UN Inspectors Gas Attack Report: A Manipulated Fraud
by Stephen Lendman
A separate article explained. Crime scene evidence was manipulated. Doing so made it worthless.
UN inspectors mentioned problems. They didn’t highlight them. Their summary fact sheet ignored them. So did major media reports.
Nothing links Syrian forces to Ghouta’s attack. Plenty suggests insurgents were responsible. Rockets were launched from territory they held.
Pro-government supporters were targeted. They were civilian men, women and children. Why would Assad attack his own people? Why would he do it with UN inspectors close by? Why would he shoot himself in the foot?
Many questions remain unanswered. Why did UN inspectors rush to meet an artificial deadline? Why did they agree to operate under opposition control?
Why did they use tainted evidence? They admitted it was tampered with and moved. It likely was planted before they arrived. Doing so made it suspect and worthless.
Most samples tested contained no toxic chemical agents. Nothing indicated whether sarin found was factory or homemade. Munitions fragments could have come from anywhere.
Separate evidence suggested video and photo evidence was fake. Inspectors provided no body count numbers.
Their entire report was unprofessional. It was slapdashed together. It was done quickly. It was worthless.
It wasn’t worth the paper it was written on. It’s of no scientific significance. It willfully deceived. It did so disgracefully.
Washington, Britain, France, Israel, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and other rogue Arab League states want war. Perhaps they plan launching it based on fabricated evidence.
It wouldn’t be the first time. All wars are based on lies. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov expressed concern.
“Moscow has serious reasons to believe that the use of chemical weapons near Damascus (was) a provocative act,” he said.
“Russia is ready to participate in the activities to ensure security along the perimeter of the sites where Syrian experts and experts of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) will work.”
Otherwise their efforts may be compromised. Anti-Assad warmongers reject peaceful conflict resolution. They want UN Charter Chapter VII authorization for war.
Article 41 states:
“The Security Council may decide what measures not involving the use of armed force are to be employed to give effect to its decisions, and it may call upon the Members of the United Nations to apply such measures.”
“These may include complete or partial interruption of economic relations and of rail, sea, air, postal, telegraphic, radio, and other means of communication, and the severance of diplomatic relations.”
Article 42 states:
“Should the Security Council consider that measures provided for in Article 41 would be inadequate or have proved to be inadequate, it may take such action by air, sea, or land forces as may be necessary to maintain or restore international peace and security.”
“Such action may include demonstrations, blockade, and other operations by air, sea, or land forces of Members of the United Nations.”
Article 43 (1) states:
“All Members of the United Nations, in order to contribute to the maintenance of international peace and security, undertake to make available to the Security Council, on its call and in accordance with a special agreement or agreements, armed forces, assistance, and facilities, including rights of passage, necessary for the purpose of maintaining international peace and security.”
Clause 2 states:
“Such agreement or agreements shall govern the numbers and types of forces, their degree of readiness and general location, and the nature of the facilities and assistance to be provided.”
Clause 3 states:
“The agreement or agreements shall be negotiated as soon as possible on the initiative of the Security Council.”
“They shall be concluded between the Security Council and Members or between the Security Council and groups of Members and shall be subject to ratification by the signatory states in accordance with their respective constitutional processes.”
UN Charter provisions prioritize peaceful conflict resolution. War is a last option. Security Council authorization is required to wage it.
Lavrov prioritizes peace. He wants Geneva II convened as soon as possible. He wants anti-Assad forces pressured to participate. He opposes Chapter VII authorization for war.
He and Kerry discussed it last weekend in Geneva, he said. UN resolution language must exclude it, he stressed.
“If there are some cases of refusal from cooperation or some reports about the obstacles from either side or the reports about someone’s use of chemical weapons then the UN Security Council will consider this situation,” he added.
Measures should be undertaken to avoid foreign intervention. “But if convincing data is produced the UN Security Council should take proper measures against the violators, these actions will be taken.”
“The Russian-US document holds that we want to focus on those possibilities that are laid down in the Chemical Weapons Convention, particularly Article 8.”
“This article holds that when the organization (OPCW) faces some difficulties in its work to destroy the chemical weapons in a country, it is empowered to address (them) in the UN Security Council.”
“Therefore, this link between the professional work of the inspectors, who will be feeling at the site how this is going on, and the UN Security Council, which will control progress of their work, will receive regular and urgent information, if some problems arise, will guarantee a quite reliable legal mechanism of supervising this process.”
“We should not discuss Chapter 7 or 6 or anything else. The top task is to fulfill a plan for the destruction of Syrian chemical weapons.”
“We call for the Russian-US agreements to be fulfilled and are prepared to promote actively those approaches, which were agreed upon in Geneva in the previous week.”
On September 11, Press TV headlined “Former US officials warn Obama of false intelligence on Syria,” saying:
“A dozen former US military and intelligence officials called the August 21 attack staged.”
“We regret to inform you that some of our former co-workers are telling us, categorically, that contrary to the claims of your administration, the most reliable intelligence shows that Bashar al-Assad was NOT responsible for the chemical incident that killed and injured Syrian civilians on August 21, and that British intelligence officials also know this,” they said.
“You have not been fully informed because your advisers decided to afford you” plausible deniability.
“We have been down this road before – with President George W. Bush, to whom we addressed our first VIPS memorandum immediately after Colin Powell’s Feb. 5, 2003 UN speech, in which he peddled fraudulent ‘intelligence to support attacking Iraq.”
“(A) chemical incident of some sort did cause fatalities and injuries on August 21 in a suburb of Damascus.” Anti-Assad militants staged it. They did so “to bring the United States into war.”
The incident was “a pre-planned provocation by the Syrian opposition and its Saudi and Turkish supporters.”
Netanyahu wants war. He wants “Washington more deeply engaged in” waging it.
“(W)ith outspoken urging coming from Israel and those Americans who lobby for Israeli interests, this priority Israeli objective is becoming crystal clear.”
Reuters headlined “Russia says no proof Assad was behind chemical attack.”
No evidence suggests it. Lavrov said “there is no answer to a number of questions we have asked.”
Nothing indicates whether alleged weapons were factory produced or homemade. “We have very serious grounds to” dispute what’s been reported, he said.
Insurgents committed many previous provocations. They were caught red-handed using chemical weapons. Significant evidence suggests they used them in Ghouta.
Syria accused Western powers of wrecking chances for peace. They’re supporting insurgents. They’re supplying more weapons.
They “exposed the truth of their aims.” They want their will imposed. They want ordinary Syrians having no say.
“Discussion of political and constitutional legitimacy in Syria is the exclusive right of the Syrian people.”
International law prohibits interfering in the internal affairs of other countries. Western powers want war. They deplore peace.
Their actions contradict their rhetoric. Saying they endorse peaceful conflict resolution doesn’t wash. They support “groups practicing violence and terrorism in Syria.”
Assad will remain president “as long as the people desire it. Whoever is not pleased by this reality should not go to the Geneva conference.”
Obama asked Congress to authorize war. So far it’s not forthcoming. Legislators can’t circumvent Security Council authority. It has final say on matters concerning war and peace.
Obama’s not deterred. His war plans are delayed. They remain firm. Expect another fabricated pretext. Expect it used to attack Syria. It’s longstanding US practice. It’s the American way.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at email@example.com.
His new book is titled “Banker Occupation: Waging Financial War on Humanity.”
Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com.
Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network.
It airs Fridays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.