Did the Rebels (Not Assad) use Chemical Weapons in Syria? And does Obama know it?

[Nakura Chambers]

Why does something HAVE to be done? Is the world going to implode if we don't? Is the ozone layer going to be replaced by these chemical weapons and we're all gonna die? Will Syria eventually give the go-ahead to create a black hole to wipe out the rebels? Why do we NEED to go there?

I am opposed to interventions in general, but we simply cannot allow any state to use chemical weapons on civilian targets. Don't get me wrong, getting involved in Syria is a mistake, but it's a mistake we have to make. If we don't stop this, then other countries will start using chemical weapons on their own people as well, because they know that the United States and international community won't do anything.

[Sunseeker]

Yea, I don't think we should just go in and support assad (doesn't he have links to Iran?), but we sure as hell can't support the terrorists...

He doesn't just have "ties", they are official allies, as they are of Russia.

[Oktoberfest]

http://web.archive.org/web/201301292...#ixzz2d93eCTzN

U.S. 'backed plan to launch chemical weapon attack on Syria and blame it on Assad's regime'

Leaked emails from defense contractor refers to chemical weapons saying 'the idea is approved by Washington'
Obama issued warning to Syrian president Bashar al-Assad last month that use of chemical warfare was 'totally unacceptable'

[Moadar]

If John Kerry says Assad used chemical weapons then its a 100% guarantee that Assad did not use chemical weapons.

[Skroe]

You do realize the source for that article, as referred to by the Mail in the middle of it, is Infowars, also known as Alex Jones' International House of Crazy Paranoia? Also known as the least reliable website on the internet?

You need a new hobby. Quick.

[Flatspriest]

I am opposed to interventions in general, but we simply cannot allow any state to use chemical weapons on civilian targets. Don't get me wrong, getting involved in Syria is a mistake, but it's a mistake we have to make. If we don't stop this, then other countries will start using chemical weapons on their own people as well, because they know that the United States and international community won't do anything.

I agree w do not need to allow anyone to use chemical weapons on civilian targets, BUT the fact remains we have no idea if it was Assad and his regime, or the ones opposing him who used the weapons. The fact that it happened right when it did just seems circumspect as to the possibility that the rebels are doing this to make it seem like Assad did it to get the UN to send in troops to abolish the regime they are opposing. Especially since Assad had already approved for the UN to send in monitors for such things, and then attacking the people sent in by the UN as they were being brought to the place of attack after Assad had brought them in to inspect.

[Oktoberfest]

You do realize the source for that article, as referred to by the Mail in the middle of it, is Infowars, also known as Alex Jones' International House of Crazy Paranoia? Also known as the least reliable website on the internet?

You need a new hobby. Quick.

I dont give a shit who posted it. The date was in January. Months before the chemical 'attack'


Btw, not saying its relative to you but I just want to state that, as a Liberal, I really hate Progressives with a passion. Bunch of snooty arrogant ignorant fuckheads who cant see the future because their heads are so far up their asses. I am not sure which is worse, a Progressive or a Far rightwing religious nut. Both should be deported.

[holyfist]

USA say they 'know' Assad government used chemical weapons without any investigation. With all lies, spying and wars they created it's safe to say truth is 100% opposite of what they are claiming.

[Oktoberfest]

USA say they 'know' Assad government used chemical weapons without any investigation. With all lies, spying and wars they created it's safe to say truth is 100% opposite of what they are claiming.

I am an American. I love my country but not because of my government. My government is NOT to be trusted. They are evil.

[N-7]

The US doesn't need oil or gas from the Middle East.

It doesn't need it but it needs the value associated with it and rely on it being traded to keep the dollar floating.

[Valerean]

Meanwhile the Russians just moved a missile cruiser and anti-sub vessel to the eastern Mediterranean.

[BreathTaker]

Exactly what does the US have to benefit by going in there, according to you?

Though there may be many reasons.. let's just see one:

Iraq, Egypt, and several small countries i don't even know about.
...
War raging in one more country on the middle east - Syria. Terrorists destabilize whole area and Iran. Iran figths back. Us comes again. Iran is the new Syria.
War raging in one more country on the middle east - Iran. Terrorists destabilize whole area and Russian muslims of caucasus. Russia figths back. Us comes again. Russia is the new Syria.
...
to be continued, but it does not bother me, for at this point i'd already be dead, thrown into US forces with TNT around my belly

This is very simplified.
Okay, US can stop after Iran. The muslims will destroy Europe and Asia anyway, if they have multiple countries under control.
You think US does not want that? Maybe, if Obama does not attack, and proves his noble prize for peacemaking is not a pile of garbage

[swineflu]

No it wasnt the Assad regime:
-they wouldnt attack their own civilians
-they wouldnt use chemical weapons on positions controlled by their own forces
-they wouldnt use chemical weapons just days after the UN chemical weapons inspection team arrives (do people realize this?)

CUI BONO? Israel.

[BreathTaker]

Meanwhile the Russians just moved a missile cruiser and anti-sub vessel to the eastern Mediterranean.

