Does the US have “100% evidence” that the Syrian Army used Sarin?

“American intelligence officials have still not been able to determine a chain of custody for the blood samples supplied by Syrian rebels that reportedly tested positive for sarin.  That is, they have not been able to establish who exactly handled the principal piece of evidence establishing “proof” of chemical weapons use by the regime.  A rather remarkable admission given that it took two full weeks for the blood samples to reach Western intelligence agencies from rebel hands.”

“Indeed, as McClatchy reported, independent chemical weapons experts maintain that “they’ve yet to see the telltale signs of a sarin gas attack, despite months of scrutiny.””

Does Obama want to distract from the Snowden affair with his sudden “red line” accusation against Syria?

“Obama’s momentous decision on military intervention in Syria…is a desperate diversionary move when his administration is caught up deep in the cesspool over the Snowden controversy.

The entire moral edifice on which Obama built up his presidency and the values he espoused…when he began his long march to the White House five years ago – transparency, accountability, legitimacy, multilateralism, consensus – lie exposed today as a pack of lies.

The heart of the matter is that Obama is on the horns of the same dilemma as Bill Clinton found himself when, in a desperate ploy to deflect world attention from his strong libido, he fired cruise missiles at Kandahar in August 1998.”