Chemical Weapons

[Red Phoenix]

It's a fucking fraud. Just like it's always been when we've manipulated the middle east.

 

Irrespective to the views of the Syrian people, their fate has long been decided by forces operating beyond their borders. In a speech given to the Commonwealth Club of California in 2007 retired US Military General Wesley Clark speaks of a policy coup initiated by members of the Project for a New American Century (PNAC). Clark cites a confidential document handed down from the Office of the Secretary of Defense in 2001 stipulating the entire restructuring of the Middle East and North Africa. Portentously, the document allegedly revealed campaigns to systematically destabilize the governments of Iraq, Somalia, Sudan, Libya, Syria, Lebanon and Iran.Under the familiar scenario of an authoritarian regime systematically suppressing peaceful dissent and purging large swaths of its population, the mechanisms of geopolitical stratagem have freely taken course.

 

Syria is but a chess piece being used as a platform by larger powers. Regime change is the unwavering interest of the US-led NATO block in collaboration with the feudal Persian Gulf Monarchies of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC). This is being accomplished by using Qatar-owned media outlets such as Al-Jazeera to project their version of the narrative to the world and by arming radical factions of the regions Sunni-majority population against the minority Alawi-Shia leadership of Assad. Since 2005, the Bush administration began funding Syrian opposition groups that lean toward the Muslim Brotherhood and their aspirations to build a Sunni-Islamic State. The Muslim Brotherhood has long condemned the Alawi-Shia as heretics and historically attempted multiple uprising in the 1960’s. By arming radical Sunni factions and importing Iraqi Salafi-jihadists and Libyan mercenaries, the NATOGCC plans to topple Assad and install an illegitimate exiled opposition leader such as Burhan Ghaliun (leader of the Syrian National Council) to be the face of the new regime.

 

Nile Bowie: The Road To Tehran Goes Through Damascus

 

Two days after a possible chemical weapons attack in Syria we know that:

 

• The United States does not have “conclusive evidence that the (Syrian) government was behind poison-gas attacks.” [Wall Street Journal, 1]

• “Neither the United States nor European countries…have a ‘smoking gun’ proving that Mr. Assad’s troops used chemical weapons in the attack.” [New York Times, 2]

• The State Department doesn’t know “If these reports are true.” [New York Times, 3]

• The White House is trying to “ascertain the facts.” [Wall Street Journal, 4]

 

All the same, the absence of evidence hasn’t stopped the Pentagon “from updating target lists for possible airstrikes on a range of Syrian government and military installations”; [5] hasn’t stopped Britain and France from accusing the Syrian government of carrying out an atrocity; and hasn’t diminished the enthusiasm of newspaper editors for declaring Assad guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt.

 

“There is no doubt,” intoned the editors of one newspaper–with an omniscience denied to lesser mortals, including, it seems, US officials who are still trying “to ascertain the facts”—“that chemical weapons were used” and that Assad “committed the atrocity.” [6]

 

In a editorial, The Guardian avers that the Syrian military “is the only combatant with the capability to use chemical weapons on this scale.” Yet The Wall Street Journal’s Margaret Coker and Christopher Rhoads report that “Islamist rebel brigades have several times been reported to have gained control of stockpiles of chemicals, including sarin.” [7]

 

That might account for why the White House admitted two months ago that while it believed chemical weapons had been used in Syria, it has no evidence to indicate “who was responsible for (their) dissemination.” [8]

 

And given that the US president claimed chemical weapons use by the Syrian military would be a red line, the rebels have a motivation to stage a sarin attack and blame it on government forces to bring the United States into the conflict more forcefully on their side.

 

For the Syrian government, however, the calculus is entirely different. Using chemical weapons would simply hand the United States a pretext to more muscularly intervene in Syria’s internal affairs. Since this is decidedly against Damascus’s interests, we should be skeptical of any claim that the Syrian government is defying Obama’s red line.

 

http://www.globalresearch.ca/accusations-continue-but-still-no-evidence-of-a-syrian-military-gas-attack/5346851

 

Don't expect our bought and paid for mainstream media outlets to help with info either. An article I was going to link is down, so instead will add something about Qatar, who are ran by another set of corrupt cunts and play a big part in all this :

 

Why would Qatar want to become involved in Syria where they have little invested? A map reveals that the kingdom is a geographic prisoner in a small enclave on the Persian Gulf coast.

