Evidence That Assad Was Behind Recent Chemical Attacks?

[Anung Un Rama]

this video is from november last year

I'm an old Ron Paul guy, but post-public office Dr Paul is a little too whacky for me. That + RT is a tough clip to get any traction on this story, but it's such a legitimate possibility that I can't believe how many people have fallen all over themselves to defend US policy and accusations.

 

[Fawlty]

Did the attack, in fact, occur?

Gotta pull your card on this one. What possible reason, if the attack did not occur, could the Syrian and Russian governments have for claiming they bombed a chemical weapons warehouse, causing civilian injuries? Did they happen to proactively claim this as a fabrication on the same day chemical weapons attacks were reported?

COME ON, man.

 

[DoomPatrol]

Bin laden was created by private individuals and your countries war on afghanistan,if we are talking modern day whos supplying terrorists i see the u.s bombing nursra and isis whereas russia is kitting hezbollah out in new gear!!!

Russia is destabilizing syria by trying to force keep in place a regime its people have rejected using foriegn manpower and airppwer and now gas

Bin Laden was created by the Russian invasion of Afghanistan. He later turned against the United States. Don't get shit twisted, he was who he was well before we joined the party.

 

[MicroBrew]

M.I.T. expert claims there isn't enough evidence to pin this on Assad and aerial bombing.

A leading weapons academic has claimed that the Khan Sheikhoun nerve agent attack in Syria was staged, raising questions about who was responsible.

Theodore Postol, a professor emeritus at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), issued a series of three reports in response to the White House's finding that Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad perpetrated the attack on 4 April.

Postol, formerly a scientific advisor at the Department of Defense (DoD), has previously outlined similar inconsistencies with US intelligence reports. Following the 2013 chemical weapons attack in eastern Ghouta, Postol again said the evidence did not suggest Assad was responsible – a finding that was later corroborated by the United Nations.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/mit-expert-claims-latest-chemical-100819428.html

 

[MicroBrew]

U.s doesnt support terrorists it bombs them, russia does though ....hezbollah nevernlooked better armed

Come on now, that sounds like something only a rabid patriotard would say. The US has supported terrorists quite a lot. In Syria they provided arms and training to the so called 'moderate ' rebels who were mostly a bunch of Sunni jihadists .

All this depends on the definition of 'terrorist' : patriotards will try to claim those we support aren't terrorists while simultaneously claiming those we oppose are .

 

[OverCoronavirus Pressure]

Gotta pull your card on this one. What possible reason, if the attack did not occur, could the Syrian and Russian governments have for claiming they bombed a chemical weapons warehouse, causing civilian injuries? Did they happen to proactively claim this as a fabrication on the same day chemical weapons attacks were reported?

COME ON, man.

I'm just not impressed enough with what I'm supposed to believe to actually believe it.
I'm just at a place where I have to accept some things as true.

 

[whougonnacall]

Bin Laden was created by the Russian invasion of Afghanistan. He later turned against the United States. Don't get shit twisted, he was who he was well before we joined the party.

Thats a general descriotion though
He was created by the huge web of private sponsorships and support for mujahadeen (more cash put in than u.s and sa combined in the war ! ) not u.s

 

[whougonnacall]

M.I.T. expert claims there isn't enough evidence to pin this on Assad and aerial bombing.





https://www.yahoo.com/news/mit-expert-claims-latest-chemical-100819428.html

Same shill said he ddint do ghouta either

 

[whougonnacall]

Come on now, that sounds like something only a rabid patriotard would say. The US has supported terrorists quite a lot. In Syria they provided arms and training to the so called 'moderate ' rebels who were mostly a bunch of Sunni jihadists .

All this depends on the definition of 'terrorist' : patriotards will try to claim those we support aren't terrorists while simultaneously claiming those we oppose are .

We trained fsa groups dude none of which are or were on any terrorist lists (bar russia and assad regime ones)
Plus no one has hit nursras leadership or isis in genral close to how hard we hit them



By contrast hezbollah are sporting some really spiffy new gear ....russia openly supply an international listed terror org as well as other iraqi/iranian militas listed as terrorists internationaly too!.

 

[DespicablePeep]

Thats a general descriotion though
He was created by the huge web of private sponsorships and support for mujahadeen (more cash put in than u.s and sa combined in the war ! ) not u.s

US funded the rebels against Russia in Afghanistan, much like Syria. All trainned in Pakistan to fight in Iran.

