Target Syria NWO's next acquisition The Middle East- WW III - Muslim Civil War

[Mark]

Rush Limbaugh is calling this operation shuck and jive. 

[Psalm 51:17]

http://nymag.com/thecut/2013/09/usa-12-times-more-interested-in-miley-than-syria.html
Final Tally: Americans Were 12 Times More Interested in Miley Cyrus Than Syria
9/9/13

That Miley Cyrus captures more attention than escalating war in Syria is, by now, conventional wisdom. But an exhaustive survey of news sources now reveals exactly how much attention Miley steals: Americans viewed twelve times as many pages about Miley Cyrus as they did about Syria — even though the news sources published 2.4 Syria articles for every one about Miley.

Outbrain supplies "related links" modules to a network of 100,000 publishers, including major news sources like CNN, Fox News, and ESPN. On any given day, 87 percent of Americans who browse the web will view a page with an Outbrain module, explains the company's vice-president of global marketing. They collect traffic data from every site in their network, which they use in a variety of algorithms to generate recommendations.




In the three days surrounding Miley's VMA performance and the Obama administration signaling its willingness to bomb Syria, Outbrain's network generated 8,104 stories about the former and 19,568 about the latter. The day after the VMAs, Miley Cyrus stories accounted for 12 percent of total U.S. page views, while Syria stories accounted for 1 percent.

Interest in the starlet significantly outpaced Syria in England, Australia, France, Germany, and every other nation in Outbrain's analysis — except Israel and Russia. Globally, Miley Cyrus stories generated eight times as many page views as Syria did in the days surrounding the VMAs.



Two million Syrian refugees have fled the nation. To make the country twelve times more compelling — and thus as compelling as Miley Cyrus's *** is to Americans — the conflict only needs to displace 22 million more, i.e., the entire population of Syria.

The day after the VMAs, joking about the Miley-Syria attention gap was popular online, too. The Onion told Slate's Farhad Manjoo that its best traffic day to date coincided with a widely shared parody attributed to a CNN manager, entitled "Let Me Explain Why Miley Cyrus' VMA Performance Was Our Top Story This Morning." Laughing at those who read about Miley Cyrus is America's second-favorite pastime, right after reading about Miley Cyrus.

[Mark]

GOP lawmaker says Obama pushing Syria to distract from scandals

Rep. Joe Wilson (R-S.C.) on Monday accused the Obama administration of seeking military action against Syria in order to deflect attention away from the economy and the scandals it faced over the summer.

"The White House announced April 25th Syria had chemical weapons," Wilson said on the House floor. "But only after four months of serious scandals, ObamaCare-destroying jobs, and the upcoming debt debate vote did it seek action."

Wilson did not mention other scandals, but the White House has been under pressure from Republicans to fire IRS workers for targeting conservative groups, and to rein in spying operations against U.S. citizens that many in both parties feel has gone too far. Other Republicans have been pushing for more progress in finding those responsible for last year's attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi.

Wilson, who famously said "You lie" to Obama during a 2009 joint session of Congress, said most of his constituents told him they oppose strikes against Syria during the August recess.

Rep. George Holding (R-N.C.) spoke after Wilson, and said he is even less persuaded to support a military strike against Syria after hearing from the Obama administration in classified briefings.

"After classified briefings and hearing directly from Secretaries [John] Kerry and [Chuck] Hagel, I am more skeptical than ever," he said on the House floor. "This administration has done nothing to convince me and the American people that they have a focused, effective plan for military action in Syria, or really any true plan at all.

"These strikes, like the administration's Middle East policy of the last four and a half years, lack coherence and fail to support a long-term strategy."

Holding added that the test of a good foreign policy is that it leads U.S. allies to trust the U.S. more, and instills fear in U.S. enemies. "President Obama has failed in this regard, and a military strike will fail to benefit the United States' broader strategy or international interest," he said.


Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/321077-gop-lawmaker-says-obama-pushing-syria-to-distract-from-scandals#ixzz2eQPQRb00
 

[Mark]

Putin Takes Advantage of Kerry Blunder

In what looks like an off-the-cuff blunder, Secretary of State John Kerry might have accidentally given Russian President Vladmir Putin the opportunity to muddy the international diplomatic waters and buy his friends in Syria some time.

During a press briefing on Monday, Kerry said that Assad could avoid American air strikes by giving up all his chemical weapons within a week. Within hours, the State Department was forced to walk Kerry's new red line back with the claim that he was making a "rhetorical argument about the impossibility and unlikelihood of Assad turning over chemical weapons he has denied he used."
 
It seems, then, reasonable to conclude that Kerry spoke out of turn. Kerry was not authorized to offer Syria an "out" or a new ultimatum. But Kerry's hypothetical hyperbole appears to have already backfired.

In an obvious desire to make Kerry pay for his flub and throw a wrench in Obama's determination to go to war with Syria, Putin has seized upon Kerry's hypothetical and called on Syria to accept Kerry's offer and turn over all of its chemical weapons. No one believes Assad would ever willingly give up his chemical weapons, but should he agree to an offer the Obama administration did not mean to make, it could stall American action for weeks and even months.
 
Syria is already warming to the idea. 
 
This complication could be a major blow to all of the Obama administration's prepared plans to punish Assad for using the weapons and to change the balance of power in the ongoing Syrian civil war.  Public opposition to Obama's war is already surging. Weeks or months from now, after the torturous international diplomatic process that no one believes would end with Assad giving up the chemical weapons that keep him in power winds down, it is doubtful Congress or the American public would be ready to stomach a renewed push for war.

But now that Putin has suggested Syria say "yes" to an offer Kerry was sure no one would accept, the Associated Press is reporting that the State Department will take a "hard look" at Russia's proposal.