 

It relies upon the export of LNG, because it is restricted by Saudi Arabia from building pipelines to distant markets. In 2009, the proposal of a pipeline to Europe through Saudi Arabia and Turkey to the Nabucco pipeline was considered, but Saudi Arabia that is angered by its smaller and much louder brother has blocked any overland expansion.

 

Already the largest LNG producer, Qatar will not increase the production of LNG. The market is becoming glutted with eight new facilities in Australia coming online between 2014 and 2020.

 

A saturated North American gas market and a far more competitive Asian market leaves only Europe. The discovery in 2009 of a new gas field near Israel, Lebanon, Cyprus, and Syria opened new possibilities to bypass the Saudi Barrier and to secure a new source of income. Pipelines are in place already in Turkey to receive the gas. Only Al-Assad is in the way.

 

Qatar along with the Turks would like to remove Al-Assad and install the Syrian chapter of the Moslem Brotherhood. It is the best organized political movement in the chaotic society and can block Saudi Arabia’s efforts to install a more fanatical Wahhabi based regime. Once the Brotherhood is in power, the Emir’s broad connections with Brotherhood groups throughout the region should make it easy for him to find a friendly ear and an open hand in Damascus.

 

A control centre has been established in the Turkish city of Adana near the Syrian border to direct the rebels against Al-Assad. Saudi Deputy Foreign Minister Prince Abdulaziz bin Abdullah al-Saud asked to have the Turks establish a joint Turkish, Saudi, Qatari operations center. “The Turks liked the idea of having the base in Adana so that they could supervise its operations” a source in the Gulf told Reuters.

 

The fighting is likely to continue for many more months, but Qatar is in for the long term. At the end, there will be contracts for the massive reconstruction and there will be the development of the gas fields. In any case, Al-Assad must go. There is nothing personal; it is strictly business to preserve the future tranquility and well-being of Qatar.

 

Mystery Sponsor Of Weapons And Money To Syrian Mercenary "Rebels" Revealed | Zero Hedge

[Phoenix]

The reality is non of the western powers will commit to troups on the ground for regime change and will end up up cruise missiles killing more civilians. Then on top of that we havce the opposition groups to Assad formed of islamists.

 

Either we go all in or dont bother at all.

[Anny Road]

'some sort of intervention'.

?

[Lee909]

I cant see anything being done with troops unless it is a US/UK invasion.

China and Russia will block anything from the UN.Not saying it should happen but surely you cant stand back and watch this happen.

[Section_31]

It's a horrific mess, Bush and Blair have got a lot to answer for, they kicked off this sectarian bloodshed following the Iraq invasion, and also emasculated the United Nations, two problems which have come back to haunt the world now. I don't remember the world ever feeling as truly chaotic as it does now.

[Anny Road]

Is CS gas Ok? Pepper spray? How about sticking something in the water to sterilize an entire population? Where is the line.

[Magic Sponge]

I draw the line at making my bird sniff my farts underneath the duvet.

[cochyn]

It's a horrific mess, Bush and Blair have got a lot to answer for, they kicked off this sectarian bloodshed following the Iraq invasion, and also emasculated the United Nations, two problems which have come back to haunt the world now. I don't remember the world ever feeling as truly chaotic as it does now.

 

I agree on B&B, but you can't ignore the effect social media has had in enabling uprisings that led ultimately the events of the Arab spring. The very same technology that's alerting the world to this latest atrocity. Bashar has walked right into this and must surely have known this attack would not go unnoticed by the international community.

 

So why do it? Sounds like the act of a desperate man rapidly running out of options.

 

Military intervention by Nato is not the answer, as it clearly hasn't worked in Iraq. Russian support is vital: Mandating the UN to establish protectorates within Syria would be the best solution. Then push for a political solution backed by the UN with Russia fully on board.

[Magic Sponge]

 

I agree on B&B' date=' but you can't ignore the effect social media has had in enabling uprisings that led ultimately the events of the Arab spring. The very same technology that's alerting the world to this latest atrocity. Bashar has walked right into this and must surely have known this attack would not go unnoticed by the international community.

 

So why do it? Sounds like the act of a desperate man rapidly running out of options.

