____________________
Syria
Mr. Jehl has labored mightily, but the full details of the still secret Syria dispute are yet beyond his reach. And Republicans have decided it will remain so. Mr. Jehl provides additional insight in his previous report (April 26, linked above).
John Bolton, in his prepared statement and public testimony, Mr. Jehl cites, boldly asserted, and elaborated, that — like the United States itself — Syria too has “a stockpile of the nerve agent sarin that can be delivered by aircraft or ballistic missiles, and has engaged in the research and development of more toxic and persistent nerve agents such as VX.”
As for biological, he was careful to not claim, Syria has a biological warfare program, or any biological warfare weapons, or any biological warfare agents, when he was sticking to his script:
“We believe that Syria is continuing to develop an offensive biological weapons capability.”
John R. Bolton, prepared statement, “Syria's Weapons of Mass Destruction and Missile Development Programs” {copy}, and testimony, Syria: Implications for U.S. Security and Regional Stability {106kb.html, 290kb.pdf, purl} (U.S. Congress 108-1, House Hearing, September 16 2003, International Relations Committee, Subcommittee on the Middle East and Central Asia, Serial No. 108-66) {SuDoc: Y 4.IN 8/16:SY 8/5, OCLC: 54456390, GPOcat, LL: paper, microfiche, DL, WorldCat}.
But during her opening statement, and later colloquy, the Subcommittee Chairman three times asserted, Syria has a “biological weapons program” (pages 9/2, 40/18), John Bolton did not correct her, and indeed himself referred to Syria’s “BW program” later in the colloquy (page 48/21).
This illustrates the folly, the peril, the negligent, reckless, or willful deceit, of using obtuse, cryptic language, which incites unwarranted inferences, in the minds of partisans, hoping for the worst (the pretext they’ve been advocating), in the minds of government officials, anxious about what they should do, and unwarranted suspicions and doubts, in the minds of impartial observers.
And if this be the purpose of that language, to incite unwarranted inferences, then the people who adopted that language, for that purpose, have committed a crime. And an aggravated criminal conspiracy to lie, by those who willfully reinforce the unwarranted inferences, with background briefings, with lies they plant in the foreign and U.S. press, with unsubstantiated assertions by others they endorse.
This harks back a year, when John Bolton defiled U.S. intelligence, by asserting:
“Syria ... is pursuing the development of biological weapons and is able to produce at least small quantities of biological warfare agents.”
This, in his inflammatory, rogue, speech, “Beyond the Axis of Evil,” at the Heritage Foundation (May 6 2002), clothed with authority of U.S. intelligence.
Escalating, into an willful lie, the mere speculation he first asserted six months earlier. And escalating the asserted threat, into his willful lie, as well:
“We believe that Syria ... has an offensive BW program in the research and development stage, and it may be capable of producing small quantities of agent.”
John R. Bolton, prepared statement, “Biological Weapons Convention: Remarks to the 5th Biological Weapons Convention RevCon Meeting” {copy} (Geneva Switzerland, November 19 2001).
Liar glossary
A “willful” liar knows, what s/he asserts is untrue.
A “reckless” liar knows, s/he does not know, if it’s true, or not.
Both are willful liars. The one as to the fact s/he asserts, the other as to the certitude s/he asserts. –CJHjr
John Bolton’s Heritage Foundation speech about Syria — as with Cuba — was a willful lie, about U.S. intelligence, and a reckless lie, about the facts, which he lied to be unassailably true.
This, judging from the sharp retreat, imposed upon him and his testimony, the next year, by his masters and his betters (September 16 2003, linked above).
It’s little wonder, he didn’t show up, a month later, to repeat his Heritage Foundation lies to Congress, with a 5 year prison sentence staring him in the face, in the unlikely event an honest U.S. Attorney General (an oxymoron) could ever to be found to prosecute him.
