This and That...

[Warph]

***>> Job Interview <<***

Ultra Reality: What would you do in this situation?

[Warph]

Egyptian media is publishing the image below of POS  Barack Hussein Obuma as Satan himself.

(Wow!  Such a huge contrast from the halos that Liberal U.S. media portray in all their images of Obama.  Wonder if Liberal media or Bill O'Reilly will accuse Egyptian's of being racist?  Didn't Liberals get upset with the History channel for a similar comparisonas I recall?)

Raymond Ibrahim at PJMedia posted the following accompanying information:
Popular and widely read Egyptian newspaper Al Wafd published the above picture today portraying U.S. President Barack Hussein Obama as Satan himself. The unflattering picture has been making the rounds on Facebook in the Middle East and, according to Al Wafd, is representative of the hatred growing numbers of people in the region have for the American president, thanks to his staunch and unwavering support for Islamists and jihadiis — whether in Nigeria, Libya, Egypt, or Syria — even as they terrorize, murder, rape, and burn down Christian churches, that is, even as they engage in diabolical activities.

[Warph]

Michigan Professor Bullies Student During Anti-Republican Rant

Posted by Andrea Ryan on Wednesday, September 4, 2013, 8:14 PM
Guest post by Breitbart News writer, John Nolte

On the first day of his creative writing class at Michigan State University, Professor William S. Penn was caught on video launching an eight-minute rant against "cheap" racist Republicans who don't want to pay taxes (after raping this country) or allow black people to vote.  At one point the professor singles out a student he caught "frowning" and berates him or her in front of the class:

–

Campus Reform reports that the university will be "looking into" the event:
"At MSU it is important the classroom environment is conducive to a free exchange of ideas and is respectful of the opinions of others," Kent Cassella, an MSU spokesman wrote.

[Warph]

25 Quotes About The Coming War With Syria
That Every American Should See

By Michael Snyder, on August 29th, 2013

     
If Barack Obama is going to attack Syria, he is going to do it without the support of the American people, without the approval of Congress, without the approval of the United Nations, and without the help of the British.  Now that the British Parliament has voted against a military strike, the Obama administration is saying that it may take "unilateral action" against Syria.  But what good would "a shot across Syria's bow" actually do?  A "limited strike" is not going to bring down the Assad regime and it is certainly not going to end the bloody civil war that has been raging inside Syria.  Even if the U.S. eventually removed Assad, the al-Qaeda affiliated rebels that would take power would almost certainly be even worse than Assad.  Even in the midst of this bloody civil war, the rebels have taken the time and the effort to massacre entire Christian villages.  Why is Barack Obama so obsessed with helping such monsters?  There is no good outcome in Syria.  The Assad regime is absolutely horrible and the rebels are even worse.  Why would we want the U.S. military to get involved in such a mess?

It isn't as if it is even possible for the U.S. military to resolve the conflict that is going on in that country.  At the core, the Syrian civil war is about Sunni Islam vs. Shia Islam.  It is a conflict that goes back well over a thousand years.

Assad is Shiite, but the majority of Syrians are Sunni Muslims.  Saudi Arabia and Qatar have been pouring billions of dollars into the conflict, because they would love to see the Assad regime eliminated and a Sunni government come to power in Syria.  On the other side, Iran is absolutely determined to not allow that to happen.

Saudi Arabia and Qatar have no problem with using Sunni terrorists (al-Qaeda) to achieve their political goals.  And as a very important ally of the Saudis, the U.S. has been spending a lot of money to train and equip the "rebels" in Syria.

But there was a problem.  The Syrian government has actually been defeating the rebels.  So something had to be done.

If it could be made to look like the Assad regime was using chemical weapons, that would give the U.S. government the "moral justification" that it needed to intervene militarily on the side of the rebels.  In essence, it would be a great excuse for the U.S. to be able to go in and do the dirty work of the Saudis for them.

So that is where we are today.  The justification for attacking Syria that the Obama administration is giving us goes something like this...

