Sources: Intercepts show top Syrians preparing for chemical attack, discussing afterward

[JaneyVee]

CNN has learned new details about what is contained in the U.S. intelligence assessment that alleges the Syrian regime was behind a deadly chemical weapons attack outside Damascus, Syria, last week.

According to senior U.S. officials, the assessment contains evidence showing senior regime officials making preparations for a massive chemical attack in the area where the incident occurred - the evidence is part of a "body of intelligence beforehand" that links the regime to the attack, as one of the officials described it.

It also includes evidence of senior regime officials discussing the attack afterward, acknowledging a realization the event was already getting massive attention and discussing that it would be wise to lay low for a while and refrain from launching such massive chemical attacks in the near future, the officials said.

In addition, the intelligence shows there was increased intensive shelling in the area after the attack, the officials

Earlier, CNN reported that according to a U.S. official, the United States had intercepts of conversations among top Syrian military officials discussing the chemical weapons attack after it took place. Those intercepts form a key basis for the conclusion that the Syrian regime was behind the attack.

The rest: http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2013/08/29/sources-intercepts-show-top-syrians-preparing-for-chemical-attack-discussing-afterward/

[Nevernose]

1. Remember that time the Iraqi army took Kuwaiti babies

From their cribs in the hospital and dashed their brains out on the floor? In 1991? Or that time the North Vietnamese attacked us in the Gulf of Tonkin, or the time Iraq was building weapons of mass destruction to arm terrorists with? Or any of half a dozen other similar events?

I do. I'll wait for the UN to inspect. Our track record on this kind of stuff isn't so great.

[Heddi]

2. don't forget the vials of anthrax

VIALS OF ANTHRAX FOR GOD'S SAKE

[JackRiddler]

7. And yet why does this most remind me of...

"The match begins tomorrow" and "Tomorrow is Zero Hour."

Unlike the incubator babies and the anthrax vial, this did actually happen.

It's important who did it, and by no means a settled question.

[Nevernose]

16. I would agree

A few months ago, there were reports that both the rebels and the military used poison gas. Sarin isn't exactly difficult to make.

[KittyWampus]

9. Here you go, since you think it was a hoax.

[Nevernose]

15. Did I say it was a hoax?

I said I'll wait for confirmation. For clarification, I'll add that I'll wait for clarification on what precisely killed those children and who, precisely, is responsible. Because that's a responsible response; "kill the fuckers!" is not.

Because I've seen lots of pictures of dead babies over the years, and quite often the pictures are used to garner support for yet another bullshit war.

[CthulhusEvilCousin]

23. Murdered babies

are usually a good reason to go to war.

[AtheistCrusader]

42. Not if you don't know for sure who murdered them.

You might well be committing murder yourself, otherwise.

[cali]

58. only for people who live in a simple little world

and who operate on the dangerous combination of sentimentality and ignorance.

Idiot compassion as Chogyam Trungpa called it.

[Electric Monk]

18. It was a hoax, pulled off by the PR firm Hill & Knowlton.

Those children in the picture you linked look rather old to be incubator babies, as well, don't you think?

When contemplating war, beware of babies in incubators

How PR Sold the War in the Persian Gulf | PR Watch

[freshwest]

39. Sarin nerve gas victims? Sure some will say it's just a slumber party.

[nadinbrzezinski]

17. I cannot forget the Germans bayoneting Belgian Babies.

(That was my first contact with War time propaganda)

Here, a mild period one

[leveymg]

34. You're older than I imagined, Nadin.

[nadinbrzezinski]

36. It was a history course

Prof showed us 20th century propaganda. Gulf war one broke as we were in class. Assignments included deconstructing it in real time.

Belgian babies and Kuwaiti babies...

[leveymg]

44. Of course.

I always thought the silly hats and mustaches were always an effective give-away to villainy:

[nadinbrzezinski]

45. You gotta admit the Remington 12 gauge is a nice touch

[CthulhusEvilCousin]

19. You forget

Area 51, the alien coverup, the Reptilians, the illuminati, the Free Masons, the LDS, etc.

All perfectly good reasons to embrace anti-American paranoia and accuse your government of inventing a chemical attack that killed more than a thousand people.

[JackRiddler]

25. Incompetent attempt at distraction, sir.

No one here mentioned any of the items you bring up, and they have no relevance whatsoever here. Invoking these distractions means you have very little to offer in the first place. Might as well talk about Miley Cyrus, while you're at it.

Also, I missed the part where anyone here has said "your government" "invented" a chemical attack. What does "invented" mean? Fabricated something that didn't happen? Actually carried out the attack? I don't see people saying either about "your" (the US) government.

However, the "incubator babies" in Kuwait, the WMD lies and "Curveball," the Gulf of Tonkin fake-outs... these are among many blatant lies told by "your government" to start wars or justify invasions, with extremely bloody consequences. Are these what you would like us to ignore?

