White House Releases 'Evidence' Showing Assad Behind Chemical AttackChris Menahan
Apr. 11, 2017
Emma Watson Writes Open Letter Apologizing For Her 'White Privilege'
German State TV In A Nutshell
Prof Releases 'Checklist' To Determine If You Support White Supremacy
John Stossel: SPLC Is A 'Hate Group,' 'Money Grabbing, Slander Machine'
HATE HOAX: Police Say 'Scissors Attack' On Hijabbed 11yo Girl Never Happened
The White House has finally released some "evidence" they claim shows Assad's forces carried out last week's chemical attack.
Unfortunately, all the videos and satellite imagery cited in the report do not appear to have been released, so there's no way to judge almost any of it. We're basically still stuck with that picture above from last week showing a flight pattern.
Of course, the media couldn't care less about any of this and is just acting like it's case closed.
From The New York Times:
WASHINGTON — The White House accused the Russian government on Tuesday of engaging in a cover-up of the chemical weapons attack last week by Syrian forces that prompted American missile strikes, saying that United States intelligence and numerous contemporaneous reports confirmed that the Syrians used sarin gas on their own people.You can view the full document below.
They start off by saying they "cannot publicly release all available intelligence on this attack due to the need to protect sources and methods." Incidentally, the 2013 report from the Obama regime started almost the exact same way, and UN officials separately determined rebels were behind the attack.
While the new report cites all sorts of videos and satellite imagery, none of it is contained in their report and I can't find their sources anywhere. A look on WhiteHouse.gov shows there was a background briefing given about this report, but they're not releasing video of it, only a transcript with a name reading, "SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL."
If you read their report, just like with their briefing, no one was willing to put their name on it. While some of what's cited sounds compelling, again they don't provide the video or photographic evidence, so it's not really possible to judge either way. If they're not even going to show their evidence I don't know how they can expect the public to believe it.
Follow InformationLiberation on Twitter and Facebook.