-Chemical weapons were used in Syria.

-The rebels do not have the ability to use chemical weapons.

-Therefore it must have been the Assad regime that was responsible for using chemical weapons.

-The U.S. military must punish the use of chemical weapons to make sure that it never happens again.

Unfortunately for the Obama administration, the world is not buying it.  In fact, people are seeing right through this charade.

The U.S. government spends $52,000,000,000 a year on "intelligence", but apparently our intelligence community absolutely refuses to see the obvious.  WND has been able to uncover compelling evidence that the rebels in Syria have used chemical weapons repeatedly, and yet government officials continue to insist over and over that no such evidence exists and that we need to strike Syria immediately.

Shouldn't we at least take a little bit of time to figure out who is actually in the wrong before we start letting cruise missiles fly?

Because the potential downside of an attack against Syria is absolutely massive.  As I wrote about the other day, if we attack Syria we have the potential of starting World War 3 in the Middle East.

We could find ourselves immersed in an endless war with Syria, Iran and Hezbollah which would be far more horrible than the Iraq war ever was.  It would essentially be a war with Shia Islam itself, and that would be a total nightmare.

If you are going to pick a fight with those guys, you better pack a lunch.  They fight dirty and they are absolutely relentless.  They will never forget and they will never, ever forgive.

A full-blown war with Syria, Iran and Hezbollah would be a fight to the death, and they would not hesitate to strike soft targets all over the United States.  I don't think that most Americans have any conception of what that could possibly mean.

If the American people are going to stop this war, they need to do it now.  The following are 25 quotes about the coming war with Syria that every American should see...

1. Barack Obama, during an interview with Charlie Savage on December 20, 2007: "The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation."

2. Joe Biden, during a television interview in 2007: "The president has no constitutional authority ... to take this nation to war ... unless we're attacked or unless there is proof we are about to be attacked.  And if he does, if he does, I would move to impeach him."

3. U.S. Representative Ted Poe: "Mr. President, you must call Congress back from recess immediately to take a vote on a military strike on Syria. Assad may have crossed a red line but that does not give you the authority to redline the Constitution."

4. U.S. Representative Kurt Schrader: "I see no convincing evidence that this is an imminent threat to the United States of America."

5. U.S. Representative Barbara Lee: "While we understand that as commander-in-chief you have a constitutional obligation to protect our national interests from direct attack, Congress has the constitutional obligation and power to approve military force, even if the United States or its direct interests (such as its embassies) have not been attacked or threatened with an attack."

6. The New York Times: "American officials said Wednesday there was no 'smoking gun' that directly links President Bashar al-Assad to the attack, and they tried to lower expectations about the public intelligence presentation."

7. U.S. Senator Rand Paul: "The war in Syria has no clear national security connection to the United States and victory by either side will not necessarily bring in to power people friendly to the United States."

8. U.S. Senator Tim Kaine: "I definitely believe there needs to be a vote."

9. Donald Rumsfeld: "There really hasn't been any indication from the administration as to what our national interest is with respect to this particular situation."

10. Robert Fisk: "If Barack Obama decides to attack the Syrian regime, he has ensured – for the very first time in history – that the United States will be on the same side as al-Qa'ida."

11. Former congressman Dennis Kucinich: "So what, we're about to become al-Qaeda's air force now?"

12. Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Muallem: "We have two options: either to surrender, or to defend ourselves with the means at our disposal. The second choice is the best: we will defend ourselves."

13. A Syrian Army officer: "We have more than 8,000 suicide martyrs within the Syrian army, ready to carry out martyrdom operations at any moment to stop the Americans and the British. I myself am ready to blow myself up against US aircraft carriers to stop them attacking Syria and its people."

14. Khalaf Muftah, a senior Ba'ath Party official: "We have strategic weapons and we're capable of responding."

15. An anonymous senior Hezbollah source: "A large-scale Western strike on Syria will plunge Lebanon virtually and immediately into the inferno of a war with Israel."