Just like Obama's unscripted "red line" comment that started this debacle, it looks as though another off-teleprompter administration blunder has shoved America's foreign policy into a corner.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2013/09/09/Putin-takes-advantage-of-kerry-blunder

[Psalm 51:17]

GOP lawmaker says Obama pushing Syria to distract from scandals

Rep. Joe Wilson (R-S.C.) on Monday accused the Obama administration of seeking military action against Syria in order to deflect attention away from the economy and the scandals it faced over the summer.

This was the same guy who yelled "You Lie!" to Obama during one of Obama's speeches to Congress in 2009.



FYI, Joe Wilson is also a Freemason.



As for pushing for war against Syria to "distract" away from his scandals? Nah - Obama's a lame duck President. He has nothing to gain.

[Mark]

Kerry tells Russia his Syria comments were not meant as a proposal

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry told Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov his comments about Syria averting a U.S. military strike by turning over its chemical weapons within a week were rhetorical and not meant to be a proposal, a senior U.S. Official said on Monday.
 
Kerry also voiced "serious skepticism" when Lavrov offered to explore the idea, saying that the United States would take a look at any serious proposal, but this could not be a reason to slow the White House's efforts to secure congressional authorization to use force against Syria, the official told reporters traveling back from London with Kerry.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/09/us-syria-crisis-kerry-lavrov-idUSBRE9880ZN20130909

This isnt grade school, you said it, you cant take it back when whole countries agree to it. I really hope Obama fires this tard,  go back to making ketchup

[Psalm 51:17]

"After classified briefings and hearing directly from Secretaries [John] Kerry and [Chuck] Hagel, I am more skeptical than ever," he said on the House floor. "This administration has done nothing to convince me and the American people that they have a focused, effective plan for military action in Syria, or really any true plan at all.

And Joe Wilson had no qualms with all of the phony intelligence reports Bush and Cheney put out over Iraq?

[Psalm 51:17]

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jRgFp6Zt8UJAiiPE57SynvnWHkpQ?docId=CNG.f9b50cbc69bc832a2e740a952c80f64d.6d1&hl=en
9/9/13

France, Germany welcome Russian Syria proposal

PARIS — France and Germany on Monday welcomed a Russian proposal that the Syrian regime hand control of its chemical weapons arsenal to international supervision as a way of staving off the threat of military action.

French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius insisted that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad "commit himself without delay" to the elimination of his country's chemical weapons arsenal.

"The proposal of Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov merits close examination," Fabius said, demanding that Assad "commit himself without delay to put his chemical arsenal under international control and to let all of it be destroyed".

Fabius also demanded that those behind the alleged August 21 chemical attack that killed hundreds outside Damascus be tried by the International Criminal Court in The Hague.

Fabius said Lavrov's proposal was "acceptable under at least three conditions".

Assad "must commit without delay to put his entire chemical arsenal under international control and have it destroyed", he said adding that this "operation must be carried out on the basis of a binding Security Council resolution, with a short timetable and firm consequences if he does not respect his commitments."

And the International Criminal Court must get involved because "those responsible for the August 21 chemical massacre must no go unpunished".

"We demand precise, quick and verifiable commitments by the Syrian regime," he added.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel said she hoped "action" would follow Russia's proposal, and that it was not just a way to buy time.

"Today there was an interesting proposal from Russia, which called on Syria for the first time to place its chemical weapons under international control," said Merkel on German public television speaking to a group of German voters.

"If this is followed by action and not about buying time and this materialises, then Germany will push for that road to be followed," she said.

"Everything must be tried to achieve this without military intervention," she added, referring to the threat of US-led military action to punish the Assad regime for its alleged chemical attack.

Merkel, who is seeking re-election for a third term in September 22 poll, also again stressed that "Germany will under no circumstances" be part of any military strike.

France and the United States claim growing international support for military strikes to punish the Syrian regime for the alleged chemical attack, while Russia, Syria's staunchest ally, on Monday seized the diplomatic initiative with its plan to head off the threat of US military strikes.

[Mark]

France, Germany welcome Russian Syria proposal

  now Kerry has lost France, that is too much .

[Psalm 51:17]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323595004579063571644873040.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop
Buck McKeon: A 'No' on Syria If Military Cuts Aren't Restored
9/9/13

I can't agree to send our troops on another mission without making sure they have the funding they need.

Assad's use of chemical weapons, much has been said and written about America's special role in the world. Simply put, the blessings of prosperity obligate the U.S. to enforce the peace it seeks.

There is no nobler duty. If the U.S. is unwilling to use its strength to respond to Assad's crimes, then the defenseless will continue to be slaughtered in Syria, and America risks having similar atrocities visited upon its citizens. To allow the use of weapons of mass destruction to go unanswered would be an abdication of America's unique responsibility in world affairs.

That said, consider the condition of the military that President Obama seeks to deploy against the Assad regime. Common sense dictates that if you increase how often the military is used at a time when the military budget is being cut, you should restore the funding or you're asking for trouble. It's the same with driving a car: If you put 175,000 miles on your Chevy and spend less on maintenance as time passes, soon that Chevy's going to be up on blocks.

The president, instead of dictating a clear national-security strategy and budgeting to meet those strategic aims, has instead done the opposite.

During his five years in office, Mr. Obama has cut the defense budget three separate times, with the reductions totalling $1.2 trillion. President Obama surged troops to Afghanistan as he cut the military's budget. He sent the Air Force on bombing missions over Libya as he cut the military's budget. He initiated a "pivot" to Asia, focusing the Navy there, as he cut the military's budget. And now he is asking Congress to authorize military strikes against Syria while cutting the military's budget another $50 billion in the next fiscal year under sequestration.

**But you had no problem with Donald Rumsfeld cutting the military budget when he was Secretary of Defense under George W. Bush?

Americans should be uncomfortable with the notion of deploying a depleted military to combat without a commitment on the part of the president and Congress to restore its funding. It's irrelevant if the plan in Syria ultimately calls for cruise missile strikes, airstrikes or boots on the ground. The American people have always demanded that if the U.S. military goes to war, troops are provided with the equipment and support necessary to win.

