Video: John Kerry’s not good, very bad day with Chris Wallace

posted at 12:31 pm on September 1, 2013 by Jazz Shaw

Ed warned you this morning, so we all knew that John Kerry was doing the Full Ginsburg for Sunday morning. The topic, of course, was the President’s sudden about-face on letting Congress make the call on attacking Syria. It was bound to be a tough sell, but I don’t think anyone expected things to go as badly as they did when he talked to Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday, so you should really see the video here if you missed it.

It’s a roughly 12 minute interview, but if you want to jump straight to the opening volley of the fireworks, skip to the two minute mark of the video below. Kerry is busy trying to spin the I-Formation hand-off from POTUS to the Congress as a “big gain” as the world receives the “legitimacy of the full throated response of the Congress of the United States and the President acting together after our democratic process has worked properly.” Wallace is having none of it.

Chris Wallace: But Mr. Secretary, this isn’t CSI. This isn’t a civics lesson. People’s lives are at stake, as I don’t have to tell you, on the ground in Syria. In your remarks on Friday you said that this matters, and it matters beyond the borders of Syria. Take a look.

[Insert video from Friday]

CW: Mr. Secretary, what message are we sending to Iran and Hezbollah and North Korea when the President announces that he thinks that we should take military action, but he’s going to wait nine days for Congress to come back before he takes any action, and then he goes off and plays a round of golf? What message does that send to the rebels on the ground whose lives are in danger and to our enemies who are watching?

Secretary of State John Kerry: I think actually North Korea and Iran ought to take note that the United States of America has the confidence in its democratic process to be able to ask all of the American people to join in an action that could have profound implications with respect to Iran. The fact is that if we act, and if we act in concert, then Iran will know that this nation is capable of speaking with one voice on something like this, and that has serious, profound implications, I think, with respect to the potential of a confrontation over their nuclear program. That is one of the things that is at stake here. You just quoted it. That and America’s willingness to enforce the international norm on chemical weapons. I think we are stronger. The President thinks we are stronger when the Congress of the United States joins in this. I mean, Congress can’t have it both ways. You can’t sit there and say you’ve got to consult with us and honor the constitutional process, and Congress has the right to make its voice heard in these decisions, and the President is giving them that opportunity, and I think you should welcome it, Chris. And the Congress and the country should welcome this.

CW: But Mr. Secretary…

JK: It’s an important debate, and we do not lose anything militarily in the meantime.

CW: But the refugees on the ground lose something, sir. They lose with the possibility that they’re going to get killed in the meantime. Let me just, if I may, follow up.

I omitted all of the “ummms, uhs” and pauses from Kerry’s answers as per usual standards, but you have to see it to get the full flavor. It goes downhill from there. Let’s cut to the video, and then come back for a bit of different coverage.

The panel discussion before the interview is also worth a look. It covers many of the same scenes with a variety of opinions. But if there is one take from the opposite side which is at least worth a chuckle, it’s brought up by a panelist who quotes Axlerod from Twitter. On Obama’s decision to let Congress decide after so many of them insisted he needed their approval before going to war, he described the President as essentially turning Congress into “the dog that caught the car.

Discuss at your leisure.



Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

Still no word from Shrillary on the subject. hmmmmm.

Kissmygrits on September 2, 2013 at 9:11 AM

All by design.

Nile Gardiner, UK Telegraph:

Firstly, a US military intervention in the Syrian civil war is strongly opposed by the vast majority of the American public. A recent poll showed just nine percent of Americans backing US military involvement. She probably doesn’t see another war in the Muslim world as a vote winner in 2016. Secondly, she may well be harbouring doubts over the White House approach, which beyond the talk of airstrikes, lacks a coherent strategy, and the president hasn’t exactly made a clear-cut case that taking America to war in Syria is in the national interest. Thirdly, as “the Obama doctrine” goes down in flames in the Middle East, from Damascus to Cairo, Clinton will be nervous about being seen as part and parcel of it, which of course she is.

Fourthly, Clinton’s own track record on Syria has hardly been stellar. Before Syria descended into war, Clinton was a strong backer of engagement with Syria, greatly underestimating the nature of the Baathist regime, famously referring to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad as a “reformer” in April 2011. In addition, as Washington’s most senior foreign policy official, Clinton did little to stand up to Moscow’s aggressive support for the Syrians, eager to appease the Russians through the controversial “reset” strategy, which was her own brainchild. In addition, the Secretary of State was weak in the face of Iran, whose military and financial backing for the Assad regime has been vital to its survival.

Del Dolemonte on September 2, 2013 at 11:15 AM

As I had predicted in an earlier post on this thread, Obama is being applauded by liberals for his “courage” to seek approval from Congress. Just read some propaganda at Huffington Post and this is a quote from the article…”Obama’s move is also considered a rare act of genuine political courage.”

The article also insinuates that previous POTUS have not followed international norms and order by authorizing military strikes without approval from Congress. Clinton is the only one that comes to mind on that issue, but I feel the author of the article was trying to implicate Bush 41 and 43. In my earlier post, I also mentioned that Obama will get out of this jam by declaring that he and Congress will be following the “will of the American people” as Congress will surely vote no to any military intervention. Huffington article states “”Now, it’s up to the American people to make certain that Congress hears their voice as they make this decision.”