 

Military intervention by Nato is not the answer, as it clearly hasn't worked in Iraq. Russian support is vital: Mandating the UN to establish protectorates within Syria would be the best solution. Then push for a political solution backed by the UN with Russia fully on board.[/quote']

 

The Iraq war was not under NATO.

[Neil G]

In answer to the OP, I think a lot of the revulsion of Western governments stems from a recognition of the damage a chemical attack could cause to their own countries. I agree that in the context of the Syrian conflict, this attack by the regime (assuming it did it) was no more destructive than the conventional bombing and shelling it's been dishing out, but in the scenario of a ballistic missile attack on a Western nation by a rogue state, chemical weapons would cause many more deaths than conventional ones. So Western governments have an interest in taking a hardline response to their use.

 

The same goes for a potential terrorist attack with chemical weapons, which likewise would be more deadly than a conventional one. To prevent this the US and Europe will want to prevent the proliferation of chemical weapons, and I'm presuming that part of their thinking is that other countries are less likely to develop and stockpile them if they know their use will be punished.

 

I don't support boots on the ground in Syria, at least not at this stage, and I doubt any of the Western powers want it. I support punitive air strikes against military targets though. I don't see any alternative now. If there's no military response to this it's basically giving the green light to Assad to do it again.

[Neil G]

I agree on B&B, but you can't ignore the effect social media has had in enabling uprisings that led ultimately the events of the Arab spring. The very same technology that's alerting the world to this latest atrocity. Bashar has walked right into this and must surely have known this attack would not go unnoticed by the international community.

 

So why do it? Sounds like the act of a desperate man rapidly running out of options.

 

Military intervention by Nato is not the answer, as it clearly hasn't worked in Iraq. Russian support is vital: Mandating the UN to establish protectorates within Syria would be the best solution. Then push for a political solution backed by the UN with Russia fully on board.

 

 

Not a chance this will happen. Russia and China would never approve it, and even if they did, no country would be prepared to put its troops in the middle of that shitstorm.

[Stu Monty]

If anyone is interested in a good podcast on the extremes of war, like Dresden and Hiroshima, the Dan Carlin History one is very interesting (as are all his other podcasts).

 

Can anyone direct me to any actual evidence this was Assad? Call me a cynic but, you know, fool me once - shame on you, fool me a fucking dozen times - shame on me.

 

We care so very deeply about Syria because it's not allied to us, it's allied to China and Russia. Hence why regime change, even to any old bunch of complete fucking lunatics, is very important to us.

 

If Assad had any brains he's use the same shells the US used in Fallujah or the phosphorus that the Israelis like to throw about. Silly boy.

[polymerpunkah]

Amen to Carlin's podcasts.

 

Very interesting and insightful commentator.

[Red Phoenix]

We're part of a war machine. We're the biggest problem the world faces because we can't get out of the middle east and have been causing problems over there for most of the last hundred years. A lot of it is about oil. The rebels are CIA backed for a big part and the "uprising" was probably related too when all of this started. It's in the interests of the US, UK, Qatar and so on to get rid of the Syrian leadership, or should I say "regime" if we want to add the propaganda spin.

 

I'm not saying al-Assad is some type of angel, but it's clear that we want to control the middle east so supposed chemical weapons attacks can easily be a load of shit if you say the Syrian forces have done this. It's a proxy war.

 

How the fuck can anyone trust Cameron, Obama, Hague, Kerry, and so on with this? They're corrupt, and when the truth finally comes out about all of this, history will probably shit on them.

 

It pisses me off because I spent quite a bit of time researching this last year and it's truly sickening. You have to look at the rebels and research who's funding them. I think it was Saudi Arabia that freed murderers, rapists, etc from their prisons too and sent them over there as rebel forces. (and I'll find sources if you think this is bullshit.) They're sick and will go to any length to gain power in that country. As soon as Obama said that chemical weapons would cross a "red line" it was obvious that this situation would happen.

 

Where the proof? But we still go in anyway? Look at Blair and Bush now, this hardly seems different in any significant way at all. Where's the evidence that it was al-Assad? We should get the fuck out of the middle east and stop manipulating the place. We made the borders of Syria along with France and also made the borders of several other countries in the area, it's classic divide and conquer. It's one of the worst things the west has ever done, maybe even the worst, what's happened over there.

