Rebels Admit Responsibility for Chemical Weapons Attack

[Jeff]

Well President Obama I guess we should learn all the facts before shooting off at the mouth, but seriously man does this make ya nervous or what , terrorist with chemical weapons, not a good thing for sure.


Syrian rebels in the Damascus suburb of Ghouta have admitted to Associated Press correspondent Dale Gavlak that they were responsible for last week’s chemical weapons incident which western powers have blamed on Bashar Al-Assad’s forces, revealing that the casualties were the result of an accident caused by rebels mishandling chemical weapons provided to them by Saudi Arabia.

http://www.infowars.com/rebels-admit-responsibility-for-chemical-weapons-attack/

[jafar00]

Considering the sources for this story Russia (http://voiceofrussia.com/news/2013_08_30/Syrian-rebels-take-responsibility-for-the-chemical-attack-admitting-the-weapons-were-provided-by-Saudis-1203/), and Iran (http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/08/30/321260/syria-militants-use-saudisupplied-gas/) I would not believe it. Even they name unnamed and unverified sources.

Meanwhile the evidence to the contrary is in.


The Attack:
Multiple streams of intelligence indicate that the regime executed a rocket and artillery attack against the Damascus suburbs in the early hours of August 21. Satellite detections corroborate that attacks from a regime-controlled area struck neighborhoods where the chemical attacks reportedly occurred – including Kafr Batna, Jawbar, ‘Ayn Tarma, Darayya, and Mu’addamiyah. This includes the detection of rocket launches from regime controlled territory early in the morning, approximately 90 minutes before the first report of a chemical attack appeared in social media. The lack of flight activity or missile launches also leads us to conclude that the regime used rockets in the attack.
Local social media reports of a chemical attack in the Damascus suburbs began at 2:30 a.m. local time on August 21. Within the next four hours there were thousands of social media reports on this attack from at least 12 different locations in the Damascus area. Multiple accounts described chemical-filled rockets impacting opposition-controlled areas.
Three hospitals in the Damascus area received approximately 3,600 patients displaying symptoms consistent with nerve agent exposure in less than three hours on the morning of August 21, according to a highly credible international humanitarian organization. The reported symptoms, and the epidemiological pattern of events – characterized by the massive influx of patients in a short period of time, the origin of the patients, and the contamination of medical and first aid workers – were consistent with mass exposure to a nerve agent. We also received reports from international and Syrian medical personnel on the ground.
We have identified one hundred videos attributed to the attack, many of which show large numbers of bodies exhibiting physical signs consistent with, but not unique to, nerve agent exposure. The reported symptoms of victims included unconsciousness, foaming from the nose and mouth, constricted pupils, rapid heartbeat, and difficulty breathing. Several of the videos show what appear to be numerous fatalities with no visible injuries, which is consistent with death from chemical weapons, and inconsistent with death from small-arms, high-explosive munitions or blister agents. At least 12 locations are portrayed in the publicly available videos, and a sampling of those videos confirmed that some were shot at the general times and locations described in the footage.
We assess the Syrian opposition does not have the capability to fabricate all of the videos, physical symptoms verified by medical personnel and NGOs, and other information associated with this chemical attack.
We have a body of information, including past Syrian practice, that leads us to conclude that regime officials were witting of and directed the attack on August 21. We intercepted communications involving a senior official intimately familiar with the offensive who confirmed that chemical weapons were used by the regime on August 21 and was concerned with the U.N. inspectors obtaining evidence. On the afternoon of August 21, we have intelligence that Syrian chemical weapons personnel were directed to cease operations. At the same time, the regime intensified the artillery barrage targeting many of the neighborhoods where chemical attacks occurred. In the 24 hour period after the attack, we detected indications of artillery and rocket fire at a rate approximately four times higher than the ten preceding days. We continued to see indications of sustained shelling in the neighborhoods up until the morning of August 26.
To conclude, there is a substantial body of information that implicates the Syrian government’s responsibility in the chemical weapons attack that took place on August 21.As indicated, there is additional intelligence that remains classified because of sources and methods concerns that is being provided to Congress and international partners.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/08/30/government-assessment-syrian-government-s-use-chemical-weapons-august-21

[Jeff]

Considering the sources for this story Russia (http://voiceofrussia.com/news/2013_08_30/Syrian-rebels-take-responsibility-for-the-chemical-attack-admitting-the-weapons-were-provided-by-Saudis-1203/), and Iran (http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/08/30/321260/syria-militants-use-saudisupplied-gas/) I would not believe it. Even they name unnamed and unverified sources.