It’s a no-brainer. There will not be enough votes from Republicans and conservatives to authorize intervention. In fact, there will be more Dems and liberals voting against intervention than Republicans and conservatives. And the analysis will be that if more Republicans/conservatives had sided with the POTUS, then the al-Assad regime would have been properly “punished” and too frightened to attempt another chemical attack in the future. In other words, it will look like Republicans/conservatives will be responsible for leaving the door open to additional chemical attacks in Syria and perhaps Israel as well.

This administration knows how to propagandize moments like this better than any other in recent history. That is why they will most likely take over the House in 2014 and why Hillary “what difference does it make anyway” Clinton will become the first female POTUS in 2016. Conservatives are in for a hell of a ride for years to come.

metroryder on September 2, 2013 at 11:17 AM

samples that were provided to the United States

All these lawyers up on Capitol Hill…

“we were provided.”

Not, “we obtained” or “we went out and gathered on the ground where the attack took place.”

Chain of custody?

Depending on other services or even civilian groups with a dog in the fight, news agencies (Baghdad come to mind?) or a United Nations that has never ever in 50 years or longer ever provided fake evidence to any member ever?

Parsing Statedepartmentese is tough but not impossible…

Parsing English…is easy…if one just does it.

Which is why the Dems so often (to include that brilliant wordsmith Jake Carney) keep telling us, derisively, that we are simply parsing the words that were said and not listening to what was said as if parsing is such and evil ploy…

Words have meaning…convey meaning.

coldwarrior on September 2, 2013 at 11:17 AM

Well said.

BTW, Orange or Blue? Metro, that is.

coldwarrior on September 1, 2013 at 10:13 PM

I really don’t ride the buses or subways. Don’t have subways where I come from and I have no need to ride the bus. Not that I wouldn’t if there was a convenient bus route in my neck of the woods, but there isn’t. I have driven the same economical compact car for years and have no plans to trade up. I still have manual roll-down windows and 5-speed manual transmission. A car of anykind to me is just a method of getting from point A to point B. And I’ll choose the most economical car for my purposes. I think I am responsible for putting the “C” in conservatism.

metroryder on September 2, 2013 at 11:31 AM

Del Dolemonte on September 2, 2013 at 11:15 AM

We still have an embassy out there and maintain diplomatic relations with Syria…and we were just telling the world that Assad was a nice guy, a reformer, wasn’t a jihadi nutcase, Pelosi just loved visiting with him, as did Hillary, and John F’n Kerry, and all sorts of special folks….

I thought BFF meant forever….

coldwarrior on September 2, 2013 at 11:37 AM

The stupidity and contempt for this country Obama displays is becoming hard to hide. Even my sister is starting to catch on. He is dangerously unfit for office and is creating PR disasters for President Jarrett every time he moves his purple lips.

To review :

The US Embassy in Benghazi is under attack for 7 hours and Barry orders the military to stand down. Our ambassador and three navy SEAL’s are killed and dragged thru the streets and our embassy ransacked and destroyed.

Our response?

Hillary apologizes to the Muslim’s for a video that slanders the name of the prophet Mohammed. No military action is taken.

In Syria the Russian backed Muslims gassed the Al-Qaeda backed Muslims during a civil war to control this Islamic shithole.

Our response ?

Barry wants to take immediate action to defend the Al-Qaeda rebels from this atrocity. Military action MUST be taken.

But not until after everyone’s vacation.

He is a clown. But not a funny one. He is a sad and pathetic little clown that has been handed a stage he cannot act upon. It is just a matter of time before the rotten fruit is tossed at him and the curtain comes down.

DeweyWins on September 2, 2013 at 11:41 AM

Have you all seen the photos of the Kerrys having dinner with Assad?

Drudge headline…

dogsoldier on September 2, 2013 at 11:45 AM

metroryder on September 2, 2013 at 11:31 AM

Just a little Beltway game we used to play back in the Reagan days when we met people…Orange Line, or Blue Line?

Most often we’d ask for the stop…Pentagon was a giveaway…Foggy Bottom was a no-brainer…Pentagon City meant you were one of those Beltway bandits…Roslyn was a bit tougher, Pentagon and the Agency ran special Bluebirds from the metro stop…South Capital was a Hill staffer…good people to meet and play with…Orange Line was up and coming youngsters like myself…Vienna, Reston…out there in NoVa.

Yellow Line or Green Line, not so much.

Saw the handle, metroryder, thought I’d ask.

coldwarrior on September 2, 2013 at 11:46 AM

dogsoldier on September 2, 2013 at 11:45 AM

I see a sequel…

“Guess Who’s NOT Coming to Dinner?”

coldwarrior on September 2, 2013 at 11:48 AM

This is not an “imperial presidency”. Excuse me…then what is it then, if not exactly what Kerry said? Do We the People, have any say in anything any longer???