John Bolton’s Heritage Foundation claims about Syria, apparently, were just one more of his many rank fantasies, U.S. intelligence had no credible evidence to support.
Or a simple, willful, lie, to bully, terrorize, harass Syria, to obey the whims of his White House masters. And to pretext a war, if Syria would not obey, his Emperors’ orders.
At the very least, a reckless lie, a mendacious effort, to paint Syria with offensive, terrorist, tendencies. (Viruses and bacteria attack whomever they encounter, not just the enemy, and so only a lunatic would use them anywhere near their own homeland, or their own forces).
By the next year, his State Department masters realized, John Bolton is untrustworthy, dishonest, a reckless, incendiary, liar.
And they know a liar when they see one, because they look in the mirror every day.
They took charge of his public statements, or at least some of them:
“Three sources confirmed that Bolton’s speeches had to be specially vetted by Armitage or Powell’s personal staff because Bolton had become so controversial.”
Sonni Efron, Mary Curtius, Doyle McManus, Tyler Marshall, “Bolton's a Tough Guy With a Cause” (Los Angeles Times, May 1 2005).
“Deputy secretary of state, Richard L. Armitage, ordered two years ago that Mr. Bolton be blocked from delivering speeches and testimony unless they were personally approved by Mr. Armitage. ...
“Therefore, the deputy made a decision, and communicated that decision to me, that John Bolton would not give any testimony, nor would he give any speech, that wasn’t cleared first by Rich,”
Mr. Wilkerson said, according to a transcript {73kb.pdf} of an hourlong interview with members of the committee staff last Thursday. ... “No one else was subjected to these tight restrictions,” he said ... in an e-mail message on Monday ... Lawrence B. Wilkerson, a longtime aide to former Secretary of State Colin L. Powell ... a retired Army colonel who was Mr. Powell’s chief of staff from 2002 to early 2005 ... speaking for himself, not for Mr. Powell or Mr. Armitage.”
Douglas Jehl, “No. 2 at State Dept. Was Said to Put Restrictions on Bolton” (New York Times, May 10 2005).
Now, Syria is “unlikely” “able to produce at least small quantities of biological warfare agents” The opposite of his Heritage Foundation lie:
“We know that Syria is pursuing the development of biological weapons. Due to its limited biotechnical infrastructure, it is unlikely that Syria has produced effective biological weapons agents or weapons at this point.”
John R. Bolton, prepared statement, “U.S. Efforts to Stop the Spread of Weapons of Mass Destruction” {copy}, and testimony, U.S. Nonproliferation Policy After Iraq {647kb.pdf, purl} (U.S. Congress 108-1, House Committee on International Relations, Hearing, Serial No. 108-38, June 4 2003, 10:34-1:32 p.m., 3+85 pages) {SuDoc: Y 4.IN 8/16:P 75/28, LCCN: 2003373415, OCLC: 53341977, GPOcat, LL: paper, microfiche, DL, WorldCat, October 31 2003}.
He abandoned one lie, in his second sentence.
But he continued to assert two lies in his first sentence.
What is the explanation for this?
Is this the hand of his masters at work? Who ordered John Bolton to stop his second sentence lie? But not sufficiently informed themselves? To appreciate that his first sentence also contained two lies?
Or is this John Bolton’s own hand at work?
The hand of a lawyer. Eager to fly about the world, lying and bullying whom he pleases. But mindful, of that 5 year prison sentence, for lying to Congress. Wary, of private assurances, his actual masters, in the White House, may have offered, that he is free to lie on their orders, and to pay no mind to his theoretical masters, in the State Department.
A lawyer. Trained to think ahead. Mindful that political winds shift. That a future U.S. Attorney General might not agree, that the U.S. President has legal authority, to order U.S. officials, to lie on orders. A foundation law of all police-states, and of the elected dictatorship of the United States of America, now under construction, and nearing completion, by secret, unlawful, opinions of Justice Department lawyers, in the Office of Legal Council, the breeding ground, the indoctrination center, for aspiring U.S. federal judges. Legal advocates, pretending to be legal advisers.
