Terrorists used chemical weapons in Syria

The U.S. with the help of its traditional allies and controlled mass media tries to convince the world that the Syrian governmental forces used chemical weapons.
Earlier the Americans based their arguments on dubious data from the Internet, uncertain witnesses' evidence and faked videos. And it is no exaggeration, the French and the British special services directly admitted they had lack of serious information sources in Syria and based their information analysis on social media data. (www.abovetopsecret.com...).

However, the report on chemical use in Syria of the UN commission that had investigated incident in the Damascus suburbs presented new arguments to the western countries. The experts came to the conclusions as follows: 122 mm projectiles were used on August 21; flight trajectory and explosion crater testify the munitions were fired from the governmental forces positions; 350 liters of Sarin gas were used in the rockets. (www.spiegel.de...). There were also Cyrillic signs on the rocket cruise engine. It's worth mentioning that these facts can testify that some forces really used chemical weapons in Syria but nothing more.

But the U.S. and French authorities were the first to spread the sensational news about Assad's responsibility for the chemical attack even before the offi-cial report was made public. Moreover the U.S. State Department specialists say that so called insurgents have neither means of chemical delivery nor war gases. So they make conclusion that the ruling regime is to blame. It's worth mentioning that Washington seriously said there were no Al-Qaida terrorists among the Syrian opposition fighters and only intellectuals willing freedom from the tyranny fight for democ-racy.(www.telegraph.co.uk... ays-IHS-Janes-report.html).

Let's look carefully into the details of the Damascus incident of August 21. Ac-cording to Roman law, it's necessary to find out a motive investigating any crime case. Then it would be easier to find a criminal.

So let's find out who benefited from the chemical use in Guta.

By the middle of August Assad's troops supported by Hezbollah had dis-lodged the terrorists from all their strongholds. Many opposition groups were disintegrated, fled to Turkey or surrendered to the winner. The Qatari new government suddenly stopped financing the Syrian Free Army and the West couldn't grant it full support as it had no reason for a large-scale intervention. (mideast.foreignpolicy.com...).

Meanwhile, the Syrian president invited the UN experts to investigate the chemical attack in Aleppo killing dozens of Syrian army soldiers. Bashar Assad had firm conformation that the terrorists used chemical agents, so he waited for an impartial investigation. (abcnews.go.com...). There is no sense in using chemical weapons in a situation like that, especially against civilians on the day of the UN commission arrival! He isn't a self-murderer, is he?

What about the terrorists? That's not a simple question... Reliable sources among the opposition informed me long ago that General Idris had just one way out of the inevitable defeat that was to provoke foreign intervention using the pretext of a chemical attack with a great number of victims. Well-informed American intelligence veterans write in the Internet that Langley officials had the same ideas.

Moreover, hackers exposed information in winter 2013 that Qatar was to hire a private military company to deliver chemical munitions from Libya to the conflict zone. (www.cyberwarnews.info...). In early summer the American opposition mass media referred to the Turkish intelligence as saying that the U.S., British and French Special Forces units were deployed in Syria ready to conduct sensitive operations. (______beforeitsnews/war-and-conflict/2013/06/us-special-operations-in-syria-2447124.html). After the chemical attack in the Eastern Guta hackers got access to an Army intelligence high-ranking officer's e-mails. Several mails confirmed that the terrorists had staged the attack. (hackersnewsbulletin.com...).

We can also mention CIA and Pentagon veterans' letter to President Obama where they say that terrorists are responsible for the chemical attack in the Damascus suburbs (www.globalresearch.ca...) as well as information in American press about Turkish special services capturing terrorists with hun-dreds litres of chemical agents and shocking videos uploaded to Youtube on September 17 (www.infowars.com...).

Now we can see that the terrorists obtain artillery, launchers for homemade rockets and gas-masks of the U.S. origin... I surfed carefully the Internet and found a lot of evidence that Al-Qaida fought Assad's troops with Russian how-itzers, self-propelled artillery vehicles, multiple rocket launcher systems, large-calibre mortars and MANPADs (www.youtube.com... , www.youtube.com... ). They say they captured the weapons from the governmental forces. At the same time the West can supply their suspicious allies not only rations and means of communication.