Carolynr on September 2, 2013 at 11:01 AM

When someone makes a statement like that they are in fact telling you the exact opposite. Zero does see himself as a king who can do no wrong and can have as much desert as he wants.

coldwarrior on September 2, 2013 at 11:11 AM

We must parse what they say very carefully, because taken within the context of this regime, they are untrustworthy, duplicitous, corrupt, underhanded, sneaky, they make shit up and they lie.

Did I mention they lie?

We don’t spy on American citizens.

hmmmm reminds me of

I did not have sex with that woman….

See, the truth is the exact opposite of what they say.

dogsoldier on September 2, 2013 at 11:52 AM

Politics aside, will we ever see any evidence on who released the chemicals? The hiding behind ‘classified’ says they don’t really have solid evidence. Balance that with N. Korea supposedly supplying Syria with chemicals indicates Assad had the better means of doing it. I can not dismiss Al-Qaida gaining the most from dispersing the chemicals to set up the Assad government.

Whatever the evidence shows the decision will be political irrespective of the facts. This administration has so screwed this up that there will be no good outcome no matter what is decided.

TfromV on September 2, 2013 at 11:55 AM

coldwarrior on September 2, 2013 at 11:17 AM

I think they decided to oust Assad and hoped this incident would give them sufficient reason. 150 cruise missiles is not a shot across the bow or even a limited engagement. That is a serious amount of ordinance.

Enough to destroy Assad and hand Syria over to Al Qaeda.

The evidence does not clearly show Assad made the attack. In fact certain elements of the “evidence” show that no one really knows who made the attack. I posted on that yesterday. Kerry put out a telephone intercept of one of Assad’s officers trying to find out what happened.

Zero’s advisers are desperately hoping to pin this embarrassing episode on the GOP, but the GOP didn’t rush our military to the med.

The GOP should come back, early if Zero asks, bring up the authorization for a vote and all of them should vote “present.”

It’s all on you democrats, Emperor Zero’s folly.

dogsoldier on September 2, 2013 at 12:05 PM

Meanwhile, out in Cairo….

Dissolve the Moslem Brotherhood.

Gonna need a whole lot more aqua regia….but that should do the trick.

If they want to do it right.

coldwarrior on September 2, 2013 at 12:08 PM

…over 100,000 Syrians are dead so far…and NOW it matters?
…didn’t matter when they murder Christians…but no pass on the gas… when they can’t be certain what a$$ used the gas?

KOOLAID2 on September 2, 2013 at 12:15 PM

TfromV on September 2, 2013 at 11:55 AM

The rebels – AQ – Have means, motive and opportunity. If our government had hard evidence against their very good friend Assad, they would have plastered it all over the web.

Assad’s gotta be feeling a little betrayed. No honor among dictators, I suppose.

dogsoldier on September 2, 2013 at 12:16 PM

The GOP should come back, early if Zero asks, bring up the authorization for a vote and all of them should vote “present.”

dogsoldier on September 2, 2013 at 12:05 PM

Congress, each house of Congress, can come and go as they please, and Obama asking should not play into this at all unless one wants to show that Obama controls Congress.

The House controls the budget the allocation of federal funding.

In earlier times we had things like the 1985 Boland Amenddment…cut off funds for the Contras. Made a few colleagues jobs a lot more difficult at the time. And there are dozens and dozens of examples of such House Bills, Amendments and such in recent history…after WWII…where the House cut off funding for Presidential projects…even so-called defense projects…haven’t seen any Valkyrie B-70 bombers or nuclear powered fighter jets recently, have you? All sorts of “vital to our national security special things” were wiped out with a vote and a pen stroke…on the Hill, in the House…and the Whit House be damned. The White House could not override that veto of funding.

If we didn’t have 545, is that the current number, idiots up on the Hill, complicit with this Obama global crime syndicate, the House could cut off funding once and for all and all US Government activities, participation, supplies, military assistance, logistics and materiel for anything dealing with Syria in any manner whatsoever…and under our Constitution, it would stop. If the White House went around the House of Representatives…that is an impeachable offense…the House impeaches…and that end-run around the House is indeed a major impeachable offense.

Well, that one is totally on John Boehner….not Darryl Issa….John Boehner.

Boehner has the ball.

Watch for the fake and fumble.

coldwarrior on September 2, 2013 at 12:23 PM

Just a little Beltway game we used to play back in the Reagan days when we met people…Orange Line, or Blue Line?

Most often we’d ask for the stop…Pentagon was a giveaway…Foggy Bottom was a no-brainer…Pentagon City meant you were one of those Beltway bandits…Roslyn was a bit tougher, Pentagon and the Agency ran special Bluebirds from the metro stop…South Capital was a Hill staffer…good people to meet and play with…Orange Line was up and coming youngsters like myself…Vienna, Reston…out there in NoVa.

Yellow Line or Green Line, not so much.

Saw the handle, metroryder, thought I’d ask.

I have been on the transit system in D.C…back in the late 70′s. Stopped briefly at the Pentagon. Anyway, you sound and write like a true warrior and patriot of the U.S. Glad to see there are some thinking people still out there.

metroryder on September 2, 2013 at 12:23 PM

As actor Dick van Dyke says “When he drew that red line stuff last year, and he’s on the spot, and Congress says no, then he’s off the hook. He (Obama) can say ‘Well, I tried.’ I’m hoping that’s what he’ll say.”

