Evidence: Syrian Rebels Used Chemical Weapons (Not Assad)

by Shoebat Foundation on August 27, 2013 in General

By Walid Shoebat and Ben Barrack
Recent news of a chemical weapons attack in Syria smacks of desperation. The question comes down
to who is most desperate right now, the Assad regime or the Muslim Brotherhood rebels? Consider
that since June, Assads forces have been winning. According to a CBS News report from last month,
victories for the rebels had become increasingly rare and that the Muslim Brotherhood-backed
opposition fighters were sustaining some of their heaviest losses near Damascus.


The New York Times echoed this sentiment, even saying that before gaining the upper hand,
concerns were that Assad would use chemical weapons; he did not.
In fact, even before Assads forces gained the momentum, a UN official reportedly found evidence of
rebels using chemical weapons but no evidence Assads regime did. This, from a Washington
Times article by Shaun Waterman dated May 6, 2013:
Testimony from victims strongly suggests it was the rebels, not the Syrian government, that used
Sarin nerve gas during a recent incident in the revolution-wracked nation, a senior U.N. diplomat
said Monday.
Carla del Ponte, a member of the U.N. Independent International Commission of Inquiry on Syria,
told Swiss TV there were strong, concrete suspicions but not yet incontrovertible proof, that rebels
seeking to oust Syrian strongman Bashar al-Assad had used the nerve agent.
But she said her panel had not yet seen any evidence of Syrian government forces using chemical
weapons, according to the BBC, but she added that more investigation was needed. {emphasis ours}
Today, while the rebels are more desperate than they were at the time of that article, evidence of
rebels using chemical weapons is available; evidence Assads regime has used them is not.
Waterman wrote
Rebel Free Syrian Army spokesman Louay Almokdad denied that rebels had use chemical weapons.
Its significant to consider that the rebels were reportedly using chemical weapons at a time when
Assad was more desperate than he is now. Again, why would Assad use chemical weapons now and
not then? Who is more desperate at this point in the conflict?
The answer is, the Muslim Brotherhood rebels, who have no problem killing themselves (or their
own) if the cause of Islam is moved forward.
Even CNN International, which has typically been quick to report favorably for the Muslim
Brotherhood rebels, is hedging its bets lately, when it comes to who is responsible for the attack.