You can´t change history and spill bullshit

Hezbollah is mostly funded by Iran and Lebanon.

And US is actually supplying terrorists in Syria not bombing them, much of the Arab spring was used by the west to take hold of assets and gain power. First time social media was used to create several coups.

edit: mistake

 

[whougonnacall]

US funded the rebels against Russia in Iran, much like Syria. All trainned in Pakistan to fight in Iran.
You can´t change history and spill bullshit

Hezbollah is mostly funded by Iran and Lebanon.

And US is actually supplying terrorists in Syria not bombing them, much of the Arab spring was used by the west to take hold of assets and gain power. First time social media was used to create several coups.

In iran? Think ur mixed up there bud

Hezbolla was mostly funded by those 2 back when syrian regime had cash, now russia is clearly arming them too
Brand spanking new russian gear every pic

U.s is doing the bulk of isis fighting and struck more nursra leaders than anyone ....the only guys the bare suppling(and very meagrely) arent considered terrorists by anyone bar russia/iran/regime
And lol at arab spring being some grand cia plot ...unarmed people didnt brave gunfire for the cia buddy.

 

[MicroBrew]

Same shill said he ddint do ghouta either

Hans Blix quote:

"I don't know whether in Washington they presented any evidence, but I did not see that in the Security Council," Blix said. "Merely pictures of victims that were held up, that the whole world can see with horror, such pictures are not necessarily evidence of who did it."


Blix says the problem with this situation is that while it's natural to jump to the conclusion that the regime is far more likely than the rebels to have the means to carry out an attack of this magnitude with a substance such as sarin gas, it is far from proven that it did so.


And those distinctions matter, Blix insists. "If you had a murder and you strongly suspect one fellow, do you go to judgment and execution straight away?" he asked. "Three days after the murder?"

http://www.dw.com/en/eu-urges-diplo...pector-says-us-acted-without-proof/a-38345413

 

[MicroBrew]

We trained fsa groups dude none of which are or were on any terrorist lists (bar russia and assad regime ones)
Plus no one has hit nursras leadership or isis in genral close to how hard we hit them



By contrast hezbollah are sporting some really spiffy new gear ....russia openly supply an international listed terror org as well as other iraqi/iranian militas listed as terrorists internationaly too!.

Most of the Sunni rebel groups and the most powerful factions are Sunni jihadis ; they share the same sectarian sympathies as Al Nusra.

I don't see Hezbollah as a terrorist group, they target fighting forces and are organized like an army.

 

[whougonnacall]

Hans Blix quote:

"I don't know whether in Washington they presented any evidence, but I did not see that in the Security Council," Blix said. "Merely pictures of victims that were held up, that the whole world can see with horror, such pictures are not necessarily evidence of who did it."


Blix says the problem with this situation is that while it's natural to jump to the conclusion that the regime is far more likely than the rebels to have the means to carry out an attack of this magnitude with a substance such as sarin gas, it is far from proven that it did so.


And those distinctions matter, Blix insists. "If you had a murder and you strongly suspect one fellow, do you go to judgment and execution straight away?" he asked. "Three days after the murder?"

http://www.dw.com/en/eu-urges-diplo...pector-says-us-acted-without-proof/a-38345413

U.s was confident enough they had the right guy..why wait?

 

[MicroBrew]

U.s was confident enough they had the right guy..why wait?

The US wouldn't have done it if Assad was an ally. US intervention is not necessarily about facts, it is about serving US and allied interests and cloaking their intervention as Humanitarian .

Considering the parallel with Iraq (accusing Saddam of having / working on WMDs) it is right to be suspicious with US claims. Shortly after Iraq the NeoCons tried to claim Saddam's WMDs went to Syria ; and if they had gotten everyone to fall for it, they could make a case for invading Syria. They tried to and still try to claim Iran is working on nukes.

 

[DespicablePeep]

My mistake meant to say Afghanistan, Hezbolla is funded by Iran. US is not doing the bulk of fighting, they are actually arming radical groups expecting Assad to lose control, including al Nusra

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/715977/al-nusra-us-arming-jihadists-syria

He also claimed that when Al-Nusra was “besieged, we had officers from Turkey, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Israel and America here… Experts in the use of satellites, rockets, reconnaissance and thermal security cameras.”


http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/view/hezbollah-finances-funding-the-party-of-god


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-hughes/us-support-for-al-qaeda-l_b_10089410.html

In iran? Think ur mixed up there bud

Hezbolla was mostly funded by those 2 back when syrian regime had cash, now russia is clearly arming them too
Brand spanking new russian gear every pic

U.s is doing the bulk of isis fighting and struck more nursra leaders than anyone ....the only guys the bare suppling(and very meagrely) arent considered terrorists by anyone bar russia/iran/regime
And lol at arab spring being some grand cia plot ...unarmed people didnt brave gunfire for the cia buddy.