16. Ali Larjiani, the speaker of the Iranian parliament: "...the country which has been destroyed by the terrorists during the past two years will not sustain so much damage as the warmongers will receive in this war."

17. Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei: "Starting this fire will be like a spark in a large store of gunpowder, with unclear and unspecified outcomes and consequences"

18. General Mohammad Ali Jafari, chief of Iran's Revolutionary Guards: (an attack on Syria) "means the immediate destruction of Israel."

19. Israeli President Shimon Peres: "Israel is not and has not been involved in the civil war in Syria, but if they try to hurt us, we will respond with full force."

20. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu: "We are not part of the civil war in Syria, but if we identify any attempt whatsoever to harm us, we will respond and we will respond in strength."

21. The Jerusalem Post: "The lines between Hezbollah and the Syrian regime are so blurred that Israel will hold Damascus responsible if Hezbollah bombards Israel in the coming days, Israeli officials indicated on Wednesday."

22. Ron Paul: "The danger of escalation with Russia is very high"

23. Pat Buchanan: "The sole beneficiary of this apparent use of poison gas against civilians in rebel-held territory appears to be the rebels, who have long sought to have us come in and fight their war."

24. Retired U.S. General James Mattis: "We have no moral obligation to do the impossible and harm our children's future because we think we just have to do something."

25. Syrian refugee Um Ahmad: "Isn't it enough, all the violence and fighting that we already have in the country, now America wants to bomb us, too?"

[Warph]

WND EXCLUSIVE
Evidence: Syria gas attack work of U.S. allies

Contrary evidence arises as U.S. considers punishing Assad regime

Published:


08/26/2013
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/08/video-shows-rebels-launching-gas-attack-in-syria/#uEW0VhKmIKM0gtvX.99

Video's and pictures showing that these are U.S.Backed rebels, the FSA (Free Syrian Army).


NEW YORK – As the U.S. considers a response to what it calls a chemical weapon attack by Syria's Bashar al-Assad regime that killed hundreds of civilians, reliable Middle Eastern sources say they have evidence the culprits actually were the rebel forces trying to take over the government.

Secretary of State John Kerry accused the Assad government Monday of covering up the use of chemical weapons in "a cowardly crime" and a "moral obscenity" that shocked the world's conscience. Kerry claimed the Obama administration had "undeniable" evidence "that the Assad government was culpable in the use of chemical weapons on civilians" in the Aug. 21 attack in Damascus suburbs.

Reports that the Obama administration is considering a military strike against the Assad government continued to circulate Monday. Meanwhile, U.N. weapon inspectors in Syria were fired upon by snipers as they attempted to investigate the site of the Aug. 21 attack.

Assad has rejected charges that his government forces used chemical weapons as "preposterous" and "completely politicized," the Los Angeles Times reported.

He argues Syrian forces were in the targeted area.

"How is it possible that any country would use chemical weapons, or any weapons of mass destruction, in an area where its own forces are located?" Assad asked in the interview with Izvestia, according to a translation provided by Syria's official news agency and published by the Los Angeles Times.

"This is preposterous! These accusations are completely politicized and come on the back of the advances made by the Syrian Army against the terrorists."

Rebel attack?

With the assistance of former PLO member and native Arabic-speaker Walid Shoebat, WND has assembled evidence from various Middle Eastern sources that cast doubt on Obama administration claims the Assad government is responsible for last week's attack.

A video posted on YouTube, embedded below, shows Free Syrian Army, or FSA, rebel forces launching a Sarin gas attack on a Syrian village.


Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/08/video-shows-rebels-launching-gas-attack-in-syria/#uEW0VhKmIKM0gtvX.99   

[jarhead]

Warph,
And you can bet the farm that those chemical weapons are marked, "the property of Saddam Hussein"---you know--the WMD's that "Bush lied and people died"

[Warph]

Warph,
And you can bet the farm that those chemical weapons are marked, "the property of Saddam Hussein"---you know--the WMD's that "Bush lied and people died"

(Video: Syrian Rebels Fire Gas Canister At Hospital With "Allah's Permission"...

