‘Trump lied about Syrian chemical attack’


This video says about itself:

#HandsOffSyria: 30+ cities protest Trump’s missile strikes

10 April 2017

As US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson prepares to meet with his Russian counterpart Sergei Lavrov, an anti-war movement is brewing in US streets against US missile strikes in Syria. Hundreds of protesters gathered in more than 30 cities to speak out against President Donald Trump’s pivot towards regime change.

By Gareth Porter in the USA:

New Revelations Belie Trump Claims on Syria Chemical Attack

Thursday, April 13, 2017

Two unnamed senior Trump administration officials briefing journalists Tuesday asserted that a Syrian regime airstrike in the city of Khan Sheikhoun on April 4 had deliberately killed dozens of civilians with sarin gas.

The Trump administration officials dismissed the Russian claim that the Syrian airstrike had targeted a munitions warehouse controlled by Islamic extremists as an afterthought to cover up the Syrian government’s culpability for the chemical attack. Moreover, the Trump officials claimed that US intelligence had located the site where the Syrian regime had dropped the chemical weapon.

However, two new revelations contradict the Trump administration‘s line on the April 4 attack. A former US official knowledgeable about the episode told Truthout that the Russians had actually informed their US counterparts in Syria of the Syrian military’s plan to strike the warehouse in Khan Sheikhoun 24 hours before the strike. And a leading analyst on military technology, Dr. Theodore Postol of MIT, has concluded that the alleged device for a sarin attack could not have been delivered from the air but only from the ground, meaning that the chemical attack may not have been the result of the Syrian airstrike.

The Trump administration is pushing the accusation that the Assad regime was the force that carried out the highly lethal chemical attack on April 4 very hard, perhaps not so much to justify the already politically popular US strike against the Shayrat airbase on April 6, but rather to buttress a new hardline policy against the Syrian regime.

The two unnamed senior Trump officials who briefed journalists Tuesday sought to discredit the Russian claim that the Syrian airstrike had hit a warehouse in Khan Sheikhoun that was believed to hold weapons including toxic chemicals. One of the two unnamed officials said that a Syrian military source had “told Russian state media on April 4 that regime forces had not carried out any strike in Khan Sheikhoun, which contradicted Russia’s claim directly.”

This Trump administration official appeared to be suggesting that there was no evidence that a weapons storage site had been hit by a Syrian airstrike. But an internal administration paper on the issue now circulating in Washington, a copy of which Truthout obtained, clearly refers to “a regime airstrike on a terrorist ammunition dump in the eastern suburbs of Khan Sheikhoun.”

More importantly, the US military allegedly knew in advance that the strike was coming: Russian military officers informed their American counterparts of the Syrian military’s plan to strike the warehouse in Khan Sheikhoun city 24 hours before the planned airstrike, according to the former US official who spoke with Truthout. The official is in direct contact with a US military intelligence officer with access to information about the US-Russian communications. The military intelligence officer reported to his associate that the Russians provided the information about the strike to the Americans through the normal US-Russian Syria deconfliction telephone line, which was established after the Russian intervention in 2015 to prevent any accidental clash between the two powers. The officer said that Russia communicated to the US the fact that the Syrians believed that the warehouse held toxic chemicals.

That information was considered so politically sensitive that after its initial dissemination, it was available only to a few officials, the US military intelligence officer told his associate.

Despite the US denial of the Russian account of a Syrian strike on a warehouse in the city, an eyewitness account appears to confirm it. A 14-year-old resident told The New York Times she was walking only a few dozen yards away from a one-story building when she saw a plane drop a bomb on it.  The eyewitness reported the explosion created a “mushroom cloud” that stung her eyes.

She added that she then hurried back home and watched as people began to arrive to help others in the neighborhood and were stricken by the toxic chemical in the air.

The airstrike she saw appears to be the one that was the objective of the Syrian operation in Khan Sheikhoun. The mushroom cloud she saw seems to be the widest of the three mushroom clouds shown in a video taken sometime after the explosion.

The senior US officials briefing the press insisted that a Syrian air strike delivering sarin was the only credible explanation for the dozens of deaths in Khan Sheikhoun. One of the officials cited a video showing a crater in the middle of a main road, which the Trump administration’s key officials have determined was the site of the chemical weapon that reportedly killed 50 to 100 people. He implied that this was evidence that a Syrian airstrike had released what was believed to be sarin.

But Dr. Theodore Postol of MIT, who debunked the original official claims of the location of rockets that hit Syria’s Ghouta area with what appeared to be sarin on August 21, 2013, has come to a different conclusion. Postol says that the carcass of the delivery vehicle — shown in last week’s video and in still photos of the small crater — indicates that the chemical attack was not delivered via airstrike but from the spot on the road where it was found.

In an assessment completed on Tuesday, Postol called the collapsed metal tube shown in the crater, which he estimates to be about two and a half feet long, “an improvised dispersal device.” He analyzes the device as having been assembled from a section of pipe from a 122 mm rocket with caps at both ends that was filled with sarin and with some kind of explosive placed on top of it. The explosive on top smashed in the pipe holding the sarin, and pushed the sarin out of its tube, according to Postol, “like toothpaste from a toothpaste tube.”

Postol estimates that the device might have held eight to 10 liters of sarin. Was it actually used to emit the toxic chemical that killed dozens of residents? Postol doesn’t claim to know, but he states that it did not resemble an air-delivered chemical weapon. “The administration attempted to use evidence that contradicted their own claim,” Postol told Truthout.