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2013/09/02/Dick-van-Dyke-Fears-for-His-Life-if-US-Wars-with-Syria

metroryder on September 2, 2013 at 12:24 PM

Watch for the fake and fumble.

coldwarrior on September 2, 2013 at 12:23 PM

Turns out many of them did come back – YESTERDAY – and democrats leaders are not satisfied. Turns out that whole “limited engagement” thingy had a short shelf life.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/katenocera/skepticism-runs-high-on-capitol-hill-after-classified-syria

FTA:

There was widespread concern among members, even those generally supportive to striking Syria, that administration’s draft resolution was far too broad and open-ended. Vermont Sen. Patrick Leahy, the chairman of the judiciary committee, said after meeting that the language would “be amended in the Senate” to tighten the wording of the authorization.

Add one more lie to the pile.

dogsoldier on September 2, 2013 at 1:01 PM

The picture over at Lucianne.com is priceless.

“Is that Syria evidence under here?”

dogsoldier on September 2, 2013 at 1:08 PM

dogsoldier on September 2, 2013 at 1:01 PM

Apparently that was just a dog and pony for select members of certain committees of the House and Senate.

I’d prefer the full House…all of them…screw the Senate for the present.

I would have much preferred an “immediate drop those hot-dog tongs, and git yer butt on the first and fastest flight into R.Reagan International now!” sort of call to the House by Boehner.

Like that’s gonna happen…

And then in public, in the open, take apart ALL the Team Obama “intel” and make a case for immediate de-funding of the entire Obama-inspired “Operation Save My Bacon Image” combined task group still being established to conduct hostile actions in and over Syria….along with any activities that enhance the ability of Islamists to gain control in Damascus.

But…while I am glad many members are skeptical…I am worried they are skeptical for the wrong reasons…I hope you understand my meaning.

Putting off war for a few days or well until next week, is no different than going to war today…still going to war.

It is the underlying reason, the rationale, the illusive “why?” that bugs the crap out of me.

I could not give one damn less at this juncture about all the “our prestige in the region” nonsense….if “our prestige” was at stake, we’d have dumped Obama immediately after that June 2009 Cairo Apologia.

coldwarrior on September 2, 2013 at 1:33 PM

Notice the favorite use of the word “norm”, carefully avoiding the word “law”. They know there is no legal basis for attack.

virgo on September 2, 2013 at 2:05 PM

The picture over at Lucianne.com is priceless.

“Is that Syria evidence under here?”

dogsoldier on September 2, 2013 at 1:08 PM

“You can come out now Reggie, the tv cameras have left.”

slickwillie2001 on September 2, 2013 at 2:31 PM

slickwillie2001 on September 2, 2013 at 2:31 PM

Quick…how do you get Dr. Pepper out of your keyboard…? Thanx. :-)

coldwarrior on September 2, 2013 at 2:34 PM

Have we gotten to the point that we can do a bit of speculation? There are two parts of this equation that are very interesting. First, Arab States led by the Saudis are building a coalition to attack. Second France is not yet out of this. Now, “The What If” the Arab States get it together and France goes it alone with the Arab States go ahead, and find the Smoking gun of chemical use, which is most likely being used by both sides. I just can not imagine the WH briefing if this be made so. This would definitely be an opportunity missed by the Miss-direct, run and hide, cover your own a$$ President.

Recap: The Arab States form a Collation, France Goes it alone as a World Leader, Finds the WMD from Iraq MADE IN Saudi Arabia and shipped to Syria by the Russians.

jpcpt03 on September 2, 2013 at 2:50 PM

So it turns out that Obama has asked congress to authorize ‘broad war powers’ …not a limited strike.

Perhaps the administration realized that they couldn’t just go in and hit some targets in Syria and not have to face the repercussions from the ‘global community’ for failing to actually unseat Assad and contain any biological weapons lying around. They may have determined that a ‘broad war’ effort… occupation… was required to achieve the goals of taking out Assad and securing the biological weapons.

When this nation got involved in such a way in Afghanistan, it has, to date, cost this nation American blood and trillions of US dollars poured into the region both to fund our military goals there, but also in the name of ‘nation building’. The taliban still controls Afghanistan, they murder their own citizens at will, and there has been no marked improvement in infrastructure or living standards.

Iraq cost this nation American blood and trillions in treasure. The nation teeters on the brink of civil war. It’s citizens live in war zone conditions on a daily basis.

So, is the United States now going to go to war with these nations who wage war on their own people, whenever and where ever this savagery should occur, and then spend our tax dollars to ‘rebuild’ their nation afterward, only to leave the area and the people suffering, essentially, as we found them?

thatsafactjack on September 2, 2013 at 2:55 PM

Lots of pointed, healthy skepticism of the administration’s claims explicated in this article:
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/357392/flawed-assessment-alan-reynolds

onlineanalyst on September 2, 2013 at 3:01 PM

Politics aside, will we ever see any evidence on who released the chemicals?

