HOLY SHIT! BRITAIN MORE AND MORE AT WAR WITH ISLAM AND FOR ISRAEL!
PATRIOTISM, GAYISM (ANAL ORIENTATIONISM), SHOAISM, ZIONISM - MUSLIM NEWLY IMPOSED RELIGIONS
LEE RIGBY'S 'MURDER' SHOWN TO BE STAGED BY THE BRITISH STATE
by ALAIN SORAL!
*
'MUSLIM soldiers' will go into schools to fight "Islamic extremism" in the wake of the Soldier-Assassin Lee Rigby State Staged 'Murder'!
*
HOLY SHIT 2!
MUSLIM television addicts will soon watch with or without their entire family PORNOGRAPHIC film "DEEP THROAT"!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rt32GP1FG00&feature=player_embedded
TREACHEROUS WARSI, WARSA, WARSO!
"Muslim troops’ in school to fight extremism"
MUSLIM soldiers will go into schools to fight extremism in the wake of the Lee Rigby murder.
Idea*: Baroness Warsi, Minister for Faith and Communities
Some 650 of Our Boys and Girls who follow Islam will tell youngsters it is possible to be Muslim and a patriotic Brit.
The idea* is thought to have come from Baroness Warsi, 42, who is Minister for Faith and Communities and a Muslim.
Drummer Rigby was hacked to death** as he returned to Royal Artillery Barracks in Woolwich, south-east London, in May.
A Whitehall source*** said the Government was determined to smash the myth that Britain is at war with Islam.“This is an opportunity for men and women in uniform to show that people of all faiths are serving alongside each other”An insider
The insider added: “This is an opportunity for men and women in uniform to show that people of all faiths are serving alongside each other.”
Attacks against Muslims have soared eight-fold after the murder of dad-of-one Lee, 25.
Michael Adebolajo, 28, from Romford, Essex, and Michael Adebowale, 22, of Greenwich, south-east London, are due to stand trial later this year accused of murder.
* IDEA? CERTAINLY NOT HERS!
** HACKED TO DEATH BY "ISLAMIC EXTREMISM"? WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE???????
*** THE IDEA, MOST CERTAINLY COMES FROM WHITEHALL!
By the way, who is that "Baroness Warsi" after all?
Is she a REAL Muslim or does she too belong to one of those fanatical sects (like, for example, the Ismaili cut-throat Sect, the Qadianis (Ahmadis, Mirzais), etc.) working for the British imperialists, Freemasons, Zionists, Jewish and Homosexual Lobbies, and mass murderers???????
BAFS
Ms. del Ponte, who in Y 1999 was appointed to head the UN was crimes tribunals for Yugoslavia and Rwanda, has sometimes been a controversial figure. She was removed from her Rwanda post by the UN Security Council in Y 2003, but she continued as the Chief prosecutor for the Yugoslav tribunal until Y 2008. Rebel Free Syrian Army spokesman Louay Almokdad denied that rebels had use chemical weapons (CW).
http://guardianlv.com/2013/08/syrian-...
http://www.aina.org/news/201308261319...
Rebels Admit Responsibility for Chemical Weapons Attack
Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
August 30, 2013
Syrian rebels in the Damascus suburb of Ghouta have
admitted to Associated Press correspondent Dale Gavlak that they were
responsible for last week’s chemical weapons incident which western
powers have blamed on Bashar Al-Assad’s forces, revealing that the
casualties were the result of an accident caused by rebels mishandling
chemical weapons provided to them by Saudi Arabia.
Image: YouTube
“From numerous interviews with doctors, Ghouta
residents, rebel fighters and their families….many believe that certain
rebels received chemical weapons via the Saudi intelligence chief,
Prince Bandar bin Sultan, and were responsible for carrying out the
(deadly) gas attack,” writes Gavlak. (back up version here).
Rebels told Gavlak that they were not properly trained
on how to handle the chemical weapons or even told what they were. It
appears as though the weapons were initially supposed to be given to the
Al-Qaeda offshoot Jabhat al-Nusra.
“We were very curious about these arms. And
unfortunately, some of the fighters handled the weapons improperly and
set off the explosions,” one militant named ‘J’ told Gavlak.
His claims are echoed by another female fighter named
‘K’, who told Gavlak, “They didn’t tell us what these arms were or how
to use them. We didn’t know they were chemical weapons. We never
imagined they were chemical weapons.”
Abu Abdel-Moneim, the father of an opposition rebel,
also told Gavlak, “My son came to me two weeks ago asking what I thought
the weapons were that he had been asked to carry,” describing them as
having a “tube-like structure” while others were like a “huge gas
bottle.” The father names the Saudi militant who provided the weapons as
Abu Ayesha.
According to Abdel-Moneim, the weapons exploded inside a tunnel, killing 12 rebels.
“More than a dozen rebels interviewed reported that their salaries came from the Saudi government,” writes Gavlak.
If accurate, this story could completely derail the
United States’ rush to attack Syria which has been founded on the
“undeniable” justification that Assad was behind the chemical weapons
attack. Dale Gavlak’s credibility is very impressive. He has been a
Middle East correspondent for the Associated Press for two decades and has also worked for National Public Radio (NPR) and written articles for BBC News.
The website on which the story originally appeared -
Mint Press (which is currently down as a result of huge traffic it is
attracting to the article) is a legitimate media organization based in
Minnesota. The Minnesota Post did a profile on them last year.
Saudi Arabia’s alleged role in providing rebels, whom
they have vehemently backed at every turn, with chemical weapons, is no
surprise given the revelations earlier this week that the Saudis
threatened Russia with terror attacks at next year’s Winter Olympics in
Sochi unless they abandoned support for the Syrian President.
“I can give you a guarantee to protect the Winter
Olympics next year. The Chechen groups that threaten the security of the
games are controlled by us,” Prince Bandar allegedly told Vladimir
Putin, the Telegraph reports.
The Obama administration is set to present its
intelligence findings today in an effort prove that Assad’s forces were
behind last week’s attack, despite American officials admitting to the New York Times that there is no “smoking gun” that directly links President Assad to the attack.
US intelligence officials also told the Associated Press that the intelligence proving Assad’s culpability is “no slam dunk.”
As we reported earlier this week, intercepted
intelligence revealed that the Syrian Defense Ministry was making
“panicked” phone calls to Syria’s chemical weapons department demanding
answers in the hours after the attack, suggesting that it was not
ordered by Assad’s forces.
UPDATE: Associated Press contacted us
to confirm that Dave Gavlak is an AP correspondent, but that her story
was not published under the banner of the Associated Press. We didn’t
claim this was the case, we merely pointed to Gavlak’s credentials to
stress that she is a credible source, being not only an AP
correspondent, but also having written for PBS, BBC and Salon.com.
Facebook @ https://www.facebook.com/paul.j.watson.71
FOLLOW Paul Joseph Watson @ https://twitter.com/PrisonPlanet
FOLLOW Paul Joseph Watson @ https://twitter.com/PrisonPlanet
*********************
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: Friday, August 30, 2013 at 1:00 pm
Tags: foreign affairs, terrorism, war
'We're ready to go': Britain and US could launch missile strikes on Syria as early as FRIDAY as Assad's foreign minister warns it will defend itself using 'all means available'
- PM considering 'proportionate response' to 'abhorrent' chemical attack
- David Cameron recalled Parliament for Thursday and has promised vote
- He said any action would be to prevent the use of chemical weapons
- He said their use was 'wrong' and the 'world should not stand idly by'
- He has said Syria has used chemical weapons on 10 previous occasions
- U.S. Defence Secretary says they're 'ready to go' if action is ordered
- Russians: West acts 'towards Islamic world like a monkey with a grenade'
- Syrian foreign minister denied 'utterly' the state was behind gas attack
|
David Cameron today insisted any military action in Syria would be to prevent the future use of chemical weapons as he warned Britain was not looking to get involved in 'a Middle Eastern war'.