Meanwhile the evidence to the contrary is in.


http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/08/30/government-assessment-syrian-government-s-use-chemical-weapons-august-21

You may very well be right jafar but it seems rather premature to be planning to bomb a country when we stil don't have all the answers, and ya have to remember jafar Obama ran on we don't belong in Iraq and he would get our troops ( at one point ) out of there in as little as 6 months and then get Bin laden and get out troops home, he stated on many occasions we don't need to be all over the world fighting we need to take care of America and the Democrats echoed his thoughts, now he as well as them have changed there minds.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

You may very well be right jafar but it seems rather premature to be planning to bomb a country when we stil don't have all the answers, and ya have to remember jafar Obama ran on we don't belong in Iraq and he would get our troops ( at one point ) out of there in as little as 6 months and then get Bin laden and get out troops home, he stated on many occasions we don't need to be all over the world fighting we need to take care of America and the Democrats echoed his thoughts, now he as well as them have changed there minds. Obama wanting to strike and cripple the Syrian government military has absolutely nothing to do with any response to a chem attack. He just wants to try to help the Al Qaeda led terrorist rebels to win control and another nation becomes a future member of the muslim Caliphate that the so-called "Arab Spring" is all about bringing to life.. Its illegal by our laws for him to aid those terrorist groups so this scam was engineered and blame given to the Syrian Government forces. A false flag attack if ever there was one IMHO.--Tyr

[jafar00]

You may very well be right jafar but it seems rather premature to be planning to bomb a country when we stil don't have all the answers, and ya have to remember jafar Obama ran on we don't belong in Iraq and he would get our troops ( at one point ) out of there in as little as 6 months and then get Bin laden and get out troops home, he stated on many occasions we don't need to be all over the world fighting we need to take care of America and the Democrats echoed his thoughts, now he as well as them have changed there minds.

A surgical slap on the wrist is what Obama is after. Not a full war although I admit with Russia, Iran and China backing Assad, it could be what he will get.


Obama wanting to strike and cripple the Syrian government military has absolutely nothing to do with any response to a chem attack. He just wants to try to help the Al Qaeda led terrorist rebels to win control and another nation becomes a future member of the muslim Caliphate that the so-called "Arab Spring" is all about bringing to life.. Its illegal by our laws for him to aid those terrorist groups so this scam was engineered and blame given to the Syrian Government forces. A false flag attack if ever there was one IMHO.--Tyr

Remember it was an "Arab Spring" that brought about the downfall of the Ottomans.

[DragonStryk72]

A surgical slap on the wrist is what Obama is after. Not a full war although I admit with Russia, Iran and China backing Assad, it could be what he will get.



Remember it was an "Arab Spring" that brought about the downfall of the Ottomans.

Yeah, but Obama's talking too big a game for a small surgical slap, and that's a problem. He's using language that has been used before, back in about 2004, when Bush was getting ready to enter Iraq. He's already said that if he can't get congressional approval, he'll go in without it. Who does that sound like?

[jafar00]

Yeah, but Obama's talking too big a game for a small surgical slap, and that's a problem. He's using language that has been used before, back in about 2004, when Bush was getting ready to enter Iraq. He's already said that if he can't get congressional approval, he'll go in without it. Who does that sound like?

It does sound kinda familiar except that this time, Assad has done something to deserve it. 100,000+ civilian deaths is too high a price to pay before someone does something and the surrounding Arab nations have been made too impotent to act.

[tailfins]

It does sound kinda familiar except that this time, Assad has done something to deserve it. 100,000+ civilian deaths is too high a price to pay before someone does something and the surrounding Arab nations have been made too impotent to act.

Few if any US interests are at stake in Syria. Iran should be the target. The mission should be similar to render Iran incapable of waging war.

