Friday, April 14, 2017

Oath Keepers - Was President Trump Manipulated Into Using Military Force in Syria?


Official Pentagon Satellite Images "Proving" Assad use of Chemical Munitions
by Navy Jack


"The term 'false flag' has its origins in naval warfare where the use of a flag other than the belligerent's true battle flag is flown while engaging the enemy to provide a tactical advantage."

In order for our President to make responsible decisions regarding foreign policy and the use of military force, our intelligence community bears an awesome responsibility to provide him with accurate information. When that information is tampered with or concocted to fit a political narrative, the President's actions can appear to be quite reasonable, even though in reality he will have been manipulated for ulterior and possibly sinister motives.
On April 4, 2017 a bomb was dropped in Idlib Syria. The position of the United States is that Bashar al-Assad used a sarin gas device against his own people. The position of the Syrian government is that a regular munition was dropped on a suspected Al Nusra Front (Al Qaeda) warehouse containing chemical munitions. In my previous article titled "Has President Trump Been Blackmailed or Deceived by the NEOCONs?" I discussed the various motives (or lack thereof) for either argument.  In this article I will discuss the apparent misleading of both the American public and possibly even the President of the United States by our intelligence community.
The following are the items of evidence presented by the U.S. intelligence community to support the decision for the President's deadly attack on an airbase in Syria with 59 Tomahawk Cruise Missiles:

Satellite Evidence

Using the following image, senior Pentagon officials disputed a Russian report that an opposition chemical weapons facility was struck by a standard bomb dropped by the Syrian military. The officials insist that these images prove exactly where the chemical weapon impacted:
 
Careful review of these images reveals very quickly that the North/South orientation is reversed and the magnification scale is dramatically different between the two images. When the images are normalized for orientation and scale, it becomes rather obvious that the Pentagon claim is false and that the impact site they insist is "new" was in fact present before the event in question:

Step 1 - Orient transparent "No impact crater" image at correct size over "New impact crater" image.
In Step 1 above, we can clearly see that the "No impact crater" marker has been placed too far north to provide an accurate comparison. By using a fixed distance reference available in both images that is the length of the misplacement (the length of the arms of the U shaped building), we can accurately place the "No impact crater (2)" marker in Step 2 below:


Step 2 - Correctly position the "No impact crater (2)" marker to determine if a crater pre-existed.
As is clearly evident in the Step 2 image above, the "New impact crater" actually existed before the bomb event, thereby eliminating the theory and analysis presented by the Pentagon.

 To read more, or make a comment on this post,
GO HERE

.If you believe in the mission of Oath Keepers, to defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, please consider making a donation to support our work.   You can donate HERE.




Popular Posts