I guess it's ineffective. If i was a syrian, i'd train a bunch of high class scubadivers to detonate all the enemy navy. Because they don't have much weapons, and.. can aircraft detect a human with TNT, and understand it's not a dolphin? Somehow i doubt it

[Notchris]

No it wasnt the Assad regime:
-they wouldnt attack their own civilians
-they wouldnt use chemical weapons on positions controlled by their own forces
-they wouldnt use chemical weapons just days after the UN chemical weapons inspection team arrives (do people realize this?)

CUI BONO? Israel.

Yeah, because it's not like they haven't killed a metric ass-ton of their own civilians already.

[BreathTaker]

Yeah, because it's not like they haven't killed a metric ass-ton of their own civilians already.

He had to all the following.
They would not use chemicals on their own people, as long as they know this is taboo. And they don't even need it, for the govenment is already winning.
Would you fight a sparrow with atom bomb if you can kill it with a gun? And not getting punished for using a gun, but punished for nuke?
So your point is not suitable

[Deleted]

Assad didn't use chemical weapons.

The only reason America wants to support the terrorists is because they gain more from it, not because it's the right thing to do.

Assad might be a wicked man, but he wants what's best for the country's future. The rebells do not want a bright future. (Look at Turkey, times 100)



I don't understand why people don't get that Assad doesn't belong to the worst side.

[Invection]

Syria is cockblocking gas pipe for Qatar.


http://www.globalresearch.ca/why-qat...-syria/5306223
http://www.theguardian.com/environme.../2013/may/13/1

Yes Currently GAZPROM has a monopoly in the EU market, that is why Putin said any military strike in Syria will be considered a military strike against russia herself. Qatar which is basically in a geographical prison was blocked by Saudi Arabia from putting any overland pipelines in place. Up untill recently, they have been the chief financier of the rebel groups and have spent over 3 billion dollars on the rebels, and that is just in the case with syria never mind Libya. Saudi Arabia just past them in funding. Turkey already has this natural gas pipeline built and ready to receive Qatar's LNG export. The only thing standing in the way of that had been Al-Assad.

[Oktoberfest]

Yes Currently GAZPROM has a monopoly in the EU market, that is why Putin said any military strike in Syria will be considered a military strike against russia herself. Qatar which is basically in a geographical prison was blocked by Saudi Arabia from putting any overland pipelines in place. Up untill recently, they have been the chief financier of the rebel groups and have spent over 3 billion dollars on the rebels, and that is just in the case with syria never mind Libya. Saudi Arabia just past them in funding. Turkey already has this natural gas pipeline built and ready to receive Qatar's LNG export. The only thing standing in the way of that had been Al-Assad.

http://web.archive.org/web/201301292...#ixzz2d93eCTzN

Leaked emails have allegedly proved that the White House gave the green light to a chemical weapons attack in Syria that could be blamed on Assad's regime and in turn, spur international military action in the devastated country.

A report released on Monday contains an email exchange between two senior officials at British-based contractor Britam Defence where a scheme 'approved by Washington' is outlined explaining that Qatar would fund rebel forces in Syria to use chemical weapons.

According to Infowars.com, the December 25 email was sent from Britam's Business Development Director David Goulding to company founder Philip Doughty.

It reads: 'Phil... We’ve got a new offer. It’s about Syria again. Qataris propose an attractive deal and swear that the idea is approved by Washington.

'We’ll have to deliver a CW to Homs, a Soviet origin g-shell from Libya similar to those that Assad should have.

'They want us to deploy our Ukrainian personnel that should speak Russian and make a video record.

'Frankly, I don’t think it’s a good idea but the sums proposed are enormous. Your opinion?

'Kind regards, David.'

Britam Defence had not yet returned a request for comment to MailOnline.

[Invection]

http://web.archive.org/web/201301292...#ixzz2d93eCTzN

Leaked emails have allegedly proved that the White House gave the green light to a chemical weapons attack in Syria that could be blamed on Assad's regime and in turn, spur international military action in the devastated country.

A report released on Monday contains an email exchange between two senior officials at British-based contractor Britam Defence where a scheme 'approved by Washington' is outlined explaining that Qatar would fund rebel forces in Syria to use chemical weapons.

According to Infowars.com, the December 25 email was sent from Britam's Business Development Director David Goulding to company founder Philip Doughty.

It reads: 'Phil... We’ve got a new offer. It’s about Syria again. Qataris propose an attractive deal and swear that the idea is approved by Washington.

'We’ll have to deliver a CW to Homs, a Soviet origin g-shell from Libya similar to those that Assad should have.

'They want us to deploy our Ukrainian personnel that should speak Russian and make a video record.

'Frankly, I don’t think it’s a good idea but the sums proposed are enormous. Your opinion?

'Kind regards, David.'

Britam Defence had not yet returned a request for comment to MailOnline.

I've seen that but their is some controversy over emails that have the same time stamp down to the exact second. However despite a lot of scrutiny many are saying it's 100% legit. Infowars or alex jone's nutcase website has been reported to have featured this when in fact CNN, washingtonpost, wall street journal, NY times all reported on this. I couldn't find links to those but did find one that yahoo news did on it when they were originally hacked in January. Here is the link for yahoo
http://in.news.yahoo.com/us-backed-p...045648224.html
-----------------Please take special note to the date, it is dated January 30th of this year.