**But you had no problems with Bush's Sec of State Donald Rumsfeld providing poor equipment et al to our Iraqi troops?

While the president intends to carry out a "limited" strike—as he and Secretary of State John Kerry have emphasized—history has taught that war is unpredictable, and unexpected events may require more force. This is why, during this debate, we can't ignore the budget-sequester cuts that fell with extra weight on the military.

I share President Obama's concern about the barbaric use of chemical weapons on Syrian civilians. I also care deeply about U.S. standing in a region where credibility counts. When the president drew his red line, he put America's cards on the table.

However, I am equally concerned about the condition of a military that has been chewed up from budget cuts and years of fighting. Mr. Obama is now asking Congress to respond to the Assad regime's brutality with military force. But the day before he asked Congress to authorize this mission, he told our troops that their salaries will be almost 1% less than expected next year.

**Then blame the Federal Reserve, which is largely responsible for piling up trillions of dollars in debt, and pulling the puppet strings of our Capitol Hill politicians!

This is unacceptable. We cannot keep asking U.S. troops to perform dangerous missions while multiple rounds of defense cuts, including sequestration, hang over their heads. There must be a balance between the missions the president asks the military to do and the missions the president is willing to fund. You don't conduct military campaigns with half a heart or half a wallet. Or, as Napoleon put it: "When you set out to take Vienna, take Vienna."

On Tuesday last week, I was encouraged to learn that the president shares my concerns. At the end of a meeting with other congressional leaders, he told me that he wants to find a way to fix sequestration. I am taking him at his word, which is why I have asked for a follow-up meeting to discuss specifically how he intends to restore military spending.

I need to understand just how committed the president is to negotiating a resolution on sequester in order to make an informed decision about my vote to use military force in Syria. I understand that we can't lessen the damage of sequester before taking action in Syria. But we have a near-term opportunity to do so.

I plan to ask the president, in light of the weight of his decision to intervene in Syria, for his commitment to address sequestration as part of any deal on the debt ceiling. If he makes that commitment, then he has my support. If not, I won't be able to vote to send our over-stretched and under-funded military into action. The opportunity to undo the harm of the budget sequester is unlikely to come around again.

Support for a military strike is uncertain, particularly in the House. The idea that we would—once again—deploy forces while they are financially strapped weighs heavily on many members, including me, who would otherwise vote in favor of a strike.

In the coming days the president and his advisers will be working to allay many understandable concerns: What are the likely secondary effects of a strike? How will the president achieve his broad policy goal of ending Assad's rule with such a limited mission? Is having Assad "step aside," as the president put it in 2011, still the end goal?

With budget sequestration, as with Syria, President Obama's policies have put this country in a tight spot. But as commander in chief, he has the power to pull us out.

Mr. McKeon, a congressman from California, is chairman of the House Armed Services Committee.

[Psalm 51:17]

Pretty much more maneuvering and manipulation tactics - Bush and Cheney did the same thing before they invaded Iraq.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/syria-obama-sells-attack-us-tv-blitz-221340798.html#J2P24tI
Syria: Obama May Halt Attack Over Weapons Deal
9/9/13

Barack Obama has said he will delay a military strike against Syria if the Assad regime agrees to place its chemical weapons under international control.

The US president said he was "absolutely" prepared to pause plans for military action - but was sceptical that Syria would relinquish control.

The potential for a diplomatic solution came after Russia proposed that Syria turn its chemical weapons over in return for avoiding strikes from the US.

Russia floated the idea after US secretary of state John Kerry said the only way for Syria to avoid attack was to hand over all of its chemical weapons in a week.

Prime Minister David Cameron said the Russian plan was "hugely welcome".

But he warned that it must not become a "distraction" from resolving the crisis over poison gas attacks on civilians in the country.

The US Department of State had initially attempted to play down the significance of Mr Kerry's comments, claiming he had been speaking "rhetorically".

But Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov immediately seized on the comments, raising the prospect of international observers supervising the handover.

Syria has welcomed the proposal.

On Monday night, with a breakthrough in sight, US Senate majority leader Harry Reid postponed a crucial vote to authorise military action, due to be held on Wednesday.

A series of six television interviews with Mr Obama was also aired, with the US president welcoming Syria's statement as a potentially "positive development".

Asked by Diane Sawyer of ABC News if he would delay an attack should Mr Assad yield control of his chemical weapons, Mr Obama answered: "Absolutely, if in fact that happened."

He added: "I want to make sure that norm against use of chemical weapons is maintained.

"That's in our national security interest. If we can do that without a military strike, that is overwhelmingly my preference."

He said the US needed to maintain its threat of military action, arguing that any potential breakthrough was due to the sustained pressure on the Assad regime.

In a separate interview with NBC, Mr Obama took the step - unusual for any politician - of conceding he may lose his campaign in Congress for military authorisation.

"I wouldn't say I'm confident" of the outcome, he said.

Legislation approved in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee last week would give Mr Obama a maximum of 90 days to carry out a military attack.

It includes a ban on combat operations on the ground in Syria.

Mr Obama meets with Democratic and Republican senators on Tuesday and gives another televised address to the nation tonight.

Three polls out on Monday, by CNN/ORC International, the Pew Research Center, and the Washington Post/ABC, indicate 63% of Americans oppose strikes.

Most of those surveyed between September 6 and September 8 said they believed even limited strikes would lead to a long-term military commitment.

The US accuses Mr Assad's government of being behind the August 21 attack in Damascus, which killed 1,429 people.

[Mark]

White House: No ‘Irrefutable, Beyond-a-Reasonable-Doubt Evidence’ That Syrian Gov’t Behind Chemical Weapons Attack

The White House asserted Sunday that a “common-sense test” dictates the Syrian government is responsible for a chemical weapons attack that President Barack Obama says demands a U.S. military response. But Obama’s top aide says the administration lacks “irrefutable, beyond-a-reasonable-doubt evidence” that skeptical Americans, including lawmakers who will start voting on military action this week, are seeking.
“This is not a court of law. And intelligence does not work that way,” White House chief of staff Denis McDonough said, part of his five-network public relations blitz Sunday to build support for limited strikes against Syrian President Bashar Assad.
 
