How the U.S. Concocted a Terror Threat to Justify Syria Strikes, and the Corporate Media Went Along

[stupidicus]

http://www.democracynow.org/2014/9/29/how_the_us_concocted_a_terror I think DemocracyNow and all of its personalities should be thrown under the bus and ran over a few times for a headline like that, no? They are obviously in cahoots with that villian Glenn "the chameleon" Greenwald.

MURTAZA HUSSAIN: So, in the days leading up to the attack, several anonymous sources suggested that an attack was imminent. They suggested that there were a threat against airliners using toothpaste bombs or flammable clothing. And they said that, like Barbara Starr mentioned, they were in the final stages of planning this attack. After the strikes were carried out, several U.S. officials started walking back that estimation quite far and saying that the definition of "imminent" is unclear, and when we’re saying is a strike about to happen, we’re not sure what that means exactly. So, in retrospect, this definition of a strike being imminent and this characterization of a threat coming from this group, which is very definable and very clear, became very unclear after the strikes, and they suggested through The New York Times the strikes were merely aspirational and there was no actual plot today existing against the United States. So, the actual justification for the strikes was completely negated after the strikes ended, which was something quite troubling.

AMY GOODMAN: Explain what you mean, negated right after the strikes began, right after the justification worked.

MURTAZA HUSSAIN: Right. So, after the strikes happened and there were statements saying that people were killed and the group had been scattered, James Comey and many others within the U.S. establishment started saying that, "Well, you know, we said the strikes were imminent from this group, but what does 'imminent' really mean? Could be six months, could be a year.’" And other anonymous officials started saying there was not any threat at all, there was not any plan in the works to attack the United States. And then, further it came to light that the Khorasan group itself, which we had been hearing about in the media was a new enemy and was a definable threat against the United States, did not really exist per se; it was simply a group of people whom the U.S. designated within a Syrian opposition faction as being ready to be struck. So, the entire narrative that had been developed, and within the media developed, was completely put to a lie after the strikes. And it was interesting that Ken Dilanian reported the story first in the Associated Press, saying that this was a new threat and a new group, and he was one of the first people to break the story afterwards saying that U.S. officials are now adding more "nuance," is the word he used, to their previous warnings about the group. So, it was kind of a really egregious case of media spin, whereby the media had taken up this narrative of a threat from a new terrorist, and then, after the strikes had been conducted which justified this group, they immediately took the opposite tack, saying that in fact there was no threat that was imminent and the group itself did not exist per se. So, it was really quite a failure of the media, which we’ve seen several times in the past, as well.

I suppose the doves turned into hawks due to the influence of that dastardly GG should be happy for this BHO failure http://dallasmorningviewsblog.dallasnews.com/2014/09/obama-justifying-syria-strikes-with-same-law-he-sought-to-repeal-in-january.html/ and the way he successfully brought the two parties together so as maybe they can be droned at the same wedding party some day. http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=16&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CG0QFjAP&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.theguardian.com%2Fworld%2F2014%2Fsep%2F28%2Fisis-al-qaida-air-strikes-syria&ei=uCIrVJK6FsK3yASBxoDAAQ&usg=AFQjCNFcF28D42qTii-xG0iE0KyBf_OT6Q&bvm=bv.76477589,d.aWw

[blkmusclmachine]

1. Operation Northwoods

http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=92662


U.S. Military Wanted to Provoke War With Cuba

[stupidicus]

2. yep

while we're not talking about a false flag attack here, your post certainly suggests that a healthy amount of skepticism and the vocalizing of it are always justified.

It's certainly better than blind/unqualified trust outta our leaders or their propaganda arm known as the corporate media.

[flamingdem]

3. That's a nasty plan, I've never read about it

and glad it didn't happen.

[sabrina 1]

5. Why do you think it didn't happen? Back then?

[sabrina 1]

4. Democracy Now, under the bus!!

Well, considering the the 'media' takes its orders from 'government sources' you can't really blame them for this:

So, it was kind of a really egregious case of media spin, whereby the media had taken up this narrative of a threat from a new terrorist, and then, after the strikes had been conducted which justified this group, they immediately took the opposite tack, saying that in fact there was no threat that was imminent and the group itself did not exist per se. So, it was really quite a failure of the media, which we’ve seen several times in the past, as well.

Even for the most willing tools, when the arbiters of the 'truth' are so confused themselves as to how best 'get the people on board', one can hardly blame them.

[stupidicus]

6. no doubt sabrina

it seems to me there are only two plausible explanations for what happened -- willful and deliberate subterfuge, or incompetence on the part of the admin and media alike.

I think as much as anything else and regardless of which it is, it's explained in whole or at least in large part by BHO's desire not to be guilty of what he likely won the election on -- no more "dumb" wars -- and the lack of any legal justifications for this one.

[wandy]

7. Sometimes things will only make sense...............

If you stand on your head and look in the mirror sideways.
Try reading it like this.

Their was this new terrorist group posing an imminent threat. We bombed the living snot out of them causing them to go away. Suddenly their was no threat, in fact their was no terrorist group at all. Somehow in all the spin and counter spin the media got all screwed up and failed to report this the way either side wanted it reported. In any event all of the nonexistent terrorists were eliminated by drones at the wedding.

See? Makes perfect sense.
Right.
Tell me another story.

[stupidicus]

8. indeed, they eliminated the imminent threat with extreme prejudice and ruthless efficiency

or the truth was the first and maybe only casualty

[sabrina 1]

9. Lol, 'tell me another story'. That pretty much sums it up. But I like stories that are not

a repeat of the last story I heard. Something new, more creative would be nice.

I hate knowing the ending of a story in advance.