Rebels Admit Responsibility for Chemical Weapons Attack

Rebels Admit Responsibility for Chemical Weapons Attack

www.infowars.com

“From numerous interviews with doctors, Ghouta residents, rebel fighters and their families….many believe that certain rebels received chemical weapons via the Saudi intelligence chief, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, and were responsible for carrying out the (deadly) gas attack,”

“We were very curious about these arms. And unfortunately, some of the fighters handled the weapons improperly and set off the explosions,” one militant named ‘J’ told Gavlak.

(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.mintpressnews.com

1st of all, yes I know this is from infowars, but this article is just reporting a story from another website mintpressnews.com. Which happens to be down at the moment because...

"The website on which the story originally appeared - Mint Press (which is currently down as a result of huge traffic it is attracting to the article) is a legitimate media organization based in Minnesota. The Minnesota Post did a profile on them last year."

The person who reported this article is Dale Gavlak.

Dale Gavlak’s credibility is very impressive. He has been a Middle East correspondent for the Associated Press for two decades and has also worked for National Public Radio (NPR) and written articles for BBC News.

But anyways, it seems Saudi Arabia gave the rebels these weapons, not telling them what it was, or how to use them. Due to this the rebels admitted to setting them off by accident. If true, it seems like the Saudis did this knowing they would be used, starting the fiasco that occured, giving a proper excuse for the US to enter war. Which would benefit Saudi Pockets, and the U.S. plan to take control of the Middle East.

www.infowars.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

For some reason, I don't think that President Obama will accept this as being true.

He seems hell-bent on lobbing missiles.

Color me confused...

I have had little doubt that the rebels did indeed commit the CW atrocity, but why on Earth would they admit that? Why draw a giant target on your own head and invite the US/UK/etc. to launch a couple of hundred missiles at you because you decided to use gas on a civilian population? Even Russia and China wouldn't dare support you if that were the case.

If they wanted to commit suicide, they have plenty of vests over there.

This make absolutely no sense.

reply to post by Dreine


From the article it seems they didnt know what the weapon was, and it was an accident. If the US launches a strike against Assad, yes that is a victory for the rebels, but is it really? That would also mean many civilians and residential neighborhoods would be destroyed. Im sure they dont want that either.

And the Saudi Arabia bit actually makes a bit of sense...

Who profits the most when the West goes to war? Our oil-supplying buddies in the Kingdom, of course!

Not to mention that if a prolonged US action were to take place, we would be doing most of the ground staging from Saudi Arabia, which would be a boon for the economies around the bases or FOBs.

Something to ponder.

reply to post by Dreine


Makes no sense to me either..

I don't know the reliability od said news source mintpressnews but I found the article and they do say their site is down due to traffic..

The article can be read on their facebook page here:

mint press news: Syrian rebels admit to chemical attack (paraphrased)

By Dale Gavlak and Yahya AbabnehAugust For MintPress News
Aug. 29, 2013

Rebels and local residents in Ghouta accuse Saudi Prince Bandar bin Sultan of providing chemical weapons to an al-Qaida linked rebel group.

This article is a collaboration between Dale Gavlak reporting for Mint Press News (also of the Associated Press) and Yahya Ababneh.

...

“My son came to me two weeks ago asking what I thought the weapons were that he had been asked to carry,” said Abu Abdel-Moneim, the father of a rebel fighting to unseat Assad, who lives in Ghouta.

Abdel-Moneim said his son and 12 other rebels were killed inside of a tunnel used to store weapons provided by a Saudi militant, known as Abu Ayesha, who was leading a fighting battalion. The father described the weapons as having a “tube-like structure” while others were like a “huge gas bottle.”

Ghouta townspeople said the rebels were using mosques and private houses to sleep while storing their weapons in tunnels.

...

“They didn’t tell us what these arms were or how to use them,” complained a female fighter named ‘K.’ “We didn’t know they were chemical weapons. We never imagined they were chemical weapons.”

“When Saudi Prince Bandar gives such weapons to people, he must give them to those who know how to handle and use them,” she warned. She, like other Syrians, do not want to use their full names for fear of retribution.

A well-known rebel leader in Ghouta named ‘J’ agreed. “Jabhat al-Nusra militants do not cooperate with other rebels, except with fighting on the ground. They do not share secret information. They merely used some ordinary rebels to carry and operate this material,” he said.

“We were very curious about these arms. And unfortunately, some of the fighters handled the weapons improperly and set off the explosions,” ‘J’ said.

