There is ample proof of who committed the gas attacks in Syria; (I too believed that there wasn't until I started digging and looking; there's clear concise evidence that place Syrian jets dropping the bombs within seven minutes of when the first alert of Sarin gas was detected).
There's also a huge distinction between this one event of slinging a hand full of Tomahawk missiles at a military complex that is known to have been the originator of the Sarin gas attack, and any comparison to what transpired in 2013-2015. But then there's some who still believe that one militaristic action constitutes, "War"....Go Figure... *Obama launches 2,800 strikes on Iraq, Syria without congressional approval* *Nearly 3,000 strikes in Iraq and Syria to date* By Jacqueline Klimas <http://www.washingtontimes.com/staff/jacqueline-klimas/> - The Washington Times - Monday, April 27, 2015 U.S. forces have now surpassed 2,800 strikes against targets in Iraq <http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/iraq/> and Syria <http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/syria/> under President Obama’s war against the Islamic State, all as part of a conflict Congress <http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/congress/> has yet to specifically authorize — and amid worries lawmakers won’t ever act. Under intense pressure from Capitol Hill, Mr. Obama finally submitted a draft authorization for the use of military force against the Islamic State in February, but it’s since languished, caught in the stalemate between those who want tighter restrictions and those who want the president to have as free a hand as possible. Now analysts worry that inaction will set a dangerous precedent and leave Congress <http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/congress/> shorn of its warmaking powers. “I understand it’s unlikely that they’ll act, but it’s important for them to act,” Shoon Murray, an associate professor in the School of International Service at American University, said last week. “It does take away the war powers of Congress <http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/congress/> by Congress <http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/congress/>‘ own deference.” The U.S. military has been conducting strikes in Iraq <http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/iraq/> for 10 months, and began striking directly at targets in Syria <http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/syria/> last September as part of Mr. Obama’s announced campaign to degrade the capabilities of the Islamic State. Mr. Obama has justified the attacks under his commander in chief powers and under the 2001 resolution authorizing force against al Qaeda, and the 2002 resolution authorizing the ouster of Saddam Hussein in Iraq <http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/iraq/>. Some lawmakers on Capitol Hill have said Mr. Obama is stretching those laws and that the strikes could be illegal — though they say they want to put them on firm footing by passing a new authorization. But first Mr. Obama balked at sending up new war language and, when he finally did, the split on Capitol Hill became clear: The draft authorization was too aggressive for some, chiefly Democrats, who wanted tighter restrictions on ground troops. But it was too narrow for hawks, chiefly Republicans, who would prefer the president to retain all options. “Obviously, it is not going anywhere,” Sen. John McCain, Arizona Republican and chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee, told Defense One last week. “The proposal was not enough for those on the left and way too much for those of us who believe that the Constitution says the president is the commander in chief.” Sen. Bob Corker, Tennessee Republican and chair of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, which would consider the authorization, told reporters last week that he is starting discussions to look for a bipartisan path forward, but will not bring it up if partisan debates on the authorization could give the impression that lawmakers are divided on fighting the Islamic State. Political analysts said the stalemate is bad for Congress <http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/congress/>, which is granted the power to declare war under the Constitution, while the president is granted the powers of commanding the armed forces. “You have this structure of checks and balances in place. The problem is, it’s not being followed,” said Chris Edelson, assistant professor of government at American University. “The system depends on each institution asserting its power, and that’s not happening.” The president, in his February draft, requested authority to use military force for three years, allowing the administration to strike the Islamic State anywhere in the world, though the use of ground forces outside of limited roles like advisers or search-and-rescue is prohibited. Complicating matters is the 2001 authorization to use force against al Qaeda, which would remain in effect. Since the president has argued the current war is legal under that authorization, which has no endpoint, even the expiration of a new authorization against the Islamic State wouldn’t necessarily halt the war. That leaves the administration free to pursue its war without having to get new permission from Congress <http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/congress/>. Mr. Edelson said it wasn’t long ago that Congress <http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/congress/> did flex its war powers. When Obama wanted to strike Syria <http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/syria/> to stop the Assad regime in 2013, enough lawmakers publicly demanded first Mr. Obama seek their permission that he backed off his plans, creating space for Russian President Vladimir Putin to broker a deal. “Congress <http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/congress/> has shown it is capable of asserting itself,” Mr. Edelson said. For Mr. Obama, his unilateral stance is also an about-face from his time as a senator, when he argued Congress <http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/congress/> needed to keep the president from acting unilaterally in declaring war, Mr. Edelson said. “The president does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation,” Mr. Obama said during a 2007 interview with The Boston Globe. “As president, unfortunately he doesn’t follow that approach,” Mr. Edelson said, noting that the president has conducted unilateral strikes in 2011 in Libya before his campaign against the Islamic State. On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 1:47 PM, MJ <[email protected]> wrote: > > April 8, 2017 > > *Donald Trump Warns That Attacking Syria Could Start World War III * Jeff > Berwick > > [image: []] > > > Yes, you read the headline right. Donald