Is it "anti-American paranoia," for example, to say said government invaded Indochina against the wishes of its peoples and murdered 2 million or more of them, in large part by bombing and burning civilians from the air? Napalm was a chemical attack. White phosphorus bombs in Fallujah continue the tradition, which also further back includes dropping atomic bombs on cities.

[CthulhusEvilCousin]

28. Of course they do

It's the same kind of silly paranoia, don't you think? No one is even talking about occupying Syria or nation building. We're talking about bombing targets filled with Syrian government goons who ordered chemical attacks on civilians. But yet you're talking Vietnam, Iraq war, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, etc. It's these sorts of comments, not mine, that are completely nonsensical and ridiculous.

So go fly off on a UFO and maybe move to a country you won't hate as much.

[robinlynne]

37. Do you like free republic much?

[CthulhusEvilCousin]

43. LOL

I was reading Free Republic earlier and they all oppose bombing Syria with the same type of paranoid nonsense. They say he's doing it to support Al-Qaeda and that it's all government propaganda and disinformation.

You FAIL at your taunt.

[Fumesucker]

54. The difference between DU and FR is that DU was against the Iraq War also

While the Freepers were orgasmic over the proposition of Dubya invading Iraq.

[JackRiddler]

60. Where does this standing to act as...

the world policeman come from?

How does this power devolve to the serial killer of nations, even if in one or another case it might produce good results? From where does it derive its legitimacy?

It's the idea that the USG gets to decide all questions of this manner that generates actions like the invasions of Vietnam and Iraq, as well as the ones you imagine are legitimated. They go together, unavoidably.

[dflprincess]

31. And the Maine

Don't ever forget the Maine

[deutsey]

59. Wasn't it blown up in the Gulf of Tonkin?

[morningfog]

3. Giddy up, time to cowboy into another war.

[Niceguy1]

52. the intentional

Gassing and napalming of children is not something I support.

Arwnyou ok with standing by and watching this while the un plays politics?

[leveymg]

4. Omits mention of intercepted angry call of Defense Minister to local unit commander.

Also, if you read carefully the only specifics of the alleged prior conversations are about unit locations, no mention here of specific evidence of planning for the attack. The conclusions drawn here of involvement in planning the attack at "highest levels" of the Syrian gov't don't seem to be supported by the evidence presented.

The report about Assad's brother ordering the attack are acknowledged to be unconfirmed, and originate with DEBKAfile, an Israeli organization that has been accused of disinformation in the past.

[joshcryer]

20. Not sure how an outraged Defense Minister means anything.

He could've been out of the loop, for instance, for that very reason. He may not have signed off on such an attack. If anything it could prove that he was outraged because he knew the attack was sanctioned.

I of course agree with the rest of what you said and I'd like to hear the audio tapes (with subtitles preferably, I listened to a lot of Libyan intercepts and about 90% of them were accurate and you can discern a lot just from the tone even if you don't understand the language).

[leveymg]

29. There's no reference to specific planning for this attack by any higher-ups -- only vague reference

to monitoring and discussion of unit movements, which would be normal command communication, not an indication of command responsibility for the attack, itself.

Every single one of the command-level officials would be fully aware of the dire consequences of such an attack, including the Defense Minister who is the highest official in the chain-of-command below the President. If he didn't know -- and he was reportedly outraged in tone -- that indicates to me that this was not an authorized launch of chemical weapons.

I doubt the Minister was expressing outrage by what he took to be an attack authorized at a higher level (the President or his brother) - his tone and the content of his words would be quite different with the unit commander. If the Defense Minister came to understand through his conversation with this particular officer that the attack had been sanctioned, he would immediately fall quiet in his tone, and cut the conversation short upon realizing that he was out of the loop, which might be dangerous for him.

I would look to see what's happened since with the Defense Minister for a possible indication that he may have stepped on the toes of a higher-up.

They're all bastards and I'm willing to accept the possibility of command responsibility and culpability, but I don't see hard evidence yet. Just layers of supposition and spin. I want to hear the conversations, and do not accept the usual BS about revealing collection methods and sources - we already know IDF Unit 8200 is the source for these intercepts, as well as some of their contents.

[joshcryer]

40. Not sure we read the same article.

You say, "there's no reference to specific planning for this attack by any higher-ups." The article says, "contains evidence showing senior regime officials making preparations for a massive chemical attack in the area where the incident occurred." Perhaps you have an issue with the word "preparation" and think it doesn't mean "planning."

So far we don't know what was said, this is just third hand reporting, probably from a congressperson who got a translation of a recording. The recordings really need to be released so that journalists, interpreters, can verify the contents. And I'm saying in full. The recordings could be taken out of context, too. It's the difference between, "prepare ... to ... fire chemical weapons," and "prepare procedures to contain area, rebels are about to fire chemical weapons."

[leveymg]

48. That particular sentence doesn't provide any specific new facts, just spin.

It stood out for me for that very reason. I agree with you completely about the rest. The reprisals operation will remain totally illegitimate if they don't declassify and release the entire file contents, inclusing the "raw" intercepts. They can keep their analysis- I want to hear the recordings.

