Philip Giraldi says IC-Military Doubt Assad Gas Narrative

via libertarianinstitute.com

Philip Giraldi, former CIA officer and Director of the Council for the National Interest, says that “military and intelligence personnel,” “intimately familiar” with the intelligence, say that the narrative that Assad or Russia did it is a “sham,” instead endorsing the Russian narrative that Assad’s forces had bombed a storage facility. Giraldi’s intelligence sources are “astonished” about the government and media narrative and are considering going public out of concern over the danger of worse war there. Giraldi also observes that the Assad regime had no motive to do such a thing at this time.



If you enjoy OffG's content, please help us make our monthly fund-raising goal and keep the site alive.

For direct-transfer bank details click here.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Notify of

oldest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Apr 8, 2017 10:05 PM

If you review the current circumstances in Syria and the fact that the US has been planning regime change there for a decade, you might wonder why an intelligent man such as al Assad, would provoke the exact US military response he knew would result from such a foolish and deadly gas bombing.

Apr 8, 2017 4:52 PM

Trump’s in an incredibly difficult, isolated and dangerous position. Even if he was inclined to oppose the war hysteria, what can he really do when the entire US media and political class are against him? He’s only hanging on to the presidency by his fingertips and possibly facing impeachment because of his links to Russia, or as the BBC called it his ‘romance’ with Putin… fucking… amazing… ‘romance’!
It’s easier and safer, far safer, to go with the flow and for the first time receive some praise for ones actions, that must be tempting for Trump, a respite from ridicule and hatred. Finally, he’s doing something ‘right’ something the court approves of, his baptism in blood. He’s growing into the role of president… yuk.
Suddenly, it’s really rather grotesque, the man who couldn’t say a word that was true, a serial liar, is believed by everyone that matters, probably the smug bastards on Saturday Night Live will learn to love Trump too.

Apr 8, 2017 3:43 PM

Maria Zakharova answering questions on alleged cheical attack video via Fort Russ.
Well worth listening to Zakharova… nails it in my opinion… zero on the ground expert investigation, just partisan claims and allied political rhetoric.

Norman Pilon
Norman Pilon
Apr 8, 2017 3:15 PM

Reblogged this on Taking Sides.

Apr 8, 2017 9:09 AM

There’s a quite detailed analysis of the Shajul Islam video –
the one used to justify the Tomahawk attack at:
It was produced by one Denis OBrien, who’s done time in US Marines, and also
worked in NZ in Pharmacology for 10 years. Both good indicators 😉
So how can a clear thinking individual produce a report within a day
that gives a lie to this “Causus Belli” when the 17 US intelligence agencies
and their multi billion budgets fail to report such obvious fakery??
One of the reasons for his prompt and detailed rebuttal
of the False Flag /Shajul Islam video was his earlier work
on the Ghouta Massacre
Theres a detailed, convincing and technical pdf at
which is free to download. ( And well worth printing and distributing )
It transpires that the Khan Sheikhoun Incident of Apr04|2017
was an AQ rerun / re-staging of the Ghouta Massacre of Aug21|2013.
This time with the desired effect on President Mousetrap 🙂

Norman Pilon
Norman Pilon
Apr 8, 2017 3:22 PM
Reply to  DavidKNZ

Hope you don’t mind, David, but to save myself some time, I’m just going to “lift” your comment and transplant it on my blog as “additional and related information.”

Apr 8, 2017 7:36 PM
Reply to  Norman Pilon

Go for it. Here in NZ the MSM are simply cranking out the “brutal Assad must go” meme with no way of challenging their fact deficient war mongering. So anything you or I can do to bring the truth to awareness is worth doing. I’ve printed off the PDF – its a challenging read – and passed it on to my military minded acquaintances. Thats produced a lot of heat, but hopefully a little light. Just small steps; they all help

Apr 8, 2017 8:49 AM

It´s absolutely clear: everybody with a clear mind and a Minimum of Information must know: this wasn´t Assad!
“Syrian Tonkin Gulf – Trumpillary”: https://wipokuli.wordpress.com/2017/04/07/syrian-tonking-gulf-trumpillary-der-syrische-tonkin-golf/

Tom Turner
Tom Turner
Apr 8, 2017 8:47 AM

I’d like to thank everyone involved with this site (and the authors of the BTL comments) for their good work in trying to keep us all informed. The authenticity of the Guardian, C4 News and BBC etc. has felt ‘off’ for quite a few years now. Some may have noticed it earlier, and I might have been naive, but I’ve woken up. I now find them all quite unwatchable/unlistenable. Watching John Pilger’s The War You Don’t See recently made it all make sense. It has been said the War On Terror could go on for at least 50 to 100 years. If we’re in a constant state of ‘war’, that means we’re in a constant state of war propaganda (with public relations in full swing). I for one can’t accept the lies and hypocrisy anymore. Thanks again.

