Video Shown to Senators in Classified Briefings Released

Here we go, just saw this on Twitter.

CNN has a video of various clips, the same video that Obama is showing to Congresspeople in the classified meetings.

***Warning, the video is quite graphic****

What does the video *show*? It shows clips of people dead and dying after the supposed attacks. Now, CNN can't independently verity the veracity of the video clips themselves, but they can verify that the Obama administration is showing them to Congresspeople.

Now, what does this say?

Because of apparent lack of evidence tying Assad to the attacks, he is playing pure PATHOS to drum up congressional support, because that is ALL they have: playing on people's emotions.

Look at the little girl in spasms. Look at the little boy foaming at the mouth and convulsing. Looks at all the horrible things! We must act!

What does the video NOT show? Evidence of WHO is behind it, and certainly not evidence of Assad being behind it.

As one of the three tiers of the rhetorical triangle, since the other don't appear to be working (the logical and ethical arguments fail except for the most vicious of the war hawks), PATHOS is going to be the one played, possibly, even harder.

The intent is to get these images to the public, so Obama can have "confidence" that Americans will support a campaign, after he pulls at their heart strings and shows—not just pictures—but video of dead and dying children...

Pulling the dead and dying children card to play...Pretty low.

With NO evidence tying Assad to it.

ETA: A new article released by NBC

The footage of bodies writhing on the floor, people with their dilated eyes watery and dazed, and children seemingly gasping for air, sometimes with other, inert bodies nearby, are just some of the gruesome images that the administration says are consistent with exposure to nerve agents.

NBC News has not been able to independently verify the authenticity of these videos.

Will the people swallow it?

It looks like a standard production. CNN is good at that.

I don't think the video is showing real victims.

Might be a training video.

There's more of those around that genuine footage of real events.

Strange how they always seem to have high quality cameras right there in the middle of the confusion !!

No doubt the event happened and real people died, but as far as WHO is responsible for the attack, well, I think we know the "rebels" carried out said attack, at the order of the CIA and or the POTUS. The rebels are mere pawns, sent in to commit these attacks, and then the results are force fed to the world as having been carried out by the Syrian government.

reply to post by Liquesence

This video proves nothing.
If this video answers to this questions, I might buy it.
1. Was this in Syria?
2. In what way the alleged chemical agents were used?
3. If people in the video are poisoned with chemicals, where're the blood tests which proves it?
4. Where's the irrefutable proof that regime forces used alleged chemicals?
5. DFQ is this video?
In other words, where's the video that proves who, when, what, how used alleged chemicals?

If this is how justice works in America, may God help us all...

What I want to see- are the transcripts of the soldiers in complete confusion.

THAT is what we NEED to see.

Not a video of a bunch of dying children not tying anything to anyone. So Tacky.

reply to post by xuenchen


It could very well be a production, but I am fairly certain CNN is not behind it. The US administration might be, but to claim it's CNN is a bit unfair. I'm sure the White House and State Dept have their own video editors that created the video with clips, but whether those clips are authentic is the question (and even CNN can't verify that they are). CNN is just saying, " hey, this is what the White house is showing senators."

As far as quality, even iPhones shoot in HD, so quality is not much of an issue. I doubt they're using analog camcorders over there....

reply to post by zilebeliveunknown


I agree.

That's why it's a pathetic play of pathos on the government/Obama's part.

They HAVE nothing else....

reply to post by Liquesence


What a totally piss poor PSYOP campaign by the White House. It just goes to show you how amatuerish this Administration is.

I doubt it was even classified.

Why do I have this feeling that if the American people and Congress manages to get the White House to back down, then the Progressives in charge won't get what they want?

reply to post by xuenchen


I'm curious... What about this doesn't look legitimate to you?

There are a couple things I noticed but I wouldn't call it fake. I respect your opinions though so I'm wondering what you keyed on that I may have missed? I'll hold much other comment about the video until then... Hmmmm

On a whole different aspect, I do note it very interesting that CNN, usually a pro-admin channel in overall coverage, made several special points about saying this proved nothing for source, just effect. I wonder if they did that with thought to Obama or toward CNN crews likely in Syria and possibly subject to bad treatment or lost access if CNN is too critical?

Hard to say these days, isn't it?

reply to post by TDawgRex


Hi there TDawg.... addressing your statement that you doubted these videos were even classified.. that answer would be.... no they were not.

I was watching CNN as this was being presented as "Breaking News" on the Syrian situation. The reporter who was narrating the videos goes on to say, very shortly after the OPs sourced video ends, is that these videos being presented to our law makers were uploaded to YouTube shortly after the attack and are available to anyone. So no, these are not even close to being qualified as classified intell since our own intelligence community admits to pulling them off YouTube to begin with.

classified briefings. Other bad stuff is happening on twitter. O.o

I don't doubt that these videos are real. I saw one of the videos they showed in that piece on CNN the day after it happened on YouTube, so the videos themselves were not classified. Having said that I do believe that chemical weapons were used, that has never been a doubt that there was IMO. The videos DON'T show who did it, and even if they did, why do we once again need to be the morality police!!

reply to post by MyMindIsMyOwn


That's...funny. Not funny haha, but..

