Anti-Assad Death Squads Responsible for Gas Attack
by Stephen Lendman
Assad’s wrongfully blamed for Ghouta’s gas attack. Evidence shows insurgents bear full responsibility. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov was clear and unequivocal, saying:
“We have the most serious grounds to believe (Ghouta’s attack) was a provocation.” Assad had nothing to do with it.
“There is no answer to a number of questions we have asked, such as where the weapon was made – at an official factory or using homemade methods,” Lavrov added.
Clear evidence shows insurgents have sarin and other toxic chemicals. Pentagon contractors trained them in their handling and use.
They have surface-to-surface missiles to launch them. They have motive, opportunity and capability to do so. They’ve done it multiple times before. They’ve been caught red-handed with toxic agents.
According to Russian political analyst Sergei Markov:
“We hear this argument that the rebels are not technically or morally capable of doing such a thing, and we simply don’t accept that.”
“We’d like to see previous instances (of toxic chemicals used) properly investigated, because you will find that the rebels have used poison gas before in this conflict.”
“Logic dictates, and the evidence indicates, that this is also what happened near Damascus on Aug 21.”
“It would be a tragedy if the rebels succeeded in getting the West to go to war for them because of this. “
On September 5, McClatchy publications headlined “Russia gave UN 100-page report in July blaming Syrian rebels for Aleppo sarin attack,” saying:
“(T)he report included detailed scientific analysis of samples that Russian technicians collected at the site of the alleged attack, Khan al Asal in northern Syria. The attack killed 26 people.” Another 86 were harmed.
At the time, UN spokesman Farhan Haq acknowledged receiving the report. It wasn’t released. It was ignored. It was suppressed. Doing so reflects coverup and denial. It shows UN support for Obama’s imperial agenda.
According to McClatchy:
Russia’s report contained “scientific detail.” It contrasts markedly with “the far shorter intelligence summaries that the United States, Britain and France have released to justify their assertion that the Syrian government launched chemical weapons against (Ghouta) on Aug. 21.”
“The longest of those summaries, by the French, ran nine pages. Each relies primarily on circumstantial evidence to make its case, and they disagree with one another on some details, including the number of people who died in the attack.”
Russia’s investigation conformed to strict Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) protocol procedures.
Evidence collected went to OPCW-certified laboratories in Russia for analysis.
“The Russian report is specific,” the ministry statement said. “It is a scientific and technical document.”
Lab analysis said Russia’s report showed shells used “w(ere) not regular Syrian army ammunition.” They were “artisan-type (munitions) similar to unguided rocket projectiles produced in the north of Syria by the so-called gang ‘Bashair An-Nasr.’ “
Soil and shell samples contained sarin. It was “not synthesized in an industrial environment.” It wasn’t how sarin is made today.
It resembled what was “used by Western states for producing chemical weapons during World War II.”
OPCW experts examined Syrian soldiers harmed by the March attack. What happened in Ghouta, they said, must acknowledge prior insurgents use of chemical weapons.
“It is obvious that any objective investigation of the incident on Aug. 21 in East Ghouta is impossible without considering the circumstances of the March attack,” their statement said.
According to McClatchy:
“The Russian statement said Russian officials had broken the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons’ code of silence on such probes only because Western nations appear to be ‘preparing the ground for military action’ in retaliation for the Aug. 21 incident.”
National Security Council spokeswoman Caitlin Hayden dismissed Russia’s report, saying:
“We have studied (it) but have found no reason to change our assessment.”
Mother Agnes Marian de La Croix heads the International Support Team for Mussalaha in Syria (ISTEAMS). She believes 150,000 foreign jihadists operate internally. They’re waging war against the Syrian people.
They’re responsible for repeated atrocities, she said. “I don’t understand what the world wants,” she added. “To help Al-Qaida? To establish a jihadist state in Syria?”
Obama’s intervention will strengthen them. “That is what the world wants? Another Afghanistan?” Another disaster?
On September 16, Mother Agnes headlined “The Chemical Attacks in East Ghouta Used to Justify a Military Intervention in Syria.” saying:
ISTEAMS’ preliminary report includes vital information too important to ignore. Its Forward states in part:
“From the moment when some families of abducted children contacted us to inform us that they recognized the children among those who are presented in the videos as victims of the Chemical Attacks of East Ghouta, we decided to examine the videos thoroughly.”
“Our first concern was the fate of the children we see in the footages. (They’re) in the hands of adult males that seem to be elements of armed gangs.”
“(O)ur study highlights without any doubt that their little bodies were manipulated and disposed with theatrical arrangements to figure in the screening.”
“If the studied footages were edited and published to exhibit pieces of evidence to accuse the Syrian State of perpetrating the chemical attacks on East Ghouta, our discoveries incriminate the editors and actors of forged facts through a lethal manipulation of unidentified children…”
“Thus we want to raise awareness toward the humanitarian case of this criminal use of children in the political propaganda of the East Ghouta Chemical Weapons Attack.”
ISTEAMS preliminary study Conclusion said in part:
“Concerning the alleged Chemical Attack on East Ghouta, the International Support Team for Mussalaha (Reconciliation) in Syria has studied some of the 13 videos nominated by the US intelligence Community to exhibit pieces of evidence to incriminate the Syrian State.”
“We have found that three nominated videos present evidence of artificial scenic treatment using the corpses of dead children.”
“Studying the whole videotaped documentations available online we find that the civilian population in East Ghouta as presented in those videos is inconsistent with the composition of a real Syrian civilian society.”
“There is a flagrant lack of real Syrian families in East Ghouta, as presented by the videos? Who are the children that are exposed in those videos?”
“Where do they come from? Where are their parents? How did they get killed? Where are their bodies buried?”
“We think (based on) the evidences of media manipulation that are shown in this Study and other studies, there is a moral obligation to launch an International investigation and arrest Warrant under the yellow and black notice to find and identify the Syrian children bodies used in a criminal way in the so called Chemical Attacks of East Ghouta.”
“Only then total light will be shed on this historical case of mass manipulation.”
On September 18, Voice of Russia (VOR) headlined “Syria hands Russia proof (of) rebels use of chemical weapons.”
On Tuesday, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov met with Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Moallem.
Both officials stressed resolving Syria’s conflict diplomatically. Ryabkov said “Russia does not accept any UN Security Council resolution based on Chapter Seven concerning the Russian initiative.”
Evidence UN inspectors found must be carefully analyzed, they said.
Moscow is “disappointed,” added Ryabkov. UN analysis is “incomplete.” It’s suspect. Important questions are unanswered.
“Without the full picture of (what happened in Ghouta), we cannot but call the nature of conclusions drawn by UN experts as politicized, biased and unilateral,” Ryabkov stressed.
UN inspectors prepared their report at random, he said. It lacks credibility. Conclusions are “lopsided.” They’re one-sided. They’re tainted. They exclude a full picture of what happened.
Ryabkov said Syria gave Moscow “new evidence.” It shows insurgents used chemical weapons.
“This is really true,” said Ryabkov. “Just now we were given evidence. We need to analyze it.” He didn’t elaborate further.
Throughout months of conflict, insurgents used chemical weapons multiple times. They have access to sarin and other toxic agents. Russia’s Aleppo attack analysis proves it. So does other clear evidence. Coverup and denial don’t wash.
Russia believes insurgents bear full responsibility for attacking Ghouta. Assad had nothing to with it. Stopping Obama’s imperial madness matters most. Doing it depends on reporting important truths. It requires dispelling Big Lies.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org.
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.