Dropping Hypocrisy Bombs On Syria By Jacob G. Hornberger!!
(2018-04-12 at 16:50:13 )

Dropping Hypocrisy Bombs on Syria by Jacob G. Hornberger

Whatever bombs Donald Trump decides to use against Syria, one thing is for certain: the United States government has already dropped enough hypocrisy bombs on that country to last a lifetime.

Trump, Congress, and the United States national-security establishment (e.g., the Pentagon and the Central Intelligence Agency) are shedding big crocodile tears over the plight of the Syrian people, especially those who recently died or suffered from a purported gas attack supposedly committed by the Syrian government against Syrian revolutionaries.

The truth is that United States officials could not give a hoot for people in Syria.

How do we know this? Lots of reasons.

For one thing, keep in mind that it was the United States government that encouraged the Syrian people to violently revolt against their dictatorial regime.

Did United States officials do that because they wanted the Syrian people to live in a free and prosperous society? Of course not. A violent domestic revolution against a foreign dictator is one of the methods by which the United States government achieves regime change in countries that have independent dictatorial regimes - that is, ones that are independent of United States government control. The fact that the Syrian dictatorship is aligned with Russia, rather than the United States, has inevitably made it a target of a United States regime-change operation.

Regime change has been a core mission of the United States government ever since the federal government was converted from a limited-government republic to a national-security state after World War II. The goal is to remove recalcitrant (i.e., independent) foreign dictators from power and replace them with pro-United States dictators. In that way, the United States government can wield control over everyone in the world by exercising power through their domestically installed dictators.

The United States government uses different ways to achieve regime change. One way is through assassination, which is really nothing more than legalized murder. That is the method that the Central Intelligence Agency-Mafia partnership employed against Cubas dictator Fidel Castro for decades, notwithstanding the fact that Cuba never attacked the United States or even threatened to do so.

A second method is a military invasion. That was the method the Pentagon wanted to use against Cuba during the Cuban Missile Crisis. It was also the method it used to effect regime change in countries like Grenada, Panama, Iraq, and Afghanistan.

A third method is an internal military coup, one in which the domestic military ousts its ruler from power, takes control, and then takes it marching orders from United States officials. That is what happened in Chile in 1973, where United States officials had set into motion a process whereby Chiles democratically elected president was ousted from power and replaced by a brutal military dictator. The same occurred in Guatemala in 1954. And Iran in 1953. And, more recently, in Egypt.

A fourth method is by encouraging the local populace to revolt and install a pro-United States dictator into power. That is what sanctions and embargoes are all about. United States officials inflict maximum economic harm on the citizenry in the hope that they will revolt and replace their dictatorial regime with a pro-United States regime. That was the goal of the sanctions against Iraq, which killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children. It is the same with sanctions against Iran and Russia. And the economic embargo against Cuba.

With the revolution method of regime change, United States officials know that large numbers of people are going to die. That is what happens when people violently revolt against any government. Every government, including the United States government, uses maximum violence to suppress violent revolts. United States officials point out that Syrias dictator, Bashar al-Assad, has killed hundreds of thousands of his own people. So did Abraham Lincoln, who killed hundreds of thousands of his people, and not for revolting but simply for seceding.

In a United States-instigated revolution, the revolutionaries are just pawns. Sure, crocodile tears are shed for them when they are being killed but all that is just for appearance sake. When it comes to regime change, the sacrifice of pawns is considered necessary and "worth it."

United States officials say that the Syria regime is a brutal dictatorship and, therefore, needs to be removed from power. Really? What about Egypts military dictatorship? It is every bit as brutal as the Syrian dictatorship, perhaps more. Yet, what is the attitude of United States officials toward that dictatorship? They love it. They continue to fortify it with massive amounts of guns, tanks, and weaponry to use against its own people. They train it. They partner with it. They help it to maintain its tyrannical hold on power.

