3 The World‎ > ‎4 Territories‎ > ‎

Syria


Chemical Weapons Attack

27 Aug 2013 BBC

A very nice article until you put it into context. Lets look at it and the key words they have put in there.

'But any military action would have to be proportionate and legal,' this has only been added in there as a response to the outcry of the alternative press. He still doesn't say how or why attacking the Syrian military rather than dealing with the individuals concerned within it, is an appropriate response.

'Mr Cameron said he believed that the Syrian government had the "motive and the opportunity" to use chemical weapons while the likelihood of opposition forces being the perpetrators was "vanishingly small".' Again no evidence is provided to substantiate this, not even a paragraph explaining what the motive might have been.

'While there was no question of the UK and its allies seeking to alter the outcome of the military struggle in Syria, they must decide whether limited military action was needed to "deter and degrade the future use of chemical weapons".' Again why not bring those that did it to justice rather than just attack Syria. Assad is happy for an investigation.

This article uses its lack of detail in order to avoid investigating what may be behind the attacks. Lots of good words but no substance. As we all know this is what makes British politics.

Although the article might stand if the government had not deceived us before we know they lied about Iraq and went to war on the basis of it, its not new.

Infowars  20 Jan 2013 published information regarding trying to set up this operation, they give sources.

The Daily Mail apparently removed this article Daily Mail from its website.

The Tehran Times has this to say about the whole thing,

Finally the company that suspected of involvement Britam Defence, how proud we must all be.

Of course in Obama's world suspicion is enough to kill. Where as in our civilised world we will give these people a trial.

Another account here but from the same sources The Big Picture.


© Tom de Havas 2011. The information under this section is my own work it may be reproduced without modification but must include this notice.



COPY OF Infowars JUST IN CASE IT GOES DOWN

This is not my work but can be found at Infowars.


Hacked Emails Reveal ‘Washington-Approved’ Plan to Stage Chemical Weapons Attack in Syria

Obama administration complicit in war crime?

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
January 28, 2013

UPDATE: Britam has admitted that it was hacked but denied that the emails released by the hacker were genuine. Click here for a statement by a Britam spokesman.

Alleged hacked emails from defense contractor Britam reveal a plan “approved by Washington” and funded by Qatar to stage a chemical weapons attack in Syria and blame it on the Assad regime, fulfilling what the Obama administration has made clear is a “red line” that would mandate US military intervention.

The leaked emails, obtained by a hacker in Germany, feature an exchange (click here for screenshot) between Britam Defence’s Business Development Director David Goulding and the company’s founder Philip Doughty;

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

The fact that the plan involves delivering a CW (chemical weapon) that is “similar to those Assad should have,” clearly suggests that the idea is to stage a false flag chemical weapons attack that could be blamed on Assad by Gulf states like Qatar and NATO powers.

If the claim that such as plot was “approved by Washington” can be verified, then the Obama administration is complicit in a war crime.

According to Cyber War News, which details the process of how the emails were hacked and includes screenshots of the leaked documents, the hack also uncovered, “extremely personal information,” including copies of passports of Britam employees, some of whom appeared to be mercenaries.

A full list of all the hacked documents can be found here. One software systems administrator who analyzed the ‘header’ details from the email in question concluded, “I have to admit that the email does indeed look genuine….all these facts check out. So with Mythbusters objectivity I have to call this one plausible.”

Online business profiles confirm that both David Goulding and Philip Doughty work for Britam Defence.

Last year, reports began to circulate that that US-backed rebel fighters in Syria had been given gas masks and were willing to stage a chemical weapons attack which would then be blamed on the Assad regime to grease the skids for NATO military intervention.

Soon after in August, President Barack Obama warned that the use or even transportation of chemical weapons by the Assad regime would represent a “red line” that would precipitate military intervention. French President Francois Hollande followed suit, stating that the use of such weapons “Would be a legitimate reason for direct intervention.”

At around the same time, a source told Syrian news channel Addounia that a Saudi company had fitted 1400 ambulance vehicles with anti-gas & anti-chemical filtering systems at a cost of $97,000 dollars each, in preparation for a chemical weapons attack carried out by FSA rebels using mortar rounds. A further 400 vehicles were prepared as troop carriers.

The attack would be blamed on the Syrian Army and exploited as an excuse for a military assault. A March 2012 Brookings Institution report entitled Saving Syria: Assessing Options For Regime Change outlined this very scenario – where a manufactured humanitarian crisis would be cited as justification for an attack.

Yesterday, Israel’s vice premier Silvan Shalom told reporters that if Syrian rebels obtained chemical weapons from stockpiles belonging to the Assad regime, such a development would force Israel to resort to “preventive operations,” in other words – a military strike on Syria.

In December, a shocking video emerged of Syrian rebels testing what appeared to be a form of nerve gas on rabbits, bolstering claims that the rebels had already obtained chemical weapons.

As Tony Cartalucci also highlights, “Mention of acquiring chemical weapons from Libya is particularly troubling. Libya’s arsenal had fallen into the hands of sectarian extremists with NATO assistance in 2011 in the culmination of efforts to overthrow the North African nation . Since then, Libya’s militants led by commanders of Al Qaeda’s Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) have armed sectarian extremists across the Arab World, from as far West as Mali, to as far East as Syria.”

Last month, 29 different US-backed Syrian opposition groups pledged their allegiance to Al Nusra, an Al-Qaeda-affiliated group which, as the New York Times reported, “killed numerous American troops in Iraq.

Numerous reports confirm that Al Nusra is the leading front line fighting force in Syria and is commanding other rebel groups. Given their prominent role, allied with the fact that the terror group has been responsible for numerous bloody attacks in Syria, the notion that the Obama administration would approve a plot that could see chemical weapons fall into the hands of Al-Qaeda terrorists could represent a foreign policy scandal even bigger than Benghazi-Gate.

In a related story, the Syrian Electronic Army, a separate hacktivist group, continues to release hacked files and emails from numerous sensitive foreign ministry and military websites belonging to Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey, including emails sent between these countries.

*********************

Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Infowars.com and Prison Planet.com. He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a host for Infowars Nightly News.

This article was posted: Monday, January 28, 2013 at 6:01 am





Comments