Thus, it's obvious that Assad had no sense of using chemical weapons, he was defeating the opposition. But it was the last chance for the terrorists. More than that they had all means for a provocation: chemical agents, means of delivery, political will to use Sarin gas, and media support from the western countries.

reply to post by farhad


The UN report indicates Assads involvement in conducting the attacks. Your sort of askin me to take his word that it was rebels that caused the attack as proof. I'm not buying into it, his lies or Russian and Chinese propaganda.

My country by and large doesn't support military intervention, so it's a waste of time for me to advocate for this. What I wont be doing is taking his word on it that he is a friendly misunderstood dictator.

It's no use making your argument here, you have to bury your head in the sand so they can hear you.

reply to post by SasquatchHunter


I think most people would agree actually, as i understand it nobody(including UN inspectors) knows exactly who perpetrated the chem weapons attack, Assad should go there is no question, but replaced by who? the MB? Al-Qaeda? Most would agree the current govt.of Syria is the lesser evil.

reply to post by farhad


Let's don't be dissing the rebels.

Their on our side, you know. Or maybe I should say ... we're on their side. Or maybe I sould say ... we want the same things.

Yea, that's it we and Al-Qaida want the same things now.

reply to post by all2human


The U.N. and the U.S. especially have mishandled this situation from the beginning. We can see the contrast between Egypt and Syria what happens when the army backs the people and what happens when the army backs the government.

The lesser of two evils is a valid point but I'm not so sure its the best position longterm.

reply to post by SasquatchHunter


The army IS the people, this is a civil war in the sense that Sunni, Shia, Kurd, Al-Qaeda, MB and other factions are fighting amongst themselves,including the Alawi dominated govt, this isn't nor has it been a collective push to overthrow the government.
What happened in Egypt was an uprising against Austerity measures, completely different.

reply to post by SasquatchHunter


Actaully, the UN report was specifically instructed not to finger, infer, point out, suggest, state, accuse or identify where the attack came from and who ordered it.

..that in itself is suspicious!

Everything on the USA's side revolves around this mysterious Israeli report that the missiles were fired from a mountain, Russia and Syria suggest they have sat intel that says different.. meanwhile neither is willing to show its hand

The UN report was never going to counter America's position, regardless of the facts its a complete waste of time.

simple logic says to me that the leader of a country that is winning a civil war would not use Sarin Rockets on his capital cities suburbs.
Even if the rebels were on the ground causing mayhem, simple mortar strikes or troops sent in would have quelled the situation.

The rebels tried and failed to force the US into Syria

reply to post by Agit8dChop


The report itself is not itself supposed to place blame but simply present findings of evidence. The U.N. has made clear the report based on evidence should then be used to identify the perpetrators of the attack. What is this the problem with this? Isnt this exactly how the scientific community operates.

What does the scientific community, number crunchers and weapons experts say about the non biased evidence?
They all say it strongly implicates Assads regime carried out the attack.

Hey your common sense, Assads word, and Putin's high tech non existent satellite imagery trumps scientific and expert analysis!

were the first to spread the sensational news about Assad's responsibility for the chemical attack


sensational news?

Odd wording there...there are two sides, what's so "sensational" about Ass-hat using the chems?

Oh wait I know where this is going.

Such a kind man would never hurt folks right?

lol/

reply to post by canucks555


Yea the humanitarian Assad the president that got elected with no opposing candidates. CAUSE HE'S THE ONLY IN PERSON SYRIA WHO WANTED THAT PESKY JOB OF BEING PRESIDENT. It most definitely doesn't prove he uses the military for whatever he wants.

reply to post by canucks555
Assad has been awful willing to work with people for a guy that did nothing. Oh behind their chief ally whos doing all the looking into the thing. It smells.

SasquatchHunter
reply to post by canucks555

 

Yea the humanitarian Assad the president that got elected with no opposing candidates. CAUSE HE'S THE ONLY IN PERSON SYRIA WHO WANTED THAT PESKY JOB OF BEING PRESIDENT. It most definitely doesn't prove he uses the military for whatever he wants.

You run against Assad in an election......they find you out on the edge of town.

Agit8dChop
reply to post by SasquatchHunter

 

Actaully, the UN report was specifically instructed not to finger, infer, point out, suggest, state, accuse or identify where the attack came from and who ordered it.

..that in itself is suspicious!

