The circle is almost complete, the central bankers/US government forced
other middle eastern countries to use the dollar as the reserve
currency. Now its Syria and Iran's turn. The central bankers/US
government have been trying for over 20 plus years to get into these
countries, this is their last attempt and it will start WWIII. There is
no turning back at this point, if the war starts tomorrow or 3 weeks
from now is not important, war will start to cover up the economic
collapse.
Thursday, August 29, 2013
Alan Grayson: We Are Broke Why are we going to spend Billions in a War in Syria ?
Alan Grayson: 'Not Even Clear That It Was A Chemical Attack' In Syria
8/29/13 - "I think the administration is giving only one side of the story," Rep. Alan Grayson (D-FL) told CNN's The Lead guest host John Berman on Thursday. Grayson told Berman that he opposes intervention in Syria because U.N. inspectors have not definitively concluded that either a chemical attack took place in Syria or that such an attack was ordered by Bashar al-Assad's regime.
"I don't see how this tragedy -- and, yes, it's a tragedy -- affects U.S. national interests," Grayson said when asked to respond to the assertion from President Barack Obama that the Syrian crisis is a threat to American national security. "The greatest norm, the highest norm in international law, is that you don't attack another country unilaterally without the authorization of the United Nations."
"We can't simply go and bomb people whenever we feel like it," he continued.
"Is standing by and doing nothing really an option?" Berman asked.
RELATED: Graphic: Video Emerges from Syria Showing Horrific Aftermath of Chemical Attack
"Well, frankly, you have overstated and the secretary certainly overstated the evidence that this was a deliberate decision made by the high command in Syria," Grayson replied. "Even if we had undeniable evidence, the fact is it's simply not our reasonability."
"Sometimes, everyone needs to learn to learn the principle, mind your own business," Grayson added.
"It's not even clear it was a chemical attack," he asserted. "If it was a chemical attack, then the residue left on the clothing of victims would have poisoned other people. That hasn't happened."
Grayson added that, if there was a chemical attack, there is no evidence that the Assad regime carried out that attack deliberately.
8/29/13 - "I think the administration is giving only one side of the story," Rep. Alan Grayson (D-FL) told CNN's The Lead guest host John Berman on Thursday. Grayson told Berman that he opposes intervention in Syria because U.N. inspectors have not definitively concluded that either a chemical attack took place in Syria or that such an attack was ordered by Bashar al-Assad's regime.
"I don't see how this tragedy -- and, yes, it's a tragedy -- affects U.S. national interests," Grayson said when asked to respond to the assertion from President Barack Obama that the Syrian crisis is a threat to American national security. "The greatest norm, the highest norm in international law, is that you don't attack another country unilaterally without the authorization of the United Nations."
"We can't simply go and bomb people whenever we feel like it," he continued.
"Is standing by and doing nothing really an option?" Berman asked.
RELATED: Graphic: Video Emerges from Syria Showing Horrific Aftermath of Chemical Attack
"Well, frankly, you have overstated and the secretary certainly overstated the evidence that this was a deliberate decision made by the high command in Syria," Grayson replied. "Even if we had undeniable evidence, the fact is it's simply not our reasonability."
"Sometimes, everyone needs to learn to learn the principle, mind your own business," Grayson added.
"It's not even clear it was a chemical attack," he asserted. "If it was a chemical attack, then the residue left on the clothing of victims would have poisoned other people. That hasn't happened."
Grayson added that, if there was a chemical attack, there is no evidence that the Assad regime carried out that attack deliberately.
BREAKING ~ British Parliament Votes Against Military Action in Syria
Britain Parliament Votes Against Military Action in Syria
BBC. British MPs have voted to reject possible military action against the Assad regime in Syria to deter the use of chemical weapons.
A government motion was defeated 285 to 272, a majority of 13 votes.
Prime Minster David Cameron said it was clear Parliament does not want action and "the government will act accordingly".
It effectively rules out British involvement in any US-led strikes against the Assad regime.
And it comes as blow to the authority of David Cameron, who had already watered down a government motion proposing military action, in response to the opposition Labour Party's demands for more evidence of Assad's guilt.
Labour had seen its own amendment - calling for "compelling" evidence - rejected by MPs by 114 votes.
But - in an unexpected turn of events - MPs also rejected the government's motion in support of military action in Syria if it was supported by evidence from United Nations weapons inspectors, who are investigating claims President Bashar al-Assad's regime had used chemical weapons against civilians.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