 

This gives information on the rough time period that we started all this, and what happened : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sykes-Picot_Agreement

 

If al-Assad really was the tyrant they're making him out to be, the only problem they have is that he's with Russia, because if he wasn't we'd not be going in there, we'd probably be making an alliance with him. Our governments would probably be patting him on the back for keeping the country divided and in a state of chaos.

 

We fucked Libya up, same with Iraq, if we do it here you can bet we won't stop and Iran will be next. Like it or not it's a fascist war machine that's obsessed with territorial power and energy manipulation, and that's basically the bottom line. Our governments are every bit as bad as anything they say al-Assad's forces are, but when you do the research it's clear that the UK and US governments down the years have been far, far worse.

 

To finish with something about the media, and even The Guardian have "journalists" in on this one that are so biased it's disgusting, but something from The Guardian a couple of years back. It applies here to some level, it simply has to when you look at the bias :

 

The cracks are appearing in the most unexpected places. Look at the remarkable admission by the rightwing columnist Janet Daley in this week's Sunday Telegraph. "British political journalism is basically a club to which politicians and journalists both belong," she wrote. "It is this familiarity, this intimacy, this set of shared assumptions … which is the real corruptor of political life. The self-limiting spectrum of what can and cannot be said … the self-reinforcing cowardice which takes for granted that certain vested interests are too powerful to be worth confronting. All of these things are constant dangers in the political life of any democracy."

 

Most national journalists are embedded, immersed in the society, beliefs and culture of the people they are meant to hold to account. They are fascinated by power struggles among the elite but have little interest in the conflict between the elite and those they dominate. They celebrate those with agency and ignore those without.

 

But this is just part of the problem. Daley stopped short of naming the most persuasive force: the interests of the owner and the corporate class to which he belongs. The proprietor appoints editors in his own image – who impress their views on their staff. Murdoch's editors, like those who work for the other proprietors, insist that they think and act independently.

 

It's a lie exposed by the concurrence of their views (did all 247 News Corp editors just happen to support the invasion of Iraq?), and blown out of the water by Andrew Neil's explosive testimony in 2008 before the Lords select committee on communications.

 

The papers cannot announce that their purpose is to ventriloquise the concerns of multimillionaires; they must present themselves as the voice of the people. The Sun, the Mail and the Express claim to represent the interests of the working man and woman. These interests turn out to be identical to those of the men who own the papers.

 

So the rightwing papers run endless exposures of benefit cheats, yet say scarcely a word about the corporate tax cheats. They savage the trade unions and excoriate the BBC. They lambast the regulations that restrain corporate power. They school us in the extrinsic values – the worship of power, money, image and fame – which advertisers love but which make this a shallower, more selfish country. Most of them deceive their readers about the causes of climate change. These are not the obsessions of working people. They are the obsessions thrust upon them by the multimillionaires who own these papers.

 

The corporate media is a gigantic astroturfing operation: a fake grassroots crusade serving elite interests. In this respect the media companies resemble the Tea Party movement, which claims to be a spontaneous rising of blue-collar Americans against the elite but was founded with the help of the billionaire Koch brothers and promoted by Murdoch's Fox News.

 

Journalism's primary purpose is to hold power to account. This purpose has been perfectly inverted. Columnists and bloggers are employed as the enforcers of corporate power, denouncing people who criticise its interests, stamping on new ideas, bullying the powerless. The press barons allowed governments occasionally to promote the interests of the poor, but never to hamper the interests of the rich. They also sought to discipline the rest of the media. The BBC, over the last 30 years, became a shadow of the gutsy broadcaster it was, and now treats big business with cringing deference. Every morning at 6.15, the Today programme's business report grants executives the kind of unchallenged access otherwise reserved for God on Thought for the Day. The rest of the programme seeks out controversy and sets up discussions between opponents, but these people are not confronted by their critics.

 

This media is corrupt - we need a Hippocratic oath for journalists | George Monbiot | Comment is free | The Guardian

 

From Reuters :

 

"Failure awaits the United States as in all previous wars it has unleashed, starting with Vietnam and up to the present day," he told the pro-Kremlin Izvestia newspaper in an interview which the Russian daily said was conducted in Damascus.

 

Assad said Syrian government forces had been close to the area, in suburbs of Damascus, where rebel forces accused his troops of firing poison gas projectiles last week, and there was no clear front line there.