Well, there’s this:~

“Syrians at site of chem attack accuse jihadist rebels, not Assad, of using chemical weapons supplied by Saudis”

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2013/08/syrian-at-site-of-chem-attack-accuse-jihadist-rebels-not-assad-of-using-chemical-weapons-supplied-by.html

Liam1304 on September 2, 2013 at 3:29 PM

onlineanalyst on September 2, 2013 at 3:01 PM

All of them very simple easy to answer questions, at that.

Good find…and better for sharing it.

But…there you go again…you and the rest of you conservatives, it is all about facts, facts, and more facts, with all of you.

Bet you can’t even form your own opinion without having to rely on your precious little facts.

You’re all a bunch of Hitler’s…and you hate Obama…and children.

[do I really need a /sarc/ tag, oa?]

coldwarrior on September 2, 2013 at 3:30 PM

Liam1304 on September 2, 2013 at 3:29 PM

Have seen similar elsewhere since this whole “Operation Stop the Mockery” began.

Agents provocateur have for centuries stood ready in the shadows…

But, when you draw a red line, that red line is all that matters…and don’t call my bluff, neither…

Obama built this…he owns it.

coldwarrior on September 2, 2013 at 3:34 PM

coldwarrior on September 2, 2013 at 3:30 PM

I was hoping that you would read that link. The points confirm much of what you have been posting.

Between the aticle’s healthy questioning of the feeble talking points of the O administration blustered by Kerry and Obysmal and the easy refutation of their propaganda, our legislative leaders and thinking pundits had better raise a howl.

onlineanalyst on September 2, 2013 at 3:38 PM

Good catch on the FNC interview Jazz; its easy for stuff like this to slip under the radar, especially on a holiday weekend. Anyone who hasn’t watch the interview already should do so ASAP.

Speaking of the holiday weekend, does anyone know if AllahPundit will be back after Labor Day? I’m looking forward to reading his thoughts on on all that has transpired over the last week and a half…

Lawdawg86 on September 2, 2013 at 3:41 PM

onlineanalyst on September 2, 2013 at 3:38 PM

Alan Reynolds…coldwarrior…approximately the same age…same number of years in and out of DC…lots of DC experiences away from the usual tourist haunts…hmmmm…often similar writing styles…can easily cover a broad range of topics handily…

Nope..don’t even go there.

Alan is all about economics as his first strength…and a hell of a lot smarter and more eruditer than I are.

Then there is that CATO thing.

I had nothing to do with it.

K?

:-)

coldwarrior on September 2, 2013 at 3:48 PM

Dr. ZhivBlago on September 2, 2013 at 3:41 PM

Have seen bits of that in the foreign press for at least a month or so…thought it was typical raghead journalism…or journalist rags…whatever.

I passed it off as disinformatsiya.

Now, it bears a second hard look.

coldwarrior on September 2, 2013 at 3:50 PM

onlineanalyst on September 2, 2013 at 3:01 PM

Yeah even Pat Leahy was scratching his head…

But…while I am glad many members are skeptical…I am worried they are skeptical for the wrong reasons…I hope you understand my meaning.

coldwarrior on September 2, 2013 at 1:33 PM

I do understand. It appears there is not much critical analysis of the report, as there is at the link onlineanalyst provided.

How is it that the United States has very little direct evidence of our own?

Don’t we have people that do that?

What compelling national interest exists for the US to take any action in Syria? Zero has bankrupted the country, failed at two wars and one illegal attack in Libya, yet he wants to start yet another fight?

Come on people. Ask yourselves, are these the actions of a rational person? Zero needs a psych eval. We should get him all the help he needs…

dogsoldier on September 2, 2013 at 4:07 PM

Lots of pointed, healthy skepticism of the administration’s claims explicated in this article:
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/357392/flawed-assessment-alan-reynolds

onlineanalyst on September 2, 2013 at 3:01 PM

Good report. I also found the pictures of the scene to be rather-too-orderly and calm. If you can stomach it, google “kurd gas attack” images to see what real chemical attack looks like. Complement that with “syria gas attack”.

The other point to note is that many initial reports cited “activists“, not a news agency, as the source of the reporting. That means “rebels” and their supporters (such as the US Department of State).

No doubt some kind of massacre took place, but we are trusting partisans for our information here.

virgo on September 2, 2013 at 4:10 PM

Liam1304 on September 2, 2013 at 3:29 PM

That supposedly got reported by an AP reporter named Dale Gavlak:

http://www DOT mintpressnews.com/witnesses-of-gas-attack-say-saudis-supplied-rebels-with-chemical-weapons/168135/

and

http://www DOT infowars.com/rebels-admit-responsibility-for-chemical-weapons-attack/

dogsoldier on September 2, 2013 at 4:12 PM

Dr. ZhivBlago on September 2, 2013 at 3:41 PM

Have seen bits of that in the foreign press for at least a month or so…thought it was typical raghead journalism…or journalist rags…whatever.

I passed it off as disinformatsiya.

Now, it bears a second hard look.

coldwarrior on September 2, 2013 at 3:50 PM

I stopped waiting around for the American LSM to verify the Truth for me long ago. If it makes sense, and seems to be substantiated, I don’t care who breaks the story.