“The common-sense test says he is responsible for this. He should be held to account,” McDonough said of the Syrian leader who for two years has resisted calls from inside and outside his country to step down.
 
The U.S., citing intelligence reports, says the lethal nerve agent sarin was used in an Aug. 21 attack outside Damascus, and that 1,429 people died, including 426 children.

rest: http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/09/09/white-house-no-irrefutable-beyond-a-reasonable-doubt-evidence-that-syrian-govt-behind-chemical-weapons-attack/?utm

Thats because the rebels were behind it all

[Mark]

Daniel Greenfield: The Myth of the Moderate Syrian Rebels

The moderate Syrian rebels, like the Easter Bunny and the Tooth Fairy, are a myth; an imaginary character used to tell soothing stories to children. Unfortunately the storytellers think that we’re the children. The Syrian Civil War is a religious war. It’s not a war over democracy or freedom. It’s a conflict between two totalitarian systems, one loosely based on a mixture of Islam and Socialism, and the other more rigidly based on Islam. Both are brutal and merciless to anyone who doesn’t belong. Both have their death squads and extensive corruption on the inside.   

MORE: http://frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/there-are-no-moderate-syrian-rebels/

[Mark]

Obama Silent On Syrian Rebels Forcing Christians To Convert To Islam

Terrified Christians claim Syrian rebels ordered them to convert to Islam on pain of death when they ‘liberated’ their ancient village. Opposition forces, including fighters linked to Al Qaeda, gained temporary control of the Christian village of Maaloula after fighting with regime forces.

http://www.nowtheendbegins.com/blog/?p=14927

Syrian Rebels Tell Christians: 'Convert to Islam, Or You Will Be Beheaded'
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2013/09/09/Maaloula-Syria-rebels

[Mark]

The UN Has Had Evidence That Syrian Rebels Have Been Using Chemical Weapons Since May

Did you know that the United Nations has had evidence that the Syrian rebels have been using sarin gas against Syrian government forces since May?  This was reported by Reuters and other major news organizations around the world, but there has been an almost total blackout of this information by the big corporate news outlets in the United States.  So why are they keeping the truth from us?  What you are about to read might really surprise you.  The Syrian rebels have been caught red-handed with sarin gas in their possession, the UN has had evidence that the rebels have been using sarin gas for several months, and the Syrian rebels have even admitted that they were the ones that caused the deadly gas attack that the U.S. government is using as justification to attack Syria.  Please share this article with as many people as you can, because it is absolutely imperative that we get

(Read More....) http://thetruthwins.com/archives/the-un-has-had-evidence-that-syrian-rebels-have-been-using-chemical-weapons-since-may

[Psalm 51:17]

http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/09/10/20416189-peaceful-solution-syria-accepts-russia-deal-to-hand-over-chemical-weapons?lite
9/10/13

'Peaceful solution': Syria accepts Russia deal to hand over chemical weapons

President Barack Obama has agreed to discuss Russia's proposal that Syria hand over chemical weapons, the White House said Tuesday after Damascus confirmed it would accept such a deal.

Talks begin at the United Nations later Tuesday, a White House official told NBC News, even as Obama prepared to address Congress  - and the American people - over the need for military strikes.

Earlier, Syria’s Foreign Minister Walid al-Moualem told NBC News in Moscow that he hoped acceptance of the "peaceful solution" would "put an end to the war."

He was speaking hours after France announced it would seek a U.N. Security Council resolution along similar lines. That added to the international momentum behind the proposal, which has already been endorsed by Iran and China and cautiously welcomed by Britain and Germany.

Obama said Monday that the Russia plan offered a potential path that averted U.S. military strikes, but Secretary of State John Kerry cautioned that the only reason the Russia solution has "potential legs at all" is because of a credible threat of force.

"Nothing focuses the mind like the prospect of a hanging," Kerry told a Congressional committee Tuesday. He said Obama would look at the plan but added: "We’re waiting for that proposal but we’re not waiting for long.” 

Kerry said it had been the “credible use of force” by the U.S. that has, “for the first time brought this regime to even acknowledge that they have a chemical weapons arsenal,” adding that the threat of military action “is more compelling if the Congress stands with the commander in chief.”

Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel echoed that line, saying the Russia deal "could be a real solution to this crisis," but added: "We must be clear-eyed and ensure it is not a stalling tactic by Syria and its Russian patrons."

Senior Senators - including John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Chuck Schumer (D-NY) - announced they were working on a new plan that would authorize the president to use force only if Syria did not comply with a U.N. resolution to remove chemical weapons by a pre-determined deadline.

But even as they discussed their move, Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell announced his opposition to military strikes against Syria.

In a further development, a spokesman for Vladimir Putin said the Russian president had discussed the weapons handover plan with Obama at last week’s G-20 summit.

That shed a different light on Secretary of State John Kerry’s mention of the plan at a news conference in London on Monday. That had previously been characterized by spokesman Jen Psaki as an  off-the-cuff “rhetorical argument.”

The president will travel to Capitol Hill on Tuesday to meet with the Senate Democratic Caucus and Senate Republican Conference before delivering an address to the nation from the East Room of the White House at 9:01 p.m. ET.

His case for limited airstrikes targeting Assad's regime was boosted early Tuesday when a Human Rights Watch report blamed Syrian government forces for the Aug. 21 poison gas attack that killed hundreds of people.

The U.S.-based rights group said it had reached its conclusion after analyzing witness accounts, remnants of the weapons used and medical records of victims.