 

"Would any state use chemical or any other weapons of mass destruction in a place where its own forces are concentrated? That would go against elementary logic," Assad told Izvestia.

 

Syria's Assad says U.S. military will fail if it intervenes | Reuters

Edited August 27, 2013 by Red Phoenix

[Red Phoenix]

Apologies for any typos, etc, and the tl;dr aspect, but seeing this flare up again has reminded me of the shit I found when researching last year. There's a lot of it all over the internet if you just take the time to try and find decent media sources, journalists and researchers, whilst avoiding the usual mainstream propaganda.

[Red Phoenix]

This is a document issued by

 

Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

Ministry of Interior

Follow-up LOGO Number: 71466/J/H

Attachments:

Date: 25/5/1433 H. [April /17/2012 AD]

 

(Top Secret)

 

His Excellency General Suood Al-Thnayyan

The Classified [secret] Office at the Ministry of Interior May Allah protect him

 

Peace be upon you and Allah's mercy and blessings

 

In reference to the Royal Court telegram No. 112, dated on 04/19/1433 H [March 3, 2012], referring to those held in the Kingdom jails accused with crimes to which Islamic Sharia law of execution by sword [decapitation] applies, we inform you that we are in dialogue with the accused criminals who have been convicted with smuggling drugs, murder, rape, from the following nationalities: 110 Yemenis, 21 Palestinians, 212 Saudis, 96 Sudanese, 254 Syrians, 82 Jordanians, 68 Somalis, 32 Afghanis, 94 Egyptians, 203 Pakistanis, 23 Iraqis, and 44 Kuwaitis.

 

We have reached an agreement with them that they will be exempted from the death sentence and given a monthly salary to their families and loved ones, who will be prevented from traveling outside Saudi Arabia in return for rehabilitation of the accused and their training in order to send them to Jihad in Syria.

 

Please accept my greetings.

 

[signed]

Director of follow up in Ministry of Interior

Abdullah bin Ali al-Rmezan

 

CC:

Authority of enforcement of the common good and prevention of forbidden

Copy for general intelligence

 

Saudi Arabia Sent Death Row Inmates to Fight in Syria in Lieu of Execution

[BCM]

Makes you wonder how long Russia and China will sit there and allow the Usa and its allies to Police the middle east.

This Chemical attack just doesnt look right at all, why would Assad do it. Knowing the reprisals.

[Joe Le Taxi]

They probably bought these chemicals off the US anyway.

[BCM]

Foreign secretary says military action ok without UN mandate, on Sky News.

 

Fucking warlords

[Red Phoenix]

On the supposed attack by al-Assad's forces :

 

Dan Kaszeta, a former officer of the U.S. Army’s Chemical Corps and a leading private consultant, pointed out a number of details absent from the footage so far: “None of the people treating the casualties or photographing them are wearing any sort of chemical-warfare protective gear,” he says, “and despite that, none of them seem to be harmed.” This would seem to rule out most types of military-grade chemical weapons, including the vast majority of nerve gases, since these substances would not evaporate immediately, especially if they were used in sufficient quantities to kill hundreds of people, but rather leave a level of contamination on clothes and bodies which would harm anyone coming in unprotected contact with them in the hours after an attack. In addition, he says that “there are none of the other signs you would expect to see in the aftermath of a chemical attack, such as intermediate levels of casualties, severe visual problems, vomiting and loss of bowel control.”

 

Steve Johnson, a leading researcher on the effects of hazardous material exposure at England’s Cranfield University who has worked with Britain’s Ministry of Defense on chemical warfare issues, agrees that “from the details we have seen so far, a large number of casualties over a wide area would mean quite a pervasive dispersal. With that level of chemical agent, you would expect to see a lot of contamination on the casualties coming in, and it would affect those treating them who are not properly protected. We are not seeing that here.”

 

Additional questions also remain unanswered, especially regarding the timing of the attack, being that it occurred on the exact same day that a team of UN inspectors was in Damascus to investigate earlier claims of chemical weapons use. It is also unclear what tactical goal the Syrian army would have been trying to achieve, when over the last few weeks it has managed to push back the rebels who were encroaching on central areas of the capital. But if this was not a chemical weapons attack, what then caused the deaths of so many people without any external signs of trauma?

