The US president Barack Obama is still adamantly pushing for a military strike against Syria for who he believes is at fault for a chemical attack against rebels, accidently killing citizens as well. The US and its allies claim that they have profound evidence that prove the Syrian regime and its leader President Bashar al-Assad to be the perpetrators behind the attack, but a new found report could prove otherwise.
Coinciding with a recent article released from Uncle Sam’s Misguided Children, two journalists Dale Gavlak, who assisted in the writing, and Yahyah Ababneh the ground correspondent, interview Syrian citizens from Ghouta and Syrian rebels that say Saudi-supplied weapons to the rebels are the reason behind the attack.
The U.S. and others are not interested in examining any contrary evidence, with U.S Secretary of State John Kerry saying Monday that Assad’s guilt was “a judgment … already clear to the world.”
However, from numerous interviews with doctors, Ghouta residents, rebel fighters and their families, a different picture emerges. Many believe that certain rebels received chemical weapons via the Saudi intelligence chief, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, and were responsible for carrying out the dealing gas attack.
Abdel-Moneim, father of a Syrian rebel fighter who died along side of 12 others in the tunnel where the weapons were kept states, “My son came to me two weeks ago asking what I thought the weapons were that he had been asked to carry.” He described some as “tube-like structures” and others as “huge gas bottles.”
One rebel fighter leader by the handle ‘J’ states, “Jabhat al-Nusra militants do not cooperate with other rebels, except with fighting on the ground. They do not share secret information. They merely used some ordinary rebels to carry and operate this material,” he explains “We were very curious about these arms. And unfortunately, some of the fighters handled the weapons improperly and set off the explosions.”
Because the Saudi obtained weapons were not familiar to the rebel fighters, it resulted in an accidental explosion setting off the chemical weapons as well as others in an underground tunnel where armaments are normally kept. The Ghouta residents say that the rebels use mosques and private houses to sleep in while storing they’re munitions inside underground tunnels.
The article also takes and excerpt from Peter Oborne’s writing from the Daily Telegraphstating;
“Consider this: the only beneficiaries from the atrocity were the rebels, previously losing the war, who now have Britain and America ready to intervene on their side. While there seems to be little doubt that chemical weapons were used, there is doubt about who deployed them.“
The US, France, and Britain still claim the evidence they contain strongly implies the chemical attack was from the Syrian regime. The US has provided documentation containing “strong” evidence, is meant to be seen by congress only. British parliament has voted “no” to intervention, while US congress, and French parliament are still in discussion.
US media reports that there 1,400 casualties while Doctors Without Borders stated there was at least 355 dead and possible a little over 3,000 affected by the gas.
The article written by the two journalists is an absolute must read. Not only does it contain information regarding the chemical attack in Damascus, but it also discusses why they may targeting Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad as well, discussing deals for oil in exchange for his demise.