The Prime Minister said the Syrian regime had used chemical weapons on 10 other occasions before the attack that killed up to 1,200 in Damascus last week and warned the world 'should not stand idly by'.
Meanwhile, U.S. Defence Secretary Chuck Hagel said its armed forces were in place in the region and was 'ready to go' should President Barack Obama order action.
Reports in America suggest they could lead missile strikes from as early as Thursday.
But the tyrannical al-Assad regime has warned it will fight back with 'all means available' and its foreign secretary said attacking the country to help rebels in their war with the state was 'delusional'.
Earlier today, Mr Cameron announced Parliament would be recalled four days early, on Thursday, to debate the crisis, followed by a vote by MPs on what action to take against president al-Assad.
SCROLL DOWN FOR VIDEO
Threat: David Cameron, pictured arriving at No
10 this morning, is considering whether to take 'proportionate'
military action against Syria in response to the chemical weapons attack
last week
Message: David Cameron has revealed this
lunchtime that Parliament would be called back four days early and a
vote on what action Britain will take
Summit: Foreign Secretary William Hague arrives
at 10 Downing Street for a meeting with Prime Minister David Cameron
this morning
Speaking this afternoon, he said no decision had been
made about British involvement but the world had agreed almost a century
ago chemical weapons should not be used.He said: 'Let me stress to people, this is not about getting involved in a Middle Eastern war or changing our stance in Syria, or going further into that conflict.
'It's about chemical weapons. Their use is wrong and the world should not stand idly by.'
Mr Cameron said the question for Britain is whether failing to act this time would lead to more use of chemical weapons in Syria and elsewhere in future.
'It must be right to have some rules in our world and try to enforce those rules,' he said.
'Of course as Prime Minister I take my responsibilities about the safety of our Armed Services incredibly carefully, seriously but the question we need to ask is whether acting or not acting will make the use of chemical weapons more prevalent.'
Mr Cameron said Thursday's debate would ensure 'proper' scrutiny and allow the Government to listen to MPs.
Business: Chancellor George Osborne and Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg arrive to speak to the PM today
Crisis talks: Foreign Secretary William Hague is
also at No 10 as the Armed Forces began to draw up plans to attack
Syria if needed
'I think in Parliament is the right place to set out all of the arguments, all of the questions.
'But I would say this to people - there is never 100 per cent certainty, there is never one piece or several pieces of intelligence that give you absolute certainty.
'But what we know is this regime has huge stocks of chemical weapons. We know they have used them on at least 10 occasions prior to this last widescale use.
'We know they have both the motive and the opportunity whereas the opposition does not have those things and the opposition's chance of having used chemical weapons in our view is vanishingly small.'
Mr Cameron said: 'Let's be clear what is at stake here.
'Almost 100 years ago the whole world came together and said the use of chemical weapons was morally indefensible and completely wrong.
'What we have seen in Syria are appalling scenes of death and suffering because of the use of chemical weapons by the Assad regime.
'I don't believe we can let that stand.'
He concluded: 'I understand people's concerns about war in the Middle East, about getting sucked into the situation in Syria.
'This is not about wars in the Middle East, this is not even about Syria.
'It's about the use of chemical weapons and making sure as a world we deter their use and deter the appalling scenes we have all seen on our TV screens.'
Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg said this afternoon failing to act against the use of chemical weapons would set a 'very dangerous precedent'.
Labour leader Ed Miliband said: 'When I saw the Prime Minister this afternoon, I said to him that we the Labour Party would consider supporting international action, but only on the basis that it was legal, that it was specifically limited to deterring the future use of chemical weapons, and that any actions contemplated had clear and achievable goals. And we'll be scrutinising any action that is contemplated on that basis.'
Call to arms: Tony Blair today irged David
Cameron to back military intervention in Syria to avoid a 'nightmare
scenario' for the West in the Middle East
Environment Secretary Owen Paterson indicated he would be voting with the Prime Minister, saying he was 'a loyal member of the Government'.
He added: 'And the United Nations Security Council will be looking at the difficult options facing this country.
'But what we've seen in the past week is horrific and we will wait to see what those proposals are on Thursday, and I think it's absolutely right that the Prime Minister has recalled Parliament.'
Politicians have speculated that if an attack is agreed it could be launched within days of the vote because Britain has a RAF base in Cyprus, less than 100 miles from Syria, while the Royal Navy has several warships and a submarine with missiles on board already in the Mediterranean.
U.S. Defence Secretary Chuck Hagel said today its armed forces are in place in the region and 'ready to go' should President Barack Obama order military action in Syria.
A decision on whether to fire missiles into Syria could be taken before the results of a report by UN weapons inspectors into the attack is produced.
Russia on Tuesday warned a military intervention in Syria could have 'catastrophic consequences' for the region and called on the international community to show 'prudence' over the crisis.
Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin tweeted: 'the West behaves towards the Islamic world like a monkey with a grenade.'
Downing Street said all options were still on the table adding they wanted to 'deter' al-Assad from using more chemical weapons.
'Let me stress to people,
this is not about getting involved in a Middle Eastern war or changing
our stance in Syria, or going further into that conflict'
- David Cameron
'Any decision taken will be taken under a
strict international framework. Any use of chemical weapons is
completely and utterly abhorrent and unacceptable and the international
community needs to respond to that,' Mr Cameron's official spokesman
said.- David Cameron
'No decision has yet been taken. We are continuing to discuss with our international partners what the right response should be, but, as part of this, we are making contingency plans for the armed forces'.
US Defence Secretary Chuck Hagel said this afternoon it was 'clearer and clearer the Syrian government was responsible' for chemical attacks in the suburbs of Damascus last week.
'I think it is pretty clear chemical weapons were used against people in Syria. I think the intelligence will conclude it was not the rebels who used it,' he told the BBC.
'We have moved assets in place to be able to fulfill and comply with whatever option the president wishes to take. We are ready to go.'
French president Francois Hollande added his voice to the growing clamour for action, saying France is 'ready to punish those who took the heinous decision to gas innocents'.
The Arab League also threw its weight behind calls for punitive action, blaming the Syrian government for the toxic attack that activists say killed hundreds of people and calling for the perpetrators to be brought to justice.
Free Syrian Army fighters hold up their weapons as they cheer after seizing Aleppo's town of Khanasir on Monday
An opposition fighter fires a rocket propelled
grenade during clashes with regime forces over the strategic area of
Khanasser, situated on the only road linking Aleppo to central Syria
A heavily damaged street in Syria's eastern town of Deir Ezzor
British warplanes have apparently been arriving at RAF Akrotiri, the UK's airbase in Cyprus which sits just 100 miles from Syrian targets.
The Guardian said today that commercial pilots in the area have seen military aircraft from their windows and also 'formations of fighter jets on their radar screens'.
RAF Akrotiri was built in the mid 1950s and first used in the Suez crisis.
More recently the base was used as a supply post during the Iraq wars and also used to support the attacks on Libya in 2011.
'What
we have seen in Syria are appalling scenes of death and suffering
because of the use of chemical weapons by the Assad regime. I don't believe we can let that stand'
- David Cameron
It came as former Prime Minister Tony Blair compared the violent Bashar al-Assad regime to the 'dark days of Saddam'.- David Cameron
Mr Blair, who took Britain to war in Afghanistan and Iraq, said this morning that it is 'time we took sides'.
