Russia: Aug. 21 Syria Chemical Attack Was ‘Staged’

(UNITED NATIONS) — Russia is lashing out at the U.S. and its allies on the United Nations Security Council over who is to blame for chemical weapons attacks in Syria this year.

Russia’s ambassador on Monday told the council that the dramatic Aug. 21 attack that led to Syria agreeing to give up its chemical stockpile was “staged” and a “large-scale provocation.”

Vitaly Churkin compared it to the “manipulation of public opinion” that led up to the U.S. invasion of Iraq. He read reporters the statement he read to council members.

The current council president, French Ambassador Gerard Araud, told reporters only that members had an “acrimonious exchange.”

A U.N. inspection team’s final report last week said chemical weapons probably were used in Syria several times.

The team did not say who was responsible.

Russia: Aug. 21 Syria Chemical Attack Was ‘Staged’

Not surprised to read about this. This isn't the first time Russia has made such claims but since the UN's recent investigations found chemical weapons to have been used that tragic day in Syria Russia is making sure the West isn't going to jump the gun and begin a military campaign.

What I would like to know about the chemical weapons used is this, what was their delivery system? Was it high tech or low tech? There must have been some kind of evidence of the delivery system left behind?

reply to post by Swills


Sister Miriam Agnes de la criox has been on a U.S. speaking tour and she has spoken about this subject at length. I'll see if I can find any of her talks on youtube. The problem is the area in question was under rebel control the entire time. Some of the bodies are actually alleged to be those of children who were kidnapped from outlying cities. Many people believe they were killed and then "staged" in the area.

Russia's contention seems to be that it is impossible to say who did it when the rebels could have easily gained access to chemical weapons as well given the current state of the country. The problem is Assad had little to gain from the attack itself-He was already winning. The rebels were fleeing further and further. Russia's belief is that the rebel's "staged" the attack to bring the U.S. into the fight.

I have yet to see any firm evidence in the form of containers. The U.N. proclaims the bodies showed death by exposure, but when you don't see autopsy reports it's difficult to believe I don't really dispute a chemical attack happened and Russia doesn't either-They dispute who carried it out.

reply to post by antonia


Yeah I've heard such claims as well but I'm sure we'll never really know what's going on there because Syria is a melting pot of death. I wonder what the delivery systems are because Al Nursa and other Al Qaeda groups have chemical weapons and so do the rebels. I've always doubted Assad's forces used the weapons because if they do then they're basically giving the green light for the West to do whatever they want. And I hate to say it, but a false flag wouldn't be out of the question for the West so.....

Swills
reply to post by antonia

 

Yeah I've heard such claims as well but I'm sure we'll never really know what's going on there because Syria is a melting pot of death. I wonder what the delivery systems are because Al Nursa and other Al Qaeda groups have chemical weapons and so do the rebels. I've always doubted Assad's forces used the weapons because if they do then they're basically giving the green light for the West to do whatever they want. And I hate to say it, but a false flag wouldn't be out of the question for the West so.....

I don't think it really has to be the west orchestrating the mess though. The rebels could very well have done it of their our fruition. If it was the west then I don't see why Obama would have let Putin bail him out. He would have simply ignored Russia's overtures. In fact, Obama should pick up the red phone and kiss Putin's butt every day because he really did save Obama's skin.

Interestingly enough the FSA's top commander has stated they will no longer seek Assad's removal as a precursor to the Geneva talks. He has even hinted he is willing to unite with Assad's forces against Al Nursa and other foreign fighters.

reply to post by Swills

The current council president, French Ambassador Gerard Araud, told reporters only that members had an “acrimonious exchange.”

ac·ri·mo·ni·ous
ˌakrəˈmōnēəs/
adjective
adjective: acrimonious

1. (typically of speech or a debate) angry and bitter.

OOOPS, Apparently the entire second half of my post was left on the clipboard.

I think the UN Council President was obviously trying to do damage control. I got the impression from the read that verbal hell broke loose. Good for the Russians. But, to tell the truth. I'm also glad Syria gave them up too.

reply to post by antonia


Without a doubt it could have a false flag, whether orchestrated by the rebels and or the West. The rebels staging it means the West would provide NATO and arms support, but I just don't imagine the West wouldn't be involved if that were the case being that the CIA, M16, Mossad, and a plethora of other ententes involvement in the area. I think Obama and Kerry found a way out when Russia and Assad willingly agreed to destroy all chemical weapons after they saw there was no support from Americans or the English for a Syrian campaign. We're sick of war.