Well the UN has Russia on the security counsel. That's what that could mean. If it were some lesser country of no consequence to the UN they would probably fully expose them.

Everything on the USA's side revolves around this mysterious Israeli report that the missiles were fired from a mountain, Russia and Syria suggest they have sat intel that says different.. meanwhile neither is willing to show its hand.

Every body has operatives they need to protect. These guys that work in that country passing on intel are very valuable and are not going to get a bullet in the head just so you and I can know all the facts.

Logarock

SasquatchHunter
reply to post by canucks555

 

Yea the humanitarian Assad the president that got elected with no opposing candidates. CAUSE HE'S THE ONLY IN PERSON SYRIA WHO WANTED THAT PESKY JOB OF BEING PRESIDENT. It most definitely doesn't prove he uses the military for whatever he wants.

You run against Assad in an election......they find you out on the edge of town.

edit on 23-9-2013 by Logarock because: n

Yes all of Assads political opponents seem to have strange medical conditions that prevent them from doing things like being alive, I mean aren't there any healthy individuals who wanna run for office or protest who don't suffer from sudden death ailments.

Of course its not really PC to call these guys dictators anymore. I mean back in Saddam's day it was acceptable because we were as a tolerant and loving world but that's ancient history now.

Maybe we could start callin Lil Kim the Burger King and calling Assad leader is boring and dictator just isn't PC so how about President El Ninja cause really who else can get away with so many things in broad daylight an no one sees it. Ninjas!

canucks555
were the first to spread the sensational news about Assad's responsibility for the chemical attack


sensational news?

Odd wording there...there are two sides, what's so "sensational" about Ass-hat using the chems?

Oh wait I know where this is going.

Such a kind man would never hurt folks right?

lol/

edit on 23-9-2013 by canucks555 because: (no reason given)

I believe the "sensational" aspect of it, is saying he is responsible with no proof. That is the same as saying you are responsible. Sure the circumstantial evidence points to him or the rebels as more likely candidates, but I say you did it. lol

According to some on here, Assad has to proof it wasn't him. You please prove to me, that you weren't the mastermind behind the attack.

ps- I'm not actually accusing you of this attack, just showing how ridiculous the arguments are.

superman2012

canucks555
were the first to spread the sensational news about Assad's responsibility for the chemical attack


sensational news?

Odd wording there...there are two sides, what's so "sensational" about Ass-hat using the chems?

Oh wait I know where this is going.

Such a kind man would never hurt folks right?

lol/

edit on 23-9-2013 by canucks555 because: (no reason given)

I believe the "sensational" aspect of it, is saying he is responsible with no proof. That is the same as saying you are responsible. Sure the circumstantial evidence points to him or the rebels as more likely candidates, but I say you did it. lol

According to some on here, Assad has to proof it wasn't him. You please prove to me, that you weren't the mastermind behind the attack.

ps- I'm not actually accusing you of this attack, just showing how ridiculous the arguments are.

This isn't like playing a game of clue where anyone and everyone is a suspect.

This person could easily prove it wasn't them involved that's just silly. First by location have they ever been to Syria?
Do they have millions of dollars to buy rockets hire an army and educated in making WMD?

YOU would first need to establish that the person you're accusing has anyone of these capabilities.

Assad clearly does have these capabilities! Since we have established him s a prime suspect, wouldn't you thunk the first thing Assad wanted to do would be to clear his name?

Assad is the one claiming he has proof it was the rebels and not him he had this proof before the first U.N. inspection wrapped up. Why didn't he turn this evidence over?

reply to post by SasquatchHunter


Flip side is that the US et al claim that Assad did it and have proof, why isn't it released as well?

My game is the same as the "world leaders" play...just not as deadly.

reply to post by SasquatchHunter


The ONLY thing your

scientific and expert analysis

concluded is that chemical weapons were used, I don't know about you, but that was never the doubt in my mind.

Logic, dictates that Assad would lose more than he would gain if he did some random, mass, chemical attack. He'd been restrained in the past when things were worse and the rebels were on the back foot needing outside intervention.

No one has proven where the rockets came from or who fired them accept some mysterious Israeli claim.

reply to post by farhad


In a Related Story , Saudi Security Agencies have Threatened Reporters who broke the Story ..........The Plot Thickens..........



www.prisonplanet.com...