The Truth About The Syria Chemical Attacks – No Evidence of Assad Chem Weapons, Western False Flag Seems Likely

The Truth About The Syria Chemical Attacks – No Evidence of Assad Chem Weapons, Western False Flag Seems Likely

As the world awaits the OPCW inspectors scheduled to enter Douma and present their findings regarding the alleged chemical weapons attacks there, most researchers and discerning onlookers already have a pretty good idea of what took place. Despite the crowing of Western countries regarding their yet to be disclosed “proof” that the Syrian government launched chemical weapons against civilians in Douma, there has been not one shred of evidence to back them up. Indeed, what evidence does exist seems to prove only that the attack was staged.

Below are a number of reasons that the claims made by the United States, Britain, and Frances are completely false:

The Lack Of Western Evidence

Despite both the United States and France claiming to have clear evidence that the Syrian government used chemical weapons on the Syrian people, with French President Macron stating that he had undeniable “proof,” not one shred of evidence has been presented to their respective populations or even the United Nations, whose own standard for “proof” is a bar set rather low to say the least. Theresa May of Britain stated that her cabinet agreed it was “highly likely” Assad used chemical weapons.

At the end of the day, the undeniable “proof” was nothing more than social media posts, grainy videos, and staged photographs released by terrorist fighters in Douma and the notorious Nusra Front propaganda organization known as the White Helmets. Even the U.S. Secretary of Defense James Mattis admitted there was no evidence that the Syrian government used chemical weapons. In testimony to Congress, Mattis stated “I believe there was a chemical attack and we’re looking for the actual evidence.” He added, “There have been a number of these attacks. In many cases as you know, we don’t have troops, we’re not engaged on the ground there so I cannot tell you we had evidence even though we certainly had a lot of media and social media indicators that either chlorine or sarin were used.

In other words, the United States, Britain, and France launched an attack on a sovereign nation in service of jihadists terrorists which may very well have caused world war three all on the basis of facebook posts and twitter feeds. However, there is much more to the story as the entire premise of the official narrative coming out of Washington rests on the premise that the West was acting in defense of civilians killed with chemical weapons. In order for the narrative to be true, the Syrian government would have had to use chemical weapons against civilians, the terrorists would have had to present accurate facts, and the West would have to care for the fate of civilians. Of course, none of these premises are true.

Still, despite the fact that none of the three countries with such concrete “proof” have yet to provide it, there is quite a lot of evidence to contrary, which should be examined at least in part.

Evidence Was Blown Up Before It Could Be Confirmed

Ever since the moment that Russia was able to secure an OPCW inspection team to enter Douma, the Western bloc of imperialists began moving to strike on an even faster scale. Quite clearly, the Western nations seemed to want to destroy any evidence that would have contradicted their stories before the OPCW team could reach Douma and come to the logical conclusion (assuming that the OPCW team is not bought and paid for by the United States as previous teams have been in the past). America and its “allies” were able to destroy a number of facilities and sites they claimed were chemical weapons facilities before the team could arrive. In reality, those facilities had already been visited and certified by the OPCW as not having been associated with chemical weapons, one of which was a pharmaceutical plant that manufactured cancer drugs, a necessity to produce in Syria since Western sanctions have made it impossible to import them.

After the Western missile strikes, OPCW inspectors, although having been delayed by the Western war machine, were able to make it to Syria regardless. However, on their way to Douma, the inspection team came under fire from what was almost certainly terrorist factions attempting to prevent the team from reaching the alleged chemical weapons site.

Now, after having experienced the setback of the Western missile attacks and gunfire from terrorists, the West is claiming that whatever evidence existed to prove the Western case for war has been destroyed, evaporated, or removed by the Syrian government. In other words, the West is claiming the OPCW inspectors have taken too long to reach the scene and thus, if they find there is no evidence to back up Western claims, it is only because the evidence was somehow removed while the team was in transit.

The Western attitude toward the presentation and investigation of its alleged “proof” is perhaps the most transparent attempt at covering up the fact that it has zero evidence with which to present to the world. Reasons why it is unable to produce proof regarding chemical weapons in Douma are thus changing by the day.

Russia And Syria Deny Attacks, Russia Claims It Was Staged

Maintaining a sizeable presence in Syria, Russia was in a perfect position to investigate the claims of chemical weapons usage immediately after the alleged incident took place. Immediately after the liberation of Douma, Russian radiological, chemical, and biological-warfare units carefully investigated and examined the scene of the alleged attack. The Russian specialists found no evidence whatsoever that a chemical attack had taken place. When Russian specialists interviewed Syrian doctors working at the hospital that was supposed to have treated the victims, the doctors stated clearly that no one showed signs of having been exposed to chemical weapons and were not treated for such exposure. Indeed, the specialists found many local witnesses who stated the video allegedly showing the aftermath of the attack were in fact staged.

This investigation led Russia’s Ambassador to the Organization for Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), Aleksandr Shulgin, to state at a special meeting of the OPCW Executive Council that the attack was a “pre-planned false flag attack by the British security services, which could have also been aided by their allies in Washington.”

“Things unfolded according to the pre-written scenario prepared by Washington. There’s no doubt, the Americans play ‘first fiddle’ in all of this,” he added, pointing out that the attack was staged by “pseudo-humanitarian NGOs” who are operating under the control of Syria’s enemies.

Shulgin was most likely referring to the Syrian American Medical Society, an organization which only functions in terrorist held areas and is itself funded by the U.S. government via the State Department and USAID, very much like the Nusra propaganda team known as the White Helmets.