Whichever, John Bolton’s theoretical masters woke up:
A capacity for straight talking rather than peddling half-truths ...
Margaret Thatcher
“... planned testimony by ... John R. Bolton ... was to be presented Tuesday ... delayed until September ... prepared to tell members of a House ... subcommittee that Syria’s development of biological, chemical, and nuclear weapons had progressed to such a point that they posed a threat to stability in the region ... a “revolt” among intelligence experts ... CIA’s objections and comments alone ran to 35 to 40 pages ... House panel ... considering a bill ... toughen trade and diplomatic sanctions against Syria.”
Warren P. Strobel, Jonathan S. Landay (Knight Ridder), “CIA: Assessment of Syria's WMD exaggerated” (Miami Herald, July 15 2003).
“Lawrence B. Wilkerson {73kb.pdf} ... Mr. Powell’s chief of staff from 2002 to early 2005 ... said ... deputy secretary of state, Richard L. Armitage ... decided in the summer of 2003 to postpone Congressional testimony that Mr. Bolton had planned to give on Syria and that had touched off significant opposition from American intelligence agencies.”
Douglas Jehl, “No. 2 at State Dept. Was Said to Put Restrictions on Bolton” (New York Times, May 10 2005).
They woke up, perhaps to their own ignorance, and called in their own masters:
The ber masters, in charge of intelligence.
The National Intelligence Council.
If anyone on the policy side chose to give a speech without our clearance, that was O.K. by me.
Robert L. Hutchings
Who are happy, and content, to stand by, and watch U.S. officials lie through their teeth, about the ber masters’ intelligence, feeling no responsibility, for the tens of thousands of dead bodies, slain by those very lies, attributed by the lying U.S. officials to them, the ber masters.
As is the new National Intelligence Director.
Let’s say that he took isolated facts and made much more of them to build a case than I thought the intelligence warranted. It was a sort of cherry-picking of little factoids and little isolated bits that were drawn out to present the starkest-possible case.
Robert L. Hutchings {36kb.pdf}
But, on this occasion, the ber masters were asked to step in (according to Mr. Jehl’s interview with Robert L. Hutchings). And when asked to speak, they themselves strive to speak the truth, they now claim, but did not do, previously.
The /ber masters terminated both of John Bolton’s first sentence lies, by the time he next testified, three months later (September 16 2003, quoted above).
Now, Syria is not pursuing biological “weapons,” as John Bolton lied in his Heritage Foundation speech, but merely a “biological weapons capability.”
Whatever that means, if anything. Likely nothing. A likely cover-up, of previous lies. Pretending, there is some secret substance, somewhere, for something, to do with biological weapons. But we’re not going to tell you what. Because you would laugh at us. And discover our cover-up lie.
And now too, we no longer claim to be sure, even about that:
John Bolton’s lie, “We know,” became “We believe.”
Whether their belief is honest, we know not. Whether it’s reasonable, we know not. Whether it’s based on any credible evidence, we know not.
Judging from their very sordid, very dishonorable, very deadly, very criminal, history, their supposed belief is likely to be dishonest, unreasonable, and based on no credible evidence. And I myself, certainly, do not believe a single word they say, about anything, if it purports to demonize anybody or any country.
A “biological weapons capability” is a pharmaceutical plant, manufacturing vaccines.
A completely innocent operation.
Having nothing, whatsoever, to do with biological weapons.
But which is “capable” of producing biological weapons agents (germs and viruses).
Which then require an additional “capability” to weaponize. How to keep the creatures alive, during storage, surviving disbursal, so they can do their life’s work.
And a further, additional “capability” to manufacture the weapons to contain and disburse the weaponized agents.
And a further, additional “capability” to deploy the weapons, disburse them, store them, create a protocol, for storing, arming, using them.