Dr. ZhivBlago on September 2, 2013 at 4:32 PM

Here’s something that dates back to my time in the Army, the M256 chemical detection kit. We were flooded with these things in the 80s, along with chemical suits, alarms, and chemical shelters. Why wouldn’t they supply some of these things to the rebels? Why wouldn’t someone be at the scene with some of the detection paper and the charts. We had this stuff coming out our ears.

Instead we’re presented with doubtful photos and inconclusive videos. This is 100% pure BS.

http://www.army.mil/factfiles/equipment/nbc/m256a1.html

claudius on September 2, 2013 at 4:42 PM

I may be getting a bit too close to sources and methods and such here…but what the hell, right?

When intelligence reports are written for the White House and senior policy makers and Cabinet officials, there is an established shorthand used…just to make things a bit easier to understand without lot of stupid questions, repetitive questions being asked again and again by the various actors on the very same day to the single officer at the Agency who is the gate keeper for the day…

So…report evaluation…”we trust” and “we believe” are not the same thing. Having a “degree of confidence” is not the same as “confidence.”‘ A “source with access” is not the same as a “source with general access to the information.”

And the list goes on…across sources and accuracy of the information and whether or not the information is derived from direct access or from as liaison (foreign spy service) source or document.

There is an agreed upon format and parsing for all sorts of areas of intelligence reporting. The people who do this are reports officers. And they are most often far better than the intel analysts because of their direct experience with the country, subject and source material and their operational training…they just don’t have the fancy degrees from Hawvawd or Smith or one of them fancy colleges.

Reading official intel reports, even the unclassified ones, since they are directed to policy makers, is an art form. They can be deciphered in the first paragraph…and in the formatting, and whatever background material is included. Experienced staff members do this mundane task…lord knows, do not give an elected official a report…soon you have headlines, soon you have misinformation, soon the original problem becomes far far bigger…because Senator Clayborne or Representative Jones just did “read” the report…they read it but did not know how to “read” it. Follow?

This “unclassified” (not “declassified”) report [there is a huge difference, remember that] which Kerry was selling on television was so shot full of holes…that it was a waste of paper to print it, let alone try to sell it.

As for the “facts” of that report? Pauce. Vapid. But most important…not from recruited vetted controlled American sources.

The language proves it.

coldwarrior on September 2, 2013 at 4:44 PM

The M51 Chemical Shelter. As far as I know I was the first person to successfully set one of these up at Ft. Ord. It was filtered, heated and air-conditioned. I set it up with a four man squad. It was a bear, but you could operate in comfort in a very hostile environment.

http://www.davidallenracing.com/M51setup.htm

claudius on September 2, 2013 at 4:55 PM

What compelling national interest exists for the US to take any action in Syria? Zero has bankrupted the country, failed at two wars and one illegal attack in Libya, yet he wants to start yet another fight?

dogsoldier on September 2, 2013 at 4:07 PM

There are many more questions that should be answered before this vote is taken. To cite just a few:

– Assad has reportedly slaughtered more than 100,000 Syrians during this civil war; why are the 300-1400 he allegedly gassed last month important enough for the U.S. to intervene militarily in the Syrian civil war, but the 100,000 Syrians Assad killed before that were not important enough?

–What if the U.S. has overestimated the strength of Assad’s regime, and the U.S. missile strike is indeed enough to topple the regime and allow the rebels to take over. Since we know many of the rebels are AQ, what are we going to do when Assad’s chemical weapons fall under their control?

–What if the U.S. has underestimated the strength of Assad’s regime, and the missile strike is just enough to piss Assad off, and he decides to gas another few thousand civilians, just to show he can. What action are we going to take then?

–What if Russia decides it doesn’t like the U.S. lobbing missiles at its ally and client state Syria, and decides to retaliate against the U.S. by taking out one of our destroyers? What are we going to do then?

AZCoyote on September 2, 2013 at 4:57 PM

As for the “facts” of that report? Pauce. Vapid. But most important…not from recruited vetted controlled American sources.

The language proves it.

coldwarrior on September 2, 2013 at 4:44 PM

Exactly! I noticed the same thing. At one point they were citing reports from Doctor Without Borders.

claudius on September 2, 2013 at 5:02 PM

AZCoyote on September 2, 2013 at 4:57 PM

Great questions. Zero planned to use as many as 150 cruise missiles, according to one report. That’s enough to hand the country over to AQ.

dogsoldier on September 2, 2013 at 5:07 PM

Exactly! I noticed the same thing. At one point they were citing reports from Doctor Without Borders.

claudius on September 2, 2013 at 5:02 PM

and “social media,” Youtube video – again. I didn’t check did they mention twitter and facebook?

dogsoldier on September 2, 2013 at 5:08 PM

Here’s an interesting device:

“The M21 Automatic Chemical Agent Alarm provides the Army with the first-ever capability of detecting chemical agent vapor clouds at a distance. The Alarm was type classified standard and approved for full-rate production in March 1995. Intellitec Corporation (formally Brunswick Defense) will produce 156 M21 Alarms for fielding. The production option for these units was awarded in May 1995, and the first Alarms will be fielded in late 1996.

