How does one Verify Trust with these Characters?


John R. Houk

© September 14, 2013


Hmmm … Fox News reports that the USA and Russia have worked out an agreement format to collect Assad’s Chemical Weapon arsenal. I wonder if Obama is plugged into President Reagan’s “trust but verify”?


I have had the feeling of being a Conservative lone wolf because I favored the forcible removal of Chemical Weapons from Syria with the caveat that the USA did not do it alone. Also my thoughts included forcible removing any Chemical Weapons the Syrian Rebels may have acquired clandestinely from perhaps Saudi Arabia or even Libyan Chemical Weapon stores clandestinely sent via U.S. involvement.


It is my personal feeling to not trust Obama (and his Dem Administration), Putin and Iranian client Bashar al-Assad. So I have doubts the U.S./Russia accord is worth the paper it is spelled upon:


Framework for elimination of Syrian chemical weapons

The U.S. and Russia have agreed to work together on a new, binding U.N. Security Council resolution that would ensure verification of the agreement to secure and destroy Syria’s chemical weapons stocks and remove its capability to produce such weapons.


SEPTEMBER 14, 2013




Taking into account the decision of the Syrian Arab Republic to accede to the Chemical Weapons Convention and the commitment of the Syrian authorities to provisionally apply the Convention prior to its entry into force, the United States and the Russian Federation express their joint determination to ensure the destruction of the Syrian chemical weapons program (CW) in the soonest and safest manner.


For this purpose, the United States and the Russian Federation have committed to prepare and submit in the next few days to the Executive Council of the OPCW a draft decision setting down special procedures for expeditious destruction of the Syrian chemical weapons program and stringent verification thereof. The principles on which this decision should be based, in the view of both sides, are set forth in Annex A. The United States and the Russian Federation believe that these extraordinary procedures are necessitated by the prior use of these weapons in Syria and the volatility of the Syrian civil war.


The United States and the Russian Federation commit to work together towards prompt adoption of a UN Security Council resolution that reinforces the decision of the OPCW Executive Council. This resolution will also contain steps to ensure its verification and effective implementation and will request that the UN Secretary-General, in consultation with the OPCW, submit recommendations to the UN Security Council on an expedited basis regarding the UN’s role in eliminating the Syrian chemical weapons program.


The United States and the Russian Federation concur that this UN Security Council resolution should provide for review on a regular basis the implementation in Syria of the decision of the Executive Council of the OPCW, and in the event of non-compliance, including unauthorized transfer, or any use of chemical weapons by anyone in Syria, the UN Security Council should impose measures under Chapter VII of the UN Charter.


The proposed joint US-Russian OPCW draft decision supports the application of Article VIII of the Chemical Weapons Convention, which provides for the referral of any cases of non-compliance to the United Nations General Assembly and the United Nations Security Council.


In furtherance of the objective to eliminate the Syrian chemical weapons program, the United States and the Russian Federation have reached a shared assessment of the amount and type of chemical weapons involved, and are committed to the immediate international control over chemical weapons and their components in Syria. The United States and the Russian Federation expect Syria to submit, within a week, a comprehensive listing, including names, types, and quantities of its chemical weapons agents, types of munitions, and location and form of storage, production, and research and development facilities.


We further determined that the most effective control of these weapons may be achieved by removal of the largest amounts of weapons feasible, under OPCW supervision, and their destruction outside of Syria, if possible. We set ambitious goals for the removal and destruction of all categories of CW related materials and equipment with the objective of completing such removal and destruction in the first half of 2014. In addition to chemical weapons, stocks of chemical weapons agents, their precursors, specialized CW equipment, and CW munitions themselves, the elimination process must include the facilities for the development and production of these weapons. The views of both sides in this regard are set forth in Annex B.


The United States and the Russian Federation have further decided that to achieve accountability for their chemical weapons, the Syrians must provide the OPCW, the UN, and other supporting personnel with the immediate and unfettered right to inspect any and all sites in Syria. The extraordinary procedures to be proposed by the United States and the Russian Federation for adoption by the OPCW Executive Council and reinforced by a UN Security Council resolution, as described above, should include a mechanism to ensure this right.


Under this framework, personnel under both the OPCW and UN mandate should be dispatched as rapidly as possible to support control, removal, and destruction of Syria’s chemical weapons capabilities.


The United States and the Russian Federation believe that the work of the OPCW and the UN will benefit from participation of the experts of the P5 countries.


The United States and the Russian Federation strongly reiterate their position on Syria as reflected in the Final Communique of the G-8 Summit in Northern Ireland in June 2013, especially as regards chemical weapons.


The two sides intend to work closely together, and with the OPCW, the UN, all Syrian parties, and with other interested member states with relevant capabilities to arrange for the security of the monitoring and destruction mission, recognizing the primary responsibility of the Syrian Government in this regard.


The United States and the Russian Federation note that there are details in furtherance of the execution of this framework that need to be addressed on an expedited basis in the coming days and commit to complete these details, as soon as practicable, understanding that time is of the essence given the crisis in Syria.


Well it reads as an altruistic good thing to remove Chemical Weapons from Assad’s Syria. I have to wonder what will happen if Russia, Syria and probably Iran (even though the Iranian name is not mentioned in the agreement) do something to expose the agreement is a political sham.


Everyone was worried that an Obama attack on Syria would ignite into a WWIII. I wonder what ‘everyone’ will think when agreements are abrogated heinously an obligations to attack the abrogator leads to WWIII?


JRH 9/14/13

Please Support NCCR

JAMES BUCHANAN’S NEW CELLMATE (Or the Price we pay for electing a Mental Weakling

BHO - Yes we can flip-flop

james buchanan. by_titanicfan











Intro by John R. Houk

Posted September 9, 2013


Who is James Buchanan? Buchanan was the 15th President of the USA elected as a Democrat (You know, the same political party as Barack Hussein Obama). Buchanan’s term of Office was from 1857 to January 11, 1861. Even though Buchanan was from Pennsylvania he supported the Slave States’ position on slavery. Buchanan mouthed his support of the U.S. Constitution and the Union of the United States of America; however as President he took no action to preserve America’s Union. Controversies of if a new State should be admitted as slave or free knocked loggerheads together politically. After Abraham Lincoln was elected as a Republican President in 1860, Southern State after Southern State seceded from the Union and formed the Confederate States of America to preserve a slave economic culture in the South.


