Just like a broken clock, it tells correct
time twice a day. Barack Hussein Obama’s promise to have Congress vote upon his Syria’s strike force plans is
a first since the historic constitutional betrayal in the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution. Even the feeble attempt in The War Powers Act of 1973, to place accountability on Imperial Presidents, routinely ignored by other
POTUS, struck new heights of arrogance and abuses under this infamous Nobel Peace Prize President.
War Powers Resolution, generally known as the War Powers Act, was passed by Congress over President Nixon's veto to increase
congressional control over the executive branch in foreign policy matters, specifically in regard to military actions short
of formally declared war. Its central provision prohibited the President from engaging in military actions for more than sixty
days, unless Congress voted approval.
The key Section 1541(c)
(c) Presidential Executive Power as Commander-in-Chief;
Limitation The constitutional powers of the President as Commander-in-Chief to introduce United States Armed Forces into hostilities,
or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, are exercised only
pursuant to (1) a declaration of war, (2) specific statutory authorization, or (3) a national emergency created by attack
upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces.
The proposed authorization approval in both bodies of Congress on extending permission for
unwarranted aggression against Syria promises to be the most significant vote on foreign policy in the last half century.
How many false flag cons can a war weary public endure from the neoconservatives and liberal interventionists? The answer
becomes clear, every measure of pain and suffering that the fifth column Zionists can extract.
Before It is News, the Hacked Email of US Intelligence
Colonel Shows Pentagon’s Involvement In Chemical Attack In Syria article concludes that this documentation proves that the chemical attack
was indeed a false flag operation.
James Corbett provides a compelling summary in the YouTube video,
Who Is Really Behind the Syrian
War? He references an even more alarming analysis of the "Oded Yinon Plan" from Global Research. Their report "Greater Israel":
The Zionist Plan for the Middle East, by Michel Chossudovsky is a most significant account.
Israel" requires the breaking up of the existing Arab states into small states.
"The plan operates on two essential premises. To survive, Israel must 1) become an imperial regional power,
and 2) must effect the division of the whole area into small states by the dissolution of all existing Arab states. Small
here will depend on the ethnic or sectarian composition of each state. Consequently, the Zionist hope is that sectarian-based
states become Israel’s satellites and, ironically, its source of moral legitimation… This is not a new idea,
nor does it surface for the first time in Zionist strategic thinking. Indeed, fragmenting all Arab states into smaller units
has been a recurrent theme." (Yinon Plan, see below)
in this context, the war on Syria is part of the process of Israeli territorial expansion. Israeli intelligence working hand
in glove with the US, Turkey and NATO is directly supportive of the Al Qaeda terrorist mercenaries inside Syria.
The Zionist Project also requires the destabilization of Egypt, the creation of
factional divisions within Egypt as instrumented by the "Arab Spring" leading to the formation of a sectarian based
State dominated by the Muslim Brotherhood.
The rabid sociopathic jingoism of the NeoCons is not in defense of the United States or the American people. No, their
allegiance is to Zionism. The destructive foreign policy of the last four administrations is a strategic departure from post
World War II objectives. Since an open debate about the harmful consequences, stemming out of a blind support for Israel is
nearly nonexistent on Capital Hill, the task of setting the record straight falls upon a Canadian journalist, Joshua Blakeney
to explain why Israel and client states want
nobody to rule Syria.
ought to be kept in mind that the post-WWII US military doctrine for the Middle East was the Eisenhower Doctrine which promoted
the fomentation of stability in the region to facilitate the flow of oil to Americans. This was fine if you were safely ensconced
in Houston or Dallas with your oil companies raking in profits from Middle East oil fields but for Israel this policy was
disastrous. The funneling of petro-dollars to Israel’s adversaries like Saddam Hussein, who fired scud missiles at Israel
in 1991, and to the likes of President Assad was intolerable. Therefore a schism in the Empire soon emerged and two distinct
US-Zionist visions for the Middle East crystallized.
the perspective of anti-neocon Realists, such as Walt (Stephen Walt, professor of International Relations at Harvard), the
US has a vested interest in propping up Arab strongmen (like President Assad) who can create stability in their countries
thus making them potentially hospitable for US corporations. For Zionist-neocons and their evil twin brothers, Liberal Interventionists,
it is Israel’s regional dominance rather than US commerce which is of primary importance."
The prevailing attitude out of Israel regarding Syria is most revealing. The Jerusalem
Post reports, Israelis want US, Europe to
attack Syria, but against IDF intervention. "The US and European countries should attack Syria, but
Israel should not be involved in the assault, two polls in weekend Hebrew newspapers found."
When Congress voices their will, their true colors will show. Mournfully, most
beltway tools are dual loyalists, no matter what their heritage. Just who will be making the decision? AIPAC must be burning up multi IOU’s. When representative "pols"
see only white and blue in their flag and forget the red tint that stands for the sacrifice of patriotic blood on foreign
soil, the country is betrayed.
Mr. Blakeney continues on the
danger of relinquishing a pro America First foreign policy:
"The Israeli-neocon 9/11 coup d’état allowed the pro-destabilization, Zionist faction of the US
elite to seize the reins of power. Since then we’ve seen the implementation of the Destabilization Doctrine, which,
as stated, is the polar opposite of the less malignant post-WWII Eisenhower Doctrine. The now notorious Oded Yinon plan, authored
by the Israeli geostrategic analyst in 1982, offers the clearest manifesto for the Israeli destabilization of the Middle East.
Yinon argued the following:
total dissolution into five provinces serves as a precedent for the entire Arab world including Egypt, Syria, Iraq and the
Arabian peninsula and is already following that track. The dissolution of Syria and Iraq later on into ethnically or religiously
unique areas such as in Lebanon, is Israel's primary target on the Eastern front in the long run, while the dissolution of
the military power of those states serves as the primary short term target. Syria will fall apart, in accordance with its
ethnic and religious structure, into several states such as in present day Lebanon, so that there will be a Shia Alawi state
along its coast, a Sunni state in the Aleppo area, another Sunni state in Damascus hostile to its northern neighbor, and the
Druzes who will set up a state, maybe even in our Golan, and certainly in the Hauran and in northern Jordan. This state of
affairs will be the guarantee for peace and security in the area in the long run, and that aim is already within our reach
Many Americans are
chumps when they think Israel is our ally. When will the anti-war progressives mount an Occupy Wall Street style effort to
avoid another dangerous and avoidable involvement? Norman Solomon writing in antiwar.com warns. "The administration is about to launch a ferocious propaganda
blitz that will engulf a wide range of U.S. media. And as a fallback, the president is reserving the option of attacking Syria
no matter what Congress does."
Pat Buchanan has it correct as usual. "The idea that we would launch unilaterally
a war against a country that has not attacked us or threatened us without the authorization of the Congress, which has the
power to declare war — it seems to me is an act of almost insanity."
A record of indisputable conduct proves that the foreign policy establishment routinely operates against the best
interests of the nation. Just how many citizens realize that the Yinon Plan is actually the operational context under which
It is certainly likely that the puppet
president will just lie his way out of another box of his own creation. However, what is it gonna take for the public
to break with the incompetent buffoon, who sits on the nuclear codes?
Syria is a target for the reason Buchanan cites. "The neocons realize that if they can get us to attack Syria
and there’s a real possibility that there will be retaliatory attacks on Americans or attacks on Israel which will then
cause the Israelis or the Americans to attack Syria’s allies in Iran — Syria is the backdoor to war with Iran."
Almost sounds like the Yinon Plan is following the script that the Zionists provided
to their U.S. benefactors.
SARTRE – September 2,
Discuss or comment about this essay on the BATR Forum