 

and :

 

1. Why would Syria’s Assad invite United Nations chemical weapons inspectors to Syria, then launch a chemical weapons attack against women and children on the very day they arrive, just miles from where they are staying?

 

2. If Assad were going to use chemical weapons, wouldn’t he use them against the hired mercenary army trying to oust him? What does he gain attacking women and children? Nothing! The gain is all on the side of the US Government desperate to get the war agenda going again.

 

As I type these words, US trained and equipped forces are already across the border into Syria, and US naval forces are sailing into position to launch a massive cruise missile attack into Syria that will surely kill more Syrians than were claimed to have died in the chemical attack.

 

There's plenty more here : Experts Doubt Syrian Chemical Weapons Claims | Washington's Blog

 

Of course if you type "chemical weapons syria" into google you get all the usual mainstream suspects saying the same shit, it's by design. Kerry has apparently said it's undeniable that al-Assad's forces used chemical weapons, but where does he get this from? It's just speak, he has nothing. Neither does Hague, neither does Obama or Cameron. They have no actual evidence at all.

 

Something else relevant on that site :

 

General Wesley Clark … said the aim of this plot [to "destroy the governments in ... Iraq, ... Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Iran”] was this: “They wanted us to destabilize the Middle East, turn it upside down, make it under our control.” He then recounted a conversation he had had ten years earlier with Paul Wolfowitz — back in 1991 — in which the then-number-3-Pentagon-official, after criticizing Bush 41 for not toppling Saddam, told Clark: “But one thing we did learn [from the Persian Gulf War] is that we can use our military in the region – in the Middle East – and the Soviets won’t stop us. And we’ve got about 5 or 10 years to clean up those old Soviet regimes – Syria, Iran [sic], Iraq – before the next great superpower comes on to challenge us.” Clark said he was shocked by Wolfowitz’s desires because, as Clark put it: “the purpose of the military is to start wars and change governments? It’s not to deter conflicts?”

 

Neoconservatives Planned Regime Change Throughout the Middle East and North Africa 20 Years Ago | Washington's Blog

[General Dryness]

I draw the line at making my bird sniff my farts underneath the duvet.

 

I'm imposing sanctions and organising a military intervention as we speak. Chemical attacks against civilians will not be tolerated.

 

Tell her I'll liberate her if theres oil involved.

 

Warning! The following content is NOT WORK SAFE. Click the Show button to reveal.

[Chairman Meow]

Unfortunately we will follow whatever the yanks do because to them we are like the little brother who wants to tag along to show how good he is, begging for love from a superior force.

 

Or to to put it another way, we are Richard Hammond to their Jeremy Clarkson.

[Neil G]

There's plenty more here : Experts Doubt Syrian Chemical Weapons Claims | Washington's Blog

 

 

Interesting stuff, thanks. I jumped the gun a bit last night, I should have said that I would support air strikes if there were evidence that the regime was behind the attack.

 

The US have said they're going to produce their evidence in the next few days:

 

Obama orders release of report justifying Syria strike - CBS News

 

If that doesn't stand up to scrutiny then not only will Russia and China kick up an almighty stink, but the UN itself and a lot more of its member states will. Especially if the UN report doesn't find evidence of chemical agents that the Syrian government is known to possess. I don't think the US and UK will be able to spin this the way they did Iraq, because people are generally a lot more sceptical this time, and most of the American public don't want the US to get involved in another war in the region.

[VladimirIlyich]

On the supposed attack by al-Assad's forces :

 

and :

 

There's plenty more here : Experts Doubt Syrian Chemical Weapons Claims | Washington's Blog

 

Of course if you type "chemical weapons syria" into google you get all the usual mainstream suspects saying the same shit' date=' it's by design. Kerry has apparently said it's undeniable that al-Assad's forces used chemical weapons, but where does he get this from? It's just speak, he has nothing. Neither does Hague, neither does Obama or Cameron. They have no actual evidence at all.

 

Something else relevant on that site :

 

Neoconservatives Planned Regime Change Throughout the Middle East and North Africa 20 Years Ago | Washington's Blog

 

Pretty much nails it for me. If chemical weapons are used there would be hundreds if not thousands of deaths.

This looks like another scene from Capricorn One.

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

Looks very much to me like there will be military action.