[Kathianne]

It does sound kinda familiar except that this time, Assad has done something to deserve it. 100,000+ civilian deaths is too high a price to pay before someone does something and the surrounding Arab nations have been made too impotent to act.

But the 100k has nothing to do with this, it was 'the red line' that did. This is not serious policy. The bottom line is that no one, including Obama has done anything to punish Assad for the atrocities, including previously known chemical attacks. Seems that this just qualified into 'the throwing around of a buncha chemicals' to make Obama pay attention, then again, could have more to do with the budget that was supposed to be 'the issue' when Congress returned...

[logroller]

It does sound kinda familiar except that this time, Assad has done something to deserve it. 100,000+ civilian deaths is too high a price to pay before someone does something and the surrounding Arab nations have been made too impotent to act.
And saddam didn't do anything to deserve it? Arguably saddam was more formidable, military-wise, but he was hardly a benevolent dictator. Civilian death estimates under saddam range from a quarter to upwards of a million. Nor should it be ignored the number of civilian deaths since the invasion--100,000+ Civilians die in war, civil or otherwise--plus the millions more displaced.

The question is whether foreign intervention is justifiable, and by what rationale?

If the ends need be desirable then, given the current discourse in Iraq, where violence against civilians is still routine: signs point to no. I can hardly believe that syria would enjoy a much better result.
If there was widespread ethnic cleansing, I'd be more persuaded, but I don't see this that way and previous US actions weren't met with widespread support in the end--quite the opposite in fact. You're free to disagree-- maybe you can convince Australia to go proxy as the world police and enjoy all the spoils, we've had quite enough.

[Jeff]

It does sound kinda familiar except that this time, Assad has done something to deserve it. 100,000+ civilian deaths is too high a price to pay before someone does something and the surrounding Arab nations have been made too impotent to act.

jafar you honestly believe Saddam did nothing to deserve it, how about sending money to the terrorist or paying families to strap bombs to there kids to kill soldiers , if you are a terrorist or support terrorist you are our enemy

[Drummond]

It does sound kinda familiar except that this time, Assad has done something to deserve it. 100,000+ civilian deaths is too high a price to pay before someone does something and the surrounding Arab nations have been made too impotent to act.

Do I understand this correctly ? Saddam didn't do anything to deserve action being taken against him and his regime ???

You're joking !!

I can type you out a list of justifications for the 2003 invasion, Jafar, and you KNOW I can !! You know full well what that list would contain.

But then ... heyy .. Saddam helped bankroll HAMAS, now didn't he ? H'm. Given your support for Hamas ...

[jafar00]

Do I understand this correctly ? Saddam didn't do anything to deserve action being taken against him and his regime ???

You're joking !!

I can type you out a list of justifications for the 2003 invasion, Jafar, and you KNOW I can !! You know full well what that list would contain.

But then ... heyy .. Saddam helped bankroll HAMAS, now didn't he ? H'm. Given your support for Hamas ...

Wasn't it about 9/11 and some cockamamy story about 45 minutes to deploy chemical weapons? Oh, and he nationalised the oil.

[DragonStryk72]

It does sound kinda familiar except that this time, Assad has done something to deserve it. 100,000+ civilian deaths is too high a price to pay before someone does something and the surrounding Arab nations have been made too impotent to act.

... Saddam Hussein used mustard gas on his own people, Jafar, and that was just one of his transgressions over the years of dealing with him. He was a brutal warlord, man, whatever you may think of our reasons for walking in there, he was a sadistic murdering bastard.

[DragonStryk72]

Wasn't it about 9/11 and some cockamamy story about 45 minutes to deploy chemical weapons? Oh, and he nationalised the oil.

Actually, we didn't care about the oil getting nationalized, really. Let's see: He repeatedly refused to let the UN inspectors in that he had agreed to accept after unconditionally surrendering the Gulf war, and would push it until basically two days before we would commit to military action, then he would quickly let the inspectors in, and when we pulled back, declare victory over the USA. That was for 14 years, at least twice a year.