The M21 Alarm detects nerve and blister agent vapor clouds at line-of-sight distances out to 5 km. The M21 Alarm will be issued to Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical Reconnaissance teams for use either on its tripod or in conjunction with the NBC Reconnaissance Vehicle, known as the FOX, for surveillance or reconnaissance missions. The M21 Alarm needs to be stationary to make valid detection decisions. The improved FOX has an integrated mast assembly that stores the M21 Alarm and raises it during vehicle short halts to scan the area for agent clouds.

The M21 Alarm automatically scans a 60-degree arc, in seven field-of-view segments, to detect agent clouds. It is a passive infrared device that views the infrared energy much like your eye views visible light. The incoming energy is processed and compared against known agent spectra. When a detection (Nerve or Blister) is made, the alarm light illuminates and the horn sounds. Additionally, small field-of-view lights will illuminate to inform the operator in which of the seven fields of view an agent was detected. It is possible for several field-of-view lights to be illuminated at the same time and, subsequently, track a moving agent cloud.”

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/m21.htm

My point in this being, we have considerable experience with chemical agents used in warfare. I just don’t think that it is credible that we don’t have much more convincing evidence.

claudius on September 2, 2013 at 5:22 PM

an absolutely scathing indictment of Obama.

This is painful to read, but I recommend you read it anyway.

Key West Reader on September 2, 2013 at 6:21 PM

There are many more questions that should be answered before this vote is taken. To cite just a few:

– Assad has reportedly slaughtered more than 100,000 Syrians during this civil war; why are the 300-1400 he allegedly gassed last month important enough for the U.S. to intervene militarily in the Syrian civil war, but the 100,000 Syrians Assad killed before that were not important enough?

–What if the U.S. has overestimated the strength of Assad’s regime, and the U.S. missile strike is indeed enough to topple the regime and allow the rebels to take over. Since we know many of the rebels are AQ, what are we going to do when Assad’s chemical weapons fall under their control?

–What if the U.S. has underestimated the strength of Assad’s regime, and the missile strike is just enough to piss Assad off, and he decides to gas another few thousand civilians, just to show he can. What action are we going to take then?

–What if Russia decides it doesn’t like the U.S. lobbing missiles at its ally and client state Syria, and decides to retaliate against the U.S. by taking out one of our destroyers? What are we going to do then?

AZCoyote on September 2, 2013 at 4:57 PM

Eau de ValJar

I think she’s orchestrated this with Obama. This is what they want.

Key West Reader on September 2, 2013 at 6:40 PM

Oh oh! Note the date, 6 June 2013.

Russia asks Turkey for info on sarin terrorists

Russia has called on Turkey to share its findings in the case of Syrian rebels who were seized on the Turkish-Syrian border with a 2kg cylinder full of nerve gas sarin.

Russia’s top foreign official Sergei Lavrov tolday said the Kremlin wanted to get clear on the issue of chemical weapons used in Syria, since the allegation had taken on the role of a trading card in the conflict, becoming a focus of constant provocations.

“I do not rule out that some force may want to use it [the rumour] to say that the “red line” has been crossed and a foreign intervention is needed,” the minister said.

“We are still waiting on a comprehensive report from our Turkish colleagues,” he added, citing the incident when a gang of terrorists carrying a canister with nerve gas sarin was arrested inside the Turkish territory about two weeks ago.

http://www.turkishweekly.net/news/151261/russia-asks-turkey-for-info-on-sarin-terrorists.html

claudius on September 2, 2013 at 6:45 PM

My point in this being, we have considerable experience with chemical agents used in warfare. I just don’t think that it is credible that we don’t have much more convincing evidence.

claudius on September 2, 2013 at 5:22 PM

I have noted several times that we have some amazing HD video surveillance gear that is remarkably ABSENT. I don’t think the CIA had the stuff pointed at some Hollywood starlet’s swimming pool, but who knows, these days. In any case the eyes in the sky were apparently not looking at Syria.

The report mentions satellite detection of launches, but not who’s satellites. The wording is vague, ambiguous.

We did not collect our own samples.

dogsoldier on September 2, 2013 at 6:56 PM

If Obama went to congress to seek approval, fox says he doesn’t have the balls to take responsibility for the syria situation.
 
If Obama went it alone, without allies or even Congress, the talking point on fox would be that he didn’t talk to congress first and is throwing the us military into an unwinnable situation.
 
triple on September 1, 2013 at 7:14 PM

 
You summed up why he should tread carefully in such serious matters. Thanks.
 
