Syrian “Chemical Attack” – American Response

Syrian “Chemical Attack” – American Response

In the wake of the American attack on the Syrian Air Force base (one barely operational by the way), it might be useful to review some actual facts.

  1. The White Helmet (Al Queda) group received full hazmat chemical response gear a month before the attack.
  2. Three days before the attack they receive gas masks.
  3. They were the first response, strangely having full media cameras and reporters with them.
  4. They claim that sarin was the chemical used in the attack, which is absorbed through the skin, however camera shots reveal none of the responders wore gloves and none are shown with adverse reactions.
  5. Wounds on multiple children show blunt force trauma and strangulation as cause of death – not chemicals.
  6. The doctor on camera with journalists (Shajul Islam) is facing terrorist charges for kidnapping and torturing two British journalists and has had his licence revoked.
  7. Allegedly 50 – 80 people were killed in the attack.

Now let us look at the elected President of Syria. Just a few days after America decides that regime change will not be its objective in Syria, Mr Assad decides to launch a chemical attack in an area where civilians will be involved – a move guaranteed to provoke the Americans to revive regime change. So are we to assume that Mr Assad is completely stupid?

Or could it be that the American oil interests which have provoked America’s uninvited and probably illegal involvement in the Syrian civil war, have planned this “chemical attack” in order to ensure regime change in the hope that they can in the future access the Syrian government owned oil fields from which they have been barred for years by the Assad regime?

The “attack” seems likely to have been planned long before President Trump was elected and indeed America’s “shocked:” response would have needed careful planning.

The Syrian government stockpiles of chemical weapons were disposed of years ago under supervision. The rebels (ISIS) have used chemical attacks themselves.

The Americans have made various claims as to how many cruise missiles were fired – probably about fifty. The Syrian Air Defence missiles appear to have taken out over half of the American missiles. They possibly ceased firing anti-missile missiles when it became apparent that the American missiles weren’t aimed at anything important.

So this begs several very big questions:

  • A. Why didn’t President Trump stop the missile attack? Or wasn’t he told? Or was great pressure applied – and by whom?
  • B. Why did the American commanders go along with such a spurious story as the “chemical attack”?
  • C. Why didn’t the Americans conduct a proper, independent investigation on the ground before accepting the “chemical attack” story?
  • D. Is this another “Iraq WMD” lie to drag us into a middle eastern war that American business interests need.