Yep.. You got that RIGHT, buddy! They are still "moderates"...  FSA/Al Qaeda/Humas/Hezbollah and Lord knows who else, supported by Obuma's Adm. & and Lurch Kerry using the same blue canisters that Saddam had in Iraq containing Sarin gas)

New footage from September 3, 2013 shows militants from the "Free Syrian Army" (FSA) using blue canisters/cylinders filled with an unknown gas mounted on top of shells fired on Syrian Army targets in different areas of Aleppo that are still under the control of the Syrian military.

Published on Sep 3, 2013

[Warph]

Warph,
And you can bet the farm that those chemical weapons are marked, "the property of Saddam Hussein"---you know--the WMD's that "Bush lied and people died"

Jar...
A top Pentagon official who was responsible for tracking Saddam Hussein's weapons programs before and after the 2003 liberation of Iraq, has provided the first-ever account of how Saddam Hussein "cleaned up" his weapons of mass destruction stockpiles to prevent the United States from discovering them.

"The short answer to the question of where the WMD Saddam bought from the Russians went, was that they went to Syria and Lebanon," former Deputy Undersecretary of Defense John A. Shaw told an audience Saturday at a privately sponsored "Intelligence Summit" in Alexandria, Va. (www.intelligencesummit.org).

"They were moved by Russian Spetsnaz (special forces) units out of uniform, that were specifically sent to Iraq to move the weaponry and eradicate any evidence of its existence," he said.

FLASHBACK ON WMD

Iraq's WMD Secreted in Syria, Sada Says
By IRA STOLL, Staff Reporter of the Sun | January 26, 2006
http://www.nysun.com/foreign/iraqs-wmd-secreted-in-syria-sada-says/26514

/

Satellite photo of hundreds of trucks systematically leaving an Iraqi weapons dump, early 2003.

Instead they are located in Lebanon's heavily-fortified Bekaa Valley, swarming with Iranian and Syrian forces, and Hizbullah and ex-Iraqi agents,
Geostrategy-Direct.com will report in Wednesday's (Sept. 2, 2003) weekly edition.

U.S. intelligence first identified a stream of tractor-trailer trucks moving from Iraq to Syria to Lebanon in January 2003.
The significance of this sighting did not register on the CIA at the time.

U.S. intelligence sources believe the area contains extended-range Scud-based missiles and parts for chemical and biological warheads.

Mutually-lucrative Iraqi-Syrian arms transactions are nothing new.
Firas Tlas, son of Syrian Defense Minister Mustafa Tlas, has been the key to Syria's rogue alliance with Iraq.
He and Assad made hundreds of millions of dollars selling weapons, oil and drugs to and from Iraq,
according to the May 13, 2003 edition of Geostrategy-Direct.com.

The CIA now believes a multi-million dollar deal between Iraq and Syria provided for the hiding and safekeeping of Saddam's strategic weapons.

Not surprisingly, U.S. inquiries in Beirut and Syria are being met with little substantive response, U.S. officials said.



The media is fond of saying, without question, that there were no WMDs found in Iraq.

This has always been untrue and easily refuted, if media did anything other than parrot the party line.

The question isn't about whether there were WMDs. The question has been how have we been letting the media get away with misstating the facts for all these years when ample evidence was there.

As the military reported, after we went into Iraq, chemical weapons, facilities and residue were in fact found, and kept being found for years afterward.




Via NY Post from 2010:

US did find Iraq WMD

by Don Kaplan
October 25, 2010
http://nypost.com/2010/10/25/us-did-find-iraq-wmd/

There were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq after all.
The massive cache of almost 400,000 Iraq war documents released by the WikiLeaks Web site revealed that small amounts of chemical weapons were found in Iraq and continued to surface for years after the 2003 US invasion, Wired magazine reported.

The documents showed that US troops continued to find chemical weapons and labs for years after the invasion, including remnants of Saddam Hussein's chemical weapons arsenal — most of which had been destroyed following the Gulf War.