One of the unnamed US officials briefing the press declared, “We are confident that terrorists or non-state actors did not commit this particular attack,” and explained that non-state actors don’t have the sarin required. But whether that assumption is well-founded or not, the universal assumption that the deaths could only have been caused by exposure to sarin is mistaken. Exposure to smoke munitions that create phosphine gas when in contact with moisture can cause neurological symptoms that mimic those of sarin, because they both damage the body’s ability to produce the enzyme cholinesterase.

Both the Syrian Army and the Al-Nusra Front fighters in the Aleppo area, moreover, had abundant stocks of phosphine-producing smoke munitions in 2013, as was documented by German journalist Alfred Hackensberger of Die Welt. Furthermore, both ISIS (also known as Daesh) and al-Qaeda in Aleppo have been reported to have access to phosphine-based weapons.

These phosphine-producing munitions can be lethal if humans are exposed in confined space, and they have the smell of garlic or rotting food. That is precisely the smell that was reported by eyewitnesses in Khan Seikhoun. Sarin, on the other hand, is normally odorless.

Resuming Bush’s warlike practices, Donald Trump has launched strikes against Syria on Thursday, following a chemical weapons attack: here.

The US is doubling down on war without any plan for victory, writes JESSE JACKSON.

A Critique of ‘False and Misleading’ White House Claims About Syria’s Use of Lethal Gas. Posted on Apr 14, 2017. By Theodore A. Postol: here.

By Uri Avnery in Israel:

Cui bono – “who benefits” – is the first question an experienced detective asks when investigating a crime.

Since I was a detective myself for a short time in my youth, I know the meaning. Often, the first and obvious suspicion is false. You ask yourself “cui bono”, and another suspect, who you did not think about, appears.

For two weeks now, this question has been troubling my mind. It does not leave me.

In Syria, a terrible war crime has been committed. The civilian population in a rebel-held town called Idlib was hit with poison gas. Dozens of civilians, including children, died a miserable death.

Who could do such a thing? The answer was obvious: that terrible dictator, Bashar al-Assad. Who else?

And so, within a few minutes (literally) the New York Times and a host of excellent newspapers throughout the West proclaimed without hesitation: Assad did it!

No need for proof. No investigation. It was just self-evident. Of course Assad. Within minutes, everybody knew it.

A storm of indignation swept the Western world. He must be punished! Poor Donald Trump, who does not have a clue, submitted to pressure and ordered a senseless missile strike on a Syrian airfield, after preaching for years that the US must under no circumstances get involved in Syria. Suddenly he reversed himself. Just to teach that bastard a lesson. And to show the world what a he-he-he-man he, Trump, really is.

The operation was an immense success. Overnight, the despised Trump became a national hero. Even liberals kissed his feet.

BUT THROUGHOUT, that question continued to nag my mind. Why did Assad do it? What did he have to gain?

The simple answer is: Nothing. Absolutely nothing.

Many architects of the Iraq War openly hope Trump will go further in pursuing regime change in Syria – and then Iran: here.

Advertisements

13 thoughts on “‘Trump lied about Syrian chemical attack’

  1. Pingback: Clash punk album forty years ago commemorated | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  2. Pingback: Donald Trump’s wars update | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  3. Pingback: Donald Trump escalating United States endless wars | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  4. Pingback: ‘Nuclear war would kill everyone’ | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  5. Pingback: Sectarian massacre of Shiite Syrian civilians | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  6. Pingback: British Conservative war on Syrian government, bypassing parliament? | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  7. Pingback: Trump not welcome in England | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  8. Pingback: Donald Trump administration update | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  9. Pingback: Trump’s air force keeps killing Syrian civilians | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  10. Pingback: Trump’s air force kills ISIS’ prisoners | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  11. Pingback: British Conservatives, Trump’s Syria war poodles | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  12. Friday 18th August 2017

    posted by James Tweedie in World

    Damascus calls for international probe after banned tear-gas grenades found

    SYRIA’S government has accused Britain, the United States and Turkey of supplying chemical agents to insurgents after discoveries in Damascus and Aleppo.

    At a press conference on Wednesday, Deputy Foreign Minister Faisal Mikdad urged the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) to investigate the three countries over the allegations.

    Mr Mikdad said the munitions found — tear-gas grenades — were made by two US companies and a British one.

    “The special equipment found consisted of hand grenades and rounds for grenade launchers equipped with CS and CN toxic agents,” he said.

    The chemical munitions were produced by the Federal Laboratories company in the US. The toxic agents were manufactured by British firm Chemring Defence and NonLethal Technologies, another US company.

    The use of tear gas in war is banned under the 1993 Chemical Weapons Convention, to which Syria, the US, Britain, Turkey and all other nations except Israel, Egypt, South Sudan and North Korea are party.

    Chemring’s published business policy commits it to “ensuring that we maintain a completely ethical stance in terms of the product and country combination of our products as defined in the group ethical policy and UK government legislation.”

    A British Foreign Office spokesman told Russia’s Sputnik news: “The UK supplies no lethal equipment to any party in Syria.”

    But even if this is true, Britain could have supplied the weapons to a third country that took a more active role in arming Syrian rebels.

    The OPCW concluded its investigation of April’s Khan Sheikhoun chemical weapon attack in June, saying the nerve agent sarin had been found in samples from the town occupied by al-Qaidaaffiliated extremists.

    The US, Britain and France blamed Syria for the incident, with US President Donald Trump ordering a cruise missile strike on a government air base.

    Mr Mikdad announced that Syria had completed its own probe, which “conclusively determined that the so-called incident in Khan Sheikhoun from beginning to end was staged by militants according to a prearranged scenario.”

    Insurgents were caught smuggling sarin gas across the border into Syria in 2013, acording to Turkish MP Eren Erdem.

    http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/a-6aac-Syria-Britain-and-US-supplied-chemical-arms-to-rebels#.WZacAVFpwdU

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s