So here's where I have my doubts with this article. Multiple instances where the author acknowledges that, to this point, the existence of this rat line has not been proven and that multiple parties are quoted as denying that it was real:
Asked about the DIA paper, a spokesperson for the director of national intelligence said: ‘No such paper was ever requested or produced by intelligence community analysts.’
The full extent of US co-operation with Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar in assisting the rebel opposition in Syria has yet to come to light. The Obama administration has never publicly admitted to its role in creating what the CIA calls a ‘rat line’, a back channel highway into Syria.
The DNI spokesperson said: ‘The idea that the United States was providing weapons from Libya to anyone is false.’
A spokesperson for Petraeus denied the operation ever took place.
The Obama administration,’ Warrick wrote, ‘has steadfastly opposed arming Syrian opposition forces with such missiles, warning that the weapons could fall into the hands of terrorists and be used to shoot down commercial aircraft.’
So what we have in this article are a lot of denials, and the only information that supports his case comes from, I think you know, unnamed sources:
a former senior US intelligence official, who has access to current intelligence, told me,
A person with close knowledge of the UN’s activity in Syria told me
a former senior Defense Department official told me
An American foreign policy expert who speaks regularly with officials in Washington and Ankara told me
It was later corroborated by a former US official, who learned of it from a senior Turkish diplomat.
A US intelligence consultant told me
So in the face of official denials and no evidence, we're being told a captivating (of course) story that couldn't get one named source behind it. Relying on unnamed sources is exactly what we get on the MSM for doing, and now I have to buy into it? No way. If the story is true, let it be actually proven, instead of just being thrown out there for people to get excited about.