Not a ‘slam dunk’: US intelligence can’t prove Assad used chemical weapons

Published time: August 29, 2013 15:45 Get short URL Syrian President Bashar Assad (AFP/SANA) Trends Syria unrest Tags Bashar Assad, John Kerry, Obama, Syria, USA, War Only days after the White House suggested it was all but certain Syrian President Bashar al-Assad used chemical weapons to gas hundreds of civilians, United States intelligence officials briefed on the situation say the evidence isn’t all there. Despite recent remarks from US President Barack Obama, Secretary of State John Kerry and other top administration officials, sources within the intelligence community are disputing the certainty that Assad ordered the use of chemical gas last week on innocent civilians outside of Damascus, Syria. Four US officials — including one senior member of the intelligence community — told the Associated Press this week that there’s confusion over where the reported chemical warheads are currently being held and who exactly possesses them. Citing a lapse in both signals and human intelligence reports, the officials all told the AP on condition of anonymity that US and allied spies “have lost track of who controls some of the country's chemical weapons supplies,” according to reporters Kimberly Dozier and Matt Apuzzo. Multiple officials, the AP reported Thursday morning, used the phrase “not a slam dunk” to discuss the credibility of intelligence linking chemical weapon use directly to Pres. Assad. In 2002, then-Central Intelligence Agency Director George Tenet infamously said Washington scored a “slam dunk” with regards to confirming Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction. Now more than a decade down the road, US officials hesitant to rush off to war are again questioning the credibility of the White House’s own report. According to an Office of the Director for National Intelligence report cited by the AP, the evidence against Syria “is thick with caveats” and contains gaps that are getting in the way of putting the chemical weapon use directly in the hands of Assad. But Carney, the administration’s press secretary, said earlier this week that the White House “established with a high degree of confidence that the Syria regime has used chemical weapons already in this conflict.” “It is our firm conviction that the Assad regime is responsible” for gassing civilians on August 21, Carney added. “Logic dictates that conclusion, as well as the hard facts. And the president is working with his national security team to evaluate the options available to him to respond, as well as consulting with international allies and consulting with members of Congress.” Those remarks echoed a statement made by Sec. Kerry this week as well in which he said the White House was certain Assad’s regime maintains custody of the chemical weapons used, and that the regime “has been determined to clear the opposition from those very places where the attacks took place.” Kerry fell short of directly saying Assad ordered the attack, but Pres. Obama made that allegation during an interview with PBS’ NewsHour on Wednesday. "We have concluded that the Syrian government in fact carried these out," Obama said of the assault. "And if that's so, then there need to be international consequences." Earlier this week, Foreign Policy reporter Noah Shachtman wrote that the US intelligence community recently intercepted conversations in Syria that suggested the Aug. 21 assault could have been not necessarily ordered by Assad, but perhaps “the work of a Syrian officer overstepping his bounds.” "It's unclear where control lies," one US intelligence official told Foreign Policy. "Is there just some sort of general blessing to use these things? Or are there explicit orders for each attack?" "We don't know exactly why it happened," the official added. "We just know it was pretty fucking stupid." Pres. Obama is briefing members of Congress on the Syrian situation on Thursday using conclusions made by US intelligence, after which a declassified report is expected to be released to the public. ============ Wednesday, August 28, 2013 OOPS! NO GAS ATTACK BY ASSAD The US and UK are facing a fight to keep their Syria attack plan on track The UN and the UK Labour party want to delay any possible action. A growing number of 'honest' commentators have turned against Obama and Cameron. Dr Tim Stanley, a historian of the United States, writes in the UK Telegraph: Syria: why would Assad invite a Western intervention by using WMDs Dr Tim Stanley writes: First, we've yet to ascertain that chemical weapons really were used by Assad – specifically we've not determined a) what kind of WMDs they were or b) who actually did it... Second, why would the Assad regime do something so stupid? It must know that by using chemical weapons it would isolate itself from any international support and invite a Western military response. More importantly, Assad was already winning the war – so why bother to use WMDs during the last lap to victory? Indeed, the only people who have anything to gain by Assad using chemicals are the rebels, because that would internationalise the conflict in a way that they have long lobbied for. Girl raped and murdered by John Kerry's rebels. Third, why is the West obliged to act even if Assad did use chemical weapons? We are not under any such treaty obligations and the subject sure doesn't feature as a trigger for war in the US constitution... John Kerry ... We've got one very good reason to doubt his accuracy: Iraq. Remember that back in 2003, the then US secretary of state, Colin Powell, told the UN in no uncertain terms that Iraq definitely had WMDs. Definitely, definitely, definitely. We now know that it didn't. ~~ brian refers us to the article entitled: Sarin Gas : a new propaganda campaign against Syria According to VOLTAIRE NETWORK: The YouTube the video evidence of the massacre of August 21st was posted by the "Majles Rif" account ... the day before, on August 20th . On these videos, one quickly detects a setup: 1. The wounded children appear haggard or drugged, and do not have parents who accompany them. 2. Boys are often naked, while the girls are all dressed. 3. We see no hospital structure, not even a clandestine one, except screens and pockets of serum. ~~ Some or all of these children may be children kidnapped by the rebels and then killed.