And so, if this be its factual basis (if there be any factual basis) — a vaccine plant, or some such, they may be thinking about buying from Cuba, for example — then this sinister assertion is willfully misleading, a willful lie, by willful omission of that material fact, necessary to be stated, to prevent the asserted fact from inducing an unwarranted inference.
This asserted fact: “We believe that Syria is continuing to develop an offensive biological weapons capability.”
Inducing this, the one and only, inference: That what they are doing (if anything) can be explained only as part of a biological weapons program, and there is no other, innocent, explanation.
A willfully, maliciously, induced inference.
A complete and utter lie.
Asserting to be an unassailable fact, a mere inference (e.g. that a vaccine plant is, or will be, established with a biological warfare motive) and — by willfully lying, that this mere inference is an unassailable fact — willfully inducing a second inference, that there is no innocent explanation (e.g., to manufacture vaccines).
This analysis, if there does indeed be, an innocent, concealed, explanation possible, for whatever factual basis there may be (if any), for this assertion.
A criminal lie. By those knowingly speaking and writing the lie. And, by those principals, orchastrating the lie, complicit in the lie. In a criminal conspiracy to lie.
For which prison is the only suitable remedy.
The prison term, escalating with the malice: As the willfully concealed innocent explanation itself escalates, from theoretical, to possible, to probable, to likely, to reasonably certain, to a verified fact with no contrary evidence.
To deter onlookers. From lying to Congress. Lying to each other, in the Executive Branch. Lying to the public. Inciting fear, hatred, war, missile strikes, sanctions, to punish our innocent “enemies.” To the delight of Zionists, who pack the bank accounts, of voting Members of Congress, with millions {copy} of dollars, each year.
And if death and destruction be a foreseeable consequence of the criminal lie, then greatly extended prison sentences, for the resulting felony murder, manslaughter, arson, war crimes, incitement, complicity, facilitation, conspiracy, racketeering activities.
If I had to guess, I imagine another aspect of the Syria dispute was John Bolton’s plan to assert, that Syria was cooperating with terrorists, giving them biological or chemical weapons.
And I suppose this, because it fits the portrait he was trying to paint with biological weapons.
But especially, because of the utter, complete, absolute, unequivocal, rejection of that assertion, with an authoritative tone, contained in the script imposed upon him.
To my mind, this is the unmistakable hand of the ber masters, writing his script for him (his prepared statement), an unequivocal exoneration, John Bolton — an untrustworthy, immoral, evil, extravagant, dangerous, reckless, liar — would never volunteer, of his own free will:
“... there is currently no information indicating that the Syrian Government has transferred WMD to terrorist organizations or would permit such groups to acquire them.”
Mr. Jehl reports, the CIA rejected John Bolton’s assertion, that Syria “threatened regional security in the Middle East.”
Yet, John Bolton proceeded to assert exactly that, describing Syria as a “a serious threat to our allies and our interests in the region” about 14 times during his testimony, in one form or another, and agreed with questioners who asserted the same, another 4 or 5 times. And he referred to Syria’s weapons as “offensive.”
John strongly believed that just because the intelligence community had a conclusion on an issue, that didn’t necessarily have to be his view ... John felt he had every right to interpret what the evidence meant and come to a different conclusion than the intelligence community.
Alan A. Foley {96kb.pdf}
Claiming everything he said was “reviewed and commented on by everybody with a stake in the issue within the Executive Branch. And ... what I have said ... is something that there is very broad and deep agreement on in both the policy and intelligence communities of our government.” (page 56/27).
A confused mish-mash of heated rhetoric and bellicose talk, to an unseemly audience, eager to believe all doubts, rumors, and dark speculations about Syria, blind to contrary evidence.
In the midst of which, he nevertheless obeyed the written script, imposed upon him, and confessed, that Syria views its “CW program” as defensive:
“which it believes serves as a deterrent to regional adversaries.”