'People wince at the thought of intervention. But contemplate the future consequence of inaction and shudder,' he wrote in The Times.
This morning David Cameron returned early from his Cornish holiday to consider whether to recall Parliament.
MPs are demanding a binding vote over plans to launch missile strikes on Syria without the backing of the United Nations.
But Mr Blair, whose views appear to be out of step with current Labour MPs, urged the Government to ignore 'the impulse to stay clear of turmoil'.
'I understand every impulse to stay clear of the turmoil, to watch but not to intervene, to ratchet up language but not to engage in the hard, even harsh business of changing reality on the ground.
'But we have collectively to understand the consequences of wringing our hands instead of putting them to work.
'I hear people talking as if there was nothing we could do: the Syrian defence systems are too powerful, the issues too complex, and in any event, why take sides since they're all as bad as each other?
Tyrant: President Bashar al-Assad speaking with journalists from a Russian newspaper in Damascus, Syria
Talks: Prime Minister David Cameron (right) is
expected to hold a second telephone call with US President Barack Obama
(left) within the next 48 hours to finalise plans for military action
(file picture)
Threat: An attack by Britain, France and the United States on Syria would involve long-range Tomahawk missiles
'But others are taking sides. They're not
terrified of the prospect of intervention. They're intervening. To
support an assault on civilians not seen since the dark days of Saddam.'It is time we took a side: the side of the people who want what we want; who see our societies for all their faults as something to admire; who know that they should not be faced with a choice between tyranny and theocracy.'
Mr Blair is now the Middle East peace envoy for the US, Russia, the EU and the United Nations, and said allowing the enduring controversy over the decision to invade Iraq in 2003 to hold back military intervention in Syria could help produce a 'nightmare scenario' for the West in the Middle East.
Syrian foreign minister Walid Muallem denied 'utterly and completely' that state forces had been behind the attack.
At a press conference in Damascus, he said:
'They said that the Syrian forces, the Syrian army are the ones who did this attack.
'I deny it utterly and completely.
'There is no country in the world who would use an ultimate destruction weapon against his own people'.
Speaking about the threat of attack by Britain or America he added: 'If the purpose of a possible (foreign) military strike is to achieve a balance of power ... it's delusional and not at all possible,'
Mr Muallem claimed that the regime had not attempted to obstruct weapons inspectors from visiting the site while evidence was still fresh.
The Russian Air Force acrobatics demonstration
teams 'Russian Knights' and 'Swifts' perform during the opening of the
International Aviation and Space salon MAKS 2013
Russia has delivered aid to the region and began
evacuating some of its citizens. Picture shows the Russian Air Force
acrobatics demonstration teams
'We didn't argue about the site they wanted to go to. We agreed immediately. There's no delay.'
The Prime Minister announced that Parliament will be recalled this week to debate plans by Britain, France and the United States to launch strikes against Syria in retaliation for last week’s barbaric chemical weapons attack.
But despite a growing domestic backlash over the prospect of intervention, it was unclear whether MPs will be given a binding vote.
Russia and Syria both raised the prospect of dire consequences if the West launches attacks without a UN mandate.
US Secretary of State John Kerry called last week’s attack a ‘moral obscenity’, but Syrian tyrant Bashar al-Assad warned: ‘Failure awaits the United States as in all previous wars it has unleashed, starting with Vietnam and up to the present day.’
And experts insisted that any attack could be illegal without UN authorisation – leaving British ministers and military commanders open to war crimes charges.
MPs last night said it was vital that any military action had their backing in a binding Commons vote.
Response: United Nations chemical weapons
experts meet residents at one of the sites of an alleged poison gas
attack in the south-western Damascus suburb of Mouadamiya
In Geneva, U.N. spokeswoman Alessandra Vellucci said the inspection team might need longer than the planned 14 days to complete its work and its priority now is to determine what chemical weapons - reports range from Sarin to industrial gas - might have been used in the August 21 attack.
'This is the first priority,' she said.
Nick Clegg is also believed to back a Commons vote, as does Labour. But some ministers are wary of setting a precedent and insist the Government must have the ‘flexibility’ to respond swiftly to events without recourse to Parliament.
WE HAVE THE LEGAL RIGHT TO ATTACK SYRIA, CLAIMS HAGUE
The Foreign Secretary said the impasse on the UN Security Council caused by Russia’s support for Syria would not prevent the West retaliating against the use
of chemical weapons.
A similar argument was used when Britain and the United States invaded Iraq in 2003.
Attorney-General Dominic Grieve has been asked to draw up a legal case for military strikes, which will be presented at a meeting of the National Security Council tomorrow.
Russia said bypassing the UN to attack Syria would be a ‘grave violation of international law’. And legal experts warned that intervening without a UN mandate would be ‘very difficult’.
But Mr Hague insisted any action would be legal. He said: ‘Whatever we do will be in accordance with international law and will be based on legal advice to the National Security Council and to the Cabinet.
'So, is it possible to act on chemical weapons, is it possible to respond to chemical weapons without complete unity on the UN Security Council? I would argue, yes, it is.
'It is possible to take action based on great humanitarian need and humanitarian distress – it’s possible to do that under many different scenarios.’
But others disagreed. Former ambassador Oliver Miles said he ‘did not understand’ Mr Hague’s argument, adding: ‘There is not any legal basis that I am aware of, apart from self-defence – and this clearly is not that.’
Michael Caplan, a solicitor QC specialising in international law, said it was ‘very difficult’ to make a legal case for intervention without a UN mandate.
‘There is no threat to the security of this country or the United States so on what basis could we intervene?’
Tory Andrew Bridgen, who co-ordinated a letter to Mr Cameron signed by 81 Conservative MPs demanding a say on Syria, said MPs had previously been assured they would get ‘a debate and a substantive vote’ before action is taken.
He said ministers should now honour their promise, adding: ‘We live in a parliamentary democracy, not a brutal dictatorship. The letter was specifically about arming the rebels but also about any further escalation of the crisis.’
Tory MP Sarah Wollaston said a debate and vote were essential to air widespread public concerns about intervention in Syria.
She added: ‘I sense that we are on a headlong rush into escalating this conflict and I think Parliament can act as a natural brake to that.’
Fellow Tory Douglas Carswell also said it would be ‘unacceptable’ for Mr Cameron to launch military action without the approval of Parliament.
Mr Carswell pointed out that in opposition Mr Cameron had called for curbs on the power of the prime minister to prevent military action without Parliamentary approval.
He added: ‘If the case for military involvement in Syria is as strong as those at the top of this Government seem to believe, they will have no difficulty in coming to the House of Commons and making their case.’
Shadow foreign secretary Douglas Alexander said: ‘Both the Foreign Secretary and the Prime Minister have made commitments to the House of Commons that Parliament would be recalled before a decision about further UK involvement in Syria was taken.
‘While of course I understand the Foreign Secretary’s reluctance to discuss specific military deployments, he and the Prime Minister do need to be open about the objectives, the legal basis, and the anticipated effect of any possible UK military action in Syria.
‘I would fully expect the Prime Minister to make his case to Parliament.’
The calls came as the Prime Minister cut short his holiday to return to London to take charge of the crisis.
Mr Clegg has also cancelled a planned visit to Afghanistan to take part in a crunch meeting of the National Security Council in London tomorrow, at which plans for missile strikes against Syria could be finalised.
