Share on Google Plus Share on Twitter Share on Facebook
  2
Share on LinkedIn Share on PInterest Share on Fark! Share on Reddit Share on StumbleUpon Tell A Friend
  3
5 Shares     
Printer Friendly Page Save As Favorite View Favorites View Article Stats
6 comments
OpEdNews Op Eds

Seymour Hersh: Obama "Cherry-Picked" Intelligence on Syrian Chemical Attack to Justify U.S. Strike

By (about the author)     Permalink       (Page 1 of 5 pages)
Related Topic(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; ; , Add Tags Add to My Group(s)

Valuable 4   Supported 3   News 2  
View Ratings | Rate It

Headlined to H1 12/10/13

opednews.com

Original published at Democracy Now!

Investigative journalist Seymour Hersh joins us to discuss his new article casting doubt on the veracity of the Obama administration's claims that only the Assad regime could have carried out the chemical attacks in the Damascus suburb of Ghouta earlier this year. Writing in the London Review of Books, Hersh argues that the Obama administration "cherry-picked intelligence to justify a strike against Assad." The administration failed to disclose it knew Syrian rebels in the al-Nusra Front had the ability to produce chemical weapons. Evidence obtained in the days after the attack was also allegedly distorted to make it appear it was gathered in real time.

TRANSCRIPT

This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.

AMY GOODMAN: On Tuesday, the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons will receive the Nobel Peace Prize in Oslo as its staff prepare to destroy Syria's chemical weapons arsenal. According to a U.S.-Russia deal that stopped possible U.S. military strikes against President Bashar al-Assad's regime, Syria is to disperse -- Syria will be dispersing its arsenal of almost 1,300 tons of chemical weapons by mid-2014. The head of the mission overseeing the destruction of the country's chemical arms said last week fighting on the ground poses a major obstacle to implementing the agreement. This is Sigrid Kaag.

SIGRID KAAG: Despite the significant progress achieved to date in a very short span of time, the most complex and challenging work lies ahead. The removal of the Syrian Arab Republic's chemical agents for destruction outside of its territory will require tremendous coordination and collective effort. Security remains a key challenge for all of us. As you know, the destruction of a chemical weapons program has never taken place under such challenging and dangerous conditions.

AMY GOODMAN: That was the head of the OPCW mission to Syria, Sigrid Kaag.

This comes as a major new article casts doubts on the veracity of the Obama administration's claims that only the Assad regime could have carried out the attacks in the Damascus suburb of Ghouta earlier this year. Writing in the London Review of Books, investigative reporter Seymour Hersh argues the Obama administration, quote, "cherry-picked intelligence to justify a strike against Assad." He reports U.S. was also aware that al-Nusra, a militant group fighting in Syria's civil war, had, quote, "mastered the mechanics of creating sarin and was capable of manufacturing it in quantity."

To find out more about the piece, we go to Washington, D.C., to speak with Seymour Hersh himself, the Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative journalist. His latest piece in the London Review of Books is headlined "Whose Sarin?" Over the decades, Hersh has broken numerous landmark pieces, including the Abu Ghraib prison abuses and the My Lai massacre in Vietnam.

Welcome back to Democracy Now!, Sy. Lay out your case for what it is that the Obama administration did or didn't tell us.

SEYMOUR HERSH: Actually, Amy, it's really not my case; it's the case of people in the administration who believe when they -- when they take the oath, they take the oath of office to the Constitution and not to their immediate general or admiral or not to the -- or not to the president even. It's about truth. And there are an awful lot of people in the government who just were really very, very upset with the way the information about the gas attack took place. And that's not to say that I have -- I certainly don't know who did what, but there's no question my government does not. And there's also no question that the American president that we now have -- a guy I voted for, who has a lot of good things about him -- was willing to go to war, wanted to throw missiles at Syria, without really having a case and knowing he didn't have much of a case. And that, to me, is very troubling. We're talking about a major war crime here, because certainly hundreds, if not more, of innocent civilians -- and some bad guys, too, rebels and others -- were killed by sarin, which is a gross violation.

The case is simple. We had -- in the spring, there were a number of chemical warfare attacks in various parts of Syria that were investigated by everybody. The U.N. looked at it. They determined there were four instances of small cases of maybe 10 -- I shouldn't say small; one dead is more than enough -- but maybe 15 to 20 people killed by sarin and others incapacitated. And eventually they concluded, like they always do, the U.N., no decision on who did what. So we began looking at it. The Israelis, of course, they're a neighboring country; they're very concerned about Syrian chemical -- the arsenal. It's a strategic threat for Israel. And we got some sarin, and we got some evidence. And the thing that surprised us the most is there was a lot of reporting in -- known to the American community and to our allies, that al-Nusra, one of the more jihadi groups in -- more radical, if you will, Islamist groups fighting against Bashar, and other groups, too, to a lesser degree, AQI, al-Qaeda of Iraq -- sometimes we call it al-Qaeda of Mesopotamia -- had not only the capacity and potential and the know-how, how to produce sarin, but also had done some production of sarin. And these are reports that were very highly classified that went up the chain of command. In some cases, they were so secret that not many people in the government knew about it. They went to senior officials in the Defense Intelligence Agency. The CIA certainly was forwarding many of these reports.