Back in March, we chronicled evidence of chemical weapons being used by the Syrian rebels.
Unfortunately, since google terminated Theodores YouTube account, most of the videos in that post
have been deleted and have been more than a little difficult to find.
Running concurrent with the tide that turned in Assads favor a few months ago was another defeat
for the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. That defeat has been taking place ever since Mohammed
Mursi was ousted on July 3rd. So why would Assad use chemical weapons now and not months ago,
when his situation was much more precarious?
As the Associated Press was reporting that the U.S. is moving ships closer to Syria in response to the
alleged chemical weapons attack, Reuters reported that Assads army found chemical weapons in
tunnels that had been used by the rebels, according to Syrian state television.
Oxford University historian Mark Almond granted Russia Today an interview and explained both
why western nations are so willing to blame Assad and why rebels would have a motive to murder
their own people. In response to a question about why the U.S., the U.K., and France appear so eager
to blame Assad, Almond said:
Western governments want to say Gotcha. They have been demanding the fall of Assad for more
than two-and-a-half years now and it has become increasingly frustrating that his regime has shown
much more resilience than they had expected, despite the resources that they and the Gulf Kingdoms
have thrown into the war on the other side.
It is also like a distraction from the embarrassment of Egypt, where we see the European and the US
governments basically using weasel words to avoid any kind of condemnation of a massacre in the
streets of Cairo. So there are both the specifics of Syria and the context of what is going on
elsewhere in the Arab world, especially in Egypt.
Almond gives a very interesting answer to the question about why the rebels would intentionally gas
their own people:
We do have some very radical groups who would no doubt say, as they have when they have been
challenged about using suicide bombers, killing innocent people, that God will recognize his own
when the dead die, that he will save for heaven the justified victims and just send to hell the wicked
supporters of Assad. So it is not impossible that somebody has staged this.
Consider that a man many of the Syrian rebels show the utmost of reverence for is the Muslim
Brotherhoods spiritual leader, Yusuf Al-Qaradawi. When writing about a Muslim tactic known
as Muruna, Qaradawi expressed when it is acceptable for Muslims to kill fellow Muslims:
killing Muslims whom the unbelievers use as shields leaving these unbelievers is a danger to
the Muslims, so it is permissible to kill these unbelievers even if Muslims are killed with them in the
process. The Case FOR Islamophobia, p. 56
Of course, if the rebels are desperate enough, Muruna could sanction the murder of their own people
if it meant bearing false witness and a blood libel that would engage external forces that want Assad
removed. As things stand today, the rebels are more desperate than is the Assad regime.
Specific examples include the staged death of twelve year-old Muhammad Al-Dura by Palestinians.
Whether the child was used as a prop in a Palestinian blood-libel or was actually killed, he was
clearly put in danger by Palestinians who shot at him as the news cameras rolled for a false report
that aired on France 2. They wanted to blame the Israelis.
Earlier this month in Egypt, Muslim Brotherhood supporters were caught behaving as victims of
oppression at the hands of the military. They might have gotten away with it if nothing but still shots
were taken. Unfortunately for these miscreants, video was recorded that revealed a staged, mass
display of despicable behavior.
Syrias Muslim Brotherhood rebels would never get away with launching chemical weapons and
taking credit for it. Theyd have to do so while blaming Assad. Its straight out of the Nazi playbook
and a violation of two major commandments Thou shalt not murder and thou shalt not bear false
witness. However, the Muslim Brotherhood, as usual, provides more evil spin. It bears false witness
while committing murder in order to push an agenda.
Lying, bearing false witness, blood libel, and murder.
Yeah, that smells like the Brotherhood.
**UPDATE at 8:40am EST on August 31, 2013**
Associated Press reporter Dale Gavlak reports in MintPress news that firsthand accounts indicate that
the Chemical weapons attack was the result of the rebels mishandling of them. According to Gavlak,
the weapons came from Saudi Arabias Prince Bandar bin Sultan and were given to rebels who did
not know what the weapons were or how to store them, nor were they trained how to use them. If
these accounts are correct, the Obama administration along with more than a handful of Republican
congressmen may be complicit in a blood libel.
**UPDATE at 4:25pm EST on September 3, 2013**
An explosive article by Yossef Bodansky was published on September 1st implies that it is possible
or even likely based on a growing volume of new evidence that the August 21st Chemical attack
was carried out by the rebels against themselves in order to push an agenda that would involve
getting the U.S. to attack Assad. Worse than this, however, is that Bodansky makes the case for the
likelihood that the Obama administration knew about the attack in advance. While Bodanskys
findings differ from those of Gavlak, both seem to reach the conclusion that the rebels were the ones
responsible for the attack.
**UPDATE at 10:47am EST on September 12, 2013**
One of two European journalists who were held hostage by Syrian rebel kidnappers for five months
has gone on record as saying he overheard his captors in English discuss using Chemical
weapons in order toframe Bashar al-Assad. Pierre Piccinin claims that while in captivity, a phone
conversation via Skype took place in which he heard these claims. While the other hostage
Domenico Quirico could not confirm the conversation, he has stated that he no longer supports the
rebels and that they are Islamist fanatics. Its quite difficult to dismiss the firsthand testimony of a
hostage. Piccinins claims bolster the claims of Bodansky in the previous update.
**UPDATE at 4:32pm EST on September 21, 2013**
A Syrian blogger has posted a video purportedly shot from the cell phone of a rebel terrorist who has
since been killed. The video was shot on August 21st the date of the Chemical weapons attack
and it was shot near where the attack took place, in Ghouta. In the video, rebels can be seen wearing
gas masks and firing weapons while shouting, Allahu Akhbar. Evidence continues to mount that
Syrias rebels were responsible for the August 21st attack.
**UPDATED at 4:33pm EST on December 9, 2013**
None other than left-wing Pulitzer Prize winner Seymour Hersh makes the case in a rather
comprehensive report, that the Obama administration intentionally misled and manipulated
intelligence to fit the narrative that Assad was responsible for the Chemical weapons attack. A
central component to Hershs charges is that the administration led others to believe that it had
monitored Assads activities prior to the attack. Evidence suggests the administration knew as much
as everyone else did and didnt seize on the Sarin gas narrative until days after the attack. Hersh
compared what Obama did with Syria to what Lyndon Johnson did with the Gulf of Tonkin, which
involved altering timelines to fit an agenda. Again, that someone like Hersh who writes for the
New Yorker, broke the Abu Ghraib prison scandal, and thinks Gitmo should be closed is what
makes this news.
**UPDATED at 7:51pm EST on January 26, 2014**
Well, it took a while but none other than the left-leaning McClatchy news service has published an
article thatfurther discredits the likes of Senator John McCain (RINO-AZ) and any other Obama
administration sycophant. As it turns out, a report published by Richard Lloyd, a former U.N.
weapons inspector, and Theodore Postol, a professor of science, technology and national security
policy at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology make the case that the chemical weapon that was
used in the attack had a range that was less than the distance between Assads weapons and where
the rocket landed. Try again, McCain, you wicked apparatchik.
**UPDATED at 8:22am EST on April 8, 2014**
Seymour Hersh has done it again (see update on December 9, 2013 above). In a report that is
as explosive as it is exhaustive, the perpetrators of the August 2013 attack in Syria appear to be the
forces that work for Turkeys Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan. In his report, Hersh quotes
heavily from a former intelligence official who maintains rather adamantly that Erdogan was
increasingly frustrated with the lack of success against Assad and that a chemical weapons attack was
facilitated at the behest of high ranking officials inside the Erdogan administration, which
desperately wanted U.S. air power to finish off the Assad regime.