Bullet damage: Snipers opened fire at a United
Nations vehicle traveling in a convoy carrying a team investigating the
alleged use of chemical weapons in Damascus
Guns: Free Syrian Army fighters hold up their weapons as they cheer in Aleppo's Saif al-Dawla district
Foreign Secretary William Hague said the US was signed up to plans to deliver a ‘strong response’ – thought to involve missile strikes against key regime targets.
'Failure awaits the United States as in all previous wars it has unleashed, starting with Vietnam and up to the present day'
Bashar al-Assad, Syrian President
Bashar al-Assad, Syrian President
He added: ‘We, the United States, many other countries, including France, are very clear that we can’t allow the idea in the 21st century that chemical weapons can be used with impunity.’
Government sources confirmed that military planners were finalising potential targets for a missile attack that is likely to take place within the next ten days.
A source said any attack would be designed to ‘deter further outrages’ by Assad and send a message to other tyrants that the use of chemical weapons remained taboo.
Arsenal: A member of the 'Free Men of Syria'
(Ahrar Suriya) brigade, operating under the Free Syrian Army, works to
make improvised weapons as homemade rockets are seen in the foreground
at a factory in Aleppo
Wreckage: Black columns of smoke rise from heavy shelling in the Jobar neighborhood, east of Damascus, Syria
But the source stressed that any military strike would not signal wider involvement in Syria’s civil war, which has already left more than 100,000 dead.
'We,
the United States, many other countries, including France, are very
clear that we can’t allow the idea in the 21st century that chemical
weapons can be used with impunity'
William Hague, Foreign Secretary
William Hague, Foreign Secretary
Mr Cameron last night held a strained telephone conversation with President Putin, in which the Russian leader repeated his claim that there was still no independent evidence that chemical weapons had been used or that the Assad regime was behind any attack.
The Prime Minister told him that the UK believed there was ‘little doubt’ that the atrocity was carried out by the Syrian regime.
He is expected to hold a second telephone call with President Obama within the next 48 hours to finalise plans for military action.
Don't start what you can’t finish, warn the top brass
As Britain, America and France threaten to launch missile strikes against Syria, IAN DRURY asks some of Britain’s leading military experts what the West should do...
LORD WEST OF SPITHEAD
Former First Sea Lord and security adviser in Gordon Brown’s Labour government:
‘We have to be absolutely crystal clear in our own minds that the use of chemical weapons was by the regime. If it was, then I think we can persuade Russia to sign a UN resolution that condemns a head of state for using them against their own people. That seems to be the first move.
‘I’m very wary of military action, even if it is a limited missile strike. What do we hope to achieve? Where will it lead?
‘What if Assad says, “get lost”, and uses chemical weapons again? Are we going to escalate military action? I have a horrible feeling that one strike would quickly become more.
‘The region is a powder keg. We simply can’t predict which way military action will go and whether it would draw us, unwillingly, further into a conflict.’
LORD KING OF BRIDGWATER
Defence Secretary during the First Gulf War:
‘I’m all in favour of getting Iran [the world’s largest Shia nation] involved because it is vital not to rub them up the wrong way. It’s also important that the Russians are involved: they must not feel as though they’ve been pushed back into a corner.
‘It is imperative to find a solution, and it mustn’t be military. This is turning into such a conflagration that it’s becoming extremely dangerous. I am appalled by the idea that the regime, if that is the case as it appears, would use chemicals against its own people. But the difficulties in how we respond do not become any easier.
‘The idea of a military strike to express disapproval is fraught with problems. We would have to avoid hitting civilians, and if we attacked the chemical plants there is the danger of dispersal of those chemicals into the air. It is hugely important that the UN does show some leadership here.’
MAJOR GENERAL JULIAN THOMPSON
Ex-Royal Marines officer who led 3 Commando Brigade during Falklands War:
it has aroused a considerable amount of odium around the world. It was a stupid thing to do because Assad has fired up people who, on the whole, were not inclined to do anything about him.
‘If we are going to retaliate – which I don’t think we should – then an attack by a submarine using cruise missiles is the favoured solution because you don’t have
to put troops on the ground and you don’t fly aeroplanes against Syria’s
well-armed air defences.
‘It is risk-free, but we have to get our targeting right because we don’t want to kill civilians. The problem is we don’t know what the consequences will be. Russia is certainly against it, as is China.
‘There is a perception that Assad is poking us in the eye; if we let him get away with this chemical attack, what will he try next? But I’m wary of acting if we don’t know what the consequences will be.’
VICE-ADMIRAL SIR JEREMY BLACKHAM
Former Deputy Chief of the Defence Staff in 1999:
a punishment strike is not at all unreasonable: how else is international law to be upheld?
‘Ideally this should have support, or a mandate, from the UN or the International Court of Justice.
‘However, it would be most imprudent to do it without careful consideration of, and proper preparation for, the range of consequences which might follow. This is not
a very nice dilemma and the answer is not at all obvious.’
COLONEL RICHARD KEMP
Former Commander of British Forces in Afghanistan:
devastating surgical air strike is not only justified but necessary in order to send
a clear message to Assad.
‘It is essential that the US and UK base their decision on the best possible
chemical analysis, backed up by firm intelligence to confirm who was responsible.
‘Of course our governments will need to be prepared to follow up with a second, more severe, wave of attacks if Assad responds with another chemical strike or some other outrage. But we must not be drawn into a protracted campaign, either in the air or on the ground. It would not be long before all sides turned against us.
‘And while it will be possible – under the table – to square a swift and limited intervention with Russia, a wider operation would be much more likely to develop into a proxy war or worse.
‘Nor should we supply rebel fighters dominated by Islamist extremists with anti-aircraft or anti-armour missiles: they are sworn enemies of the West.’
GENERAL SIR MICHAEL ROSE
Former SAS commander and leader of United Nations Protection Force in Bosnia in 1994-95:
‘I am not against a military strike, but the intelligence has got to be good and the target has got to be very specific; so specific that it identifies the unit that carried out the attacks.
‘If not, we will be seen to be siding with the rebels – and that should not be the business of the Western powers. We don’t know what the outcome is going to be, and we could end up with people in power who are worse even than Assad.
‘We need to be imposing an arms embargo and a no-fly zone, which would reduce the level of the violence. This is a total lose-lose situation for the people of Syria. But however terrible their suffering is with Assad and his brutal ways, the end result of an escalating arms race will be to make things worse. The suffering will only be greater.’
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2402597/Syria-crisis-Britains-armed-forces-draw-plans-military-action.html#ixzz2dCOK0uoX
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Syria: UK Will Not (?) Take Part In Military Action
Sky News – 1 hour 15 minutes agoView PhotoSyria: UK Will Not Take Part In Military Action
The UK is not going to be part of any military action in Syria, the Defence Secretary Philip Hammond says.
He spoke after a government motion, calling for a strong humanitarian
response which may have included military strikes, was rejected by 272
votes to 285 late on Thursday night.Commentators said it was the first time a British Prime Minister had lost a vote on war since 1782.
Speaking after the historic defeat, David Cameron said it was clear Parliament "does not want to see British military action" in Syria.
Mr Hammond told BBC's Newsnight programme that Mr Cameron was "disappointed" by the vote.
But he said it was clear "the mood of Parliament is that Britain should not be involved in military action and Britain will not be involved in military action".
He said: "We are now clear that we are not now going to be part of any military action - that probably means we will not be part of any planning or discussion.
"It is certainly going to put a strain on the special relationship. The Americans do understand the parliamentary process that we have to go through.
"They have always understood that in order to be involved in military action we would have to secure the consent of Parliament."
Responding to the vote, White House spokesperson Caitlin Hayden said: "The US will continue to consult with the UK Government - one of our closest allies and friends.