It got to the point where the American government, the military, the Pentagon, looked into the whole prospect of let's go in and clean out all the -- all the nerve gas on both sides. And they did what they call an ops study, operations study. It's an ops order, really, it's called. It's a major, major study, 60 or 70 various sub-parts to it. You're going to send -- they concluded 70,000 American soldiers would have to go into Syria to clean out the chemical weapons on both sides. And that's a big deal. You know, you've got to feed them. You've got to protect them. You've got to find out how much toilet paper you're going to need. A major, major study was done over this summer. I think -- I've been told it was supposed to -- there was supposed to be what they call an NIE, a National Intelligence Estimate, on the capability of the opposition, the rebels, to manufacture sarin, but that never happened. And there we are. These reports were there. They were certainly known to the community. I can't tell you that the president himself read those documents; I don't know. But clearly, whether or not -- if he didn't, he should have.

And when he went public after the incident, right away -- you know, it was just this. The narrative was -- the real issue was the narrative was Bashar, who we don't like, who's done terrible things -- you know, certainly he's -- in order to defend his regime and his government, he has killed a lot of people, and also, we have to acknowledge, had an awful lot of his soldiers killed. There's -- it's a real rebel war there, civil war. And the point was that at no time did the United States ever consider al-Nusra to be a potential target of investigation. They were simply excluded from the conversation. And the narrative was Bashar did it. And it was bought by the mainstream press, as we all know, and by most people in the world. And this is why, you know, creepy troublemakers like me stay in business.

AMY GOODMAN: Let's turn to White House Press Secretary Jay Carney. He was being questioned in late August about the Syrian chemical weapons attack.

REPORTER: Jay, you were very firm in saying just now that there's little doubt that the Syrian regime was in fact responsible for this chemical attack. So, in that context, what is the purpose of this intelligence report? Is it to legitimize -- to get rid of any remaining doubt and therefore legitimize a response in the eyes of the international community?

PRESS SECRETARY JAY CARNEY: I'm not aware of any doubt that exists. Again, it's undeniable that chemical weapons were used on a large scale. We know that the regime maintains custody of the chemical weapons in Syria and uses the types of rockets that were used to deliver chemical weapons on August 21st. The opposition does not. We also know that the opposition does not have the capabilities that the Syrian regime has. And as I mentioned earlier, we have already had an assessment by the intelligence community, with a high degree of confidence that the Syrian regime has used, on a smaller scale, chemical weapons in this conflict already. So, suggestions that there's any doubt about who is responsible for this are as preposterous as suggestions that the attack itself didn't occur.

Next Page  1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5

 

http://democracynow.org

Democracy Now!  is a national, daily, independent, award-winning news program hosted by journalists Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez. Pioneering the largest public media collaboration in the U.S., Democracy Now! is broadcast on (more...)
 
Share on Google Plus Submit to Twitter Add this Page to Facebook! Share on LinkedIn Pin It! Add this Page to Fark! Submit to Reddit Submit to Stumble Upon

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Writers Guidelines

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

Julian Assange on WikiLeaks, Bradley Manning, Cypherpunks, Surveillance State, from DemocracyNow

Glenn Greenwald: Why the Obama Administration's Persecution of Bradley Manning Should Terrify Us All

Seymour Hersh: Obama "Cherry-Picked" Intelligence on Syrian Chemical Attack to Justify U.S. Strike

Glenn Greenwald: The NSA Can "Literally Watch Every Keystroke You Make"

Who Is Provoking the Unrest in Ukraine? A Debate on Role of Russia, United States in Regional Crisis

Chris Hedges: Monitoring of AP Phones a "Terrifying" Step in State Assault on Press Freedom

Comments

The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
6 people are discussing this page, with 6 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
(Or you can set your preferences to show all comments, always)

What - a US war , and we cherry-picked the intel?&... by JimZ on Wednesday, Dec 11, 2013 at 2:13:05 PM
Obama did more than cherry-pick. He LIED. Fortunat... by Marta B on Thursday, Dec 12, 2013 at 2:08:14 AM
He definitely did not lie.And, while the UN never ... by BFalcon on Thursday, Dec 12, 2013 at 7:20:19 AM
He definitely lied. He does not have the imbecilit... by Michael David Morrissey on Thursday, Dec 12, 2013 at 12:34:36 PM
I was stunned to read that Hersh said, about Obama... by S. Juniper on Thursday, Dec 12, 2013 at 4:24:06 PM
I think Obama really is up there in the smarts dep... by Richard Pietrasz on Friday, Dec 13, 2013 at 1:48:29 AM