Red line? Past evidence shows western-backed rebels were behind biological attacks
Paul Joseph Watson
August 21, 2013
Dubious claims that Bashar Al-Assad’s forces launched a massive chemical weapons attack near Damascus coincide with a team of UN investigators entering Syria and could provide the long awaited “red line” necessary to justify direct NATO military intervention.
“More than 200 people have been killed in an alleged chemical weapons attack near Damascus, reports Sky News. “Activists claim “toxic gas” was used by President Bashar al Assad’s forces during a bombardment of rebel-held areas outside the Syrian capital. It comes three days after a 20-strong team of UN weapons inspectors arrived in Damascus to investigate whether chemical weapons have been used in the conflict.”
The Assad government responded by slamming the reports as “false” and claiming they were aimed at distracting UN inspectors.
Charles Lister, an analyst at IHS Jane’s Terrorism and Insurgency Center, told the Jerusalem Post that the timing of such an attack raises eyebrows. “Logically, it would make little sense for the Syrian government to employ chemical agents at such a time, particularly given the relatively close proximity of the targeted towns (to the UN team),” he said.
As we have documented for well over a year, the inevitability of a chemical weapons attack has been consistently hyped by the media despite the fact that by engaging in such actions, the Assad regime would guarantee international condemnation and create a casus belli for its own destruction.
The fact that launching indiscriminate biological attacks makes absolutely no sense militarily for Assad means it’s far more likely that such attacks are being staged by rebels – many of whom are being led by bloodthirsty Al-Qaeda terrorists – with support from the likes of Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey.
Indeed, the strongest evidence suggests that chemical weapons attacks are being launched by western-backed rebels, but such reports have received scant media attention in comparison to claims such as today’s.
Back in May, UN human rights investigator Carla del Ponte said that according to evidence her team had gathered, “The rebels have used chemical weapons, making use of sarin gas.”
Two months earlier, an audio recording emerged of a phone conversation between two members of the Free Syrian Army during which discussion centered around a plan to carry out a chemical weapons attack capable of impacting an area the size of one kilometer.
Video also emerged last year showing opposition rebels killing rabbits after dispersing an unidentified chemical weapon into a glass box.
Other major attacks initially blamed on the Syrian Army were later to proven to be the work of anti-Assad militants, such as the Houla massacre.
As we have exhaustively documented, western support for the FSA has intensified in recent months despite the fact that the rebels are being led by Al-Qaeda terrorists who routinely commit beheadings, ransack Christian churches, conduct terrorists bombings against innocent people, all while burning US flags and chanting anti-American slogans while singing the praises of Osama Bin Laden.
We predicted on numerous occasions that a massive chemical weapons attack would be blamed on the Assad regime to provide a justification for direct US and NATO military involvement in Syria.
Almost a year ago we wrote about a “false flag plot to frame President Bashar Al-Assad’s forces for launching a chemical weapons attack as a pre-cursor to a NATO intervention.”
While it remains unclear whether these claims will be exploited as the primary justification for a military assault, blanket mainstream media coverage will ensure they will be used to intensify international pressure on the Assad government.