...

Doctors who treated the chemical weapons attack victims cautioned interviewers to be careful about asking questions regarding who, exactly, was responsible for the deadly assault.

The humanitarian group Doctors Without Borders added that health workers aiding 3,600 patients also reported experiencing similar symptoms, including frothing at the mouth, respiratory distress, convulsions and blurry vision. The group has not been able to independently verify the information.

More than a dozen rebels interviewed reported that their salaries came from the Saudi government.


In a recent article for Business Insider, reporter Geoffrey Ingersoll highlighted Saudi Prince Bandar’s role in the two-and-a-half year Syrian civil war. Many observers believe Bandar, with his close ties to Washington, has been at the very heart of the push for war by the U.S. against Assad.


...

Dale Gavlak is a Middle East correspondent for Mint Press News and the Associated Press. Gavlak has been stationed in Amman, Jordan for the Associated Press for over two decades. An expert in Middle Eastern Affairs, Gavlak currently covers the Levant region of the Middle East for AP, National Public Radio and Mint Press News, writing on topics including politics, social issues and economic trends. Dale holds a M.A. in Middle Eastern Studies from the University of Chicago. Contact Dale at [email protected]

Originally posted by theconspirator
reply to post by Dreine

 

From the article it seems they didnt know what the weapon was, and it was an accident. If the US launches a strike against Assad, yes that is a victory for the rebels, but is it really? That would also mean many civilians and residential neighborhoods would be destroyed. Im sure they dont want that either.

What if the Saudis gave them CW intentionally mixed into the normal Mortars for the sole purpose of blaming it on Assad so the US could overthrow him...

The Saudis have been behind the US mis-adventure in the middle east, Oil pipeline is important to them and as an Added bonus being Sunni... Well they hate Shia...

What countries happen to be dominate Shia?

IRAN, IRAQ, YEMEN, AFGHANISTAN, SYRIA...

Sooooooo, Saudi's also get help in an apparent Holy war.

You ever wonder why the Middle east calls what the US is doing a crusade against Islam? Because the guys with what we want the Saudi's are waging one.

We are just involved for economic reasons.

ETA:

Now with the above information think on this real hard, Saudi's NEED the US to intervene in the Middle east, 15 of the 9-11 high jackers were Saudi...

How many oil contracts did Halliburton get again?

Originally posted by Dustytoad
reply to post by Dreine

 

Makes no sense to me either..

Makes perfect sense if it was a Genuine accident caused by the WEST intervention, think about it, if you are fighting for your country, would you want to gas your fellow civilians?

reply to post by theconspirator


The conspiracy side of me says that this is what is called a "Grey" PSYOP in order to give Obama a out. A reason not to attack after all the rhetoric and a way to save face. He'll probably be calling for further investigation.

I'm good with that as long as we don't start lobbing missiles. We don't need to involve ourselves in this conflict.

@ benrl

After reading the article it's a little different than I thought. If you recall I am one of the ones who doesn't believe Assad ever used chemical weapons.

It does look like Saudi involvement.

Quote wasn't working sorry.

Originally posted by TDawgRex
reply to post by theconspirator

 

The conspiracy side of me says that this is what is called a "Grey" PSYOP in order to give Obama a out. A reason not to attack after all the rhetoric and a way to save face. He'll probably be calling for further investigation.

I'm good with that as long as we don't start lobbing missiles. We don't need to involve ourselves in this conflict.

A possibility.
After all, a lot of people say that the FSA is a CIA sponsored group.
AND....
Obama does seem to have painted himself into a corner on this one.

We shall see.

Originally posted by butcherguy

After all, a lot of people say that the FSA is a CIA sponsored group.
AND....
Obama does seem to have painted himself into a corner on this one.

We shall see.

There are so many different backers of the FSA and more often than not, those backers are at odds with each other. The FSA is not a coalition but rather a collection of various groups fighting a common enemy.

And quite often, when the enemy doesn't present itself, they start shooting at each other.

I can see the point of the CIA having intel assets on the ground, but the larger part of me says that they should pull out any other type of support.

Just look how Libya turned out.

Originally posted by theconspirator

Rebels Admit Responsibility for Chemical Weapons Attack

www.infowars.com

“From numerous interviews with doctors, Ghouta residents, rebel fighters and their families….many believe that certain rebels received chemical weapons via the Saudi intelligence chief, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, and were responsible for carrying out the (deadly) gas attack,”

“We were very curious about these arms. And unfortunately, some of the fighters handled the weapons improperly and set off the explosions,” one militant named ‘J’ told Gavlak.