You have to understand Buchanan’s ineptitude to comprehend the title of John Bert’s essay castigating President Barack Hussein Obama Foreign Policy and specifically Obama’s desire to engage Syria militarily.


BTW – I believe I am at least one of the reasons that John Bert reposted this essay. You can tell this might be about a week or so dated; nevertheless the thoughts are still valid. I might point out I don’t completely agree with John Bert on the issue if engaging Bashar al-Assad is not to our National Interest. I believe it is to the USA’s interest (See Also HERE) but NOT the Obama is trying to convince people to engage Assad. The lone wolf path will make things worse before it is better.


JRH 9/9/13

Please Support NCCR


I am re-posting this by request

JAMES BUCHANAN’S NEW CELLMATE (Or the Price we pay for electing a Mental Weakling)


By John Bert

Reposted September 9, 2013 2:27 pm

John Bert Facebook Post


I am re-posting this by request

JAMES BUCHANAN’S NEW CELLMATE (Or the Price we pay for electing a Mental Weakling)

Well…Folks GET READY…Obama has JUST CHECKMATED the Congress with the Syria issue. I am CERTAIN he did not make these decisions on his own…someone with an actual working brain made these calculations…not Obama.

Here is where we are:

1.) At this point there is NO Tactical advantage (or otherwise) for the type of military strike that the imbecile in chief, Obama, has been broadcasting to the enemy that we would be making.

2.) It is most assuredly NOT in our “National Interest” or in the “Security Interests” to proceed with limited military action of the sort the “president” has proposed. There is No pressing nor imminent danger. These horrible poison gas weapons are being used in theater only.

3.) Many months back Obama’s teleprompter (we have to blame it on anyone BUT him, right?) caused Obama to shoot off his mouth about “red lines”. The “red line” has been repeatedly crossed. Now, trapped by his own mouth, he had to put up or shut up. Shutting up makes him (and the country by default) look WEAK, which is no shock to anyone who has observed HIM for more than 5 minutes, as the Russians and Iranians surely have.

4.) So now, feeling the heat (and MOST importantly watching his poll numbers plummet) he had to try to find a “way out”. Now he (or actually one of his handlers) has done so. By “seeking the authority of congress” he has effectively REVERSED the tables. Now the BLAME will fall on Congress for whatever mess comes out of Obama’s desperate need to save face for his earlier case of diarrhea of the mouth about “red lines”. Maybe we should call this approaching debacle the “Vanity War”?

Here is what WILL HAPPEN NOW… The very people that you have heard repeatedly saying taking military action against Syria was a BAD IDEA with no goal and no plan and worse, it could cause the entire region to go up in flames, these very SAME PEOPLE will now (many of them) FLIP and say the Congress MUST authorize the President to do something that an hour ago they were vehemently AGAINST. Yep…you read that right. The reason will be that we MUST authorize the President to make an asinine mistake, because if we do not Iran and everyone in the world will see the USA as weak and not living up to our word (Well…not our word…but the imbecile’s). In other words by Obama seeking congressional authority he has abdicated his leadership and authority to act and will have it BOTH WAYS…

a.) If Congress denies him the authority he will point the finger at CONGRESS.

b.) If Congress grants him the authority whatever happens when he does launch his military action against Syria, now THEY–CONGRESS will stand right with him in assuming the blame for the consequences of military action with NO clear objective and no real benefit to the USA.

THIS IS PURE GENIUS!! Either way Congress is holding the bag!!

Just when you thought this Amateur could not screw things up worse he pulls a rabbit out of his hat and promptly drops it in the lap of Congress.

The price to pay for this one move will ripple forward in time with ramifications that are hard to fathom on sooo many fronts.

If it could not get worse…it will…Obama is getting ready to fly to RUSSIA for the G20 summit. This will be a circus. Do you remember the videos of Obama walking along a line of dignitaries in Russia and NO ONE SHAKING HIS HAND…Obama sticks his hand out and NO ONE takes it…reason?? Russians are proud people and would rather be shot dead than be seen with a WEAKLING and COWARD. They KNOW who and what Obama is and they will not shake the hand of a coward…it is as simple as that. So watch as the White House staff does their best to shepherd Obama clear of any opportunities for another round of videos of folks refusing to shake his hand.

The dire foreign policy issues will multiply from this decision. Israel now knows (if they had not before they SURE DO NOW) that they are on their own. Iran now knows beyond any illusions that Obama’s word is worthless…utterly. Russia already knew.

Remember Obama did NOT seek congressional approval for Libya did he? NO. It is being done here for Obama’s VANITY reasons, NOT for the benefit of the USA. It is a Parlor Trick to pull HIS ass out of the fire and stick Congress in his place. He knows historians will look on this as abdication of authority and he is desperate to find a scapegoat…he now has, IF the Congress is stupid enough to fall for this ploy.

This man is a travesty beyond comprehension. This little stunt will be paid for and I fear the price in American lives will be STEEP.

As a side note Obama has made a laughingstock out of his brand New Secretary of State. Kerry has gone out on a limb trying to assemble “partners” making a vocal and impassioned plea for military action NOW, while Obama just sawed off the limb Kerry was clinging to. Want to bet THAT picture will quickly emerge in the Political Cartoons?? I wish I could draw!

Brilliant, right? Destroy the country’s credibility. Weaken foreign policy. Throw your Sec of State under the bus….and on and on…trust me this will NOT be the last act. I could write a BOOK on what MIGHT happen from here….none of it will be good. This idiot just sealed his fate historically as probably the most inept President. Move over James Buchanan you have a new cellmate.

