By Dennis Kucinch, Reader Supported News: Top 10 Unproven Claims for War Against Syria!
In the lead-up to the Iraq War, I researched, wrote and circulated a document to members of Congress which explored unanswered questions and refuted President Bush's claim for a cause for war. The document detailed how there was no proof Iraq was connected to 9/11 or tied to al Qaeda's role in 9/11, that Iran neither had WMDs nor was it a threat to the U.S., lacking intention and capability to attack. Unfortunately, not enough members of Congress performed due diligence before they approved the war. Here are some key questions which President Obama has yet to answer in the call for congressional approval for war against Syria. This article is a call for independent thinking and congressional oversight, which rises above partisan considerations. The questions the Obama administration needs to answer before Congress can even consider voting on Syria: Claim # 1. The administration claims a chemical weapon was used. The UN inspectors are still completing their independent evaluation. Who provided the physiological samples of sarin gas on which your evaluation is based? Further reading: Brown Claim #2: The administration claims the opposition has not used chemical weapons. Which opposition? Are you speaking of a specific group, or all groups working in Syria to overthrow President Assad and his government? Has your administration independently and categorically dismissed the reports of rebel use of chemical weapons which have come from such disparate sources as Russia, the United Nations, and the Turkish state newspaper? Have you investigated the rumors that the Saudis may have supplied the rebels with chemicals that could be weaponized? Has the administration considered the ramifications of inadvertently supporting al Qaeda-affiliated Syrian rebels? Was any intelligence received in the last year by the the U.S. government indicating that sarin gas was brought into Syria by rebel factions, with or without help of foreign government or intelligence agents? Further reading: Global Research report: Wall Street Journal article: Reuters story, Zaman story in Turkish, see Google translate from Turkish to English, Atlanta Sentinel story: AP story. Claim #3: the administration claims chemical weapons were used because the regime's conventional weapons were insufficient. Who is responsible for the conjecture that the reason chemical weapons were used against the Damascus suburbs is that Assad's conventional weapons were insufficient to secure "large portions of Damascus"? Claim #4: The administration claims to have intelligence relating to the mixing of chemical weapons by regime elements. Who saw the chemical weapons being mixed from August 18th on? Was any warning afforded to the Syria opposition and if not, why not? If, on August 21st a "regime element" was preparing for a chemical weapons attack, has an assessment been made which could definitely determine whether such preparation using gas masks, was for purpose of defense, and not offense? Claim #5: The administration claims intelligence that Assad's brother ordered the attack? What is the type of and source of intelligence which alleges that Assad's brother personally ordered the attack? Who made the determination that Assad's brother ordered the attack, based on which intelligence, from what source?