What I consider critically important with this article, are the last two paragraphs:
"The U.S. blames Assad’s regime for the chemical attack and, citing intelligence reports, says sarin gas was used. The U.S. says 1,429 people died, including 426 children.Supporting the findings of the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, the Nation previously reported:
The Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, which collects information from a network of anti-regime activists, says it has only been able to confirm 502 dead."
"Days later and we still have no idea where Secretary of State John Kerry got that amazingly precise number of 1,429 killed in the alleged Syria chemical agent attack. He hasn’t cited full sourcing for it or taken questions on that. He merely claims he can’t say because it would “compromise” intelligence, which sounds like utter bull. President Obama also cited the death toll as fact in public statements beating the drums for war.Should the data of the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights be correct. Kerry clearly lied. Assuming that Kerry lied, the Obama administration’s claims become tainted and need to be verified.
And all other sources put the number a little or a lot lower. Why does this matter in the current debate? Obviously the higher number, particularly with the also unproven claim of more than 400 dead kids, is meant to sell a US military attack to the American people—and that’s why it’s a key claim. That 1,400 number makes the latest attack seem so much worse than earlier alleged Assad chem attacks, which we did not find horrible enough to claim they crossed the “red line.”
Should your read this post, request that your elected representatives investigate who actually used the chemical weapons before they vote concerning a US response.