Postscript: I have already heard Ambassador Bolton and Charles Krauthammer, two men that have repeatedly said the Syria military intervention is a horrible idea, now start sounding like Obama’s cheerleader for authority to act based upon the premise I recite above…geez…it did not take long.

Friends and Countrymen IF we are to stop this madness we NEED to let our Senators and Congressmen KNOW that voting for military intervention of the type Obama has proposed in Syria is STILL a HORRIBLE IDEA, and does NOT serve any security interest of this Country, only now, if they grant him the authority, THEY will join him in the history books as the Village Idiots who got out foxed by an Rank Imbecile.

You have my permission to post this as you see fit.


© John Bert

Edited by John R. Houk

A Vital U.S. Interest?

US Military Forces Around Syria map

Intro to: A Vital U.S. Interest?

My Brief Lone Wolf Opinion

Intro by John R. Houk

Posted 9/7/13


Justin Smith believes there is no benefit to American National Interests if President Barack Hussein Obama punishes Bashar al-Assad for the use of Chemical Weapons against Syria.


I know I am beginning to sound like a lone wolf among my fellow Conservatives, but I do think it is to the National Interests of the USA to remove Assad. And yes, I do realize Assad’s removal could lead to a Sunni version of Iran’s Shi’ite theocracy. That is exactly why I believe Assad’s removal is to America’s National Interests. Assad’s removal throws a monkey into Iranian hegemonic plans for the Middle East. If a Sunni regime stands between the Radical Islamic Shias of Iran and the Radical Islamic Shias of Hezbollah residing in Lebanon, the situation then highlights the violent divide between Sunnis and Shias. Sunni-Wahhabi support of Syrian rebels by Saudi Arabia is an illustration of Sunnis trying to prevent the power of emerging Nuclear WMD Iran from being a dominating Middle Eastern hegemon hating Israel. Keeping the divide between Sunnis and Shias is to Israel’s National Interests and thus to U.S. National Interests.  I realize that is increasingly my lone Conservative opinion, but there you go.


JRH 9/7/13

Please Support NCCR


A Vital U.S. Interest?


By Justin O. Smith

Sent: 9/2/2013 9:43 PM


The President of the United States has become an increasingly powerful branch of government over the past century, simply because Congress has not successfully checked the President whenever a power overreach occurred. So now, more from fear of being mocked than dismay over 1429 dead, including 400 children, Obama has placed himself in a politically precarious position and the U.S. in a dangerous military venture, over his “red line” comment and the use of weapons of mass destruction. He is poised to intervene in Syria through cruise missile strikes, with or without Congressional approval, since he has not let that stop him in the past in foreign or domestic policy.

The War Powers Act (WPA) is very clear on this matter. A U.S. President can only act in his capacity as Commander-In-Chief of the U.S. Armed Forces and engage an enemy of our nation, when an attack has already occurred or is imminent against the U.S. or one of our allies or when a vital U.S. interest is under a heavy threat.

President Bill Clinton acted outside the WPA when he involved the U.S. in the Serbian conflict; when President Ronald Reagan sent the U.S. Marines to Grenada, he did so to protect U.S. citizens attending medical school on the island from a Cuban invasion force.

Obama is essentially damned if he commits to this limited surgical strike and damned if he doesn’t. Two weeks ago, it wasn’t a question of if, but a question of when President Obama was going to order a strike on Syria on his own authority; and now, after speaking with Denis McDonough, White House Chief of Staff, Obama seems quite reticent to act on his own and without Congressional approval, which led Syria’s state-run newspaper, Al Thawra, to call this “the start of the historic American retreat.”

I must ask once again, “What vital interest of the U.S. is at stake in Syria, and what risk of imminent attack exists?”

The answer for the moment is that the U.S. has never had any vital interests concerning Syria, except to closely scrutinize Syria as Iran’s ally and to keep Syria and Iran from going nuclear; however, Obama’s loose-lipped “red line” comment is driving him towards proceeding with an attack which will give Iran its excuse for a retaliatory attack on Israel, according to a senior mullah in Iran, not that Obama is too worried about Israel. So, whether he attacks or not, he is seen for the indecisive, weak, and timid U.S. President, who is guided by his own arrogant self-image and false pride, rather than any clear and concise foreign policy.

More asinine reasoning is readily viewed in statements from Obama, Senator John McCain and Senator Lindsey Graham, who have continually spoken of “regime change” and Assad’s ouster, although Obama now states that this is not the mission. All three were wrong in Libya…wrong in Egypt…and now that they are on the record they are wrong in stating that any U.S. military intervention should “deter and degrade” Assad’s government’s ability to launch chemical weapons and level the field for the “rebels.” And, to what end? So Al Qaeda and Ansar al-Nusra can more easily take Syria for their own and run terrorist operations out of Syria for the rest of the century?

It should trouble us all to see hundreds and thousands of little innocent Syrian children suffering, and trouble me greatly it does. But once more, this crisis of humanity gives me pause and offers up more questions than answers.

Where were those who advocate “intervention for human rights” crises, such as Susan Rice, NSA advisor and ex-Ambassador to the U.N., Samantha Power, Obama advisor and current U.N. Ambassador and ex-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton…or for that matter Secretary of State John Kerry, when the freedom fighters of Tiananmen Square in China, the Greens of Iran or the people of Rwanda and the Congo were crying out for their assistance? Susan Rice, for one, was busy lining her pockets through her close business relationship with Rwandan dictator Paul Kagame, which extended through her time at Intellibridge and her position as the State Department’s top African affairs expert, during the Clinton administration. John Kerry was probably cruising Boston Harbor on his yacht.

The harsh reality exists that the U.S. cannot be the world’s policeman. Simply put, we help when and where we can, without doing any harm. As much as we all wish to save all the hurt and suffering people of the world, the enormity of the task is simply too much for any one nation; but this has not stopped Prince Saud al-Faisal from begging the international community to “stop Assad’s aggression” against his people, while at the same time, the Arab League, Great Britain and the U.N., all three, have given Obama a vote of no confidence and refused to join him in any coalition for intervening in Syria, because Obama is not trusted as a world leader.