"As we've said, President Obama's decision making will be guided by what is in the best interests of the US.
"He believes that there are core interests at stake for the US and that countries who violate international norms regarding chemical weapons need to be held accountable."
Labour leader Ed Miliband said UK military action is now "off the agenda" and said MPs had reacted against Mr Cameron's "cavalier and reckless" leadership.
He said the PM had tried to "bypass the United Nations" and there would have been nothing worse for the world than Britain pursuing "ill-thought through action" which lacked international support.
Education Secretary Michael Gove shouted "disgrace, you're a disgrace" at Conservative and Liberal Democrat rebels after the defeat, an MP told Sky News.
The Scottish National Party's Westminster leader Angus Robertson said he watched on as Mr Gove had to be "persuaded to calm down" following the outburst.
Conservative rebel MP Adam Holloway told Sky News: "I feel sorry for David Cameron personally because I know the guy is very sincere on this.
"To me what matters here is not so much the arithmetic of the vote but that it is much less likely now that we won't be intervening in a horrible civil war that is fast becoming a regional conflict. Outrage isn't a strategy."
General Lord Dannatt, former head of the British Army, described the vote as a "victory for common sense" and said the "drumbeat for war" had dwindled among the British public in recent days.
In the Commons, Mr Miliband called on the PM to confirm he would not use the Royal prerogative to order the UK to be part of military action before another vote.
Mr Cameron replied: "I can give that assurance. Let me say the House has not voted for either motion tonight. I strongly believe in the need for a tough response to the use of chemical weapons."
There were claims that a number of ministers had not taken part in the vote because they were involved in meetings and failed to hear the division bell.
Sky's Adam Boulton said: "It's a major embarrassment (for Mr Cameron). His authority and judgement are going to be called severely into question."
The PM had already been forced to water down his stance - accepting Labour demands that direct British involvement would require a second vote following an investigation by UN weapons inspectors.
A number of Conservative and Liberal Democrat MPs - who have spoken out regularly against military intervention in Syria - either supported Labour and voted against the Government or did not cast a vote.
It followed rejection for a Labour amendment to the motion which called for military action to be taken only once the UN Security Council had voted in light of a report from weapons inspectors on the ground in Syria.
Mr Cameron had earlier said the "abhorrent" chemical weapons attack in Damascus last week had caused "sickening human suffering" and could not be ignored.
But he stressed his plans should not be compared to the allied invasion of Iraq in 2003, which led to the downfall of Saddam Hussein.
He said: "This is not like Iraq, what we are seeing in Syria is fundamentally different. We are not invading a country. We are not searching for chemical or biological weapons."
He warned "decades of painstaking work" would be undone if there was no international action.
"The global consensus against the use of chemical weapons will be fatally unravelled, a 100-year taboo would be breached," he warned.
The PM admitted there was no "one smoking piece of intelligence" that made it 100% certain the Assad regime was behind the atrocity.
UN weapons inspectors are due to finish their work on Friday and will report directly to UN secretary general Ban Ki-moon within 24 hours.
But their conclusions will not apportion blame - they will only set out the evidence on whether a chemical attack happened or not.
Syrian President Bashar al Assad issued a fresh warning on Thursday that the country would "defend itself in the face of any aggression".
Permanent members of the UN Security Council - the UK, America, France, Russia and China - met for an hour to discuss the situation.
The UK has tabled a draft resolution seeking approval for military action.
But Moscow, a key ally of Assad, is opposed to any military intervention and with China has vetoed all previous attempts to secure resolutions critical of the regime.
Reports suggested Russia is sending warships to the Mediterranean.
Six British RAF Typhoon jets were earlier sent to Cyprus as tensions mount, in what the Ministry of Defence called a "prudent and precautionary measure".
Tonight I am a British Patriot!!!
Thursday, August 29, 2013 at 11:07PM Gilad Atzmon
The
House of Common said No to another Zio-Con war. President Obama and the
USA are left to fight this war alone, and according to the Israeli
Ynet, President Obama is willing to do so.
BBC reports: British MPs have voted to reject
possible military action against the Assad regime in Syria to deter the
use of chemical weapons.
Prime Minster David Cameron said it was clear Parliament does not want action and "the government will act accordingly".
It effectively rules out British involvement in any US-led strikes against the Assad regime.
And it comes as blow to the authority of David Cameron, who had already watered down a government motion proposing military action, in response to the opposition Labour Party's demands for more evidence of Assad's guilt.
Labour had seen its own amendment - calling for "compelling" evidence - rejected by MPs by 114 votes.
But - in an unexpected turn of events - MPs also rejected the government's motion in support of military action in Syria if it was supported by evidence from United Nations weapons inspectors, who are investigating claims President Bashar al-Assad's regime had used chemical weapons against civilians.
source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23892783
The
Real Target of These Attacks is Not Syria
Why a victory for Assad is a victory for Iran
By Robert Fisk
August 29, 2013 "Information Clearing House - "The Independent" - Before the stupidest Western war in the history of the modern world begins – I am, of course, referring to the attack on Syria that we all now have to swallow – it might be as well to say that the Cruise missiles which we confidently expect to sweep onto one of mankind’s oldest cities have absolutely nothing to do with Syria.
They are intended to harm Iran. They are intended to strike at the Islamic Republic now that it has a new and vibrant president – as opposed to the crackpot Mahmoud Ahmedinejad* – and when it just might be a little more stable. Iran is Israel’s enemy. Iran is therefore, naturally, America’s enemy. So there is nothing pleasant about the regime in Damascus. Nor do these comments let the regime off the hook when it comes to mass gassing. But I am old enough to remember that when Iraq – then America’s ally – used gas against the Kurds of Hallabjah in 1988, we did not assault Baghdad. Indeed, that attack would have to wait until 2003, when Saddam no longer had any gas or any of the other weapons we nightmared over. And I also happen to remember that the CIA put it about in 1988 that Iran was responsible for the Hallabjah gassings, a palpable lie that focused on America’s enemy whom Saddam was then fighting on our behalf. And thousands – not hundreds – died in Hallabjah. But there you go. Different days, different standards.
And I suppose it’s worth noting that when Israel killed up to 17,000 men, women and children in Lebanon in 1982 in an invasion supposedly provoked by the attempted PLO murder of the Israeli ambassador in London – it was Saddam’s mate Abu Nidal who arranged the killing, not the PLO, but that doesn’t matter now – America merely called for both sides to exercise “restraint”. And when, a few months before that invasion, Hafez al-Assad – father of Bashar – sent his brother up to Hama to wipe out thousands of Muslim Brotherhood rebels, nobody muttered a word of condemnation. “Hama Rules,” is how my old mate Tom Friedman cynically styled this bloodbath. Anyway, there’s a different Brotherhood around these days – and Obama couldn’t even bring himself to say ‘boo’ when their elected president got deposed.
So what in heaven’s name are we doing? After countless thousands have died in Syria’s awesome tragedy, suddenly – now, after months and years of prevarication – we are getting upset about a few hundred deaths. We should have been traumatised into action by this war in 2011. And 2012. But now? Why? Well, I suspect I know the reason. I think that Bashar al-Assad’s ruthless army might just be winning against the rebels whom we secretly arm. With the assistance of the Lebanese Hizballah – Iran’s ally in Lebanon – the Damascus regime broke the rebels in Qusayr and may be in the process of breaking them north of Homs. Iran is ever more deeply involved in protecting the Syrian government. Thus a victory for Bashar is a victory for Iran. And Iranian victories cannot be tolerated by the West.
