly, continuously, habitually, pathologically. They stand up, as Kerry did the other day, and tell a fabulous, fantastic lie like a 4-year-old would tell knowing full-well that he'd get his butt blistered for it.

The lies are the only "transparent" thing about this administration. They can't help themselves. They are to be pitied—and their butts blistered at the very earliest opportunity....



edit on 9/1/2013 by Ex_CT2 because: (no reason given)


Yup indeed. Happy ATS has been sharing a lot of threads on being tired of the lies too. Hopefully that's really being felt elsewhere, as it seems to be, one recent poll says most Americans do not support a war on Syria.



posted on Sep, 1 2013 @ 11:30 PM
link   
Well of course they knew.... But it was way before the 3 days. I'm quite certain they helped. After all it's their people/ Allies that got that ball rolling.

No wonder Isreal quiet... I'd keep a low profile too.
edit on 1-9-2013 by tracehd1 because: Add



posted on Sep, 2 2013 @ 12:03 AM
link   
reply to post by dreamingawake
 


Have a look at page 11 of this topic :- www.abovetopsecret.com...

It's very enlightening.



posted on Sep, 2 2013 @ 12:22 AM
link   
reply to post by dreamingawake
 



For the umpteenth time, they don't care www.abovetopsecret.com...

The only goal the U.S. currently has in regards to Syria is removing Assad and getting a puppet government in place. And nor do they care which side is using chemical weapons, they're just looking for anything which can be used as a justification for an attack (that includes MSM propaganda devoid of all factual information).



Originally posted by Pinkorchid
reply to post by dreamingawake
 


Have a look at page 11 of this topic :- www.abovetopsecret.com...

It's very enlightening.


Probably connected to the above link I posted.
edit on 2-9-2013 by Zcustosmorum because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 2 2013 @ 12:43 AM
link   
Thanks for the replies and the links especially.



posted on Sep, 2 2013 @ 12:52 AM
link   
reply to post by dreamingawake
 


Eh.. I don't buy it. I would live to know what exactly they knew. I am confidwnt it was the rebels as they had already made the same type of attack before. Could it be that they heard assad was prepping an artillary strike and gave that info to rebela who struck the same area with chems so it would be blamed on the rwgime? Like "we knew therewould be a strike there and thwn there wrre chems, so it must have been assada chems" when reality it was the rebels releasing chems on a sitw that info declaared assad would strike? Might this also explain why assad hit the same area with conventional weapons shortly after (the one that we inexplicably claimed was to cover the chem attacks)?

I think this is us "fessing up" to look kinda bad while simultaneously convincing people the chem attacks were really by assad. Get it? People are more likely to believe it if they think knowing the truth makes the US look bad. Thet wouldn't want us to know B so A must be true.



posted on Sep, 2 2013 @ 01:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by dreamingawake

Intelligence report says U.S. officials knew about nerve-gas attack in Syria three days before it killed over 1,400 people


www.dailymail.co.uk

In his press conference yesterday, President Barack Obama said that there was 'overwhelming evidence' Syrian President Bashar al-Assad carried out a chemical weapons attack against rebels in the suburbs of Damascus on August 21.

What he didn't mention was that his administration knew about the alleged nerve-gas attack three days before it happened.
(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
thecable.foreignpolicy.com


I can't read the report due to the ripoff factor of some clown place demanding money SCREW THIS



posted on Sep, 2 2013 @ 01:30 AM
link   
reply to post by dreamingawake
 



In reading through the original source here I find this:


In the three days prior to the attack, we collected streams of human, signals and geospatial intelligence that reveal regime activities that we assess were association with preparations for a chemical weapons attack,' the U.S. intelligence report released by the Obama administration said


What this says to me is that in retrospect, the intelligence agents can now assess that what they were seeing was in preparation of the attack. It does not seem to me that they are saying that they knew about it ahead of time.

Hindsight is 20/20 and that is all we are seeing here.



posted on Sep, 2 2013 @ 01:43 AM
link   
reply to post by youdidntseeme
 


But they don't know what kind of attack. The Syrian army hit the same area with conventional weapons around the same time. If the rebels could get off gas just before a syrian mortar attack woyld that not give the appearance that the Syrians fired the gas?

I just can't trust it because the UN said they coylsnt confirm whobused it, but they did confirm that the rebels HAVE used Sarin. If you have a gas attack and two possible attackers and the one winning the war hasn't used gas and has a reason not to, and yhe one losing the war HAD used gas recently and coyld turn the war aroynd by using it and blaming the other side. Which wou ld you bet on?



posted on Sep, 2 2013 @ 09:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by youdidntseeme
 


But they don't know what kind of attack. The Syrian army hit the same area with conventional weapons around the same time. If the rebels could get off gas just before a syrian mortar attack woyld that not give the appearance that the Syrians fired the gas?



Interesting point, hadnt thought of that but it makes sense that the rebels could use a syrian army attack to cover their release of the gas in that area without the need for rockets.

I'd been working on the hypothesis that israel or saudi supplied the rockets and logistics to make the attack look as though it was from the syrian army.



posted on Sep, 2 2013 @ 10:21 AM
link   
It doesn't make sense. How did american intelligence know in advance of assad gassing the rebels? Was assad stupid enough to tell them so, or is it more likely a case of the rebels were given the sarin gas and told to use it, with the sole reason of framing assad and using this as an excuse to then invade, like they invaded a whole host of other countries?

Do the math!



posted on Sep, 2 2013 @ 10:27 AM
link   
They have had access to information, and advanced warnings for months now, also a clear warning of what will happen if the USA is provoked into direct military involvement in Syria.

They are being baited, they have been hooked and are being reeled in now.

At least British intelligence wasn't so willing to dismiss the information and warnings.

In my opinion, of course.



posted on Sep, 2 2013 @ 12:12 PM
link   
According to Snowden, the US intelligence knows most if not all communications. Making use of that information is another thing, it does my head in thinking about just how much processing power is needed. The level of US involvement in Syria at the moment appears to be around providing support resources. What would of happened if they did try and step in before it happened? Is it a setup? Surely one missile strike will not make that much difference?

While there are issues surrounding the integrity of digital resources, it does provide a strong lead to track down further information.



new topics

top topics



 
13
<<   2 >>

log in

join