It mat bear reminding that more than humanitarian aid is at the forefront of Prince Faisal’s mind. This is the same family who teach the youth of Saudi Arabia that “jihad-is-the-road-to-paradise”, and because they viewed jihad, holy war, as a proper response through the Q’uran to the U.S. led invasion of Iraq, they left their borders open with Iraq. The Faisal family tacitly supported the flow of non-Iraqi islamofascist insurgents into Iraq, in much the same manner that they now support the “rebels”/islamofascists in Syria!

The best of intentions all too often go awry, and no matter that Obama calls this a “limited surgical strike” or McCain’s refrain of “no boots on the ground” echoes through the halls of Congress, to date, the military proposal has not been properly limited in its scope or duration; many Democrats and Republicans alike already stand in opposition to this intervention with great logic: Senator Christopher Murphy (D) asks, “Will a U.S. attack make the situation better for the Syrian people or worse?” And, on ‘Meet the Press’ this past Sunday, Senator Rand Paul seemed to answer that very question, as he stated, “If we start a bombing campaign in Syria that expands the misery. Assad’s not an ally, but I’m not convinced that anyone on the rebel side will be an American ally.”

Nearly two million refugees have fled Syria. Little elementary school children have witnessed unspeakable horrors and the deaths of numerous friends and family members, and the head of the United Nations Human Rights Commission says that “we are looking at a lost generation of children traumatized by this war.” And there are no good answers to far too many questions, as the world rings its hands. Is this America’s problem? No, I tend to view this more as the entire Middle East’s problem due to its cultural aberrations; under no circumstance should the U.S. further involve itself in this mess, under a Commander-In-Chief I certainly could never have served. As harsh and unfeeling as this may sound, the world has all too often stood on the sidelines and allowed much worse to take place; if the attack on our consulate at Benghazi did not warrant a U.S. military response, how can Obama justify an intervention in Syria? …He can’t!


By Justin O Smith


© Justin O. Smith

Editor-Intro John R. Houk

Why Does Negotiate-Peace-Obama Want Assad Out?

Obama Agenda Syria

John R. Houk

© September 5, 2013


[Editor: I tried to post this yesterday but was distracted by family matters. When you see words like “today” or “yesterday” keep in mind the post was meant for 9/4/13]


Has anyone wondered why President Barack Hussein Obama who in part won his 2008 election due to a combined Bush Derangement Syndrome and a promise of ending the Middle Eastern wars the USA has been fighting? I mean BHO has been the Messiah of Leftists that desire peace at any cost even if it destroys American Exceptionalism. Obama has been hot to attack Bashar al-Assad’s Syrian regime accused of launching Chemical Weapons against Syrian civilians more aligned to the Syrian Rebels than to Assad’s Shia-Alawite military dictatorship.


Frankly I have been leaning toward a U.S. attack against Assad even if it means Sunni al Qaeda-loving rebels used the attack to reassert a military advantage and remove Assad. Why? Because removing Assad throws a monkey wrench into the Iranian agenda to be the Middle East’s primary military hegemon. As a Middle Eastern hegemon Iran undoubtedly will make a play to destroy Israel. Israel’s destruction would rally even the Islam’s Sunni majority to be favorable to Iran’s Shia-Twelver Islamic minority.


Such Iranian hegemony would be unacceptable to the global seat of Radical Islam which is financed by Saudi oil multibillions of dollars. The royal family of the House of Saud seems to be unofficially divided between worldly-Western-minded billionaires and Radical Islamic Wahhabi loyalists. Wahhabism exists in Saudi Arabia because the House of Saud manages politics and Wahhabist Clerics run Saudi religious enforcement (The roots of Saud-Wahhabi alliance can be read HERE) which includes the operation of Islam’s holiest sites in Mecca and Medina. It is apparent to me the Wahhabists are gaining more and more influence within the Saud royal family over the last quarter century because of the international Saudi money being spent to spread Radical Islam throughout the Western world. For example a vast majority of Mosques built in the USA has NOT happened as a result of local Muslim money from so-called Moderate Muslims. That money has been supplied via the Saudi money coffers.


The Wahhabi Movement of Saudi Arabia over the years seems to have hooked up with Muslim Brotherhood networks in the West. A lot of that Saudi money has found its way through Muslim Brotherhood linked organizations masking as Moderate Muslims yet in reality are MB fronts for the MB agenda to spread stealth jihad in America. The Egyptian military crackdown on the Muslim Brotherhood home in Egypt has placed a bit of a dent in the MB international agenda because their Radical Islamic focus now is to remain viable in Egypt.


So again! Why is anti-war Obama rattling swords to attack Assad’s regime? There is no doubt that Chemical Weapons were deployed on Syrian civilians. The doubt is was Assad responsible for the Chem Weapon attack or were the Syrian Rebels responsible?


I listened to Obama’s explanation of who the Chem Weapon culprits are in a Swedish news conference today. Obama’s reasoning runs something like this (off the top of my head): Everyone knows Assad’s regime has Chemical Weapons. Everyone knows that Assad’s regime has the military capability to launch those Chemical Weapons. Everyone knows that the Syrian Rebels does not have the military capability to launch a Chemical Weapon attack even if they had the Chem WMD. And everyone knows the civilians attacked with Chemical Weapons were Free Syrian Army sympathizers, so are the Syrian Rebels so vicious to attack their own and blame Assad?


I have to tell ya, this is good reasoning. At this point what is important to me is that Chemical Weapons were used in an act of war. It is irrelevant who used them. The fact they were used should broach an international outcry to step into the Syrian Civil War and remove those Chemical Weapons no matter who used them. In such a measure admittedly that would turn that war toward the Radical Muslim rebels. And as I wrote earlier a rebel victory – at least momentarily – would throw a monkey wrench into the Iranian hegemonic agenda.


