Saudi Black OP Team Behind Damascus Chem Weapons Attack – Diplomatic Sources

page: 1
10
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 4 2013 @ 11:44 AM
link   


The August chemical weapons attack in the Syrian capital’s suburbs was done by a Saudi Arabian black operations team, Russian diplomatic sources have told a Russian news agency.

“Based on data from a number of sources a picture can be pieced together. The criminal provocation in Eastern Ghouta was done by a black op team that the Saudi’s sent through Jordan and which acted with support of the Liwa Al-Islam group,” a source in the diplomatic circles told Interfax.

Saudi Black OP Team Behind Damascus Chem Weapons Attack – Diplomatic Sources

It is so blaring obvious this was a false flag attack. While many of us, myself included, were busy blaming the rebels, it seems it may have been carried out by the Saudi's with the backing of the US. This would make an awful lot of sense, seeing the role they played in 9/11. They always seem to have their hands dirty.




posted on Oct, 4 2013 @ 11:46 AM
link   
A different article related to the Saudi's...


Until today it is largely unknown that the Saudi government planned a radical course change in summer 2001. Via official diplomatic channels the U.S. government was informed that the Saudis intended to stop coordinating their policy with the United States. The attacks of 9/11 destroyed these plans to separate and gain more independence only weeks later.

The intimate relationship between Prince Bandar bin Sultan, the Saudi ambassador in the United States from 1983 till 2005, and U.S. President George W. Bush is legendary. Yet, the bond between the two former fighter jet pilots included more than just personal sympathy. The close friendship of Bandar and Bush represented also the special business relationship between Saudi Arabia and the United States, dating as far back as to the first half of the 20th century. Its simple core: the Saudis are selling their oil and then promptly reinvest the received U.S. Dollars back in the United States - for weapons and large infrastructure projects. Thus in the end most of the American money is floating back to U.S. corporations.

This so-called "Petrodollar recycling" is crucial not only for the American economy but also for the U.S. currency itself. If the Arab nations, led by the Saudis, would ever decide to sell their oil for Euros instead for Dollars - like the Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein had declared some time before the invasion of his country - then the global need for Dollars would be reduced so dramatically that U.S. monetary supremacy would seriously be at risk.

So America and the Saudis are bound together in a close economic symbiosis. This leads also to a close political alliance - which tends to be fragile because of the extreme differences in the political systems of both countries. People in Saudi Arabia are living in one of the most anachronistic dictatorships in the world. The almighty rulers there allow political reforms towards more democratic participation only reluctantly. A further constant factor of instability in Saudi domestic policy is the conflict between Israel and Palestine.


www.globalresearch.ca...
911blogger.com...



posted on Oct, 4 2013 @ 11:55 AM
link   
reply to post by Merlin Lawndart
 


I just don't get it.

First it was a black op by US Special Forces.

Then it was a British SAS op.

Then it was an Israeli op.

Now it's a Saudi op?

What gives?



posted on Oct, 4 2013 @ 12:07 PM
link   

Until today it is largely unknown that the Saudi government planned a radical course change in summer 2001. Via official diplomatic channels the U.S. government was informed that the Saudis intended to stop coordinating their policy with the United States. The attacks of 9/11 destroyed these plans to separate and gain more independence only weeks later.


That`s a real eye opener!
That one little statement does more to suggest a 9/11 conspiracy than all the other "evidence" combined.

Since most of the hijackers were saudis it would have been very easy for the government to blame saudi arabia for the attacks and drum up public support for an invasion of saudi arabia.
How fortunate for the saudis that they avoided a U.S. invasion by deciding to get back in line with what the U.S. wants.
edit on 4-10-2013 by Tardacus because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 4 2013 @ 12:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Merlin Lawndart
 


I share your outrage, but based on the body of evidence, the Saudi's are not really "backed" by the US in this respect. More likely, they are instigating and the US is the "enforcer". Up for debate is the level of initiative the US might have. I doubt the US has much pull with the Saudi's. The oil corps and the Saudi's seemed to be aligned most of the time, so the US military end up as their mercenary force.

The empire is being played like a piano by the big money interests.



posted on Oct, 4 2013 @ 12:15 PM
link   
The killing of the rabbits with Sarin wasn't Saudi, and was released by the terrorist elements of the FSA. The rebels busted in Turkey with Sarin weapons to use in a couple Turkish villages sure weren't Saudi....nor were the ones in Baghdad, found with Sarin weapons in the process of being made and remote control aircraft (hobby type, not drone) to disperse it.