And while we’re on the subject of war, what happened to those magnificent Palestinian-Israeli negotiations John Kerry was boasting about? While we express our anguish at the hideous gassings in Syria, the land of Palestine continues to be gobbled up. Israel’s Likudist policy – to negotiate for peace until there is no Palestine left – continues apace, which is why King Abdullah of Jordan’s nightmare (a much more potent one than the ‘weapons of mass destruction’ we dreamed up in 2003) grows larger: that Palestine will be in Jordan, not in Palestine.
But if we are to believe the nonsense coming out of Washington, London, Paris and the rest of the ‘civilised’ world, it’s only a matter of time before our swift and avenging sword smiteth the Damascenes. To observe the leadership of the rest of the Arab world applauding this destruction is perhaps the most painful historical experience for the region to endure. And the most shameful. Save for the fact that we will be attacking Shiite Muslims and their allies to the handclapping of Sunni Muslims**. That’s what civil war is made of.
Why a victory for Assad is a victory for Iran
By Robert Fisk
August 29, 2013 "Information Clearing House - "The Independent" - Before the stupidest Western war in the history of the modern world begins – I am, of course, referring to the attack on Syria that we all now have to swallow – it might be as well to say that the Cruise missiles which we confidently expect to sweep onto one of mankind’s oldest cities have absolutely nothing to do with Syria.
They are intended to harm Iran. They are intended to strike at the Islamic Republic now that it has a new and vibrant president – as opposed to the crackpot Mahmoud Ahmedinejad* – and when it just might be a little more stable. Iran is Israel’s enemy. Iran is therefore, naturally, America’s enemy. So there is nothing pleasant about the regime in Damascus. Nor do these comments let the regime off the hook when it comes to mass gassing. But I am old enough to remember that when Iraq – then America’s ally – used gas against the Kurds of Hallabjah in 1988, we did not assault Baghdad. Indeed, that attack would have to wait until 2003, when Saddam no longer had any gas or any of the other weapons we nightmared over. And I also happen to remember that the CIA put it about in 1988 that Iran was responsible for the Hallabjah gassings, a palpable lie that focused on America’s enemy whom Saddam was then fighting on our behalf. And thousands – not hundreds – died in Hallabjah. But there you go. Different days, different standards.
And I suppose it’s worth noting that when Israel killed up to 17,000 men, women and children in Lebanon in 1982 in an invasion supposedly provoked by the attempted PLO murder of the Israeli ambassador in London – it was Saddam’s mate Abu Nidal who arranged the killing, not the PLO, but that doesn’t matter now – America merely called for both sides to exercise “restraint”. And when, a few months before that invasion, Hafez al-Assad – father of Bashar – sent his brother up to Hama to wipe out thousands of Muslim Brotherhood rebels, nobody muttered a word of condemnation. “Hama Rules,” is how my old mate Tom Friedman cynically styled this bloodbath. Anyway, there’s a different Brotherhood around these days – and Obama couldn’t even bring himself to say ‘boo’ when their elected president got deposed.
So what in heaven’s name are we doing? After countless thousands have died in Syria’s awesome tragedy, suddenly – now, after months and years of prevarication – we are getting upset about a few hundred deaths. We should have been traumatised into action by this war in 2011. And 2012. But now? Why? Well, I suspect I know the reason. I think that Bashar al-Assad’s ruthless army might just be winning against the rebels whom we secretly arm. With the assistance of the Lebanese Hizballah – Iran’s ally in Lebanon – the Damascus regime broke the rebels in Qusayr and may be in the process of breaking them north of Homs. Iran is ever more deeply involved in protecting the Syrian government. Thus a victory for Bashar is a victory for Iran. And Iranian victories cannot be tolerated by the West.
And while we’re on the subject of war, what happened to those magnificent Palestinian-Israeli negotiations John Kerry was boasting about? While we express our anguish at the hideous gassings in Syria, the land of Palestine continues to be gobbled up. Israel’s Likudist policy – to negotiate for peace until there is no Palestine left – continues apace, which is why King Abdullah of Jordan’s nightmare (a much more potent one than the ‘weapons of mass destruction’ we dreamed up in 2003) grows larger: that Palestine will be in Jordan, not in Palestine.
But if we are to believe the nonsense coming out of Washington, London, Paris and the rest of the ‘civilised’ world, it’s only a matter of time before our swift and avenging sword smiteth the Damascenes. To observe the leadership of the rest of the Arab world applauding this destruction is perhaps the most painful historical experience for the region to endure. And the most shameful. Save for the fact that we will be attacking Shiite Muslims and their allies to the handclapping of Sunni Muslims**. That’s what civil war is made of.
What's your response?
-
Scroll down to add / read comments
Sky News – 7 minutes agoView PhotoSyria Crisis: US May Act Without Allied Support
- Charity calls for Syria aidPress Association video 1:17
Play Video
- Mr Cameron said he would respect The Commons' decisionSky video 3:19
Play Video
- Article: UNESCO urges Syrian belligerents to spare heritageAFP - 16 hours ago
- Article: Ignoring taboos, Syria war wounded treated in IsraelAFP - 15 hours ago
- Article: Syria: Osborne Defends Cameron After VoteSky News - 2 hours 12 minutes ago
- Article: The death of British power? Coalition despairs as shock Syria defeat sinks inPolitics.co.uk - 4 hours ago
President Barack Obama may proceed with military action against Syria even without allied support, US officials have said.
Veto-holding members of the United Nations are at odds over a draft Security Council resolution that would authorise "all necessary force" in response to the alleged gas attack.
The UK's traditional role as America's most reliable military ally was called into question when David Cameron became the first British prime minister in history to be blocked by MPs over the prospect of military action.
A chastened-looking PM, struggling to make himself heard over calls of "resign" from the opposition benches, told them "I get it" as he abandoned hopes of joining any US strike on Syria.
Speaking after the historic defeat, the White House said Mr Obama would decide on a response to chemical weapons use in Syria based on US interests, but that Washington would continue to consult with Britain.
British chancellor George Osborne acknowledged that the inability to commit British forces to any American-led operation against Assad would damage the special relationship between Westminster and Washington.
He told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "I think there will be a national soul-searching about our role in the world and whether Britain wants to play a big part in upholding the international system, be that big, open and trading nation that I like us to be, or whether we turn our back on that."
Sky's Foreign Affairs Editor Tim Marshall said the relationship between Britain and the US was "bruised but not broken". "I don't think there's a divorce on the cards, a bit of bickering perhaps," he added.
US Defence Secretary Chuck Hagel, speaking on a trip to the Philippines, said: "It is the goal of President Obama and our government ... whatever decision is taken, that it be an international collaboration and effort."
America is mulling whether to strike Syria without UN backing despite some of the more hawkish figures in the US cautioning against military action.
Former president, George W Bush, told Fox News Mr Obama had a "tough choice to make" but would not be drawn on what he should do.
He added: "I was not a fan of Mr Assad. He's an ally of Iran and has made mischief."
Former Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, who helped spearhead US invasions in Iraq and Afghanistan, said: "There really hasn’t been any indication from the administration as to what our national interest is with respect to this particular situation."
He said, if anything, the US should be more concerned with Iran.
Earlier, top US officials spoke to key Democrat and Republican politicians for more than 90 minutes in a conference call to explain why they believe the Syrian regime was responsible for the suspected chemical attack.
They have been pressing Mr Obama to provide a legal rationale for military action, and to lay out a firm case linking President Bashar al Assad's forces to the attack.
Tennessee Senator Bob Corker, a senior Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said after the briefing that "strong evidence of the Assad regime's continued use of chemical warfare" merited a military response.
