Hersh: Hillary approved sending of Libya's sarin to Syrian rebels

[grasswire]

cross post from GDP

Hersh: Hillary approved sending Libya's sarin to Syrian rebels

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-05-01/seymour-hersh-says-hillary-approved-sending-libyas-sarin-syrian-rebels

Authored by Eric Zuesse via Strategic-Culture.org,
5/1/2016

The great investigative journalist Seymour Hersh, in two previous articles in the London Review of Books ("Whose Sarin?" and "The Red Line and the Rat Line&quot has reported that the Obama Administration falsely blamed the government of Syria’s Bashar al-Assad for the sarin gas attack that Obama was trying to use as an excuse to invade Syria; and Hersh pointed to a report from British intelligence saying that the sarin that was used didn’t come from Assad’s stockpiles. Hersh also said that a secret agreement in 2012 was reached between the Obama Administration and the leaders of Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar, to set up a sarin gas attack and blame it on Assad so that the US could invade and overthrow Assad.

"By the terms of the agreement, funding came from Turkey, as well as Saudi Arabia and Qatar; the CIA, with the support of MI6, was responsible for getting arms from Gaddafi’s arsenals into Syria."

Hersh didn’t say whether these 'arms' included the precursor chemicals for making sarin which were stockpiled in Libya, but there have been multiple independent reports that Libya’s Gaddafi possessed such stockpiles, and also that the US Consulate in Benghazi Libya was operating a "rat line" for Gaddafi’s captured weapons into Syria through Turkey. So, Hersh isn’t the only reporter who has been covering this. Indeed, the investigative journalist Christoph Lehmann headlined on 7 October 2013, "Top US and Saudi Officials responsible for Chemical Weapons in Syria" and reported, on the basis of very different sources than Hersh used, that:

"Evidence leads directly to the White House, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Martin Dempsey, CIA Director John Brennan, Saudi Intelligence Chief Prince Bandar, and Saudi Arabia´s Interior Ministry."
.................................
much more at link

The two Hersh stories from London Review of Books are available at:

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n08/seymour-m-hersh/the-red-line-and-the-rat-line

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v35/n24/seymour-m-hersh/whose-sarin


Those stories are from 2013 and 2014, however this article from zerohedge is from today.

[silvershadow]

1. I like Hersch, in general. Bookmarking to read later. nt

[muriel_volestrangler]

2. Not true: Hersh accused neither Hillary, nor Americans in general, about the sarin

He accused al Nusra, and said they obtained precursors for sarin in Turkey. At no point does he suggest American involvement in that.

And the only mention of Hillary in the Alternet interview is when Hersh says he thinks Hillary would have known what Petraeus and Ambassador Stevens knew.

You've been duped by the Russian 'Strategic Culture website, which puts out vile anti-American propaganda:

At the same time, the US Embassy is doing everything it can to ensure the broadest possible presence of overt and covert LGBT activists in the country’s legislative and executive powers. The elections in May will show whether America’s gay conspirators have succeeded in implementing Obama’s plan for the Dominican Republic – to turn it into a nature reserve for LGBT tourists and a stronghold for the penetration of LGBT ideology into other Caribbean and Latin American countries.

http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2016/04/25/dominican-republic-first-stage-americas-rainbow-experiment-latin-america-caribbean.html

[grasswire]

6. I don't consider Seymour Hersh duped in any way shape or form.

Do you???????????

[muriel_volestrangler]

7. The point it that you're not quoting Hersh; you're quoting someone who is lying

about what Hersh has said.

Have you actually looked to be what Hersh said about Hillary?

[grasswire]

8. I used the exact title of the article.

How many times do we get spanked here for using our own titles for things?

You want it both ways.

You know, many of us here are savvy enough to discern truth from hype or disinformation. It is the Hillary peeps who have their heads in the sand, eager to deny any culpability in her even in the face of massive evidence to the contrary.

I am not afraid of reading the opinions of those I don't agree with . I am not afraid of reading widely --- many many different sources that are all over the map.

I am confident enough in my judgment to not feel like quashing opinions and fearing them with a sort of fanaticism that we usually see in totalitarian societies.

Perhaps I should have just posted the Hersh articles, and they are damning enough of not only Hillary, but of Obama too (and I am sorry to read of Obama's being duped into bad policy).

But I posted the whole shebang, with links to the Hersh articles. No one makes you read anything that frightens you.

[muriel_volestrangler]

9. And the person who wrote the article is lying

That's the point.

Not everyone is "savvy enough to discern truth from hype or disinformation"; for instance, you have failed to do so in this case. I have given the reasons why, but you still haven't thought about it. There is no 'evidence' from Hersh about Hillary having anything to do with sarin. If you still think there is, then quote it, from either Hersh's article or the Alternet interview with him.

Yes, you should have just posted the Hersh articles, because they give what he said, not what a liar is saying, and they weren't posted on a Russian disinformation site - that you know is pretty scummy, given its homophobic attacks on Obama. Has it occurred to you that a site that will make up crap about Obama for political reasons would do it about Hillary, also for political reasons?

[Holly_Hobby]

3. USA! USA! n/t

[MineralMan]

4. Sheesh! Consider the source, please.

Wackadoo CT nonsense.

[SidDithers]

5. Oh FFS. Eric Zeusse?...

Sid