0 Shares 0



0

0







When Syrian Al Qaeda groups staged the ‘false flag’ Sarin attack on Ghouta in August 2013, critical analysis of the videos and supposed evidence was only carried out by a few observers, despite the obvious attempt to frame the Syrian government and create a pretext for military ‘intervention’.

Unsurprisingly, in the three and a half years since, we have learnt a lot about the modus operandi of the ‘Opposition’ machine – that includes foreign intelligence agencies, their military and media intermediaries, and insurgent takfiri groups on the ground. So when there were claims of ‘another chemical weapons attack on civilians’ this week, a veritable storm of discussion ensued about the details of what actually happened in Khan Shaikoun, north of Hama city.

There was no real doubt that this story was another hoax as soon as it broke into the news, just before the European ‘supporting Syria’ conference in Bruxelles. The sight of the White Helmets logo in the videos, as well as of WH agents in action at the scene left little alternative for those familiar with the recent expose’ of their close links to UK and US agencies, as well as of their extraordinarily careless ‘civil defence’ actions.

And we had seen it all before – the unconvincing actors, showing the wrong symptoms, operations on obvious corpses, bizarre hosing down of ‘victims’ – in this case with fire hoses – as well as an absence of any real evidence of the cause. Also of course was the suspect source of these videos and reports from Opposition-supporting media such as Al Jazeera or the ‘Edlib Media Centre’ – a new creation which appears to have replaced the French backed, Gaziantep-based ‘Aleppo Media Centre’.

While it was impossible not to follow, and be alarmed by the ludicrous and extreme language being used by Western leaders to describe this supposed attack, we had heard that before too, and perhaps found it hard to take seriously. Bad mistake! We had also become reluctant to once again warn of WW3’s imminent break-out; so far sanity – or Russia – had prevailed.

But no longer. Insanity has prevailed and the US has started a new ‘hot war’ with Syria and her allies. In a mere three days, the US has bypassed parliamentary debate, UN process and diplomacy and the laws of civilised conduct, to launch a war it has long desired – ever since 2013 in fact, when those plans were frustrated by Russia’s diplomacy just before Obama’s intended ‘punitive strike’.

It was said today that Obama had ‘tried to end the Syrian civil war for six years’, while Trump’s ‘decisive action’ is aiming to end it as soon as possible. Like everything else coming from the US and its media this is the opposite of reality – Obama managed to keep the Syrian ‘civil war’ going for six years, by supporting the countries behind the insurgency and directly through the CIA. Now Trump’s actions seem intended to inflame the conflict and provide a pretext for further military involvement and occupation.

What is most shocking about this new false flag initiated action is the support the US has demanded and received from its allies. Unlike in 2013, when military action against the Syrian government was strongly opposed in the UK, and warned against by many mainstream commentators, in this case the opposition is minimal, and completely absent from the mainstream media. The warnings that the US action is without any UNSC approval, and contravenes Syrian sovereignty, have only been voiced by Russia and Syria and Iran – and ignored. Most bizarrely, some of those voices who may have opposed such illegal actions – almost a copybook repeat of the ‘WMD’ of 2003 – and who have been vociferous against Trump until now, are seeing this ‘proportionate action’ against Syria as reasonable, and even as demonstrating Trump’s welcome enlightenment.

So what really happened, that we can record in the history books for survivors of this war – the war that it seems we must have and that good men cannot stop.

When thousands of Al Qaeda-led takfiri armed with US TOW missiles and suicide car bombs surged across the countryside towards Hama a few weeks back, and were driven back by Russian and Syrian forces, they seized and kidnapped hundreds of residents of some villages near Hama. As has happened numerous times before, but most notably a few weeks before the Ghouta ‘Sarin attack’, these poor innocent ‘pro-government’ civilians have been used as ‘extras’ in a propaganda video for the Oscar-winning White Helmets group, whether dead or gassed or alive and terrified.

Using a few screen-grabs of suffering children, and commentary from ‘doctors’ or ‘civil defence workers’, and endorsed by corrupted human rights organisations and UN bodies, the normal rational appraisal of evidence is bypassed. Even though some doubts may be expressed over the source of the ‘Sarin’, with Russian claims that a rebel CW store had been hit dismissed as ‘implausible’ – the idea that there really was a chemical weapons attack has been planted and will not be dislodged. So it only remains a question of what must be done about it. (No-one notes that all the Syrian Sarin was destroyed, so if Sarin is detected it must have come into rebel hands from Turkey – as probably happened in 2013.)

But this is not all, because the critical timing of this red-line crossing false flag atrocity, and the over-rapid US ‘response’ to it suggests a coordinated plan of attack – at least to this author. Adding some weight to this apparent pre-planning are reports that a ship load of US tanks and armoured vehicles was due to arrive off the Lebanese coast on April 4th, but from an unusual direction – Poland. It appears that much of the military hardware sent to Poland in February for supposed deployment to NATO’s ‘Russian front’ was loaded onto trains to Romania, where it was then loaded onto a ship for transport to Lebanon.

The chief Syrian Army spokesman declared that today is the first day of a new war on Syria; we can only await their ‘proportionate response’ to the US’ illegitimate and wildly provocative attack. Contrary to what Western leaders are always saying – that there can only be a political solution to the Syrian conflict – it is now clear there can only be a military one, whether Syrians like it or not.