Then I discovered an interesting thing that has not been widely disseminated by the American MSM or the mainstream conservative network known as Fox News. Or at least I have not read or listened to any news about this news story that should be widely disseminated. What is this news information I discovered? Are you saying in your mind’s eye, “Come on, out with it John?


Ok – Ok, I got you. Here it is. There is a news story from Associated Press correspondent Dale Gavlak who has written that Saudi Arabia had somehow funneled Chemical Weapons to the Syrian Rebels. The problem though is that no one taught the Rebels how to handle or use the Chemical Weapons. While in a Damascus suburb called Ghouta the Syrian Rebels unwittingly mishandled the Chemical Weapons and BOOM – Ghouta civilians were doused with Chemical Weapons. I found the story at a Conspiracy Theory blog called Zero Hedge. And Zero Hedge picked up the information from the Voice of Russia.


Admittedly the story might be Putin propaganda because Russia, China and Iran have formed a triumvirate of support for Bashar al-Assad’s Syrian government. BUT if there was even a minuscule amount of truth to the story the information would go a long way to explain peace-at-any-cost Obama wanting to engage Assad’s regime in war.


Let me say up front I do not believe Obama is a Muslim any more than I believed his assertion of being a Christian while attending Jeremiah Wright’s Marxist Black Liberation Theology oriented Church in Chicago. Yet old Barry’s upbringing included schooling in a must-be-a Muslim school in Indonesia while his Marxist mommy (very unflattering S. A. Dunham bio) was married to Barry’s BHO SR, BHO JR, and Frank Marshall DavisMuslim step-dad. This is not to mention that Barry’s Marxist daddy (OR was daddy really Frank Marshall Davis?) was also brought up a Muslim in Kenya. So I am thinking there is a lot of sympathy from President Obama toward Islam – particularly Sunni Islam which comprises around 90% of all Islam. Notably on Obama’s Middle East version of his apology tour included a speech at Cairo in which the Muslim Brotherhood was in attendance and in a stop at a G20 Conference Obama exerted Muslim respect to the King of Saudi Arabia by bowing down to him in front of the cameras that showed this symbolism to primarily Christian America. Also I could mention the scores of Radical Muslims (even if some claimed Moderate) that visited Barry Soetoroer I mean – President Barrack Hussein Obama at the White House.


Obama’s sympathies are with Sunni Islam. Wahhabi Clerics have declared Shiites as kafir (infidels or unbelievers of Islam) worthy of death. That would obviously include the Shia-Twelvers of Iran and Shia-Aliwites of Syria.


As I was writing this I haphazardly heard a Fox News report in which German Intelligence claims they intercepted a message between the Bashar regime and Hezbollah (or was it Iran to Hezbollah?) in which confirmation was heard that the Bashar military did commit the Chemical Weapon attack. Secretary of State John Kerry before a Senate Committee said that there was proof contradicting Senator Rand Paul’s assertion there is no proof of who used Chem Weapons in Syria. I was left with the impression the proof was Classified and could be revealed in Closed Chambers but not during a public forum.


So here I am after reading report that the Syrian Rebels bungled Chemical Weapon handling resulting in the deaths of hundreds of their supporters. I read the report on a Conspiracy Theory website which is always tainted with the specter of believability YET Zero Hedge quotes a much respected AP journalist in Dale Gavlak. BUT Dale Gavlak is quoted from a Russian source which I am fairly certain jumps when Vladimir Putin barks.


I suspect Obama will attack Assad. I suspect WWIII will spark. The unknown is Israel. Some suspect Obama’s agenda is Israel’s destruction. I’m not sure if it will work out that way with this WWIII spark. Perhaps Obama is just a charismatic speaking Leftist that is a Foreign Policy imbecile. Perhaps where the cards fall has multiple possibilities and God Almighty will direct how those cards fall according to His grand plan. Yup, I am a Right Wing Christian Believer in the Word of God that believes there is a Divine plan.


JRH 9/5/13

Please Support NCCR

Conventional Wisdom is to Stay out of Syria BUT is that the Correct Wisdom?

Kerry Declares 'Assad Used Chemical Weapons Multiple Times'

John R. Houk
© August 31, 2013

Yesterday Secretary of State John Kerry in news conference told Americans there is ample proof that al-Assad’s government used chemical weapons on civilian supporters of the Free Syrian Army in which most policy wonks believe is dominated by al Qaeda-like Islamists. That means if President Barack Hussein decides to attack in such a way that turns the Syrian civil war advantage back to the rebels then a Sunni version of Iran’s Shia crackpots will be the new government in Syria. On paper the appearance is American National Interests lose no matter who wins that civil war.


I follow the blog Freedom Rings 1776 operated by Danny Jeffrey. I have been paying close attention to his analysis that if Obama attack al-Assad’s government (See Also HERE) it will be a part of a ploy to engage the Soros Agenda to transfer the governments’ of the world into a Left Wing New World Order using Islamic radicalism as a trigger to engage a military catalyst with the Soros doctrine of Responsibility to Protect (R2P). Frankly I believe Danny’s analysis is very plausible one.