 

[whougonnacall]

Most of the Sunni rebel groups and the most powerful factions are Sunni jihadis ; they share the same sectarian sympathies as Al Nusra.

I don't see Hezbollah as a terrorist group, they target fighting forces and are organized like an army.

Jihadi is a vaugue term (means struggle) thus anyone picking up a gun is a 'jihadi'

In terms of the loose 'groupings' ' 2 of the big 3 fsa and anhar are by most deffinituons moderate(even russia has called anhar moderate ) and the third is extreme ie hts.....but many of its sub groups joined just for combined proection (from nursra itself as much as assad)
In fact if i recall at last peace process under 20 something of rebel forces represented outa 176 were listed terror groups!


Doesnt alter what they are though man hezbollah are officaly a listed terror org, now assisting a tyrant to starve people etc

 

[whougonnacall]

My mistake meant to say Afghanistan, Hezbolla is funded by Iran. US is not doing the bulk of fighting, they are actually arming radical groups expecting Assad to lose control, including al Nusra

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/715977/al-nusra-us-arming-jihadists-syria

He also claimed that when Al-Nusra was “besieged, we had officers from Turkey, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Israel and America here… Experts in the use of satellites, rockets, reconnaissance and thermal security cameras.”


http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/view/hezbollah-finances-funding-the-party-of-god


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-hughes/us-support-for-al-qaeda-l_b_10089410.html

Yep we funded some in afghainstan but not the forces linked directly to bin laden

Yes of course they fucking are....who else is doing the bulk of the isis bombing? In iraq and syria its us bombing and u.s backed forces leading the way...
Nursra is privately funded (google it) and us has hirt it more than anyone else (leadership hit repeatedly by u.s)

Hezbollah used to be iranain and syrian funded...no assad is broke and iran getting close
Russia is openly arming and even trainibg hezbollah terrorists now

 

[whougonnacall]

The US wouldn't have done it if Assad was an ally. US intervention is not necessarily about facts, it is about serving US and allied interests and cloaking their intervention as Humanitarian .

Considering the parallel with Iraq (accusing Saddam of having / working on WMDs) it is right to be suspicious with US claims. Shortly after Iraq the NeoCons tried to claim Saddam's WMDs went to Syria ; and if they had gotten everyone to fall for it, they could make a case for invading Syria. They tried to and still try to claim Iran is working on nukes.

Not always no but in this case unquestionably hit the right guy..the russian version defies basic chemistry

 

[lecter]

Theodore Postol, a former a scientific advisor at the Department of Defense and MIT professor says there's no proof of Assad's involvement instead there's proof of tempered evidence. I suggest you read the entire article: http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/mit-expert-claims-latest-chemical-weapons-attack-syria-was-staged-1617267

First part:

A leading weapons academic has claimed that the Khan Sheikhoun nerve agent attack in Syria was staged, raising questions about who was responsible.

Theodore Postol, a professor emeritus at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), issued a series of three reports in response to the White House's finding that Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad perpetrated the attack on 4 April.

He concluded that the US government's report does not provide any "concrete" evidence that Assad was responsible, adding it was more likely that the attack was perpetrated by players on the ground.

Postol said: "I have reviewed the [White House's] document carefully, and I believe it can be shown, without doubt, that the document does not provide any evidence whatsoever that the US government has concrete knowledge that the government of Syria was the source of the chemical attack in Khan Sheikhoun, Syria at roughly 6am to 7am on 4 April, 2017.

"In fact, a main piece of evidence that is cited in the document point to an attack that was executed by individuals on the ground, not from an aircraft, on the morning of 4 April.

"This conclusion is based on an assumption made by the White House when it cited the source of the sarin release and the photographs of that source. My own assessment is that the source was very likely tampered with or staged, so no serious conclusion could be made from the photographs cited by the White House."

The image Postol refers to is that of a crater containing a shell inside, which is said to have contained the sarin gas.

His analysis of the shell suggests that it could not have been dropped from an airplane as the damage of the casing is inconsistent from an aerial explosion. Instead, Postol said it was more likely that an explosive charge was laid upon the shell containing sarin, before being detonated.