HRW said it did not believe the attack could have been carried out by rebels or other “terrorists” as a smokescreen, as suggested by Assad. "Human Rights Watch and arms experts monitoring the use of weaponry in Syria have not documented Syrian opposition forces to be in possession of the 140mm and 330mm rockets used in the attack, or their associated launchers," the report added.

Russia’s diplomatic solution appeared to be gathering momentum internationally -- as an attractive option for many U.S. allies who agree with the White House stance against chemical weapons but who are reluctant to be drawn into another Middle East military conflict.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov explained his proposal during a pre-planned 14-minute phone call to John Kerry as the U.S. secretary of state flew from London to Washington Monday.

U.S. officials said Kerry expressed concern that it would be hard to verify whether Syria had complied with any such plan, or to know if the regime had still kept some of its chemical weapons stockpiles.

Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., issued a joint statement Monday urging Congress to press ahead with support for airstrikes regardless of the Russia initiative, saying that “only the threat of military action against the Assad regime's chemical weapons capabilities is what could create a possibility for Assad to give up control of those weapons.”

Adding to international concern, Turkey’s state-run Anadolu agency reported that Syrian jets bombed the border town of Tel Abyad Monday, prompting yet more Syrians to seek refuge in Turkey. Thousands had already flooded across the border, leaving authorities struggling to cope.

[Psalm 51:17]

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/boehner-skeptical-syrian-offer-weapons-20211252
Boehner Skeptical of Syrian Offer on Weapons
September 10, 2013 (AP)

House Speaker John Boehner (BAY'-nur) says he is skeptical of Syria's offer to turn over chemical weapons to international monitors but said President Barack Obama has not yet sold the American people on the need for military.

Speaking to reporters Tuesday, the Ohio Republican said he is skeptical of Syria's offer because of, quote, "the actors that are involved." Russia, a longtime Syria ally, is trying to broker an agreement, though Boehner did not mention Russia by name.

Boehner has supported Obama's call to use force against Syria as punishment for allegedly using chemical weapons against civilians, including children.

However, Boehner said other House members oppose Obama's plan because the president has not persuaded the American people it is necessary. Obama is to address the nation Tuesday night.

[Mark]

House Democratic Leader Pelosi tweets: 'Thanks to Pres. Obama's strength, we have a Russian proposal. We hope that it is credible and real, and therefore progress' - @NancyPelosi

Someone forgot her meds today... 

Syrian warplanes bomb rebel suburbs of Damascus for the 1st time in 3 weeks - @Reuters

[Mark]

Russian Parliament Gloats as Putin Checkmates Obama Over Syria

Monday morning, Secretary of State John Kerry made what an administration official called a "major goof" with a never-going-to-happen hypothetical that suggested Syria could avoid American airstrikes by surrendering their chemical weapons. Even the State Department walked Kerry's statement back. But Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov immediately seized upon Kerry's flub, and now a member of the Russian parliament is gloating over Putin's checkmate of Obama.

Watching one administration bungle after another unfurl, Alexi Pushkov , the chairman of the Parliamentary Foreign Affairs Committee, is publicly mocking Obama. Via Twitter, Pushkov wrote that this mess “knocks the ground out from under Obama’s plans for a military strike.”
 
Kerry's flub played right into the Russians hands; and by breaking weak, stepping back from his own red line, and embracing Kerry's hypothetical proposal during a round-robin of network interviews Monday night, President Obama chose to repeat Kerry's mistake. Russian President Vladmir Putin now looks like the world's peacemaker and Syria can dig in and drag this out forever as the West tries to figure out how to secure and destroy a thousand tons of chemicals weapons without putting "boots on the ground" in the middle of a civil war.

The real win for Syria and Russia, though, is that when this diplomatic quagmire is all over, Assad remains in power. This, after Obama said he must go.

As I write this, Assad is already taking advantage of the Putin/Kerry monkey wrench. For the first time since the talk of America military action began, today Syria resumed its bombing attacks against the rebels.

From Obama's off-script red line comment last year to Kerry's off-script second red line yesterday, the only thing driving American foreign policy regarding Syria are administration blunders.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2013/09/10/Russian-parliament-Gloats-as-Putin-Checkmates-Obama-Over-Syria

[Psalm 51:17]

http://news.yahoo.com/-senators-recasting-%E2%80%93-not-scrapping-%E2%80%93-syria-legislation--144429227.html
Senators recasting – not scrapping – Syria legislation
9/10/13

Key senators are recasting — not abandoning — legislation that could set the stage for war with Syria, sources familiar with the process said Tuesday, meaning Congress may still have to vote on the deeply unpopular issue.

And it could still easily lead to American military strikes.

The Russian-backed proposal to put Bashar Assad’s chemical weapons arsenal under international control has scrambled plans to vote as early as this week on President Barack Obama’s request for congressional authority to use force.

So a bipartisan group of senators has urgently been drafting an amendment to the legislation to enforce Moscow's initiative and to reflect expectations that the U.N. Security Council will have a bigger role to play, according to sources familiar with the deliberations.

As of early Tuesday, the basic framework of the in-the-works amendment gives the Security Council a relatively brief stretch of time to pass a resolution saying that Syria must give up its chemical weapons to international forces for destruction. It then sets out a somewhat longer stretch of time for Syria to fulfill that mandate — and for the international community to verify Bashar Assad’s compliance. The time frames were in flux.

The Security Council resolution would have to establish a process for inspections to verify Syrian compliance. The inspectors would need unfettered access to every chemical weapons site and total freedom of movement around Syria. Assad would need to take immediate steps to start transferring his weapons of mass destruction to international custody. The resolution would also need to lay out clear triggers for action, and clear timetables.

If the administration cannot certify that those conditions have been met, then the Russian plan would be considered a failure and Obama would be authorized to strike. The plan faces daunting difficulties both at the Security Council, where Russia has vetoed efforts to get tougher with Syria, and on the ground, where weapons inspectors would be hunting for chemical weapons in the midst of a civil war that has claimed the lives of more than 100,000 people.