Apr 8, 2017 5:48 AM

Scott Adams (Dilbert) thinks that Trump knows that Assad was not responsible, but went along with a show of force for his own reasons: http://blog.dilbert.com/post/159300836386/the-syrian-air-base-attack

Apr 8, 2017 1:58 PM
Reply to  ultra909

The casual way this guy talks about 59 air strikes is actually quite disgusting
Trump is claiming to be moral because of the babies the poor babies
The list of cynical reasons for him really doing it devalue American people can more

Apr 8, 2017 4:54 AM

My current theory is that Assad bombed a chemical store. Whether it was his chemicals or not is irrelevant. Whether he knew they were there or not is equally irrelevant. Just smokescreens. Assad is still responsible if his military did the strike, which Russia confirmed he did.

Dave Hansell
Dave Hansell
Apr 8, 2017 8:41 AM
Reply to  aaronmicalowe

The official explanation from the Russians and the Syrians along these lines before any investigation as to the facts and to gather evidence, whilst understandable in the context of the school playground crazies coming out with wild evidence free accusations and conclusions within hours of this story breaking, does nevertheless fall into the same broad category of assuming what you are trying to deduce prior to analysis.
It would seem reasonable to suggest beginning with the source of this information/story and checking the basics. Like for instance verifying whether what is claimed happened actually did happen. Anyone with even a rudimentary level of instruction in the effects on the human body of poison gas and nerve agents like Sarin will be aware of the toxicity and would not operate, nor would they be allowed to, within an area contaminated with such an agent without full NBC protection. This includes at least two layers of gloves, a thin white linin inner glove and a rubber compound black outer glove, as well the full Noddy suit covering extremities such as boots and head and a fully functioning gas mask.
The fact that the video submitted as evidence to sell this story shows medics operating without protective gloves requires the scepticism of critical faculties which seem to be sadly lacking. One can only speculate as to why this should be so. Perhaps it’s down to nothing more than the wish to believe and act accordingly without evidence because it’s easier to satisfy emotional needs?

Apr 8, 2017 10:47 AM
Reply to  aaronmicalowe

On that (dubious) logic Trump is also responsible for the multiple deaths and injuries caused by the Tomahawk attack because, whether he knew the ‘official’ story was a lie or not, he “did the strike”.
If Assad did order his airforce to bomb a facility known to be used by the terrorists and known or suspected to be storing chemical weapons (there is an alternative story that it was Iraqi planes which did the bombing with the aim of preventing the chemical weapons stored there from being passed on to the other terrorists in Iraq), then at least his action would be legitimate and covered by the rules of war (certainly by the American version of those, where ‘collateral damage’ is of no consequence) – whereas Trump’s ‘response’ lacks any legitimacy.

Apr 8, 2017 2:03 PM
Reply to  aaronmicalowe

(The chemical store as you put it is in indelible – the strong hold of the jihadis) .
The strike was on a building assumed to be a weapons store – a legitimate target
This target was shared with the Americans as part of the deconfliction agreement
Now the Americans therefore knew assads forces would strike there
Why therefore would Assad therefore use chemical weapons in this target knowing USA was monitoring
They struck the target it turned out to contain chemicals
The USA used the report and twisted it to launch a bombing campaign to insure all the bad publicity he has been getting

Brian Burgess
Brian Burgess
Apr 8, 2017 3:16 AM

Imagine if a nation’s justice system worked on the same principles as that which led to the Assad regime being accused, declared guilty and punished with deadly force. All without any investigation first to determine the facts. I don’t know whether or not Assad’s regime used chemicsl weaponsnor whether there is another explanation. What I do know is you couldn’t even properly investigate a simple house fire in 24 hours let alone a chemical weapons incident.

Apr 8, 2017 3:02 AM

As I have stated before all this is doing right now is taking the heat of a few major news issues that erupted recently ,namely the pepogate issue and the fact that the US is nearing bankruptcy if not already there .
What better way to change the narrative than to focus on bogus Syrian poison gas bombings.

Dead World Walking
Dead World Walking
Apr 8, 2017 2:37 AM

The psychopaths who rule are itching for a major conflict.
It’s how they get their jollies.
Round em up, lock em up and throw away the keys.