What if ISIS or some other group did it and made it look like he did it ?
That would make a lot of sense.
The question nobody in politics asks..... is why Assad would do it ?
Just one reason ?
Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...
Moderator: PoFo Political Circus Mods
In 2014, investigative journalist Seymour Hersh reported on opposition forces' ability to use chemical weapons. In an article for the "London Review of Books," Hersh obtained documents from the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), the Pentagon's own spy organization. They suggested that the Nusra Front, a Syrian offshoot of al Qaeda, had access to the sarin nerve agent. A chemical weapons attack on the Damascus suburb of Ghouta in August 2013, which was blamed on Assad, was carried out by rebels, according to Hersh's article. They wanted Washington to presume Assad had crossed Obama's "red line" and draw the US into a war.
At the time of the Ghouta attack, the Syrian government had access to about 600 tons of material necessary to make sarin and mustard gas. The stockpile was to counterbalance Israel's nuclear arsenal, Meyer said. "Israel has an estimated 200 nuclear weapons," he said. "Chemical weapons are something of a poor man's atomic weapon." The US reported these chemical stockpiles had been destroyed in 2014, although the state of confusion surrounding such a war zone makes that hard to confirm.
No one can say how the situation has evolved since the DIA's assessment in 2013 of the Nusra Front's weapons. The al Qaeda affiliate is today the most significant rebel group in the northern Syrian province of Idlib, Meyer said. Along with other jihadi extremists, it has turned itself into the "de facto ruler of Idlib."
Assad has not hesitated to use ruthless means to stay in power. In confronting the most recent use of chemical weapons in Syria, credible questions remain as to why Assad would bring world opinion against him at a time when his continued rule is beginning to be accepted.
http://www.dw.com/en/is-assad-to-blame- ... a-38330217
“The Pentagon scheme established in 2012 consisted in equipping and training Al Qaeda rebels in the use of chemical weapons, with the support of military contractors hired by the Pentagon, and then holding the Syrian government responsible for using the WMD against the Syrian people.
What is unfolding is a diabolical scenario –which is an integral part of military planning– namely a situation where opposition terrorists advised by Western defense contractors are actually in possession of chemical weapons.
This is not a rebel training exercise in non-proliferation. While president Obama states that “you will be held accountable” if “you” (meaning the Syrian government) use chemical weapons, what is contemplated as part of this covert operation is the possession of chemical weapons by the US-NATO sponsored terrorists, namely “by our” Al Qaeda affiliated operatives, including the Al Nusra Front which constitutes the most effective Western financed and trained fighting group, largely integrated by foreign mercenaries. In a bitter twist, Jabhat al-Nusra, a US sponsored “intelligence asset”, was recently put on the State Department’s list of terrorist organizations.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/pentagon-t ... ns/5583784
ThirdTerm wrote:The Trump administration should carefully investigate the incident before making a hasty decision to remove Assad by supporting Islamists affiliated with al-Qaeda. It was the al-Nusra Front's home town that was bombed and the terrorist group could have been trained by the CIA in the use of chemical weapons.
skinster wrote:Former DIA Colonel: “US strikes on Syria based on a lie”
The US administrations have changed but the methods for unleashing wars have remained the same since bombardments of Yugoslavia, Iraq, and Libya. Allegations, falsifications, grandstand playing with photos and test-tubes with pseudo results in international organizations became the reason for initiating aggression instead of an objective investigation.
The concept of managed chaos appeared long ago as a method of strengthening US influence. Its basic premise is that managed chaos projects should be launched away from the United States in regions that are crucial for global economic and financial development. The Middle East has always been in the focus of politicians and foreign policy engineers in Washington. Practice has shown that this concept is dangerous and destructive, in particular for the countries where the experiment was launched, namely Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen and Afghanistan…In Iraq, Syria and Libya, this chaos was created intentionally.
He writes that US-Israeli policy in Syria is to help prolong the war so that the entire country is hopelessly crippled and easily dominated by the world's bankster nations.
Igor Antunov wrote:He wouldn't and he didn't. The official western story makes perfect sense when you consider who stands to benefit. No mystery here.
Rich wrote:Good to see you siding with the Infidel (Assad, the Alawites and Christians) against the (Sunni) Muslims for once.
Sectarianism is gay, Rich, but it suits you, so enjoy.
A serious question, @SSDR: would you see an "[…]
Very well, what about the other similar claims in[…]
It is hard to believe that the Yemeni rebel group […]
Of course, a good economy and cutting red tape ar[…]