It remained to be seen whether any sceptics were swayed by the call, given the expectation that officials would hold back classified information to protect intelligence sources.
"The main thing was that they have no doubt that Assad's forces used chemical weapons," New York Rep Eliot Engel, the top Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said after the briefing.
But he said officials did not provide much new evidence of that.
"They said they have (intercepted) some discussions and some indications from a high-level official," he said, and that they possess intelligence showing material being moved in advance of the attack.
France announced that its armed forces "have been put in position to respond" if President Francois Hollande decides on military action.
He does not need French parliamentary approval to launch military action that lasts less than four months.
Moscow and Beijing have both vetoed previous Western efforts to impose UN penalties on Syria.
China has also been keen to show it is not taking sides and has urged the Syrian government to talk to the opposition and meet demands for political change.
Mr Assad, who has denied using chemical weapons, vowed his country "will defend itself against any aggression".
Mr Obama has ruled out putting American forces on the ground in Syria or setting up a no-fly zone over the country.
He said any US response would be limited in scope and aimed solely at punishing Mr Assad for deploying deadly gases, not at regime change.
The most likely military option would be Tomahawk cruise missile strikes from four Navy destroyers in the eastern Mediterranean Sea.
Jewish Press Unleash Hatred against Britain
The Jewish Times of Israel
editor, veteran Zionist Supremacist and agent David Horovitz, has shown
the world the true nature of Zionist Supremacism in a hatred-filled
editorial attacking “perfidious Albion” for daring not to believe Jewish
propaganda about Syria.
In an editorial titled “Perfidious Albion hands murderous Assad a spectacular victory,”
Horovitz asserted that “ a perfect storm of British ineptitude and
gutlessness sent the wrong message to the butcher of Damascus, and left
Israel more certain than ever that it can only rely on itself.”
The Times of Israel is a
Jerusalem-based online newspaper founded in 2012 by UK-born but now
“Israeli” Horovitz and his US-based capital partner Seth Klarman.
Horovitz’s hatred of the country he was
born in, and its native people, drips from the wording in his editorial.
He says that the British decision not to immediately attack Syria just
because the Zionists said they should, was the result of “political
ineptitude, short-sighted expediency, and gutlessness.”
Hortovitz’s own newspaper earlier confirmed that “Israeli intelligence” was the single source for the “evidence” about the claimed chemical attack.
He, like other Zionist Supremacists, is now outraged that the British goyim have refused to unreservedly take the Jewish line as the Gospel truth—and instead have dared to ask to actual proof.
Horovitz, previously editor of the Jerusalem Post,
went on to claim that Cameron’s defeat in the British parliament was
the result of “prime ministerial foolishness” because he had “tried to
steamroll parliament into rubber-stamping a yes to whatever Washington
might be planning.
Israelis bomb and burn children with phosphorus–crimes that Jewish Supremacists like Horovitz choose to ignore.
“The bottom line is that the UK, asked
by its leader to stand up and fight against the use of WMD to kill
innocent civilians in distant Syria, walked away,” Horovitz wrote—
ignoring the fact that Israel regularly bombs innocent civilians and
children in Gaza and Lebanon with phosphorus and depleted uranium
shells.
Even the Jewish leader of Britain’s
Labour Party, Ed Milliband, is dismissed by Horovitz for not daring to
come out openly in support of an immediate attack on Syria.
The British vote, Horovitz said,
“involved an unimpressive Labor opposition leader, Ed Miliband, who has
failed to connect to the British electorate and is unloved by his own
party, and who saw an opportunity for political gain.”
Finally, Horovitz ended his anti-British
hate rant by calling Britain “perfidious” and saying that it was clear
that Israel would have to take care of its own interests itself.
“Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will
be feeling a further bitter vindication of his long-held and oft-stated
conviction that, ultimately, against all dangers, Israel needs to be
able to take care of itself, by itself. At the very least, he might be
reflecting, perfidious Albion could not be relied upon to rally to the
rescue,” Horovitz concluded.
This statement, that “Israel needs to be
able to take care of itself” and that “perfidious Albion could not be
relied upon to rally to the rescue” is the clearest admission yet that
the whole point of the propaganda campaign waged by Horovitz and his
tribalists against Syria was to get the goyim to attack the Assad
government.
The outpouring of hatred against Britain
by Horovitz accurately reflects Jewish Supremacist attitudes towards
non-Jews: as long as the latter do Jewish bidding, they are “righteous
Gentiles,” but as soon as they dare question their Master’s Voice, they
are “perfidious” and “unreliable.”
Russia releases key findings on chemical attack near Aleppo indicating similarity with rebel-made weapons
RT's LIVE UPDATES on Syrian 'chemical weapons' crisis
A statement released by the ministry on Wednesday particularly drew attention to the “massive stove-piping of various information aimed at placing the responsibility for the alleged chemical weapons use in Syria on Damascus, even though the results of the UN investigation have not yet been revealed.”
By such means “the way is being paved for military action” against Damascus, the ministry pointed out.
But the samples taken at the site of the March 19 attack and analyzed by Russian experts indicate that a projectile carrying the deadly nerve agent sarin was most likely fired at Khan al-Assal by the rebels, the ministry statement suggests, outlining the 100-page report handed over to the UN by Russia.
The key points of the report have been given as follows:
• the shell used in the incident “does not belong to the standard ammunition of the Syrian army and was crudely according to type and parameters of the rocket-propelled unguided missiles manufactured in the north of Syria by the so-called Bashair al-Nasr brigade”;
• RDX, which is also known as hexogen or cyclonite, was used as the bursting charge for the shell, and it is “not used in standard chemical munitions”;
• soil and shell samples contain “the non-industrially synthesized nerve agent sarin and diisopropylfluorophosphate,” which was “used by Western states for producing chemical weapons during World War II.”
The findings of the report are “extremely specific,” as they mostly consist of scientific and technical data from probes’ analysis, the ministry stressed, adding that this data can “substantially aid” the UN investigation of the incident.
While focusing on the Khan al-Assal attack on March 19, in which at least 26 civilians and Syrian army soldiers were killed, and 86 more were injured, the Russian Foreign Ministry also criticized the “flawed selective approach” of certain states in reporting the recent incidents of alleged chemical weapons use in August.
The hype around the alleged attack on the eastern Damascus suburb of Ghouta showed “apparent attempts to cast a veil over the incidents of gas poisoning of Syrian army soldiers on August 22, 24 and 25,” the ministry said, adding that all the respective evidence was handed to the UN by Syria.
The condition of the soldiers who, according to Damascus, suffered poisoning after discovering tanks with traces of sarin, has been examined and documented by the UN inspectors, the ministry pointed out, adding that “any objective investigation of the August 21 incident in eastern Ghouta is impossible without the consideration of all these facts.”
UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon on Tuesday said the UN investigators are set to return to Syria to investigate several other cases of alleged chemical weapons use, including the March 19 incident in Khan al-Assal.
An Israeli soldier
rests on his armoured bulldozer in a deployment training area in the
Golan Heights near the border with Syria. Photograph: Menahem
Kahana/AFP/Getty
A team of United Nations inspectors have resumed their second
day of investigations at the site of an alleged chemical weapons
attack outside Damascus, as western leaders moved towards military
action in response to the Syrian regime's reported use of chemical
weapons against civilians.
The UN team left their Damascus hotel early on Wednesday after the operation was suspended on Tuesday following a sniper attack on its convoy on Monday.
The bulk of evidence proving the Assad regime's deployment of chemical weapons – which would provide legal grounds essential to justify any western military action – has been provided by Israeli military intelligence, the German magazine Focus has reported.