I do believe you may have some facts mixed up. I last read that the FSA commanders won't quit until Assad is removed and once he is removed only then would they join forces with the Syrian armed forces to wipe out Al Qaeda and other terrorist factions.

....and this weekend, in The Ukraine, when Senator John McCain was running off in interviews to publicly degrade and almost call out Putin on policy and such? He probably asked himself beforehand.....

'Self? What could Putin possibly do about it, which matters???'.

Putin has apparently given his version of an answer.

This could get messy quick if Putin decides to push this like he really means it. SOMEONE DID use chemical warheads there. Of that, there really is no question. Who, is the only question. I've always said and I still do....Assad had nothing to gain and in reality DID gain nothing while it would have been risking everything. He very nearly DID lose everything ... and still gained nothing.

Someone used them, though, and that rock is one McCain and everyone else might prefer not get kicked over.

reply to post by Swills


News on the ground is terribly sketchy.
iranian.com...
www.arabianbusiness.com...

You have to remember the Saudi's and their gulf state allies have a huge stake in this. I think it's a mistake to believe the U.S./U.K./France must be controlling the whole damn game. I think in this case the Saudi's are running the show and the U.S doesn't have much control over it. I do admit I don't tend to take the popular view around here that the U.S. is the devil that does everything in the world.

reply to post by Swills


I have said the same thing hundreds of times on this board.

Russia is correct. The attack was a false flag.

The rebels are in possession of Syrian made as well as foreign made chemicals. It is not difficult for them to pull this off with foreign logistics and financial support.

The reason Syria conflict is dragging is due to outside influence over various parties.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


Someone did use them and if I had to point my finger at a group I'd blame Al Qaeda because no other group is so gun ho on killing anyone and everyone then them. Maybe the rebels knew about it and turned a blind eye or maybe they they helped, but as you've said, what did Assad gain from killing civilians? What did he have to lose? What did the rebels and Al Qaeda have to gain and what did they have to lose?

reply to post by antonia


Good point, they don't control the whole game but its they who I focus on. They are in bed with the Saudi's, who are never to be trusted.

The easiest thing to forget in all of this; is that the Syrian military rolled into ground zero for battle right after the chemical weapon strike. Striking an enemy with heavy ballistics/weapons and then rolling up on them as they are shocked, scattered, and disorganized is a very common military tactic...

Syria has chemical weapons currently being removed and destroyed, they had the weapons and the capability to use them, no one disagrees: it was a chemical weapon and in my opinion they did the tactic I mentioned above.

Now if they were not rolling into the area armed for a full fire fight right after the attack... then yes there could be a reasonable doubt. But no they shocked and awed with some nasty business, and rolled in right after in an effort to clean up those fortunate enough to have survived the attack.

reply to post by BigBrotherDarkness


You are repeating what is reported in 'controlled' western media.

We often hear one side of the story as English medium media is controlled by the West. Syria government does not have the resources or the machinery to put its view across the world audience.

Syrian government would naturally hide any act of chemical use, even if it is by opposition. Why? Because The opposition is a guerrilla army, and the legal and visible government in Damascus gets the blame, whoever is the perpetrator.

reply to post by BigBrotherDarkness


Actually, we know for certain that both sides had chemical weapons and Sarin in particular. Not only did the FSA think gassing rabbits with it to share on the net was cute or something....FSA people were busted in Turkey with Sarin and intentions to stage an attack to bring action against Syria.

They tend to be their own worst enemies in all this, consistently.

reply to post by GargIndia


No... what an asumption you've made. I am repeating what a few friends on my forum said that live there told me. Many people around the world have to take to non blacklisted regular sites to get the word out of whats going on because yes, news/social media online is heavily censored and slanted one way or another as well...

INTERNET it's all over the world... translation programs if needed. Live instant penpals just about anywhere all over the world if you want them. There's absolutely no need for controlled news outlets when you have or can have friends in every major and minor city in the world, and get the honest story straight from several horses mouths instead... why people would rather talk about some stupid curtains they got on Facebook instead of explore the world and others in it I dunno.