So, the administration says in its released statement the other day that it bases its report off of, among other things, social media reports.

Which seems to suggest that they just pulled a bunch of (unverified) crap—attributed to the attack—off of Youtube or wherever else, and are using THAT as justifiable basis for attack, and selling the attack in closed door meetings with Congressional members.

That's just...

...Even more pathetic.

Originally posted by thesmokingman...I think we know the "rebels" carried out said attack, at the order of the CIA and or the POTUS.

We do? Do you have incontrovertible proof of this outrageous claim? There have been several separate gas attacks leading up to the August 21st attack. Although there is proof that the 'rebels' are in possession of Sarin and personally it would seem far more likely that they would use them than the Assad regime, I have not seen any legitimate proof as to who launched the attacks. There is a lot of 'evidence' out there that suggests that the rebels are responsible for at least some of the attacks but we really don't know for sure.

Originally posted by Liquesence
Pulling the dead and dying children card to play...Pretty low.

Most of us figured Obama's pull that.

Most people acknowledge that a chemical attack happened. That's not really up for debate.
What IS up for debate is ... WHO PULLED OFF THE ATTACK? (we don't know)
More importantly what IS up for debate .... WHY DOES THAT MEAN WE HAVE TO ATTACK?
Answer .... it doesn't mean we have to attack.
It doesn't mean that we have to support Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood.

Sen Inhofe on this thread stated that the classified briefing answered none of the important questions. It was just a pull on the heart strings thing. But it gave no information as to why we should be the ones to go into Syria ...

reply to post by FlyersFan


This is how they operate... always have. Remember the babies being thrown on the floor from their incubators at the start of the Gulf war? Same tactic. Wasn't Obama. They all use the same playbook. They always have.
People need to start understanding that.

Mhmm okay. comments removed

Originally posted by jtma508

Originally posted by thesmokingman...I think we know the "rebels" carried out said attack, at the order of the CIA and or the POTUS.

We do? Do you have incontrovertible proof of this outrageous claim? There have been several separate gas attacks leading up to the August 21st attack. Although there is proof that the 'rebels' are in possession of Sarin and personally it would seem far more likely that they would use them than the Assad regime, I have not seen any legitimate proof as to who launched the attacks. There is a lot of 'evidence' out there that suggests that the rebels are responsible for at least some of the attacks but we really don't know for sure.

We do....www.infowars.com...

The individual in the clip, Nadeem Baloosh, is a member of an insurgent group called Riyadh Al Abdeen, which is active in the Latakia area of Syria.
Baloosh speaks of “chemicals which produce lethal and deadly gases that I possess,” before going on to state, “We decided to harm them through their women and kids.”

www.globalresearch.ca...

Syrian rebels in the Damascus suburb of Ghouta have admitted to Associated Press correspondent Dale Gavlak that they were responsible for last week’s chemical weapons incident which western powers have blamed on Bashar Al-Assad’s forces, revealing that the casualties were the result of an accident caused by rebels mishandling chemical weapons provided to them by Saudi Arabi

We do......
conservativebyte.com...

“From numerous interviews with doctors, Ghouta residents, rebel fighters and their families….many believe that certain rebels received chemical weapons via the Saudi intelligence chief, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, and were responsible for carrying out the (deadly) gas attack,” writes Gavlak. (back up version here). Rebels told Gavlak that they were not properly trained on how to handle the chemical weapons or even told what they were. It appears as though the weapons were initially supposed to be given to the Al-Qaeda offshoot Jabhat al-Nusra.
Read more at conservativebyte.com...

One more for good measure

Originally posted by Liquesence
reply to post by MyMindIsMyOwn

 

That's...funny. Not funny haha, but..

So, the administration says in its released statement the other day that it bases its report off of, among other things, social media reports.

Which seems to suggest that they just pulled a bunch of (unverified) crap—attributed to the attack—off of Youtube or wherever else, and are using THAT as justifiable basis for attack, and selling the attack in closed door meetings with Congressional members.

That's just...

...Even more pathetic.

Your thoughts above mirror my own.

The only thing that was 'verified' by US Intelligence agencies are the supposed locations of the videos. Unless Syrian floor tiles photograph very differently than others I'm not even sure how that verification can be used as absolute in some of the videos. The reporter did mention that locations of video's filmed outside were verified using GPS and satellite imaging. That I can almost buy, but the rest of it even makes the plausible in all of this a worthless pile of...well you know what, as far as I am concerned.

I am glad you decided to open a thread on this, I was contemplating it myself because I was wondering if anyone else out there was having problems with it as I was. Apparently I was not alone.

reply to post by Nephalim


Show me where I laughed at kids dying. You can't, because I didn't.

So, because it's on liveleaks that makes it authentic? And yes, a source video and the subject matter therein DO matter if it's used to justify killing when there is no DIRECT correlation or relationship between the two incidents. I'm not say it's not authentic or wasn't filmed after the attacks in Syria, but until it's VERIFIED using it as evidence is not right.

And if the administration pulled and used these videos without said verification it makes it that much more troubling in their drumming for war.

That's the point.