[nadinbrzezinski]

21. The only redeeming feature to Debka File

is that it is a great place to get ideas for fiction writing.

[leveymg]

33. I know ;-) But, the offal gets worked into the mix, anyway

Never waste good protein, even if found under a rock.

I'll spare you any visual aids on this one.

[nadinbrzezinski]

38. When I am short on ideas

That, sana, and yes VOA and RT make for a good contrasting diet. Sprinkle some North Korean news...

[leveymg]

46. If you simmer anything with the right spices long enough, it tastes good.

[nadinbrzezinski]

47. There you go

And I suspect propaganda will not change after we leave the Solar system

[David__77]

5. Roll the tapes!

No? Didn't think so.

[joshcryer]

24. +1

Let's hear the evidence. Al Jazeera should be able to translate it properly and provide an unbiased view.

[delrem]

6. "Sources"

wake me when there's something besides anonymous "sources" whipping up the buildup to war / 2 minutes of hate.

[JackRiddler]

8. Source: Curveball.

[leveymg]

11. Source: IDF Unit 8200, the Israeli NSA. Here's the source for that:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/28/israeli-intelligence-intercepted-syria-chemical-talk

[JackRiddler]

14. Got to be kidding me.

Where's the eyeroll big enough for that?

[leveymg]

30. What's your problem with that?

[Ghost Dog]

55. Heh heh.

Stovepiping (also stove-piping) is a metaphorical term which recalls a stovepipe's function as an isolated vertical conduit, and has been used, in the context of intelligence, to describe several ways in which raw intelligence information may be presented without proper context. It is a system created to solve a specific problem.

[KittyWampus]

10. Best guess is this info comes from Congress members who were briefed earlier this evening.

[leveymg]

12. That's a good guess. But, the primary source for this info is Israel.

And, there are several strains of information with varying degrees of spin contained in that sourcing. We're being led by a ring in our big, dumb noses,and there STILL does not seem to be any solid evidence that the attack was authorized by anyone other than the unit commander.

Finally, the Congressional staffers and CNN are each putting their own spin on it.

[Cha]

13. yeah, those who are opposed to any kind of intervention in Syria

will turn their nose up at any kind of suffering and evidence of who's responsible if it points to the Syrian army. Must be stuffy in that tunnel.

thanks JaneyVee for this info.

[David__77]

32. What makes you think that?

I'm open to the possibility that it was the Syrian army, and even that it could have been something ordered from higher up and not a rogue unit. But it would not at all change my view that the US must absolutely not in any way militarily intervene in Syria or its civil war.

[nadinbrzezinski]

22. So I am assuming you are suiting up

and getting ready to join the good fight? If not you, due to age and all that, your blood relatives, preferably your kids?

[JackRiddler]

26. Oh yeah, JaneyVee to the front! Inspirational!

[nadinbrzezinski]

27. All of the people who are for it

I could be for war. I will admit it. But in this case I have yet to see the evidence that indeed the bad guys of the day did it.

There is no doubt that somebody used some form of organo phosphate. There is also evidence this is not the first time. The question is who? And the rush to war is reminding me very much so of... 2003.

I keep having memories of the PNAC boys...

And yes, the 1925 treaty was violated... as in seriously violated. But we still need to find out WHO? And the evidence we have is circumstantial at best.

[Iliyah]

35. Well from here

WHO CARES

[iamthebandfanman]

41. Who cares if theres any evidence!?

Let the babies keep dying!

So long as the fear Bush put in us of illegally INVADING and OCCUPYING a 'similar' country is going strong!

I mean, why should America strive to show its not a bumbling idiot ?

Nah, best to just pull the blankets over our heads and scream 'its their war! its their war!' because its not like there are any countries out there whod love to find out using chemical weapons is OKAY after all.

Its not like we ban them for a reason after WW1 or anything...
And besides, why shouldn't we be punished for the rest of our existence because a republican president who was senile sold saddam some for his war with iran ?

LET THE BABIES KEEP DYING FRIENDS!!!!

[nvme]

49. What about the Brits?

If the Parliament voted 285 to 272 against responding, they don't buy the "intel". Why should we? Everyone says no "slam dunk" then we should pause and think before we send more treasure and spill blood.

[JI7]

50. no, you assume those who believe assad used chemical weapons all want to respond

there are many who believe he used the chemical weapons but do not support a response, at least not at this time.

[Sunlei]

51. sometimes I think it's a good thing that 'someone' listens to phone calls.

I want those calls and the attached names made PUBLIC TO THE WORLD.

I paid for some of that 'work'

[malaise]

56. As in pro-war sources

[cali]

57. for the sake of your op, I'll stipulate that this is factual.

It still doesn't make a military strike a good idea or justifiable, particularly under the circumstances with no coalition.

Think, for one moment, about the potential terrible ramifications.

Just think.