A False Flag

I was going to write a long rant over the accusations that Syria used chemical weapons but I won't. I'll try to keep it short.

As I wrote here before, this is a false flag operation. It would make no sense for Assad to use chemical weapons, especially "small amounts", when there would be no tactical advantage to using them and serious political (and tactical) repercussions for doing so.

This is very likely a setup by either the rebels, Israel or both to get the U.S. involved in the Syrian civil war. The scariest part of this is the way the media plays along, with nearly all news accounts suggesting Syria has used chemical weapons.

It wasn't until yesterday Yahoo/ABC News finally brought up the possibility of it being some sort of false flag. Can't find that article now but they then made a half hearted effort at debunking false flag claims. Among them was the suggestion that it would be too difficult for rebels to deploy chemical weapons.

That's not the point. They don't have to deploy them. They only have to make it seem as if Assad's forces did. Maybe easier said than done, but not too difficult. They'd have everything to gain and nothing to lose by trying it.

As far as I'm concerned, everything points to just that happening, especially the way the media and politicians are ignoring the possibility.

Partial List of False Flags

Lewrockwell.com reprints a Zero Hedge article listing some false flag operations of the past- false flags being incidents created by governments blaming the other side in order to justify war. I hadn't heard of a couple of them. What I found most interesting was the mention of the Gulf of Tonkin incident at the end of the list.

I'd always understood the supposed attacks by North Vietnamese patrol boats on U.S. Navy ships never occurred. In fact, I worked with a guy back in the 80s that was a U.S. Navy retiree. He told me he was there during the supposed Gulf of Tonkin attacks and that "nothing happened". He seemed a bit embarrassed about it, being a fairly patriotic guy.

According to the linked article, recently declassified NSA reports conclude that one of the attacks did occur but the second one didn't. I can't help but believe the guy I knew who was there and it makes me wonder how often the NSA might come to the wrong conclusions?

False Weather Alerts?

I realize forecasting weather isn't an exact science, but I wonder if I should have signed up for a weather alert list. Not sure if this is from the weather service, or the weather channel, but I received thie one below later in the day yesterday. When they say "red flag warning issued", it makes you think things are going to get interesting, but nothing has happened that I'm aware of- no strong winds anyway:

"Red Flag Warning issued August 25 at 12:04AM PDT until August 25 at 11:00AM PDT by NWS Eureka

...GUSTY OFFSHORE WINDS AND POOR RH RECOVERIES TONIGHT... DRY AND GUSTY EASTERLY WINDS WILL CONTINUE ACROSS THE HIGH ELEVATIONS OF DEL NORTE...NORTHEAST HUMBOLDT...AND FAR WESTERN SISKIYOU COUNTIES TONIGHT. ...RED FLAG WARNING REMAINS IN EFFECT UNTIL 11 AM THIS MORNING FOR GUSTY WINDS AND LOW HUMIDITY FOR FIRE WEATHER ZONES 203 AND 204... * AFFECTED AREA...FIRE WEATHER ZONE 203 AND 204 ABOVE 2500 FEET. * WIND...NORTHEAST 10 TO 20 MPH WITH OCCASIONAL GUSTS TO 30 MPH ON THE HIGHEST PEAKS. * HUMIDITY...MAXIMUM OVERNIGHT HUMIDITY WILL BE 25 TO 40 PERCENT. * IMPACTS...ANY FIRES THAT DEVELOP WILL LIKELY SPREAD RAPIDLY. OUTDOOR BURNING IS NOT RECOMMENDED. PRECAUTIONARY/PREPAREDNESS ACTIONS... A RED FLAG WARNING MEANS THAT CRITICAL FIRE WEATHER CONDITIONS ARE EITHER OCCURRING NOW...OR WILL SHORTLY. A COMBINATION OF STRONG WINDS...LOW RELATIVE HUMIDITY...AND WARM TEMPERATURES CAN CONTRIBUTE TO EXTREME FIRE BEHAVIOR.

==========================
Services Description
==========================
This service is provided at no cost to you.

1. Severe Weather Alerts that include current radar, weather conditions and forecast links.
2. In addition to alerts you may also receive daily AM and PM forecast information with a separate option to unsubscribe."

Gas Attack Numbers Phony?

I was wondering about the numbers being thrown around in regards the recent chemical attack in Syria. The first I heard it was something like 1300 fatalities, then it went down and stayed around 300 to 400. Then the other day John Kerry started saying 1400+(?). I figured Kerry was just boosting the numbers to get people worked up.

It seems I was right. Thank you Antiwar.com for this short look at the numbers. Seems fatalities were in the hundreds as some others were saying. To be fair there's probably no way to know the exact number of casualties, but Kerry was obviously inflating his for propaganda purposes.

As an interesting aside, here's a timeline put together of the progression of the false flag operation against Syria. I thought I was pretty good about catching not- widely- reported news. I missed most of these stories.