Not a weapon to enforce offensive ambitions.
A forced confession — buried as it was, in the elaborate fabric, of his Gothic tale, of an evil regime — which appeared to escape the notice of his captivated audience, mindless fans of fiction.
Planning, preparing, initiating, or waging aggressive war with its attendant horror, suffering, and loss is a crime which stands at the pinnacle of criminality. For it there is no justification or excuse.
The Ministries Case (Nuernberg Military Tribunal 4, April 11-13 1949), 12-14 N.M.T., at volume 14, page 352 (opinion).
Which John Bolton, and his agents, doubtless incited the Committee to ignore, by background briefings, packed with his lies, to ignore what he actually said.
This, judging from extensive factual assertions by the Committee chairman.
An apparent criminal conspiracy, to lie to Congress, about U.S. intelligence, to willfully subvert, evade, gut, the command of his theoretical masters, who insisted the conclusion of the ber masters be enforced, honored, and obeyed.
A conspiracy, doubtless blessed, by his actual masters, in the White House, themselves, documented, prima facie criminal liars (President, Vice President, National Security Council, and their staffs). Who deployed this exact same technique, to initiate their prima facie crime against peace, the war on Iraq.
Syria apparently considers itself free to use chemical weapons in its own territory in self-defense.
With a simple message:
If you don’t want to be drenched in chemical weapons, don’t invade Syria.
And, if Syria can manage to deliver a chemical payload by long range missile, then Syria walks in the footsteps of the United States. Which continuously asserts a right to target and attack an innocent civilian population (an otherwise crime), with otherwise criminal weapons (nuclear), in any state which attacks the United States with criminal weapons.
A deterrent.
The threat of an international countermeasure.
With a simple message, to Israel:
If you don’t want chemical weapons raining down on your towns and cities, don’t attack Syria, with your nuclear weapons.
The United States goes much further, and asserts the right, and the intention {copy}, to attack, with its nuclear weapons, offensively.
A war crime, and crime against humanity, in virtually every scenario.
Hence, this simple message, to the United States, too:
If you don’t want chemical weapons raining down on your 106 military bases in Iraq, and your Green Zone Throne, don’t attack Syria, with your nuclear weapons, as a surrogate for Israel, or for your own ambitions, and ensure Israel does not attack us, with their nuclear weapons.
In reciprocol compliance with this, the United States Military Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations, page III-2, on first-use of its nuclear weapons (U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, Joint Publication 3-12, Final Coordination (2), March 15 2005) {1779kb.pdf, 1779kb.pdf, command comments: 1120kb.pdf}:
(1) Geographic combatant commanders may request Presidential approval for use of nuclear weapons for a variety of conditions. Examples include: ...
(d) To counter potentially overwhelming adversary conventional forces, including mobile and area targets (troop concentration).
(e) For rapid and favorable war termination on US {Syrian} terms.
(f) To ensure success of US {Syrian} and multinational operations.
(g) To demonstrate US {Syrian} intent and capability to use nuclear {chemical} weapons to deter adversary use of WMD.
(h) To respond to adversary-supplied WMD use by surrogates against US {Syrian} and multinational forces or civilian populations.
The United States regularly uses an even more evil, criminal, weapon, routinely — depleted uranium, a weapon of mass destruction which dwarfs all others, in its evil, persistent, deadly, continuous, eternal, criminality.
Against the use of which — and its invisible, permanent, criminal, poisonous, aerosols — anywhere near Syria, an international countermeasure, with chemical weapons, is perfectly lawful.
And, because it would be lawful, a counter-countermeasure, by the United States, would be unlawful.
As is its use of depleted uranium.
Finally, Syria, repeatedly, over and over again, has offered to give up its chemical weapons, with inspections, if Israel will give up its nuclear weapons, with inspections.
An offer the United States ignores, because its Zionist Masters like their nuclear weapons, and want to keep them.
–CJHjr
