It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Note: Reports of chemical attacks originating from some locations may reflect the movement of patients exposed in one neighborhood to field hospitals and medical facilities in the surrounding area. They may also reflect confusion and panic triggered by the ongoing artillery and rocket barrage, and reports of chemical use in other neighborhoods
Okay I watched the vid of her and I'm like..................................What?????? Then I threw up.
Originally posted by burntheships
This is as good a place as any to put this, sad to say it looks
like the writing is on the wall.
First we have Pelosi, using her 5 year old grandson to make a political
statement about why the U.S. "needs" to go to war with Syria.
*Warning - this will sicken you*
Secondly, here is our confirmation that the U.S.did send in
CIA - agents for support into the Rebels.
First Syria rebels armed and trained by CIA 'on way to battlefield'
Mr Obama said that a 50-man cell, believed to have been trained by US special forces in Jordan, was making its way across the border into Syria, according to the New York Times.....
"There seems to be emerging from this administration a pretty solid plan to upgrade the opposition," Mr Graham said.
He added that he hoped the opposition would be given "a chance to speak directly to the American people" to counter US fears that they were dominated by al-Qaeda sympathisers.
"They're not trying to replace one dictator, Assad, who has been brutal... to only have al-Qaeda run Syria," Mr Graham said.
So there we have the admission that also, the U.S. is now backing rebels who are
supposedly a go between for al Qaeda and Assad?
Sickening.edit on 3-9-2013 by burntheships because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by earthling42
There, he said it, the goal to help oust assad, afterwards naturally there will be boots on the ground because the civil war is over and the chemical weapons are not allowed to fall in the hands of Al Qaida.
That is how i understand it.
Originally posted by all2human
So when asked what if Chem.weapons use continues after the strikes, the answer was we don't know ? these war-hawks have not thought this through,because it has nothing to do with Syria, there luring in Iran, that's the plan..edit on 3-9-2013 by all2human because: (no reason given)
James E. Risch
Benjamin L. Cardin
Richard J. Durbin
Edward J. Markey
Very smart man. And he is right about most people not wanting this. I was on drudge today and he has a poll up, if you are in favor or against, and last I check there were a half million votes and its like 92 percent against and 8 percent for.
Originally posted by MDDoxs
reply to post by Jusvistn
Wooo Rand just made point that has been on a lot of our minds.
Why would the Assad regime use weapons when UN inspectors were on the ground..
Originally posted by earthling42
reply to post by Dianec
That is the whole point, why no honest answer in the first place?
That can only be if they were not afraid that more chemical attacks would follow.
Which begs the question, were they themself involved in the attack to force a reason for an intervention, which obviously will not be limited and will not stop untill they have their way.
A limited attack, to sell that story to us must mean they really see us as stupid cattle.