I’m unsure why you’re admitting none of the other news networks would criticize the Executive’s actions, though.

rogerb on September 2, 2013 at 7:11 PM

Saw this on another site:

http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/citation/quotes/6504

“Syria. 2010. ‘Legislative Decree No. 51 of 23 September 2001.’ National Report of the Syrian Arab Republic on its Implementation of the United Nations Programme of Action to Prevent, Combat and Eradicate the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All Its Aspects (UNPoA), p. 2. New York: Permanent Mission of the Syrian Arab Republic to the United Nations. 1 January.
Relevant contents

Legislative Decree No. 51 of 23 September 2001, which promulgated the new small weapons permits law, revoked all permits for military rifles, whether automatic or single-shot. Such rifles and their ammunition were collected from the permit holders and turned over to the Arms Directorate of the Ministry of National Defence. ”

So, if the Bamster gives guns to the Syrian rebels, he’s breaking Syrian law that bans “assault weapons”. :)

oryguncon on September 2, 2013 at 9:02 PM

Mr. Secretary, what message are we sending to Iran and Hezbollah and North Korea when the President announces that he thinks that we should take military action, but he’s going to wait nine days for Congress to come back before he takes any action, and then he goes off and plays a round of golf? What message does that send to the rebels on the ground whose lives are in danger and to our enemies who are watching?

Hahahaha

It let’s everyone know that Obama is a rubber clown mask.

SparkPlug on September 2, 2013 at 9:08 PM

an absolutely scathing indictment of Obama.

This is painful to read, but I recommend you read it anyway.

Key West Reader on September 2, 2013 at 6:21 PM

.

The damage Obama has done to the U.S. will take the effort of several presidents to repair, assuming that the nation doesn’t implode from its debt and the declining value of the dollar.

Alan Caruba, canadafreepress.com, Sunday, September 1, 2013

.
I don’t believe Alan grasps just how DELIBERATE this all is.

listens2glenn on September 2, 2013 at 10:24 PM

Hahahaha

It let’s everyone know that Obama is a rubber clown mask.

SparkPlug on September 2, 2013 at 9:08 PM

Minus the rubber and minus the mask.

Key West Reader on September 2, 2013 at 11:02 PM

Gee, John, why the long face?

John the Libertarian on September 2, 2013 at 11:31 PM

Finally Congress has the opportunity to stick it to Obozo. Everyone knows this is just a ploy to somehow make Congress responsible. Deny his request and let him flounder in his stupidity. The vast majority of Americans want to stay out of it anyway, so let the liberal idiots see what Obozo is made of…

stacman on September 3, 2013 at 12:15 AM

Politics aside, will we ever see any evidence on who released the chemicals?

And there’s this video:~
http://gatesofvienna.net/2013/09/turkey-smuggles-arms-to-al-qaeda-in-syria/

Bit of an eye-opener really. I come to the inescapable conclusion that most leading American politicians are either traitors or morons. Heck, there’s a video clip of Turkey supplying al-Qaeda – doesn’t the CIA have access to youtube?

Liam1304 on September 3, 2013 at 4:29 AM

The best way to begin genuine bipartisanship to make America stronger is to work together on the real crises facing our country, not to manufacture an artificial crisis to serve a special interest agenda out of touch with the needs of Americans.

– John F. Kerry My take.

kingsjester on September 3, 2013 at 6:37 AM

Congress could put off a vote on this and keep asking for more information, for more clarification. This whole thing smells.

claudius on September 3, 2013 at 8:14 AM

A face like a melted candle.

And I thought Pelosi and Mickey Rourke were in rough shape.

jangle12 on September 3, 2013 at 9:11 AM

You can’t sit there and say you’ve got to consult with us and honor the constitutional process, and Congress has the right to make its voice heard in these decisions, and the President is giving them that opportunity, and I think you should welcome it, Chris. And the Congress and the country should welcome this.

That’s not the point, Jackass. Nobody said we didn’t welcome the Constitutional process being honored. The problem is, you a-holes were perfectly fine with completely disregarding the Constitutional process less than 48 hours ago!!!!

Is what Wallace should’ve said.

Pale Rider on September 3, 2013 at 9:28 AM

Can we expect honest action out of Congress or does the NSA have all their numbers?

claudius on September 3, 2013 at 9:29 AM

And if Congress does not authorize a strike, you bastards will strike anyway. So save us all the BS about honoring constitutional processes.

Pale Rider on September 3, 2013 at 9:30 AM

an absolutely scathing indictment of Obama.

This is painful to read, but I recommend you read it anyway.

Key West Reader on September 2, 2013 at 6:21 PM

I found the scathing indictment thoroughly enjoyable to read.
It’s the summarization of the damage he’s inflicted on America that was painful.
Thanks for the link.

Buttercup on September 3, 2013 at 10:11 AM

The Democrats always invoke “for the children”. I don’t care what Syrians do to other Syrians. Obama has no interest other than sucking in Republican twits in order to gain a 2014 election advantage.

“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by an endless series of hobgoblins, most of them imaginary.” ~ H.L. Mencken

“The state — or, to make matters more concrete, the government — consists of a gang of men exactly like you and me. They have, taking one with another, no special talent for the business of government; they have only a talent for getting and holding office. Their principal device to that end is to search out groups who pant and pine for something they can’t get, and to promise to give it to them. Nine times out of ten that promise is worth nothing. The tenth time it is made good by looting ‘A’ to satisfy ‘B’. In other words, government is a broker in pillage, and every election is a sort of advanced auction on stolen goods.” ~ H.L. Mencken

SpiderMike on September 3, 2013 at 11:56 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3