It was no different with the Pinochet dictatorship in Chile. United States officials loved that one too. That is why they were so committed to installing it into power. Sure, Pinochet and his goons kidnapped, raped, incarcerated, tortured, abused, or killed tens of thousands of innocent people. But so what? What mattered was that Pinochet was our dictator. He did what United States officials told him to do. In return, United States officials let him do whatever he wanted to his own people.

It was the same with the 1953 coup in Iran, which was the United States national-security establishments first regime-change operation. Central Intelligence Agency officials ousted the democratically elected prime minister of the country, Mohammad Mossadegh, and replaced him with the brutal Shah. The Central Intelligence Agency then proceeded to train the Shahs forces in the arts of torture and oppression, ensuring that the Iranian people would suffer under one of the most brutal dictatorships in history for the next 26 years.

In 1979, the Iranian people could not take the tyranny any more. In a violent revolution, they ousted their United States-installed tyrant from power. Unfortunately, they were unable to restore the democratic system that the United States government had destroyed 26 years before and instead ended up with another dictatorship, this one an independent, anti-United States theocratic dictatorship.

United States officials have never forgiven the Iranian people for doing that to their United States-installed dictator. That is what all the anti-Iran animosity is all about. That is what the sanctions against Iran are all about - squeezing the Iranian populace economically so that they will oust their dictatorship in a violent revolution and replace it with another brutal pro-United States dictatorship, like that of the Shah.

Indeed, it was what the United States partnership with Saddam Hussein, the brutal dictator of Iraq, was all about. United States officials partnered with Saddam (who they were later turn on and call a "new Hitler") in Iraqs war of aggression against Iran.

Oh, and I will bet you will never guess what the United States furnished Saddam to use against Iranians!! Gas!! Yes, the same type of gas that the Syrians are accused of employing against Syrian rebels.

Do not believe me? Take a look at this two part series I wrote back in 2003 and 2014:

"Where Did Iraq Get Its Weapons of Mass Destruction?" by Jacob G. Hornberger

"“Where Did Iraq Get Its Weapons of Mass Destruction? Part 2” by Jacob G. Hornberger"

While we are on the subject of hypocrisy and chemical warfare, It’s probably worth remembering that the United States government employed napalm and Agent Orange as part of its unconstitutional war against North Vietnam, a country that never attacked the United States. Why are some chemicals considered better than others? Are the victims not just as dead?

Indeed, let us not forget that the United States used nuclear bombs to target the entire populations of two Japanese cities in World War II. And that Trump has threatened to carpet-bomb North Korea with nuclear bombs. Is there really any difference in principle between chemical weapons and nuclear bombs? We also should not forget the "germ warfare" that United States officials employed against the North Korean populace during the Korean War. Is germ warfare not as bad as chemical warfare?

United States officials condemn Russia for coming to the assistance of the Syrian dictatorship, forgetting two things in the process:

One, the United States government comes to the assistance of its dictatorships (e.g., Egypt and Saudi Arabia, especially with the latters vicious war in Yemen).

Two, the United States government, operating through the Central Intelligence Agency, also partnered with the Assad regime in the rendition and torture of Canadian citizen Mahar Arar. Americans are still not permitted to know the details of how that secretive rendition-torture partnership came into existence but one thing is for certain: Russia is not the only regime that has partnered with the Syrian dictatorship.

Even if the Syrian regime did initiate that gas attack - and that is still far from being established - why is that that the business of the United States government? Indeed, why is Syrias civil war, a war that United States officials helped to instigate, any business of the United States government? Why is ISIS the business of the United States government? Why are Iraq, Libya, and Yemen? Who appointed the United States government, including the Pentagon and the Central Intelligence Agency, as the worlds policeman, interloper, invader, shooter, meddler, intervener, assassin, and bomber?

Finally, the fact that Trump intends to initiate war against Syria in direct violation of the United States Constitution, which expressly requires a congressional declaration of war - and that Congress will undoubtedly do nothing about it - is perhaps the biggest hypocrisy bomb of all.

Printed here with permission from Mr. Jacob G. Hornberger of The Future of Freedom Foundation!! Their Great Website!!