On the other hand chemical weapons have been unleashed in Syria. The Obama Administration WHOM I NEVER BELIEVE claims al-Assad is the perpetrator. Again many believe the Radical Muslim Free Syrian Army is the perpetrator either in trying to turn the tide of al-Assad recent victories or as a smokescreen propaganda tool to blame Assad and entice the USA to get involved militarily.
The point is that chemical weapons were used in direct contradiction to International Convention against the use of chemical weapons in warfare. Here is a brief summary of the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC):
The CWC aims to eliminate an entire category of weapons of mass destruction by prohibiting the development, production, acquisition, stockpiling, retention, transfer or use of chemical weapons by States Parties. States Parties, in turn, must take the steps necessary to enforce that prohibition in respect of persons (natural or legal) within their jurisdiction.
All States Parties have agreed to chemically disarm by destroying any stockpiles of chemical weapons they may hold and any facilities which produced them, as well as any chemical weapons they abandoned on the territory of other States Parties in the past. States Parties have also agreed to create a verification regime for certain toxic chemicals and their precursors (listed in Schedules 1, 2 and 3 in the Annex on Chemicals to the CWC) in order to ensure that such chemicals are only used for purposes not prohibited.
A unique feature of the CWC is its incorporation of the ‘challenge inspection’, whereby any State Party in doubt about another State Party’s compliance can request the Director-General to send an inspection team. Under the CWC’s ‘challenge inspection’ procedure, States Parties have committed themselves to the principle of ‘any time (sic), anywhere’ inspections with no right of refusal.
The Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on Their Destruction (the ‘CWC’, or the ‘Convention’) aims to eliminate an entire category of weapons of mass destruction by prohibiting the development, production, acquisition, stockpiling, retention, transfer or use of chemical weapons by States Parties.
The States Parties to this Convention -Determined to act with a view to achieving effective progress towards general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control, including the prohibition and elimination of all types of weapons of mass destruction, -Desiring to contribute to the realization of the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations.. (READ ENTIRETY Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on their Destruction (Chemical Weapons Convention); Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons [OPCW])
You can download the official text of the CWC HERE. You can read specifics on the CWC from the NGO Nuclear Threat Initiative (NTI). In full disclosure the NTI was founded by Ted Turner and (probably to add political credibility) former Senator Sam Nunn (D-GA). If you check the NTI Leadership and Staff page you will a combination of Leftists, RINOs and even some representing Islamic interests. The NTI seems to provide a decent summary which is why I point to it; however as a formulator of Think Tank policy I would be very wary of conclusions and suggestions.
At the point of my writing my thoughts the Brits have pulled out of supporting the USA in a punitive military expedition against Assad. I watch the news station that Leftists and hard core Conservatives love to hate – Fox News. This news services seems to indicate they believe Obama will do a go-it-alone strike against Syria BUT also seems to be drawing back in reticence most likely because of the Brits very public withdrawal. Also big dogs Russia and China are supportive of Assad. AND Assad has insinuated they will launch an all-out attack on the USA’s primary ally in the region – Israel. If Obama breaks his pattern of Foreign Policy weakness and launches an attack on Syria such action would follow Danny Jeffrey’s analysis of an R2P conspiracy to terminate Israel to curry favor with hate-Jews/hate-Israel Muslim Arabs. If Obama backs off the President will again show the world he is a weak-kneed global leader incapable of committing to a consistent Foreign Policy.
Contrary to many of my fellow Conservatives and Obama’s Leftist base, think militarily removing Assad has more short term positives to American National Interests than should be passed up. The Egyptian military is dropping the hammer on the Muslim Brotherhood and the Egyptian military currently desires to keep the U.S. military flowing. If the Egyptian military maintains that hammer it is unlikely that U.S. military aid will find its way to Muslim Brotherhood revolutionary favorites such as Hamas and the Free Syrian Army to be used nefariously against Israel. A week Syrian government minus Assad messes up Iran’s connection to client terrorist organization Hezbollah in Lebanon. Sunnis hate Shias as much as both hate Jews. Perhaps a Sunni Islamist government in Syria will be a tool to diminish Hezbollah to allow the remaining Christians and Sunnis in Lebanon to take back their nation from the Shia terrorist organization. AND it would be in Israel’s National Interests to facilitate a weakening of Hezbollah as well. That is the short term potential benefits of removing Bashar al-Assad.
The problem for America and Israel is the unknowability of both nation’s long term National Interests. If a Democrat is elected to the Presidency in 2016 then Israel National Security will be in danger. If a RINO is elected in 2016 Israel’s existence won’t be as threatened but if the RINO pushes for the creation of a Palestinian that will be an existential threat to Israel. If a true Conservative is elected in 2016 America’s National Interests will be in better shape with at least a stealth weakening via Intelligence services of the weak Islamist nations and the promise of aid to the stronger Muslim nations. The use of a kind of carrot and stick balance to the region with Israel either participating in concert or exerting unilateral espionage points that the USA ignores.
There are a lot of variables involved in a decision to attack Syria or not to attack. Each variable may lead to a variety of plusses or minuses for or against the USA and Israel. Frankly those variables could may slant the wrong way if Danny Jeffrey is correct about a Soros-Obama agenda. I don’t trust Obama. Do you?
JRH 8/31/13

Please Support NCCR

WATCH: Kerry Declares ‘Assad Used Chemical Weapons Multiple Times’
Aug 30 2013 1:38pm
Secretary of State John Kerry delivered a statement moments ago on the chemical attack in Syria.
Kerry said that the intelligence community has “carefully reviewed and rereviewed information regarding this attack,” and that the “United States government now knows that at least 1429 Syrians were killed in this attack including at least 426 children.”
He continued, “Even the first responders – the doctors, nurses, and medics who tried to save them – they became victims themselves. We saw them gasping for air, terrified that their own lives were in danger. This indiscriminate, inconceivable horror of chemical weapons. This is what Assad did to his own people.”
“We know that the Assad regime has the largest chemical weapons program in the entire Middle East. We know that the regime has used those weapons multiple times this year […] We know that for three days before the attack, the Syrian regime’s chemical weapons personnel were on the ground in the area making preparations. And we know that the Syrian regime elements were told to prepare for the attack by putting on gas masks and taking precautions associated with chemical weapons.”
He stressed that this “crime against humanity” could not go unpunished.
[Editor: The Fox News Insider webpage has two News coverage videos and the transcript of what would have been the third part. I found a 19 minute version of the news conference which I am posting here.]
Posted by YouHotNews
Published on Aug 30, 2013
News Conference Speech 8/30/2013
Kerry Says Assad, A ‘Thug And Murderer,’ Was Behind Attack
(WashingtonPost) Secretary of State John F. Kerry made a forceful case Friday for U.S. military intervention in Syria, saying that U.S. intelligence has information pinning responsibility for last week’s chemical weapons attack squarely on the government of President Bashar al-Assad.