So when we started getting information that Saddam had chemical weapons, we weren't precisely surprised, and it made a degree of sense, since he was doing his whole "deny the inspectors" game again. Now, he was arguing over allowing the inspectors into mosques, but before you take offense, he really did used to stash weapons, troops, and whatnot in them. As well, since he's already used chemical attacks on his own people previously, we had to assume that if he got a hold of a set, he was going to use them.

As to the "story", that's actually accurate. If Saddam decided to fire at us, we'd only get 45 minutes to evac. Now, it's more likely that he would use his weapons to do as he did before, take over Kuwait or one of the other small arab countries about, and basically use the chemical weapons to hold that country hostage.

[Drummond]

Wasn't it about 9/11 and some cockamamy story about 45 minutes to deploy chemical weapons? Oh, and he nationalised the oil.

Now, be honest, Jafar ...

Is THIS what motivates you to look upon Saddam with a more charitable outlook than the trash deserved ?

http://www.scotsman.com/news/world/saddam-bankrolled-palestinian-terrorists-1-558334


SADDAM Hussein’s links to terrorism have been proven by documents showing he helped to fund the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine.

The PFLP, whose history of terrorism dates back to the "black September" hijackings of 1970, was personally vetted by Saddam to receive oil vouchers worth 40 million.

The deal has been uncovered by US investigators, trawling millions of pages of documents showing a network of diplomats bribed by Saddam’s regimes, and political parties who qualified for backhanded payments from Baghdad.

The Iraq Survey Group (ISG), which is still working its way through 20,000 boxes of documents from Saddam’s Baath party discovered only recently, found a list of pressure groups bankrolled by Saddam.

Using the United Nations’ own oil-for-food scheme - ironically intended as a sanction to control the behaviour of his dictatorship - Saddam gave Awad Ammora & Partners, a Syrian company, two million barrels of oil.

Documents handed over to US authorities by a former Iraqi oil minister only four months ago show that this was a front for the PFLP - which was then embarked on a spate of car bombings aimed at Israeli officials.

The Iraqi records show only one six-month period - suggesting the payments could go on for much longer. While some allocations to the likes of Russian political parties were not cashed in, the PFLP oil deal was carried out in full.

Since its inception after the Six-Day War of 1967, the PFLP has been dedicated to violence - and for this reason split from the Palestinian Liberation Organisation (PLO) when it accepted the peace process.

Its first atrocity came in September 1970 when its members hijacked four aircraft bound for the United States. All planes were blown up on the ground after the passengers were evacuated. A hijacking at Lod airport in Israel two years later left 24 dead.

Saddam's regime was seen to be a legitimate target in the War on Terror ... and his ultimate non-compliance with UN Resolution 1441 was the catalyst for the 2003 invasion. But there were all manner of justifications possible for acting to depose that regime, consistent with War on Terror objectives, and the article I've posted gives you a taste of why.

[Arbo]

So those that supported the war in Iraq are supporting a similar action in Syria?

[Gaffer]

So those that supported the war in Iraq are supporting a similar action in Syria?

Nope.

[Nukeman]

So those that supported the war in Iraq are supporting a similar action in Syria?Didn't support Iraq, we had no business being there and we have NO business going into Syria..

WE need to take care of our own first, if the Arabs are soo concerned about Assad let them take him out. The last thing we need to do is arm AlQueda and take out their opposition. No one thinks that the reason Assad employs such strong tactics is he knows the type of "people" he is dealing with.

Over the years I have come to the realization that the only thing most of the folks over there understand is a strong fist adn without it there is chaos and destruction.. IMHO

[Little-Acorn]

This story has been popping up in many places over the last week.

Each time a different city. Each time the story being told to a different reporter. But each story itself, exactly the same, with the same descriptions of the weapons.

And in each case, they want us to believe that one mishandled weapon, in one tunnel, killed 1,400 people.

I call bullshit.

Sounds like a planted story to me, someone trying to shift the blame onto the rebels instead of onto Assad's regime.

Nope, I can't prove that. Oddly, the way the story is set up, no one can prove it's true either, or even where it came from.

[tailfins]

So those that supported the war in Iraq are supporting a similar action in Syria?

Like Bibi Netanyahu said: We attacked the wrong country.