Trump has warned that attacking > Syria could lead the US into World War III! > > [image: []] > > He continued to warn against the repercussions of attacking Syria. > > [image: []] > > He also warned that if the President wants to attack Syria he needs to get > Congressional approval. > > [image: []] > > And he warned that if the President did attack Syria and it ended up > killing civilians, it would look very bad for him and the US. > > [image: []] > > Unfortunately, all those warnings were from 2013 when Nobel Peace Prize > winner, Barack O’Bomber, was considering attacking Syria. > > And, two nights ago, within just hours of a supposed gas attack in Syria, > and no evidence of who did it, Trump has gone ahead and attacked Syria > killing numerous civilians. > > Weren’t we warned before the (s)election that the only way for the US to > avoid a direct confrontation with Russia in Syria was to elect Donald Trump > over Killary Clinton? > > [image: []] > > So much for that. And it’s exactly what I have warned about since before > the election. Donald Trump is a globalist puppet who will just carry on the > work of Bush and Obama in the exact same way that Killary Clinton would > have. We’ve been proven right about Trump ever since his inauguration. We > even wrote an article entitled “ Trump To Continue Bankrupting The US > Through Foreign Wars” > <https://dollarvigilante.com/blog/2017/03/05/trump-to-continue-bankrupting-the-us-through-foreign-wars.html> > in March and many people said that Trump wouldn’t attack Syria and said we > were wrong. Well, we were right again. > > [image: []] > > And, the attack on April 6th has all the markings of the globalist elites > as it was the 100th anniversary of the US entering into World War I. > > Numerous people have come out against this terrorist attack by Donald > Trump including Ron Paul who said, “It doesn’t make any sense for Assad > under these conditions to all of a sudden use poison gasses. I think there > is a zero chance he would have done, you know, this deliberately.” > > The people who have come out in favor of the attack are Hillary Clinton, > John McCain, and Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau… in other words, > all of the people that Trump supporters claim to despise all adore Trump’s > action. > > And, as per the globalist agenda, they will now position the US into a > conflict with Russia. > <http://thefreethoughtproject.com/russia-responds-syrian-attack-frigate/#Zqc9kPgz1rwyzxYc.01> > > [image: []] > > Yes, it’s all scripted. Putin is just as much of a globalist puppet as > Trump. But this will be used to keep the world alarmed at their potential > doom unless, of course, the United Nations, one world government, steps in. > > You could say a lot of people were conned by Donald Trump’s pre-election > promises of not getting involved in foreign entanglements. But, given what > happened, it is probably better to say they were neo conned. > > This attack on Syria shows that Trump sides with the neocons. He also > sides with Hillary Clinton, who publicly called for the bombing of Syria > just hours before it happened > <http://www.reuters.com/article/us-people-hillary-clinton-idUSKBN179058>. > And this attack also shows that Trump aligns himself with the mainstream > media narrative on Syria… which is clearly Fake News. And he also has > aligned himself with ISIS who is actually the CIA who has been trying to > take out Assad. > > Yes, Donald Trump is working with Al Qaeda to stage a fake war with > CIA-backed ISIS. And some dumbed down, Fox (Faux) News watching, mostly > older Americans are cheering it on! Wasn’t it the older generation who > warned the younger generation would become violent due to playing violent > video games? Well, the older generation has become violent in real life by > watching Fox News! > > We are sad that we were so right on Trump. We took thousands of arrows on > the internet over our view on Trump as many sided with what can only be > seen as controlled opposition now, like Alex Jones or Stefan Molyneux. > > But, if you thought Trump was going to fix things and you got fooled don’t > be too sad. We all make mistakes… we all get fooled sometimes. > > Just remember, as George W. Bush once so eloquently said, “Fool me once, > shame on shame on you. Fool me you can't get fooled again.” > > Trump could never fix this situation. No one person can fix things. What > can fix things is spreading this information so people are aware that the > true threat to the American people and everyone else in the world is the US > government and the Federal Reserve. > > Keep one thing in mind, however. Nearly all of what is going on in Syria > is done to keep people worried, angry, fearful and therefore easier for the > government to control. > > So, do not be worried, angry, or fearful about what is going on… that’s > exactly what they want. > > Instead continue to share information amongst your friends, family, and > community about the evil of government and central banking and how if we > remove these things we’ll have peace and prosperity on Earth like we’ve > never known it. And make sure to subscribe to The Dollar Vigilante’s daily > email list (you can do so on the front page of our website > <https://dollarvigilante.com/>) or our Youtube channel > <https://www.youtube.com/user/TheDollarVigilante> and please share with > others to get this information out there. > > Always focus on the positive. The more that people like Trump and the US > government continue to terrorize and destroy the world the more that people > will wake up, stop submitting to their extortion (taxes), stop obeying > their so-called authority and begin using precious metals and bitcoin as > currency… and governments and central banks will simply cease to exist. > > Stop hoping that governments and politicians are going to save you from > government and politicians. Only you can save you from government and > politicians… by renouncing any allegiance or authority to them. > > Until then, the bombs will continue to be dropped and people will look to > the next great leader to get them out of the next big crisis caused by the > very same people. > > Oh, did I mention Trump’s poll numbers hit record lows > <http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-gallup-poll-new-record-low-approval-ratings-russia-healthcare-wiretapping-twitter-a7638601.html> > a few days ago? > > [image: []] > > > https://dollarvigilante.com/blog/2017/04/08/donald-trump- > warns-that-attacking-syria-could-start-world-war-iii.html > > -- > -- > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. > For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum > > * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. > * Read the latest breaking news, and more. > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "PoliticalForum" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
