Syrian militants and Israel get to keep WMDs

 

“Evil forces pose less danger to us when they make war on each other. This keeps them focused locally and it prevents either one from emerging victorious and thereby posing a yet-greater danger. Western powers should guide enemies to stalemate by helping whichever side is losing, so as to prolong their conflict.” …Daniel Pipes – a Zionist NeoCon

 

… by Jim W. Dean, VT Editor    … with  Press TV

 

Monday was a day of surprises, but not unexpectedly so.
Last week brought middle America out onto the front lines to fight for their own rights, including a novel one like their government respecting their opposition to what has been a disastrous foreign policy on Syria and the Mid East.
They don’t want America to become a terrorist country any more than it already has.
Most bets have been made now on the military strike resolution not being approved. Rather than suffer a more open defeat, the White house may pull the resolution despite his blustering of having the right to order an attack anyway. Terrorists get their orders to make terror legal. Presidents have their White house attorneys perform that function.
If Obama attacks on his own authority an impeachment motion would be on the House floor within a week. His presidency would be toast for the rest of his term and a large part of America will invest a huge effort to punish him and those in his administration. This is the two front war I discussed in my last Viewpoints.

I expect a movement will start to restrict the president’s commander in chief authority as necessary for our national security. Obama is nuts to think he has any authority to order such an attack on his own with what he has put on the table. Every tin horn dictator on the planet could start doing the same and call it the ‘Obama Doctrine’.

The State Department is also wounded, and not just with the John Kerry folly we have watched throughout all of this. Many Americans suspect some ‘outside influence’ has been exerted among their large number of high-ranking Zionist officials who hold dual citizenships with Israel and have lunch with AIPAC during the week.

For those in another group this would be considered a major conflict of interest. But as usual, a special exception is made for you know who.
I do see a few silver linings in all of this. The first is watching the Democrat/Republican political divide overcome for a national security issue. That said, there are political motivations also involved.
A politically wounded Obama would help the Republicans as we get closer to primary season because Obama could end up being asked to not show up at campaign events much like Bush II.
Kerry’s presidential hopes are permanently in the rear view mirror, much to the delight of Hillary Clinton. But America has much to fear from the road being made clear for her own presidential race.
Hillary has a long history of political corruption that would make her the Democratic ‘Mitt Romney’ lite candidate, minus all the drug cartel money laundering.

I sense a possible political upheaval where Americans might come to their senses to realize that a very big change is needed in Washington before any real improvements can ever be made. The usual game here is that their replacements end up being nothing more than wolves in sheep’s clothing. These new actors say what they know the public wants to hear about being anti-Washington, but when they get there they reveal themselves as being more of the same.

AIPAC looks like it will also take a beating as their looking out for Israel’s interest above America’s is becoming more widely understood for what it is…treason. We may see the next round of Congressional elections where being funded by AIPAC will actually taint a candidate, and it should. They don’t give their money out without a contract that the candidate is giving their vote to the Lobby on their key issues, a shame on Congress as an institution, and on the country as a whole.
New Congressional candidates could make demands for a new investigation of AIPAC and why American law enforcement never breaks up Israeli espionage networks a major campaign issue. Maybe the voters will wise up and make it one themselves.
Israeli espionage is now a major concern among the military people. Their new interest is due to what they have been able to learn on the internet and through the declassified archives that are getting passed around more.

Our Intelligence community has also taken a big hit here, not only among the people but fellow retired professionals. America’s teaming up with the Saudi and Qatari funded terror brigades does not go down well with them. They see no real national security issue to justify this outrage.
Some of the public thinks that damaging the country may be their goal, to create another generation of terrorists who will keep the counter Intel people regularly employed until their old age checks kick in. I have never seen this discussed so openly before.

Gordon Duff laid some of this out in spades in his Monday Viewpoints, “Syria: What America’s Congress should know.” The CIA’s drug running scandal could blow up on Obama’s watch as those coming behind him in the new elections may not want that on their plate.

These same military and Intel people, you can bet your booties their Congressmen are going to be hearing from them. The Left and Right have joined hands to call Obama’s bluff on the proof that he claimed to have. He conceded he did not have it. We already knew he didn’t, just some doctored up radio intercepts.
We expect to be seeing another unusual partnership emerging of the anti-war left and hard boiled Intel people challenging America’s aggressive military posture and pre-emptive strike doctrine as domestic threat itself.
The real test will be if they can get investigations going on our whole foreign policy, with Syria being the trigger. But the big hurdle there is that Congressional hearings don’t excite people any more as they are not trusted either.

For example, the Republicans in the House will be only too happy to start impeachment hearings on Obama if he attacks Syria, which I hope he is not stupid enough to do. But the Republicans would not want to have their past involvement in Imperial America or their providing dependable political protection for Israeli espionage operations here to be put under the spotlight.

Corporate media in America is still giving Obama a pass on saying nothing about the Persian Gulf State terror operations, and especially Prince Bandar, who have provided quiet funding and recruiting for the al-Nusra brigades.
This cannot continue indefinitely. All the Obama administration has mumbled its ‘concern’ over heavy weapons getting into the hands of al-Nusra.
That concern is a fraud on the American people as the insurgents have chemical weapons, and have admitted such. Obama’s and Kerry’s people are acting like we are all too stupid not to know this, but we do.
The Saudi Royal family has put themselves in great danger. Because the King rules by decree it is not really a country, so engaging in terrorism, including family members, makes them personally liable.
I expect to see worldwide challenges emerge regarding diplomatic immunity where State sponsored terrorism is involved. In the Royal families cases that could lead to confiscation of assets as indemnification for their crimes.
The US would want to block this of course, ironically like they do prosecutions of Israeli espionage here. The Israelis could ‘tell tales’, and so could the Saudis, like how American told them it was OK to do these regime changes using terrorism. Is America’s national security a victim of blackmail?
You would be surprised at how many Intel professionals judge that to be the case.

When the right crisis emerges the Intel community can bring it all down overnight with a big Intel dump. They have not so far because it would be a political disaster for the country. But they are now having to weigh that against the national security disaster that has been in progress for years now, with even Obama seeming to want to carry it forward.

He may feel that salvaging the Syria mess by getting rid of Assad somehow will save his presidency, as once the failure is complete there is no way to stop the leaks as to what really happened and why. I can only see Obama being willing to take these huge gambles with our country because he fears some horrible revelations if he doesn’t.
But I have to ask myself what could be worse than engaging in state sponsored terrorism for regime change?  I shudder to even contemplate what that might be.

______________________________