The Timing Of The Attacks

As in the case of every other alleged chemical weapons attack blamed on the Syrian government, the question of timing is paramount. One must keep in mind that the Syrian military was not only winning the battle of Douma but had just negotiated a transfer of terrorists from the city to Idlib, a transit that was already in process. If Assad launched chemical weapons at this juncture, it would have been the most strategically stupid decision he could have made since he would have essentially gassed civilians in an area he had recently conquered. To quote a meme circulating throughout social media: “I don’t always use chemical weapons against civilians, but, when I do, I do it in areas I have already conquered while everyone is watching so it can be used to justify international military action against me.” The idea that Assad would have ordered chemical weapons against non-military targets in a city he had just liberated beggars belief. This claim thus ranks up with the previous claims against Assad in 2013 that suggest he chose to launch chemical weapons attacks against civilians on the same day that OPCW chemical weapons inspectors were present only a few miles away.

Launching chemical weapons attacks – the same weapons that have repeatedly drawn international condemnation and Western strikes against Syria (all on false pretenses) – would be a horrible strategic mistake. Chemical weapons, in this context, would be a desperate move on the part of the Syrian government. However, we are asked to believe that Assad would use them in areas he is not only winning but was hours away from liberating entirely. This claim is simply not believable, especially when one considers the fact that Assad has stood up to the worlds greatest military power and its allies for the last seven years clearly showing that, if anything, strategy is not his weakness.

Lastly, it is important to point out that Syria has already given up its chemical weapons after the 2013 chemical weapons attack committed by terrorists was pinned on Assad by the US. After threats of invasion by the United States to invade, Russia helped negotiate a turnover of Syria’s chemical weapons stockpile for destruction which was certified by the United Nations as having been completed.

Russia Warned Of Staged Attacks Coming Down The Pike

The potential for a false flag chemical attack was not unforeseen. However, this time it was not only independent media researchers who warned of an impending staged attack, but the Russian government itself. Nearly one year ago, shortly after the Khan Sheykhoun terrorist attack blamed on the Syrian government and used to justify war with Syria, Vladmir Putin actually announced that he had evidence that a false flag was being planned in areas surrounding Damascus. Douma is a Damascus suburb.

“We have reports from multiple sources that false flags like this one – and I cannot call it otherwise – are being prepared in other parts of Syria, including the southern suburbs of Damascus. They plan to plant some chemical there and accuse the Syrian government of an attack,” he said at a joint press conference in Moscow with Italian President Sergio Mattarella.

“President Mattarella and I discussed it, and I told him that this reminds me strongly of the events in 2003, when the US representatives demonstrated at the UN Security Council session the presumed chemical weapons found in Iraq. The military campaign was subsequently launched in Iraq and it ended with the devastation of the country, the growth of the terrorist threat and the appearance of Islamic State [IS, formerly ISIS] on the world stage,” he added.

A separate statement was released from the Russian General Staff which stated that terrorists were transporting “toxic agents” into several locations in Syria.

Attacks Didn’t Expose Civilians To Chemical Weapons

US General Joseph Dunford, at the Pentagon briefing regarding the American strikes on Syria, stated that the targets of US missiles were “specifically associated with the Syrian regime’s chemical weapons program,” one of which being the Barzeh scientific research facility which he labeled as a facility that is involved in the “development, production and testing of chemical and biological warfare technology.”

The Barzeh facility is in the heart of a heavily populated area of Damascus. Civilians are all around and in close proximity. The facility is located next to a teaching institute as well as a number of homes, which are situated close by.

Dunford claimed that the strikes “inflicted maximum damage, without unnecessary risk to innocent civilians.” Indeed, the strikes, despite having killed around 75 civilians, did not result in the dispersement of chemical weapons. But how can this be the case? If the facility was indeed full of hazardous material and chemical weapons components, why would the United States believe it could bomb the building with no “unnecessary risk to innocent civilians?” To the contrary, any bombing of that facility, if it was indeed used to test and manufacture of chemical weapons, would have had an extraordinary impact on the civilians around it. Toxic chemicals would have indeed been released and the population nearby would have suffered under a cloud of chemicals that would have indeed achieved the same result as an actual chemical weapons attack. But there were no such injuries. This leads many researchers, including this one, to believe that there were no chemical weapons-related material in this facility. At best, if the US truly believed this facility contained chemical weapons material, it wantonly endangered countless civilians in addition to the ones it killed outright from ordnance.

Some of the buildings bombed did contain chemicals, however. For instance, the Pharmaceutical and Chemical Industries Research Institute was focused on the development and manufacture of cancer drugs, a much-needed industry since the cruel Western sanctions have prevented cancer medicine from being sold to Syria.

Even pro-war Reuters was forced to quote Said Said, one of the employees of the center, writing, “Standing near the rubble, Saeid Saeid, head of the center’s polymers department, said that the buildings had been used to research and make medicine components that could not be imported, including ones for cancer treatment and anti-venom.”

Rim Haddad’s article for the AFP, “At Destroyed Syria Lab, Workers Deny Producing Toxic Weapons,” quotes Said further. It reads,

The site, according to Western powers, was part of the Syrian government’s “chemical weapons infrastructure.”

But Said told AFP only non-lethal research and development was under way at the centre.

“As we work in civilian pharmaceutical and chemical research, we did not expect that we would be hit,” he said.

Instead, the centre had been producing antidotes to scorpion and snake venom while running tests on chemical products used in making food, medicine and children’s toys, according to Said.



What are you looking for?