Saudi wouldn't be above doing this, in my opinion. I don't believe, from all I've read anyway, Saudi has the technical capability though. Their troops have the reputation of being buffoons with very expensive toys who actually collect up their brass from desert exercises for the penny pinching bureaucrats. Crazy mix of things going on with them.

I could see them hiring it done though ...Maybe they back-channel paid the rebels? Err... kinda brings us back to the beginning though.



posted on Oct, 4 2013 @ 12:15 PM
link   

projectvxn
reply to post by Merlin Lawndart
 


I just don't get it.

First it was a black op by US Special Forces.

Then it was a British SAS op.

Then it was an Israeli op.

Now it's a Saudi op?

What gives?



It's rt.com



posted on Oct, 4 2013 @ 01:07 PM
link   
reply to post by MDDoxs
 


That actually does explain a lot.

I'm amazed anyone even uses them as a source still.



posted on Oct, 4 2013 @ 01:13 PM
link   
reply to post by projectvxn
 


I do enjoy reading rt.com for differing perspectives, but as we have alluded to, the stories tend to be anti-west.

And as per your previous comments, I am pretty sure I saw each development to the story you listed posted on RT.

The Israel one didnt surprise me so much though



posted on Oct, 4 2013 @ 01:29 PM
link   
reply to post by projectvxn
 


I think RT is about as worthless on anything with East/West politics even remotely involved (and that covers most things right now for headliners) but they are good for some things. They do report regional Russian news as good as anything TASS ever produced.


That can be informative too, at times.



posted on Oct, 4 2013 @ 01:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


Wrabbit I agree with you, however they always seem to be the first to report the negatives stories and give the most coverage


The recent naval base incident had them posting pictures, tweets, profiles etc etc. Anything to really dramatize the situation.



posted on Oct, 4 2013 @ 01:43 PM
link   

projectvxn
reply to post by Merlin Lawndart
 


I just don't get it.

First it was a black op by US Special Forces.

Then it was a British SAS op.

Then it was an Israeli op.

Now it's a Saudi op?

What gives?



I pointed towards many resources shortly after the attack all showing evidence that it was Saudi in origin. Many of the witnesses to the incident said it was a storage accident when the rebels didn't know what they were doing with the Saudi chemical weapons. Not sure if that's speculation on the part of the witnesses or not, but it was clear that the weapons were from the Sauds, and were given to the rebels.



posted on Oct, 4 2013 @ 01:47 PM
link   
reply to post by MDDoxs
 


Rather like the lying US media then.

They are no better than RT or any other news source with an agenda.



posted on Oct, 4 2013 @ 01:54 PM
link   

PuterMan
reply to post by MDDoxs
 


Rather like the lying US media then.

They are no better than RT or any other news source with an agenda.


I never said they were any better. In fact, they are probably far worse. It just so happens that rt.com's spin coverage is very apparent.



posted on Oct, 4 2013 @ 02:11 PM
link   

projectvxn
reply to post by Merlin Lawndart
 


I just don't get it.

First it was a black op by US Special Forces.

Then it was a British SAS op.

Then it was an Israeli op.

Now it's a Saudi op?

What gives?




RT

Enough said.....



posted on Oct, 4 2013 @ 02:12 PM
link   
reply to post by MDDoxs
 


LOL

Beat me to it.

I swear if you packaged crap just right some people would buy it.

They'd buy anything....



posted on Oct, 4 2013 @ 02:15 PM
link   
reply to post by projectvxn
 


I guess they all had a great big black op party in the suburbs of Damascus, threw chem weapon bombs all over the civilians collected their intelligence to bring back to show everyone it was the other guys, drank some champagne, then all headed home to pass on said evidence.



posted on Oct, 4 2013 @ 02:21 PM
link   
reply to post by PuterMan
 


True and in this case we are discussing RT as a source...



posted on Oct, 4 2013 @ 03:15 PM
link   
reply to post by projectvxn
 


Exactly. I just found this to be an interesting new take on the issue, not that it's necessarily true or credible. Though the story could be entirely plausible. If I remember correctly, there is some information and photos floating around that allegedly shows the chemical weapons were made in Saudi Arabia, though I could be wrong on that. I was just posting the article to share and see what others here though about it.



posted on Oct, 4 2013 @ 04:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Merlin Lawndart
 


That makes a lot of sense - the cartridges were marked as manufactured in Saudi Arabia.





new topics
top topics
 
10
<<   2 >>

log in

join