Assad’s Guilt: What’s Wrong With This Picture

Perhaps the first question that ought to be addressed is:  Who occupies Idlib province?   Idlib province contains the largest populated area controlled by anti-Assad rebels – both nationalist Free Syrian Army groups and powerful Islamist factions including the former al Qaeda-linked Nusra Front.
 
These are the people the United States government, through covert CIA programs and through Saudi, Turk and other allies, have been supporting.  Those are the groups that are not only holding Idlib but have been trained in the use of chemical weapons by U.S. contractors. 
 
This classic “atrocity porn,” as it is called, the horrific images and eyewitness testimony that have come from Idlib in the wake of the attack, did not come from ABC or CNN. Western journalists wouldn’t dare set foot in Idlib because they would be abducted and killed immediately.  
 
Video and other images released came from a notorious pro-opposition outlet based in the UK, known as the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights and picked up by Reuters,  The SOHR is run by a Syrian Sunni Muslim who owns a clothes shop in Coventry. Born Osama Suleiman, Rami Abdul Rahman adopted a pseudonym during his years of activism in Syria, and is pro-opposition and anti-Assad.  Other false flag operations have been sourced to his publicity.  
 
Before investigations could be conducted and for evidence to emerge, Federica Mogherini, the Italian politician High Representative of the European Union (EU) for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, condemned the Syrian government and said that “Assad regime bears responsibility for ‘awful’ Syria ‘chemical’ attack.” Numerous other officials, including Netanyahu, joined the chorus.
 

In Seymour Hersh’s “The Red Line or the Rat Line,” Hersh makes clear that the accusation that Assad had been responsible for the notorious chemical attack in a Damascus suburb in 2013 was false because lab testing of a sample taken did not match up with known characteristics of chemicals possessed by Assad.  The rush to judgment in that case could have led to a major world conflict if Obama had not backed off his “red line” ultimatum..  

Hersh goes on to point out, “The joint chiefs also knew that the Obama administration’s public claims that only the Syrian army had access to sarin were wrong. The American and British intelligence communities had been aware since the spring of 2013 that some rebel units in Syria were developing chemical weapons. On 20 June analysts for the US Defense Intelligence Agency issued a highly classified five-page ‘talking points’ briefing for the DIA’s deputy director, David Shedd, which stated that al-Nusra maintained a sarin production cell: its programme, the paper said, was ‘the most advanced sarin plot since al-Qaida’s pre-9/11 effort’. (According to a Defense Department consultant, US intelligence has long known that al-Qaida experimented with chemical weapons, and has a video of one of its gas experiments with dogs.) The DIA paper went on: ‘Previous IC [intelligence community] focus had been almost entirely on Syrian CW [chemical weapons] stockpiles; now we see ANF attempting to make its own CW … Al-Nusrah Front’s relative freedom of operation within Syria leads us to assess the group’s CW aspirations will be difficult to disrupt in the future.’ The paper drew on classified intelligence from numerous agencies: ‘Turkey and Saudi-based chemical facilitators,’ it said, ‘were attempting to obtain sarin precursors in bulk, tens of kilograms, likely for the anticipated large scale production effort in Syria.’

 
It is probably no coincidence that, in coordination with intelligence obtained from U.S. sources, and taking advantage of the US missile strike on the Syrian airbase, Al-Nusra Front terrorists launched a major offensive to gain control of strategic oil areas near Palmyra, but failed.  The Syrian armed forces had some difficulty crushing the offensive because their air cover would normally have come from the Shayrat airbase which operates as a hub for anti-ISIS activity in the region.
 
Another factor which points the finger at rebel forces is that local sources have claimed that many of those dead from the chemical weapons were from Majdal and Khattab, where about 250 people were kidnapped by al Qaeda last week.
 
1-24-696x463
As seen in the above picture, the al Qaeda-linked White Helmets are handling the corpses of people without sufficient safety gear.  No gloves are used, and sarin penetrates the skin immediately.  
 
Jim Jatras, a former US diplomat, foreign policy adviser to the Senate GOP leadership, and lobbyist, interviewed  by Ed Schultz, says, “Here is Assad winning the war, going into peace talks in a very strong position, seeing the beginning of Russian and American cooperation, not only against ISIS but also against Al Qaeda, which is the group that is holding Idlib, and suddenly Assad and Putin would up-turn all of that, use chemical weapons which they deny having, thereby revealing that they have them, just for the sheer evil joy of killing people — doesn’t something seem wrong here?”
 
As John Wright so aptly said, “Regarding the attack in Idlib, what we can say with certainty is that a time when pro-government forces in Syria were in the ascendancy on the ground, and when the Syrian government was making significant progress on the diplomatic front, it would have constituted an act of ineffable self-harm to launch a chemical weapons attack of any kind, much less one of this magnitude. In fact it would have conformed to the actions of a government that was intent on bringing about its own demise. “
 
The Russian Defense Ministry says the US missile strike on a Syrian airfield wasn’t very effective, with only 23 out of 59 Tomahawk missiles reaching their target. The locations of the remaining 36 missiles’ impact is now unknown, the ministry added.
 
The runway, taxiways and the Syrian aircraft on the parking apron remained undamaged, Russia’s Defense Ministry spokesman said in a statement.
The ministry described the combat efficiency of the strike as “quite poor.”
 
It’s really sad, but perhaps Donald Trump couldn’t resist his inner Hillary Clinton from firing up, or that he has been pulling the wool over the public’s eyes for some time about his intentions.   It’s certainly disappointing to all his supporters who fervently believed that he was anti-war and would resist the efforts of the war machine to consume him.   He is now considering the option of Assad’s removal — an option he dismissed as no longer on the table just days ago — and is investigating the involvement of Russia in the chemical attack — an interesting development, since no investigation of the attack itself has ever taken place.     
 
What also must be taken into consideration is the fact that the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), an organization supported by the US, confirmed back in June 2014 that the process to destroy Syria’s entire stock of chemical weapons had been completed.  If any investigation of the use of chemical weapons had been made, they would have been involved.