**Wouldn't surprise me if both Obama and Putin are working together side-by-side, while acting like they're enemies. Remember how Reagan and Gorbachev were actually good buddies!

As of late Monday, the group of lawmakers comprised Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin and Republican Sens. John McCain, Saxby Chambliss, Lindsey Graham and Kelly Ayotte. It also included Sen. Chuck Schumer, a Democratic leader, and fellow Democrats Bob Casey and Chris Coons.

A Levin staffer says the Michigan lawmaker, long a backer of a more hawkish response to Syria, thinks tying authorization to use military force to Assad’s failure to turn over his chemical weapons would achieve two American policy goals.

“First, it would increase the likelihood that Assad’s regime gives up its chemical weapons without the need for the use of force by increasing the pressure on Assad and on Russia to make that happen,” the aide told Yahoo News. “Second, it would deter Assad and others from using chemical weapons, thereby maintaining the global prohibition on use of chemical weapons that has protected America and our troops from these weapons, by authorizing the use of force if they refuse.”

[Psalm 51:17]

Russian Parliament Gloats as Putin Checkmates Obama Over Syria

Nah - Obama and Putin are likely buddies behind closed doors while acting like they're enemies in front of the cameras.

[Psalm 51:17]

James 1:2  My brethren, count it all joy when ye fall into divers temptations;
Jas 1:3  Knowing this, that the trying of your faith worketh patience.
Jas 1:4  But let patience have her perfect work, that ye may be perfect and entire, wanting nothing.

[Kilika]

"He that leadeth into captivity shall go into captivity: he that killeth with the sword must be killed with the sword. Here is the patience and the faith of the saints." Revelations 13:10 (KJB)

[Psalm 51:17]

The fact that Illuminati's Capitol Hill is making this *political* says ALOT over their sinister intentions.

Romans 3:13  Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips:
Rom 3:14  Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness:
Rom 3:15  Their feet are swift to shed blood:
Rom 3:16  Destruction and misery are in their ways:
Rom 3:17  And the way of peace have they not known:
Rom 3:18  There is no fear of God before their eyes.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/09/10/is-syria-becoming-a-partisan-issue.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+thedailybeast%2Farticles+%28The+Daily+Beast+-+Latest+Articles%29
Is Syria Becoming a Partisan Issue?
by  Ben Jacobs  Sep 10, 2013 2:40 PM EDT

Is Syria already becoming a political football?

The debate over military intervention has cut across partisan lines, with both Democrats and Republicans describing it as a “conscience vote.” But this hasn’t stopped the issue from already being used as a handy political weapon by Republicans to clobber President Obama for his leadership, or lack thereof, on the issue.

In the last week, the Republican National Committee issued two different fact sheets that whacked Obama on the current Middle East quagmire. One went after him for his ”red line” around the use of chemical weapons by the Assad regime, and the other made hay of the lack of unity in the Democratic Party around military intervention in Syria.

Democrats have cried foul. Michael Czin, press secretary for the DNC, said of them, “It’s disappointing that the RNC is trying to inject partisan politics into an important debate about our national security.” Sean Spicer, the RNC’s communications director, shrugged off any criticism, telling The Daily Beast, “I think [the statements] speak for themselves.”

The statements try to thread the needle in targeting Obama. After all, Syria is the issue of the day. Domestic policy has been eclipsed by the ongoing debate over airstrikes against the Assad regime. The GOP also has to cope with its own internal divisions on Syria as well as with some party leaders like John Boehner and John McCain supporting military intervention but many others firmly opposed. The result is that it would be difficult, and somewhat uncouth, to criticize the president on policy grounds.

But the criticism isn’t about foreign policy. A reader would be hard-pressed to find support for any course of action in the Middle East. Instead, it is simply an attack on the president’s leadership and acumen, no different from Hillary Clinton’s famous attack ad from 2008 suggesting that Obama wasn’t equipped to answer the phone at 3 a.m. in a national security crisis. 

Currently, the president leads a fractured political party and has explicitly stated that he "wouldn't say I'm confident" that Congress will authorize the use of force against Syria, a step that his administration continues to insist was not necessary. It seems perfectly fair for his political opponents to raise questions about this.

[Kilika]

All the while these people are "negotiating", people in Syria are dying, regardless of the weapon used.

[Psalm 51:17]

Rep. Alan Grayson: Syria Intelligence Manipulated

Grayson's "Stop the War in Syria" petition shows up in the banner ads on this site every now and then. If memory serves, at one time a couple of years ago, Alex Jones invited him on his radio show and pretty much acted like he's part of the "truth" movement team. So who IS this Congressman Grayson?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Grayson

Grayson worked as a law clerk at the Colorado Supreme Court in 1983,[11] and at the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals from 1984 to 1985, where he worked with two judges who later joined the U.S. Supreme Court: Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Antonin Scalia.[2] He was an associate at the Washington, D.C. firm of Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson for five years, where he specialized in contract law.

So he worked for USSC justices from BOTH political "parties"?

Grayson is considered a progressive Democrat. He supported Barack Obama in 2008. He was a member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, of which he was vice-chairman.[42] Grayson twice joined Republicans to oppose the raising of the federal debt limit. He said, "We need to live within our means. We need to eliminate wasteful spending. If we did those two simple things, we would not need to raise the debt limit."[43]

So as a member of the PROGRESSIVES(another name for COMMUNISTS, that is), the GOP somehow let him join with them on other issues?

Best known in his first term for making incendiary comments about Republicans, Grayson has focused on working with Republicans to pass amendments that "appeal to the libertarian streak in the GOP". He lobbies colleagues personally and in July 2013, David Weigel of Slate magazine called him "the most effective member of the House" and said that he was approaching "an unheralded title: The congressman who’s passed more amendments than any of his 434 peers"

And this despite him being a *progressive*!