In a speech at the State Department, Kerry said that for three days before the Aug. 21 attack, the Syrian regime’s chemical weapons personnel “were in the area, making preparations” for the strike. He also said that “regime elements were told to prepare for the attack by putting on gas masks” and taking other precautions. And he said U.S. intelligence knows that the rockets containing the poison gas were launched only from “regime-controlled areas.”

Two years after the first anti-government protests, conflict in Syria rages on. See the major events in the country’s tumultuous uprising.

The attack killed more than 1,400 Syrians, including 426 children, Kerry said.

“The American people are tired of war,” Kerry said, adding that he is also. “But fatigue does not absolve us of our responsibility.” He said that “history would judge us all extraordinarily harshly” if the United States does not respond to the use of chemical weapons by the Syrian government.

Kerry spoke after French President Francois Hollande said Friday that his country is prepared to act in Syria despite Britain’s surprise rejection of military action, potentially making READ THE REST at video page

[Editor: Back to Fox News Insider]
Part Three:
[fnivideo 2638886718001]
Below is an ongoing transcript of Kerry’s remarks.
President Obama has spent many days now consulting with Congress and talking with leader around the world about the situation in Syria.
Last night the President asked all of us on his National Security team to consult with the leaders of Congress as well; including the leadership of the Congressional National Security committees.
And he asked us to consult about what we know regarding the horrific chemical weapons attack in the Damascus suburbs last week.  I will tell you that as someone who has spent nearly three decades in the United States Congress, I know that that consultation is the right way for a President to approach a decision of when and how and if to use military force.
And it’s important to ask the tough questions and get the tough answers before taking action, not just afterwards. And I believe, as President Obama does, that it is also important to discuss this directly with the American people.
That’s our responsibility; to talk with the citizens who trusted all of us in the administration and the Congress with responsibility for their security.
That’s why this morning’s release of our government’s unclassified estimate of what took place in Syria is so important.
Its findings are as clear as they are compelling.  I’m not asking you to take my word for it.  Read for yourself, everyone, those listening, all of you, read for yourselves the evidence from thousands of sources; evidence that is already publicly available.
And read for yourselves the verdict reached by our intelligence community about the chemical weapons attack the Assad regime inflicted on the opposition and on opposition controlled or contested neighborhoods in the Damascus suburbs on the early morning of August 21.
Our intelligence community has carefully reviewed and re-reviewed information regarding this attack. And I will tell you, it has done so more than mindful of the Iraq experience.
We will not repeat that moment. Accordingly, we have taken unprecedented steps to declassify and make facts available to people who can judge for themselves.
But still, in order to protect sources and methods, some of what we know will only be released to members of Congress, the representatives of the American people.  That means that some things we do know, we can’t talk about publicly.
So what do we really know that we can talk about?     Well, we know that the Assad regime has the largest chemical weapons programs in the entire Middle East.  We know that the regime has used those weapons multiple times this year and has used them on a smaller scale but still it has used them against its own people, including not very far from where last Wednesday’s attack happened.
We know that the regime was specifically determined to rid the Damascus suburbs of the opposition, and it was frustrated that it hadn’t succeeded in doing so.  We know that for three days before the attack, the Syrian regime’s chemical weapons personnel were on the ground in the area, making preparations.
And we know that the Syrian  regime elements were told to prepare for the attack by putting on gas masks and taking precautions associated with chemical weapons.  We know that these were specific instructions.
We know where the rockets were launched from, and at what time. We know where they landed, and when.  We know rockets came only from regime-controlled areas and went only to opposition-controlled or contested neighborhoods.
And we know, as does the world, that just 90 minutes later all hell broke loose in the social media.  With our own eyes we have seen the thousands of reports from 11 separate sites in the Damascus suburbs.
All of them show and report victims with breathing difficulties, people twitching with spasms, coughing, rapid heartbeats, foaming at the mouth, unconsciousness, and death.  And we know it was ordinary Syrian citizens who reported all of these horrors.
Conventional Wisdom is to Stay out of Syria BUT is that the Correct Wisdom?
John R. Houk
© August 31, 2013
WATCH: Kerry Declares ‘Assad Used Chemical Weapons Multiple Times’
© 2013 FOX News Network, LLC. All rights reserved.

Chemical Assad is a War Criminal

Bashar al-Assah lying about chem-weapons toon

John R. Houk

© May 28, 2013


Most Conservatives see the Syrian Civil War as a no-win situation for American National Interests. On one side you have the rogue government of Bashar al-Assad that is Iran’s ally and a conduit for Islamic terrorists especially the Shi’ites of Hezbollah entrenched in Lebanon. On the other side you have the Free Syrian Army (FSA) that is a loosely united bunch of Sunni Muslims and Syrian Secularists (See Also HERE and HERE) rebelling against Assad’s Shi’ite Alawite dominated government. The current problem with the Free Syrian Army rebels is that its army is dominated by Islamist factions of which the largest appears to an al Qaeda affiliate.


And so there is the appearance of a no-win choice existing for the U.S. government. It has been confirmed that the Assad government is indeed using chemical weapons against the FSA. It is probably a good guess that Assad is using internationally illegal chemical weapons against the FSA it is a good guess that Assad is using chemical weapons against the Sunni civilian population that is supportive of the FSA.


History shows that helping Islamists against a current common enemy of the USA will come back to bite us in the – you know what. We aided Taliban Islamists against the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. Taliban were more than willing to take American aid to be a thorn in Soviet Russia’s side until the Soviet army withdrew and the puppet Communist government eventually fell into the hands of Mullah Mohammed Omar. AND the old one-eyed Mullah Omar repaid our aid by giving al Qaeda and its power structure led by Usama bin Laden refuge after the psycho Islamic terrorist sneak attack on 9/11.


The same thing will probably happen if America decides to aid the FSA against Assad’s rogue Syrian government. So then why help the FSA?


The reason for helping the FSA is because ending Assad throws a monkey wrench into Iran and Hezbollah’s nefarious designs against Israel and the USA. Well, at least for awhile there will be disruption against Iran.