(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.mintpressnews.com

Bull!!

I'll go with the "It makes no sense." crowd on this one.

They handled the weapons improperly and set them off, that part is without question a possibility, but it doesn't end there. According to what I remember reading and hearing over the last week weren't there multiple explosions, in multiple locations, over the course of multiple days? Now if it really was the mishandling of these weapons, what are the chances that the rebels received the weapons, distributed them to different groups in different locations, and they all mishandled the weapons over the course of what? 3-4 days? No one got the memo, or they didn't have any communication with each other about what happened to the other rebel groups that misused the same weapons these other groups also had in their possession? With all of that info I call b.s. on this story.

I still haven't ruled out the possibility that the rebels used the weapons, or that a branch of Assad's military used them without his knowledge, or even that Assad used them himself. As for this story, don't believe it.

Let's put on our tinfoil hats for just a moment, shall we?

The Saudis are predominately Sunni, which was mentioned above. They have had a close working relationship with the Great Satan (the West), for many decades now, supplying us with oil to feed our addiction. We have NEVER held the Kingdom to account for it's dealings with Al Qaeda... why?

Because they have us where they want us. We need their oil and they know it, so they use us as their enforcer around the region. Iraq was a threat... we eliminated it. Iran is the new threat, and getting the US to jump into Syria will almost assuredly spill the war into Iran. Which will lead into Israel going hot, and we all know how that can go.

While the West and the East go at each other, the Saudis will sit back, rake in the cash, and laugh all the way to the mosque.

TLDR: Don't be a Saudi puppet, America! Don't fight a proxy war, STAY HOME!!!!

Originally posted by FidelityMusic
I'll go with the "It makes no sense." crowd on this one.

They handled the weapons improperly and set them off, that part is without question a possibility, but it doesn't end there. According to what I remember reading and hearing over the last week weren't there multiple explosions, in multiple locations, over the course of multiple days? Now if it really was the mishandling of these weapons, what are the chances that the rebels received the weapons, distributed them to different groups in different locations, and they all mishandled the weapons over the course of what? 3-4 days? No one got the memo, or they didn't have any communication with each other about what happened to the other rebel groups that misused the same weapons these other groups also had in their possession? With all of that info I call b.s. on this story.

I still haven't ruled out the possibility that the rebels used the weapons, or that a branch of Assad's military used them without his knowledge, or even that Assad used them himself. As for this story, don't believe it.

edit on 30-8-2013 by FidelityMusic because: (no reason given)

All that would be needed would be to mix it in with normal ordnance, you would get a random mix of normal attacks with a few Chemical attacks.

Hell all that takes is dropping a crate of munitions in a war zone and hope that some desperate fighter picks them up to use.

and with how piece meal the rebels weapon supply's are wouldn't surprise me one bit if its all an op by the West to trigger war.

Originally posted by RP2SticksOfDynamite


Bull!!

Hmm

Consider this: the only beneficiaries from the atrocity were the rebels, previously losing the war, who now have Britain and America ready to intervene on their side. While there seems to be little doubt that chemical weapons were used, there is doubt about who deployed them.


It is important to remember that Assad has been accused of using poison gas against civilians before. But on that occasion, Carla del Ponte, a U.N. commissioner on Syria, concluded that the rebels, not Assad, were probably responsible.

OR from the Washington times:


Syrian rebels used Sarin nerve gas, not Assad’s regime: U.N. official

Testimony from victims strongly suggests it was the rebels, not the Syrian government, that used Sarin nerve gas during a recent incident in the revolution-wracked nation, a senior U.N. diplomat said Monday.

Don't forget this is from the first time, not the recent one.

reply to post by benrl

The problem that I have with 'mistaken munitions' excuse is that chemical weapons are marked differently to make them stand out because of their nature and the special handling procedures that go with them.

Even small arms ammunition (individual rounds) are marked as to what particular type they are (such as tracer rounds) to avoid confusion.

Originally posted by butcherguy
reply to post by benrl

 

The problem that I have with 'mistaken munitions' excuse is that chemical weapons are marked differently to make them stand out because of their nature and the special handling procedures that go with them.

Even small arms ammunition (individual rounds) are marked as to what particular type they are (such as tracer rounds) to avoid confusion.

...

If the intent was to hide what it was from the person using them, it would not be hard to do so, could even explain why they had accidents.

Improper containers for the type of munitions and handling instructions...