During his first term in office, Grayson supported Ron Paul's Audit the Fed legislation.[50] Grayson gained attention for exchanges with Federal Reserve System Vice Chairman Donald Kohn and Inspector General Elizabeth A. Coleman.[51] The 5-minute examination of Coleman in the House Financial Services Committee was posted on Grayson's official YouTube page, and as of December 2010, it has been viewed more than 4 million times.[52]

On a September 2009 Alex Jones Show segment, Grayson criticized Federal Reserve Chair Bernanke's senior adviser Linda Robertson, saying "Here I am the only member of Congress who actually worked as an economist, this lobbyist, this K-Street ****, is trying to teach me about economics!"[53][54] Robertson had previously worked as a lobbyist for Enron.[55] Grayson's language was widely criticized as inappropriate,[56] and Grayson apologized.

Again, don't believe for one minute a *progressive* is anti-Federal Reserve. And who does Alex thinks he's trying to fool?

Grayson made it a priority to increase the amount of federal money returning to his district. He often said that people in his district had been "exporting taxes and importing debt." During his first year in office, the amount of federal grant dollars returning to the district nearly doubled with a 98% increase.[60][61] Grayson established a grant notification system that notifies subscribers immediately when a federal grant opportunity in their areas of interest becomes available. He also hired a full-time grants coordinator who focused solely on helping people navigate the federal grants process.

Grayson supported the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 and has been outspoken in favor of extending unemployment benefits for Americans who have lost their jobs. Grayson argues that the government has never cut off unemployment insurance when the unemployment rate was higher than eight percent. Grayson also voted for FDA Oversight of Tobacco Products, which gives the FDA power to regulate tobacco products.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Grayson later voted for the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act[65] and the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010.[66] He voted in support of Eliminating Adjustments of Medicare Rates of Payment. He also voted against Republican substitutes for the health care amendment and insurance law amendments.[67]

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Grayson is pro-choice and supports increased funding for stem cell research.[76] He has always supported same-sex marriage and said in an interviews in 2013, "the propaganda that somehow gay marriage makes straight marriage bad for everyone is just farcical to me. I just don’t understand the logic of it."[77]

Grayson voted in support of the Hate Crimes Expansion Act, which expands the definition of hate crimes and strengthens enforcement of hate crime laws. He also voted for the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. Grayson supported the Paycheck Fairness Act, a bill that allows victims of wage discrimination to sue for punitive damages.[67]

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Grayson voted for the House's 2009 American Clean Energy and Security Act (ACES). The bill would provide for a $50 million "Hurricane Research Center" in Central Florida, and Grayson claimed it would immediately generate new jobs.[78] Grayson noted after the passage of the ACES Act his concern about our dependence on foreign oil, the need to promote green technologies, renewable energy sources, and the job creation from the bill (an estimated 95,000 jobs in Florida). "This bill unleashes American ingenuity to solve the energy crisis. It lets us solve our problems by being Americans and thinking our way out of it. We will become an international energy power," he said in a news release.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Grayson has been an outspoken critic of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. In May 2010, he introduced the War Is Making You Poor Act. The bill would require the President to fund the wars from the Department of Defense's base budget. The bill does not necessitate an end to the wars or mandate a cut-off date. In addition to the tax cuts, the bill would cut the federal deficit by $15.9 billion.[80]

Well, at least his anti-war stance has been CONSISTENT. Not that it means much, but just saying.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Final comments - in this wiki link, it says he first got elected in 2008, then lost in 2010, only to get elected again in 2012. And he's in a heavily GOP district - given that he's a PROGRESSIVE, this is a surprise. Yes, I know elections are rigged, but nonetheless it's surprising.

Ultimately - prove all things, and let NO man deceive you! Look at all of these minions that are being promoted by the "truth" movement despite their progressive leanings, and in some cases they end up being promoted as "patriots" like this guy just b/c he *happens* to go against the President of his own party!

[Christian40]

"Two Europeans who were abducted and held hostage for several months in Syria claim they overheard an exchange between their captors which proves that rebels were behind the recent chemical attack.

In a number of interviews to European news outlets, the former hostages - Belgian teacher Pierre Piccinin and Italian journalist Domenico Quiric - said they overheard an English-language Skype conversation between their captors and other men which suggested it was rebel forces, not the government, that used chemical weapons on Syria’s civilian population in an August 21 attack near Damascus.

“It is a moral duty to say this. The government of Bashar al-Assad did not use sarin gas or other types of gas in the outskirts of Damascus,” Piccinin said during an interview with Belgium's RTL radio station.

Piccinin stressed that while being held captive, he and fellow prisoner Quirico were secluded from the outside world and had no idea that chemical weapons were deployed. But the conversation which both men overheard suggested that the use of the weapons was a strategic move by the opposition, aimed at getting the West to intervene.

"In this conversation, they said that the gas attack on two neighborhoods of Damascus was launched by the rebels as a provocation to lead the West to intervene militarily,” Quirico told Italy’s La Stampa. "We were unaware of everything that was going on during our detention in Syria, and therefore also with the gas attack in Damascus." 

While stating that the rebels most likely exaggerated the accident’s death toll, the Italian journalist stressed that he could not vouch whether “the conversation was based on real facts." However, he said that one of the three people in the alleged conversation identified himself as a Free Syrian Army general, La Stampa reported.

Based on what both men have learned, Peccinin told RTL that it would be “insane and suicidal for the West to support these people.”

“It pains me to say it because I've been a fierce supporter of the Free Syrian Army in its rightful fight for democracy since 2012," Piccinin added.

 Quirico seems to agree with Peccini’s assessment.

“I am extremely surprised that the United States could think about intervening, knowing very well how the Syrian revolution has become international jihadism – in other words Al-Qaeda," Quirico said, as quoted by Italy’s Quotidiano Nazionale.

The 62-year-old La Stampa journalist believes that radical Islamic groups operating in Syria to topple Assad “want to create a caliphate and extend it to the entire Middle East and North Africa.”