Wrabbit2000
reply to post by BigBrotherDarkness

 

Actually, we know for certain that both sides had chemical weapons and Sarin in particular. Not only did the FSA think gassing rabbits with it to share on the net was cute or something....FSA people were busted in Turkey with Sarin and intentions to stage an attack to bring action against Syria.

They tend to be their own worst enemies in all this, consistently.

Exactly. If you still think after this that it was Syria that did the attack, then there is nothing anyone can say that will make you think otherwise. And I would say your capacity for rational thought is compromised.

reply to post by BigBrotherDarkness


Whatever media you use, you need considerable resources and numbers.

You should not assume that a pressured regime like Assad can accomplish PR effectively. The regime is more concerned with its survival.

See, I don't care if Assad falls. It makes no difference to me. My only concern is the way events are stage managed without regard to people's lives. Innocents are dying in conflicts worldwide, and there is no attention to that. Even innocent Syrian Christians are being killed by "rebels" (Al Queda).

reply to post by GargIndia


The media is email directly from people that actually live in Syria...

I have some stories about the Turkey business too that never hit media from people that live there... remember the park protest? You would not believe the human rights violations that went on during that... out right murder. See here in the US my local, even with the right to assemble in peacful protest we get mace/pepper spray/tear gas... all constitutionally illegal, but made legal with other laws to directly conflict with it to over ride the right... in my opinion it does not over ride it constitutional law came first. These places in the news do not have these rights for the most part, when they go too far against human rights in their fighting and conflicts the UN yells who wants to help stop this craziness? We're jaded here in the US and have trouble looking past our knowledge and personal experiences, like waddya mean a woman can't drive in some places or go to college sounds ridiculous... we apply our standards of living and laws without a second thought to those with different ones, like can't even comprehend it anoy other way.

But I'm getting off topic, get some friends in these places you have interest and concerns about... pen pal back and forth get the real story from those actually living there, is my advice, you can IM them in real time, it's odd that very few people actually use the internet for reaching out to people around the world and broadening their knowledge of another culture by talking with someone that lives it.

I personally don't care for either side fighting in Syria, both sides agendas are bad for the Syrian people... they are in a lose lose situation no matter who comes out on top.

Not really surprised at the latest accusations by Russia of a 'staged' event.

A Belgian writer held hostage for five months in Syria said that his own rebel captors denied that President Bashar al-Assad was responsible for the Ghouta massacre. Pierre Piccinin said that he and fellow hostage Domenico Quirico, an Italian war reporter, heard their jailers talking about the chemical weapon attack and saying that Assad was not to blame.

Quirico confirmed to La Stampa newspaper that they had eavesdropped such a conversation through a closed door.

Assad not Responsible for Ghouta Gas Attack
www.democraticunderground.com...

It was reported that, the rebel group al-Nusra, which is linked to al-Qaeda, did the gas attack in Damascus, using gas supplied by Prince Bandar of Saudi Arabia.

A group of journalists, one of whom works for the Associated Press, report that both rebels and local residents in Ghouta accuse Saudi Prince Bandar bin Sultan of providing the chemical weapons to the al-Qaida linked rebel group.

Syrians in Ghouta claim that Saudi Arabia supplied the rebels behind the chemical attack of 21 August 2013

Witnesses Of Gas Attack Say Saudis Supplied Rebels With Chemical Weapons
www.mintpressnews.com...

www.facebook.com...

It seems American reporter Dale Gavlak has been suspended by the Associated Press as a result of the 29th August 2013 Syria article published on Mint Press News.
www.mintpressnews.com...

www.facebook.com...

MintPress News (MPN) is an American news website which launched in February 2013, based in Minnesota. The website describes itself as an independent non-partisan journalism start up providing long form feature reporting and investigations through the lens of social justice and human rights covering "national politics, policy, civil liberties, foreign affairs, energy,

She also received threats from Saudi Arabia to “end her career” after she helped revealing a story that militants were behind a chemical weapons attack in Syria.
www.presstv.com...

Controversy surrounding MintPress Syria Chemical Weapons Ghouta Report
www.globalresearch.ca...