In August 2004, American troops were able to buy containers from locals of what they thought was liquid sulfur mustard, a blister agent, the documents revealed. The chemicals were triple-sealed and taken to a secure site.

Also in 2004, troops discovered a chemical lab in a house in Fallujah during a battle with insurgents. A chemical cache was also found in the city.




Note here that the present DNI James Clapper said in 2007 that much of the WMDs in Iraq had in fact been shipped to Syria.

This article notes in detail some of the shipments, that were in fact done with the assistance of Russia:

Syria's Chemical Weapons Came From Saddam's Iraq
Posted 07/19/2012
http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/071912-618875-syria-chemical-weapons-came-from-iraq-.htm#ixzz2e5tJ9o8A
War On Terror: As the regime of Bashar Assad disintegrates, the security of his chemical arsenal is in jeopardy. The No. 2 general in Saddam Hussein's air force says they were the WMDs we didn't find in Iraq.

King Abdullah of neighboring Jordan warned that a disintegrating Syria on the verge of civil war puts Syria's stockpile of chemical weapons at risk of falling into the hands of al-Qaida.

"One of the worst-case scenarios as we are obviously trying to look for a political solution would be if some of those chemical stockpiles were to fall into unfriendly hands," he said.

The irony here is that the chemical weapons stockpile of Syrian thug Assad may in large part be the legacy of weapons moved from Hussein's Iraq into Syria before Operation Iraqi Freedom.




Let us not forget also that "the cake was not a lie".
Secret U.S. mission hauls uranium from Iraq
Last major stockpile from Saddam's nuclear efforts arrives in Canada
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/25546334/ns/world_news-mideast_n_africa/t/secret-us-mission-hauls-uranium-iraq/#.UiXp8Tash8E

[Warph]

Iran Plots Revenge, U.S. Says
Officials Say Intercepted Message to
Militants Orders Reprisals in Iraq if Syria Hit.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323893004579057271019210230.html

(What are the odds Obuma would respond? I'd say somewhere around .001%)

Sept. 6, 2013
WASHINGTON — The U.S. has intercepted an order from Iran to militants in Iraq to attack the U.S. Embassy and other American interests in Baghdad in the event of a strike on Syria, officials said, amid an expanding array of reprisal threats across the region.

Military officials have been trying to predict the range of possible responses from Syria, Iran and their allies. U.S. officials said they are on alert for Iran's fleet of small, fast boats in the Persian Gulf, where American warships are positioned. U.S. officials also fear Hezbollah could attack the U.S. Embassy in Beirut.

While the U.S. has moved military resources in the region for a possible strike, it has other assets in the area that would be ready to respond to any reprisals by Syria, Iran or its allies.

[...]

The Iranian message, intercepted in recent days, came from Qasem Soleimani, the head of Revolutionary Guards' Qods Force, and went to Iranian-supported Shiite militia groups in Iraq, according to U.S. officials.

In it, Mr. Soleimani said Shiite groups must be prepared to respond with force after a U.S. strike on Syria. Iranian officials didn't respond to requests for comment.

Iraqi Shiites have been sympathetic to the Alawite-dominated government of Syria and oppose U.S. strikes against the regime of President Bashar al-Assad.

U.S. officials said the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad was one likely target. The officials didn't describe the range of potential targets indicated by the intelligence.

[Warph]

Lurch Kerry: We Will Help Al-Qaeda Rebels In Syria
If We Do NOT Bomb Their Enemies

(Can someone please explain the basics of war to Lurch)

Via NRO:
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/357766/kerry-inaction-will-embolden-extremists-syria-andrew-johnson

. . . "I guarantee you if we turn our backs today, the picture we all saw in the paper today and the media of those people shot, that will take place more because more extremists will be attracted to this, because they will be funded as the only alternative in order to take on Assad," Kerry told MSNBC's Chris Hayes on Thursday, referring to a New York Times report that featured a rebel group brutally executing pro-Assad forces.