In a number of news appearances, both Quirico and Piccinin shared stories of how they were subjected to two mock executions, beaten, and starved during their five-month captivity.

"These have been very tough months. We were beaten on a daily basis, we suffered two mock executions," Quirico told reporters upon his arrival in Rome, AFP reported.

 "There was sometimes real violence...humiliation, bullying, mock executions...Domenico faced two mock executions, with a revolver," Piccinin told RTL.

Both men were kidnapped in Syria last April by a group of armed men in pickup trucks who were believed to be from Free Syrian Army.

According to Piccinin, the captors soon transferred them over to the Abu Ammar brigade, a rebel group "more bandit than Islamist."

"We were moved around a lot...it was not always the same group that held us, there were very violent groups, very anti-West and some anti-Christian," Piccinin said.

Both men tried to escape twice but their attempts were unsuccessful, prompting the rebel group to punish them for their actions.

The Italian government announced on Sunday that both men had been freed after Rome intensified negotiations with the rebels for the release of the prisoners ahead of an anticipated US strike on Syria.

Another 13 journalists are still believed to be missing in Syria, according to Reporters Without Borders."

http://rt.com/news/chemical-weapons-rebels-captives-632/

[Kilika]

At first, I read some of this article, and started thinking, "What is going on with all this anti-rebel propaganda?", then I noticed the article link; Russia Today.

Explains everything! 

[Mark]

False Flag Alert: Do Syrian Rebels Plan To Hit Israel With Chemical Weapons And Blame Assad?

Do the Syrian rebels plan to attack Israel with chemical weapons in order to provoke Israel into a war with the Assad regime?  Now that it looks like the United States has been backed into a corner by Russia, it seems unlikely that the U.S. military will strike Syria in the immediate future and the Syrian rebels (and their backers in Saudi Arabia and Qatar) are extremely disappointed by this.  The entire purpose for the false flag sarin gas attack that took place back in August was to draw the United States military into the conflict.  Without U.S. intervention, the rebels have very little hope of overthrowing Assad and setting up the **** Sunni government that they desire.  So the rebels need another plan and they need one quickly.  Unfortunately, according to international news reports it looks like “Plan B” for the rebels may be to hit Israel with chemical weapons and blame it on
(Read More....) http://thetruthwins.com/archives/false-flag-alert-do-syrian-rebels-plan-to-hit-israel-with-chemical-weapons-and-blame-assad

[Psalm 51:17]

http://www.timesofisrael.com/putin-shipping-assad-more-weapons-to-crush-rebels/

‘Putin shipping Assad more weapons to crush rebels’

Israel TV: Russia steps up supplies as part of deal for regime to place its WMD stockpiles under supervision; Syrian FM: ‘We intend to give up chemical weapons altogether’

By Times of Israel staff September 10, 2013, 9:17 pm

Russia is stepping up weapons supplies to Syria’s President Bashar Assad, to help him prevail in the civil war, as part of the arrangements under which the Assad regime has agreed in principle to have its chemical weapons stockpiles placed under international supervision, Israel television reported on Tuesday night.

Negotiations between Russia and Syria on the supervision arrangement, which seem to have drastically reduced the likelihood of US-led military intervention in Syria, have been ongoing for two full weeks, and have also involved Iran, the Israeli Channel 2 report said. 

Russian President Vladimir Putin, determined to ensure that his ally Assad not face a punitive US-led strike following Damascus’s alleged use of chemical weapons in an August 21 attack that the US says killed over 1,400 Syrians, essentially ordered Assad to submit to international oversight of his chemical weapons stocks, the report said.

In return, Putin promised bolstered conventional weapons shipments, “some of which are already on their way” to Syria from the Russian Black Sea port of Novorossiysk. The TV report did not specify which weaponry Putin is supplying to Assad, but noted that the Syrian regime needs more fighter planes for use to quash rebel forces, spare parts for tanks, and all kinds of other military equipment to replenish stocks depleted during the two-and-a-half years of fighting that have left well over 100,000 Syrians dead. An estimated 1,600 Syrians have died in the three weeks since the alleged August 21 attack.

Last summer, Russia said it would not deliver weapons including 24 MiG-29 fighter jets ordered by the Syrian Air Force until the Syrian crisis ended. But in May, Russian officials said a Syrian delegation was in Moscow to discuss a new contract to supply combat aircraft.

Putin said late Tuesday that he hoped “our Syrian friends will make the appropriate decision with respect to transferring the chemical weapons to the control of the international community, and to joining the treaty preventing the proliferation of chemical weapons.”

Syria’s Foreign Minister Walid Moallem, who has been in Moscow this week, was quoted Tuesday saying Syria would indeed open all relevant sites to UN inspectors, would not produce chemical weapons, and would sign all relevant treaties.

“We fully support Russia’s initiative concerning chemical weapons in Syria, and we are ready to cooperate. As a part of the plan, we intend to join the Chemical Weapons Convention,” he said in an interview with the Lebanon-based Al-Maydeen TV.

“We are ready to fulfill our obligations in compliance with this treaty, including through the provision of information about our chemical weapons. We will open our storage sites, and cease production. We are ready to open these facilities to Russia, other countries and the United Nations.”

“We intend to give up chemical weapons altogether,” he added.

US President Barack Obama said in a series of TV interviews Monday that a deal that ensured Syria was unable to again use chemical weapons would “absolutely” roll the crisis back from the brink. His Secretary of State John Kerry warned Tuesday, however, that such a deal had to be “measureable, tangible” and speedy. “If we choose not to act, we’ll be sending a message to Iran of American ambivalence, American weakness,” the secretary noted.

Israel’s former foreign minister, Avigdor Liberman, indicated Tuesday a similar concern. Speaking against the background of the negotiations that were apparently pushing off any US-led strike on Assad’s regime, Liberman, the chairman of the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, noted that, where Iran’s nuclear program was concerned, Israel “will have to deal with it on our own.”