The hat trick is knowing history of radical Muslims we have helped will bite our gluteus maximus then at least be smart enough to develop a couple of back-up plans in preparation for that radical Muslim back-stabbing. And by back-up plans I mean something that will strike pain and fear for radical Muslim treachery. A military response does not necessarily mean soldiers on the ground. A military response can be a military strike using conventional weaponry or nuclear weaponry on a strategic basis. And strategic nukes does not turning a whole nation into nuclear made glass from a massive nuke blast.   


So yes, at this time an American led coalition needs to remove and punish Assad and his chem-weapon happy generals as war criminals.


JRH 5/28/13

Please Support NCCR

U.S. National Interests and the Syrian Civil War

Map locates Khan al-Assal, Syria, where the government and rebels accused each other of attacking with chemical weapons

John R. Houk

© April 28, 2013


Bashar al-Assad’s Syrian regime is using chemical weapons to stop the momentum of the Syrian rebels from dethroning the Assad regime. Now I realize perhaps a half to even more than a half of the Rebels are radical Muslims perhaps making them no worse than Assad’s secular-socialized government dominated by Syria’s Alawite-Shia (See Here, Here and Here) minority. Nonetheless, chemical weapons are supposed to be illegal by international convention. I am guessing the U.N. Security Council could empower military sanctions against Assad’s regime.


Now I know many Conservatives – Danny Jeffrey comes to mind – are against the doctrine of Responsibility to Protect (R2P). R2P apparently has a few criticisms such as providing an excuse to invade to accomplish the National Interests of perhaps an agreed coalition bloc of nations. And perhaps R2P could embroil the USA in a war that is conducted beyond the pale of the U.S. Constitution.


I believe removing Assad is as much in the National Interests of the USA as there is a R2P military reason to save civilian lives. Now Danny Jeffrey’s concern is that R2P strategy is an Obama mask to discreetly aid invading Arab or Muslim armies to take down the Leftist perceived threat to world peace in the Jewish State of Israel. With Obama at the helm of the U.S. government I can see Danny’s view of a reprehensible motive behind the Obama R2P agenda. President Barack Hussein Obama is NO friend of Israel. Obama has gone beyond satisfying political correctness by saying Palestinians deserve a sovereign nation to forcing the issue including robbing Israel of half its capital city of Jerusalem and giving that to Jew-Hating Arabs who call themselves Palestinians.


Why is it in America’s National Interest to remove Bashar al-Assad? Anything that throws a monkey wrench into the radical Islamic agenda of America’s enemy Iran is good for America and perhaps signals those Twelver maniacs that American muscle might actually spank Iran for making good on their threats to drive Israeli Jews into the sea.


The fine line at issue is what will the U.S. government do after aiding Syrian rebels to give the Assad regime a boot? It would be crazy to get rid of Assad and allow a radical Muslim government to form to be the Sunni mirror image of Iran’s Shi’ite Twelver radical Muslim government.


The information I have managed to cull about the nature of the Syrian Rebels is that the Islamist militias – especially Jabhat al Nusra – are gaining infrastructure control of the rebel held land in Syria. Even though the secular or more moderate Muslim rebels figured prominently early in the Syrian Rebellion against Assad, it appears the radical Muslims by virtue of infrastructure possession would evolve into the controlling faction of any future Syrian government absent of Assad. This would not be good for American National Interests. A Sunni Islamist theocratic nation will be as much of an enemy of the USA and Israel as Iran is. Indeed I suspect Iran would make friendly overtures to a Sunni Islamist regime even though Iran represents Shia Islam. Just for perspective you should know that Sunnis are about 90% of Islam while Shias are roughly 10% of Islam. Radical Muslim Sunni Clerics have labeled Shias a heretic religion thus making the Shias as much of an infidel as Jews and Christians. Perhaps even more worth of death than Jews and Christians because a Shi’ite existence could be perceived as an insult to Allah and Mohammed. Among radical Muslims, in particular insulting Mo and Allah, is a good reason for the execution of the death penalty.


So here are the horns of a dilemma the U.S. government faces. Help the Syrian Rebels defeat Assad quite probably bring into power a Jew-Hating and American-Hating Islamist government OR do nothing while Assad uses chemical weapons of mass destruction to reverse the defeat he has been experiencing utilizing conventional weapons against the Rebels. Undoubtedly an Assad victory to remain in power would result in a wholesale genocide of Sunni Rebels and the civilian Sunni population that supported the Rebels. An Assad victory would also mean acquiring hubris perhaps leading the dictator to make rash moves against American interests and Israel, feeling an illusion of being undefeatable.


In the realm of the lesser of two evils, it still seems to me Assad’s demise will in at least the short term be better for the National Interests of the USA even if the long term outcome of Assad’s removal may not be helpful. The best way to bring down Assad with the least amount of American blood is to provide arms to the Syrian Rebels. It may be a futile hope but weaponry should be distributed to the more secular minded Sunnis who desire an elected government rather than a theo-political Sharia religious government in which the religious elite call the shots.


It will be up to the U.S. government – cough the Obama Administration – to actively influence a relationship that is not inimical to American National Interests. That probably is a tough order for I sense even a secular government based on Islamic elections will still be a Jew-Hating anti-Israel government. Which brings us back to Danny Jeffrey’s thoughts that President Barack Hussein Obama will part of an agenda to use R2P to join Arab and Muslim government to end the existence of Israel.


I was brought to this line of thinking from reading a Caroline Glick article entitled, “Time to confront Obama”. Glick wants to confront Obama’s motives behind the decisions he has made relating to Islamic terrorism, his treatment of Israel, wondering the value the word of BHO in relation to the Chemical WMD attack perpetrated by Bashar al-Assad against his own citizens and so on.


As my thoughts began to evolve it became apparent I was following a different train of thinking than Ms Glick. Nonetheless, you should read her article which is anti-Obama and pro-Israel. I like that way of thinking.


JRH 4/28/13

Please Support NCCR

%d bloggers like this: