SYRIA ANALYSIS: The End-Game, the Truth About the Chemical Weapons & ‘ASSAD Is the Root of All Evil’…

Posted: August 7, 2015 in (Politics) CURRENT AFFAIRS
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


The US has just launched its first drone-strikes in northern Syria from a Turkish airbase, according to the Pentagon.
Earlier this week, the White House authorised ongoing (and internationally illegal) air-strikes to protect non-existent “moderate” rebels in Syria, and including potential strikes against government forces. The invasion of Syria, intended for so long now, is finally happening as we speak.
And, with extraordinarily convenient timing, the chemical weapons accusation has now been brought up again, with a UN investigation imminent…

The UK has already been conducting air-strikes in Syria, it recently emerged, and without any discussion in Parliament. The invasion currently unfolding is based on the policy paper recently put together by the rather infamous US foreign-policy think-tank, the ‘Brookings Institution’ (which was crucially involved in drawing up the Neo-Con plans for the Iraq invasion). The paper, titled ‘Deconstructing Syria: Towards a regionalized strategy for a confederal country’, is covered more thoroughly, along with the UK air-strikes, in this post from a few weeks ago.

A short recap: it is centered on the establishment of ‘buffer zones’, now called “safe zones”, which includes US armed forces on the ground, literally occupying seized Syrian territory helpfully cleared by the terrorist proxies, including the gangs of Al-Qaeda fighters in the north and foreign terrorist militias operating along the Jordanian-Syrian border in the south. This plan and its reference to “safe zones” isn’t something new, but was in fact being discussed very early in the outbreak of the War in Syria. The objective is to occupy areas of Syria with US special forces and to then justify a nationwide “no-fly-zone” if and when Syrian government forces attempt to retake these ‘safe zones’. The presumption is made that if this territory is taken and US (and other) troops are assigned there, the legitimate Syrian Army will be too scared of attacking those areas, as Damascus would risk full retaliation from the US military; if Damascus does attempt interference, of course, the occupiers will have grounds for the no-fly zone. It is simple entrapment, as was carried out against Gaddafi in Libya three-and-half years ago.

For more on the Brookings Institution paper, the ‘safe zones’ and the 2015 invasion strategy, see here.

All of this is based on the stated idea of ‘protecting Western-backed ‘moderate’ rebels’ from both the Islamic State fighters *and* the Syrian government. It is a policy that is so convoluted and farcical that I’m surprised it can even be declared with a straight face. It is also riddled with deceptions; (1) the so-called ‘Islamic State’ only exists because of Western and Saudi backing and arming of so-called ‘rebels’ in the first place, (2) if we wanted to fight the ISIS/ISIL militants, why would we not be working with the Syrian government to do that, given that the Syrian government are the ones who’ve been fighting ISIS for four years?, and (3) there are no ‘moderates’ anymore in Syria. Most of the ‘moderate’ rebels, which were very few in number anyway, stopped supporting the uprising ages ago when they realised it was all being backed from foreign sources.

But wait, it gets dumber and dumber. Get this: the so-called ‘New Syrian Force’ (NSF) being backed by Obama, Cameron, Hollande and the West as the sole ‘legitimate’ entity now in Syria so far consists of only 60 jidhadists! Are you hearing this60 jihadists are now being recognised as more legitimate than the actual Syrian government!

More than that, these 60 jihadists are to receive full, absolute military support from the US, Brtain, Turkey and all, and once they are established in their ‘safe zones’, if the Syrian government tries to attack these ‘rebels’, they risk full retaliation from the US-led foreign invasion force! 60 jihadists is all America needs now as an excuse for all out war against Assad and Syria! It’s not even being presented as ‘protecting civilians’ anymore, just protecting ’60 jihadists’.

And if you think that’s the dumbest thing you’ve ever heard, then keep reading


Because on Thursday, the US State Department has just pinned all of the blame for the chaos and the rise of jihadists in Syria on President Bashar Assad. That’s right; Assad and the Syrian government, which has been fighting the terrorists, mercenaries and Islamic State for four years, is being branded ‘the root of all evil’ by one of the countries that has been funding, arming and backing the terrorists, mercenaries and Islamic State for four years. This narrative has gotten so ridiculous now that one begins to wonder if Monty Python has taken over the US State Department. And yes, that’s Assad pictured with Sting above – I have no context at all to that picture, but thought it was worth posting just to exacerbate the absurdity.

“The Assad regime frankly is the root of all evil here … and has been instrumental in creating the kind of lawless area to the north where ISIL has been able to get purchase and extend its roots.”


No mention of the ‘Islamic State being a creation of the US, the Saudis, Qatar, Turkey and the others? No mention of the millions of dollars of funding provided to the Al-Qaeda groups in Syria by the Saudis and Qatar? No mention of Turkey hosting training camps for Al-Qaeda, ISIS and other terrorists or using its border to flood Syria with armed mercenaries and terrorists? No mention of the role the US and the UK played in triggering off the Civil War in Syria in 2011? Or of the masses of weapons and jihadists channeled through to Syria from Libya by America and NATO after the fall of Gaddafi in 2011? No, no mention of any of that: just a simple declaration – “the Assad regime is the root of all evil”. Classic.

Meanwhile, the U.N. Security Council is about to adopt a resolution to establish ‘an international investigation unit to identify individuals responsible for carrying out dozens of chemical weapons attacks in Syria in the hope of one day holding them accountable for their crimes’.

Uh-huh. How convenient is it that in the same week that US/Turkish air-strikes in Syria have begun, we now have the chemical weapons issue being dragged out again, with an obvious underlying agenda to try to pin the crimes on Assad and the government? No doubt, this new investigation into the chemical attacks will be timed perfectly to confirm Assad as The Villain and justify whatever it is the US, UK, Turkey and NATO is about to do in Syria.

This UN Security Council maneuver emerges as the US and its European allies have been working to convince Russia to relinquish its longstanding support for Assad. You will recall that Putin and Russia were one of the main reasons the intended Western government attacks on the Syrian government in 2013 didn’t go ahead. So now the US and its allies are shrewdly trying to remove the Russian element from the equation, perhaps – and I’m only speculating now – in exchange for an easing up on the Ukraine front. A deal – said to have been finalised on Wednesday between American Secretary of State John Kerry and Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov – essentially gifts the UN Security Council (rather amusingly called the “World Terrorism Council” by Gaddafi in his 2009 UN speech) a new opportunity to formally accuse the Syrian government of using chemical weapons against civilian targets.


So then let’s talk about chemical weapons in Syria, shall we? Let’s re-acquaint ourselves with the whole, sordid backstory…

On March 19th 2013, sarin gas was used in Syria, near the city of Aleppo. Without waiting for any proof or investigation, Israel and the US immediately blamed the Syrian government for the attacks even though many of those killed were actually Syrian government soldiers. President Obama and numerous others in Washington began talking about the event as a “red line” that had been crossed and the warmongers in both government and media began their by-now familiar propaganda march towards war. From that point on, Assad’s government, like those of Muammar Gaddafi and Saddam Hussein before him, appeared to have its days numbered, with US/NATO-led military intervention imminent.


However the UN – in a rare display of independence, perhaps influenced by the disaster that had recently unfolded in Libya – insisted on investigating the issue for itself, and on May 6th 2013 the UN investigator Carla Del Ponte went public stating that evidence from their investigation indicated that it was Syrian rebels that had used the sarin gas and that there was no indication that the Syrian government had launched any chemical attacks whatsoever.

Del Ponte, who like everyone else had been previously misled by government officials in the West, was surprised by her own findings; “I was a little bit stupefied at first”. This was reported even by the BBC on May 6th 2013. It was stated definitively by investigators: ‘This was use on the part of the opposition, the rebels, not by the government authorities.’ 

It was also strongly suggested by other sources that the chemical weapons attack had been a UK/Qatar plot carried out with Washington’s sanction, the aim being to stage the attack, blame it on the Assad government and use it as a pretext for Washington and other allies to launch military attacks on Syrian government forces, just as had been done against Gaddafi and the Libyan government.

In essence, this would mean that NATO governments carried out chemical attacks on civilian populations in Syria (by proxy) and should therefore be investigated by the International Criminal Court for War Crimes.

This of course brings us to the subsequent attack on August 21st 2013 when our governments and the corporate media attempted once again to frame the Syrian government for the use of sarin gas… and once again these claims were exposed as fraudulent. When we look at the chemical attack of August 2013 in the Eastern Ghouta region (just outside Damascus), one thing that was scarcely mentioned in mainstream coverage was that the Syrian Government had been complaining for months about terrorist gas-attacks and had even invited UN inspectors to Damascus to investigate (echoing, to some extent, Gaddafi practically begging UN investigators to come to Libya and see that the stories about his government attacking civilians weren’t true).

When these inspectors arrived, ‘rebel’ groups posted videos of dead children to the Internet, blaming the Syrian Government for a new massacre. The US government – again without any attempt to verify the ‘evidence’ or investigate independently – was quick to agree. Due to US/Western pressure and interference, the UN investigation of the chemical attacks was cancelled and all attention moved onto the horrendous matter of the gassed children. The western media went into overdrive, up in arms over this ‘outrage’ by the Assad regime, and renewed the demands for military intervention. A major escalation of the war at this point was only defused by Russian intervention and a proposal that Syria hand over its chemical weapons stockpile; a stockpile it maintained had never been used.

Soon after that, a journalist in Jordan reported that residents in East Ghouta were blaming the “Saudi Prince Bandar of providing chemical weapons to an Al-Qaeda linked rebel group”. Prince Bandar, as many know, is a major player in (and financer of) international terrorism, particularly Al-Qaeda and Salafist/Islamist groups. A Syrian Christian group led by a Mother Agnes Mariam conducted a detailed examination of the video evidence and concluded that the massacre videos had used ‘staged’ and ‘fake’ images.


Tellingly, a Colonel Abdel Basset al-Tawil, Commander of the Free Syrian Army’s Northern Front, was interviewed by Al-Jazeera Qatar on June 10th 2013 and threatened the Syrian rebels’ Western backers should they fail to send more weapons: al-Tawil threatened them with revealing what really happened in regard to the Sarin attack. “We will reveal all the evidence we have,” he told his interviewer, adding, “I think you know full well I mean what I say.”

Unsurprisingly, as this comprehensive Storm Clouds Gathering video points out, just a week after this threat the rebels received their first ‘official’ shipment of heavy weapons. Here we basically had a senior figure in the Free Syrian Army openly admitting that the mass media’s coverage of the sarin gas attack was false and that *his* people had carried out the attack. So if it wasn’t enough that the UN investigators, Russian investigators, and the Pulitzer Prize winning journalist Seymour Hersh had all attributed that War Crime on the anti-government forces, the rebels themselves had admitted to it.

“The American and British intelligence communities had been aware since the spring of 2013 that some rebel units in Syria were developing chemical weapons,” the prize-winning journalist, Hersh, reported. Hersh quotes extensively from this US government document, which the office of the US director of national intelligence now denies ever existed: the journalist notes that members of al-Nusra were arrested in Turkey last May in possession of two kilograms of sarin. They were charged in a 130-page indictment with “attempting to purchase fuses, piping for the construction of mortars, and chemical precursors for sarin.” All have since been released pending trial, or had charges dropped altogether.

Those arrests followed chemical weapons attacks in Syria in March and April 2013, where the UN investigation had found evidence implicating the Syrian “rebels.” One source told Hersh, “Investigators interviewed the people who were there, including the doctors who treated the victims. It was clear that the rebels used the gas. It did not come out in public because no one wanted to know.” Hersh then moves on to his most important revelation: that US officials believed the Turkish government, or its intelligence agencies, had instigated the gas attack in Ghouta. In a lengthy article published by the London Review of Books, the investigative journalist reported that the sarin gas attack on a Damascus suburb on August 21st 2013 was actually carried out by Syrian “rebel” forces carrying out the wishes of Turkey, for the purpose of providing a pretext for a US ‘intervention’ in Syria.

Chemical and biological weapons were most likely provided to the extremists in Syria by the US.  There is also, however, a case to be made for Turkey having been the provider.

Just as with Gaddafi and Benghazi, Assad and the chemical attacks were the manufactured basis for international leaders and officials to demand that ‘Assad Has to Go’. As someone who studied the Libyan Civil War in great depth, the degree to which what was happening in Syria mimicked what had just happened in Libya was uncanny, and of course no coincidence; and not just the false-flag incidents, staged ‘crimes of the regime’ and scripted demands for Assad to stand down, but the behaviour and even the quotes coming from the same mouths of the same conspirators who’d led the way in Libya; Hilary Clinton, John McCain, David Cameron, William Hague, and all the rest of the criminal mafia.


What’s patently evident is that the international orchestrators behind the Syrian ‘Civil War’ are simply fed up of waiting for the government to collapse. Assad’s government was supposed to collapse as quickly as Gaddafi’s had. But it didn’t go according to plan; and instead the fighting has dragged on for four years, with maximum death, carnage and cost.

‘The root of all evil’…? It’s a sick joke.


Known by many Syrians as “Mr Soft Heart”, Bashar Assad was maneuvered into the Syrian Presidency only due to the death of his father and some of his brothers. Prior to 2011, he was generally regarded as a mild-mannered, highly intelligent type, much softer than his father. Comparable perhaps with Gaddafi’s eldest son, Saif al-Islam, in Libya, Assad has, if anything, been accused by many of his supporters as having been ‘too soft’ on Syrian opposition. But, like Saif Gaddafi, he is regarded as a Western-influenced, well-educated modernist, whose reform packages were fairly popular and who would’ve been intending further reforms down the line.

Prior to the beginning of the 2011 crisis, Assad, who spent 18 months training to be an ophthalmologist in London, is married to an English wife and has been a guest of the Queen at Buckingham Palace, was not someone remotely regarded as a ‘tyrant’ even in the West.

Like Gaddafi’s Libya, his Syria could’ve easily been transitioning towards more and more democracy. Indeed, in his book New Lion of Damascus, David Lesch suggested Syria could’ve been heading towards democracy ‘within 6 months, given a chance’. The point here, by the way, isn’t to make Assad out to be an angel, but simply to illustrate how fucking stupid the US State Department’s statements are.

While it’s inevitable now that the US, Turkey, NATO, the Saudis and everyone else involved will get their way in Syria and that Assad and the Syrian government will be removed from their own country, just remember that it’s all built on lies from start to finish. The US-led international mafia has been on  a mission to destroy every stable, secular Arab society/government it can and replace them with Al-Qaeda inspired ‘caliphates; this was essentially the programme in Libya and Iraq and it is the programme for Syria.

In short, as I wrote earlier, Syria – a nation that did nothing at all to provoke it – has been under attack, reduced to ruin, for the passed four years by various terrorist groups on the ground, all backed and funded from abroad, and by undeclared and illegal air-strikes from various governments; and it is now quite possibly on the brink of a full invasion to finish off the job. After four years of President Assad and the Syrian government managing to hold on to Damascus, it seems likely that we are now entering the end-game of what was intended all along.

  1. Miss Castello says:

    No offence, I would like to point out, the title of this article (‘Assad, root of all evil’) is quite misleading, due to the ‘quote marks’ being within the title itself and not instantly noticeable; just a quick glance gives the impression the article is condemning Assad, when the very opposite is true. I had to look twice myself, before realising my mistaken impression. Not everyone might!


  2. As someone who grew up during the cold war I am getting very very very tired of seeing the return of all the bullshit. I could scream everytime I hear some government leader trotting out the same old lines – Russian Expansion, Assad must GO etc etc etc. I’ve watched the destruction of Iraq and Lybia, the coup in Ukraine (which surprise surprise happened immediately after Putin and Russia stopped the Western bombing/invasion of Syria scheduled for 2013) and of course the open prison that is Palestine. And as I watch, as each governments leader reads the US script with gusto, all I can think is “who the hell do they think they are? what gives them the right to dictate who should be leader in another country? when the hell are they going to be stopped from this non stop Western aggression and expansion?
    Where are the truthseekers and whistleblowers that we need to step forward and stop the world from barralling towards WWIII and self destruction? There must surely still be people who know the truth and still have a moral compass who could blow the lid on all this bullshit imperialist war mongering. Why don’t they come forward? So if any of them are reading this, if any of them still have a shred of human compassion, if any of them don’t want to see the world plunged into the darkness that would be another world war…please, come forward and stop this madness!

    Liked by 2 people

    • I was only about 9 years old when the Berlin Wall came down, but I was aware from my parents’ reaction to it that the ‘ending’ of the Cold War in general was supposed to be the biggest event of our lifetimes; it was supposed to be the beginning of peace and some kind of genuinely idyllic new era where there wouldn’t be war and conflict and nations plotting against nations, but it would all be diplomacy and peaceful solutions. Even when Arafat and the Israeli leader were brought to the White House (1994, I think?), this also played into that idea that we were in an era of negotiation, compromise and diplomacy and not an era of aggression.

      That is all well and truly gone, however. And now we have the ‘return of the all the bullshit’, like you say. In some ways, you could say we ended the last century with an era of renewed dialogues, reconciliations, etc, and hopes for the future; and we’ve begun the new century with a complete and utter reversion to war, mistrust, plotting and conspiracies, with the very worst forces and industries retaining total control over the flow and course of events. But I think it’s much worse than what the Cold War was; much, much worse. I feel sorry for people growing up in this world, in terms of how things are now going.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Neo-Pelagius says:

        I’m a little bit older … the contrast between Yeltsin and Gorbachev first set the alarm bells ringing for me … although I am led to believe Gorbachev wasn’t perfect? Read any Alexander Dugin or the Fourth Revolutionary War blog?


      • I haven’t read any Alexander Dugin or the Fourth Revolutionary blog, no – but thanks, NP, now I have home work to do.
        Am I wrong in thinking that Yeltsin was just a sort of comedy act?

        Liked by 1 person

      • Neo-Pelagius says:

        Well I wasn’t THAT old so I can’t really remember the intricate details and it all seemed plausible enough. I think Yeltsin was a relatively popular politician in the immediate aftermath of glasnost and perestroika and then there was a short lived coup by the old guard but Yeltsin was a spokesman for the people and stood on a tank telling the soldiers to step back which they did and the day was saved … Gorbachev and his wife were returned to Moscow having been whisked away by those involved in the attempted coup. Gorby had effectively lost his power by then. Yeltsin took over and at one stage used tanks firing on the Russian Parliament because they wouldn’t follow Yeltsin’s programme … not very democratic … then my main memories of him are his turning up drunk to important public meetings etc. I mean really drunk and it was on TV etc. Then he went and we eventually ended up with now which from my rather limited knowledge looks like an improvement … I think Yeltsin allowed the West too much influence and was a friend and/or unwitting victim of the oligarchs as they are known.

        I am new to Dugin and am just beginning his book ‘Eurasian Mission’ … yes I know sounds very Orwellian. Some regard him as a fascist but it is not that simple, I can already see how his ideas might gain traction, and not only in the Eurasian country of Russia. He has apparently had some influence on Putin. It is an explicitly anti-liberal politics but I am not so sure that that is a bad thing. It is interesting to apply his ideas to Britain which isn’t exactly European and not particularly American in its liberalism, well not unless you take people like Tony Blair and William Hague as the embodiment of ‘Britishness’. Maybe somebody else on here could elaborate further or put me straight … this is a Joe Public answer.

        Liked by 1 person

    • Miss Castello says:

      “And as I watch, as each governments leader reads the US script with gusto, all I can think is “who the hell do they think they are? what gives them the right to dictate who should be leader in another country?”

      Uncanny; the almost identical words (certainly the same sentiment) have been rattling around in my head for days; screaming at the disgusting Zionist infiltrated ‘BiBi C with its propaganda spin masquerading as ‘News’. Parallel universe doesn’t come anywhere near.

      Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.