The UN team left their Damascus hotel early on Wednesday after the operation was suspended on Tuesday following a sniper attack on its convoy on Monday.
The bulk of evidence proving the Assad regime's deployment of chemical weapons – which would provide legal grounds essential to justify any western military action – has been provided by Israeli military intelligence, the German magazine Focus has reported.
Binyamin Netanyahu said Israel was 'prepared for every scenario'. Photograph: Yossi Aloni/AFP/Getty Images
The 8200 unit of the Israeli Defence Forces, which specialises in
electronic surveillance, intercepted a conversation between Syrian
officials regarding the use of chemical weapons, an unnamed former
Mossad official told Focus. The content of the conversation was relayed
to the US, the ex-official said.
The 8200 unit collects and analyses electronic data, including wiretapped telephone calls and emails. It is the largest unit in the IDF.
Israel has invested in intelligence assets in Syria for decades, according to a senior government official. "We have an historic intelligence effort in the field, for obvious reasons," he said.
Israel and the US had a "close and co-operative relationship in the intelligence field", he added, but declined to comment specifically on the Focus report.
Senior Israeli security officials arrived in Washington on Monday to share the latest results of intelligence-gathering, and to review the Syrian crisis with national security adviser Susan Rice.
In northern Israel, a military training exercise began on Wednesday in the Golan Heights, Syrian territory that has been occupied by Israel since 1967. There have been numerous incidences of mortar shells and gunfire landing on the Israeli-controlled Golan over the past year, prompting return fire by the IDF on occasion.
The Israeli prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, was due to convene the security cabinet on Wednesday to discuss impending US military intervention in Syria. Officials are assessing the chances of Syrian retaliation against Israel following US action.
An unnamed senior Syrian army officer told the Iranian news agency Fars: "If Syria is attacked, Israel will also be set on fire and such an attack will, in turn, engage Syria's neighbours."
Israel was "prepared for every scenario" and would respond forcefully if necessary, Netanyahu said after the meeting.
Later, Benny Gantz, the Israeli chief of staff, said: "Those who wish to harm us will find us sharper and firmer than ever. Our enemies should know that we are determined and ready to defend our citizens by any action necessary, against any threat and in any scenario we will face."
The likelihood of Syrian retaliation depended on the scale of the US attack, said military analyst Alex Fishman.
"If it is decided to fire several dozen Tomahawk missiles at military targets, there is a chance that the Syrians will succeed in containing the attack, presenting the offensive as a failure and praising the staying power of the army and the Syrian people; however, if it is decided to fire hundreds of missiles and significantly harm its strategic assets, the Syrian need for an act of revenge will heighten," Fishman wrote in Yedioth Ahronoth.
"The formula is simple: The more threatened the Syrian regime feels, the greater the chance that it will fire at its neighbours," he added.
Meanwhile, demand for gas masks and protection kits from the Israeli public continued to rise. The Israeli postal authority said telephone inquiries had increased by 300% and queues had formed outside distribution depots.
According to a report in Ma'ariv, Israel's home front command is grappling with the problem of providing gas masks to men with beards, extremely common among ultra-Orthodox Jews. A special mask, which can accommodate a beard, is available but the high cost means it is only distributed to men over 65 or whose beards are for health reasons.
"Men who grow beards for religious reasons will have to shave in the event of a chemical attack," Ma'ariv reported.
The 8200 unit collects and analyses electronic data, including wiretapped telephone calls and emails. It is the largest unit in the IDF.
Israel has invested in intelligence assets in Syria for decades, according to a senior government official. "We have an historic intelligence effort in the field, for obvious reasons," he said.
Israel and the US had a "close and co-operative relationship in the intelligence field", he added, but declined to comment specifically on the Focus report.
Senior Israeli security officials arrived in Washington on Monday to share the latest results of intelligence-gathering, and to review the Syrian crisis with national security adviser Susan Rice.
In northern Israel, a military training exercise began on Wednesday in the Golan Heights, Syrian territory that has been occupied by Israel since 1967. There have been numerous incidences of mortar shells and gunfire landing on the Israeli-controlled Golan over the past year, prompting return fire by the IDF on occasion.
The Israeli prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, was due to convene the security cabinet on Wednesday to discuss impending US military intervention in Syria. Officials are assessing the chances of Syrian retaliation against Israel following US action.
An unnamed senior Syrian army officer told the Iranian news agency Fars: "If Syria is attacked, Israel will also be set on fire and such an attack will, in turn, engage Syria's neighbours."
Israel was "prepared for every scenario" and would respond forcefully if necessary, Netanyahu said after the meeting.
Later, Benny Gantz, the Israeli chief of staff, said: "Those who wish to harm us will find us sharper and firmer than ever. Our enemies should know that we are determined and ready to defend our citizens by any action necessary, against any threat and in any scenario we will face."
The likelihood of Syrian retaliation depended on the scale of the US attack, said military analyst Alex Fishman.
"If it is decided to fire several dozen Tomahawk missiles at military targets, there is a chance that the Syrians will succeed in containing the attack, presenting the offensive as a failure and praising the staying power of the army and the Syrian people; however, if it is decided to fire hundreds of missiles and significantly harm its strategic assets, the Syrian need for an act of revenge will heighten," Fishman wrote in Yedioth Ahronoth.
"The formula is simple: The more threatened the Syrian regime feels, the greater the chance that it will fire at its neighbours," he added.
Meanwhile, demand for gas masks and protection kits from the Israeli public continued to rise. The Israeli postal authority said telephone inquiries had increased by 300% and queues had formed outside distribution depots.
According to a report in Ma'ariv, Israel's home front command is grappling with the problem of providing gas masks to men with beards, extremely common among ultra-Orthodox Jews. A special mask, which can accommodate a beard, is available but the high cost means it is only distributed to men over 65 or whose beards are for health reasons.
"Men who grow beards for religious reasons will have to shave in the event of a chemical attack," Ma'ariv reported.
French Muslim girl, 16, tries to kill herself after two men threatened her with a box cutter and ripped off her veil
- The teenager said two 'European looking' men approached her in Trappes
- The men pushed her and brandished a box cutter in the attack, the girl said
- Hundreds of Muslim protesters rioted in the suburb in July in response to attempts to fine a woman wearing a full Islamic veil
- Wearing a veil which covers the face has been banned in France since 2011
|
Burka ban: A teenage French Muslim girl tried to
commit suicide after two men attacked her for wearing a veil on August
12 (file photo)
A teenage French Muslim girl, who was attacked by two men with a box cutter for wearing a veil, has tried to commit suicide.
The 16-year-old is reportedly in a critical condition in hospital after jumping out a fourth storey window at her home in Trappes, Paris yesterday.
While her motives for suicide remain unclear, she is believed to have also unsuccessfully tried to overdose on pills last week according to French newspaper Le Parisien.
In July, hundreds of Muslim protesters clashed with riot police in the Parisian suburb after attempts were made to fine a woman for wearing a full Islamic veil.
Since the controversial burka ban which was introduced across France in 2011 there has been a string of violent incidents across the country.
Worried that the girl’s suicide attempt might spark more riots, police were stationed in the commuter town to the west of the French capital on Monday night but no disorder unfolded.
The girl told police that on August 12 she was approached by two ‘European looking’ men with shaved heads near Square Berlioz as she left a friend’s house at 5.45pm.
The men allegedly shouted anti-Muslim and racist remarks at her before wielding a box cutter. They ripped off her veil, pushed her over and hit her.
Riot rampage: The 16-year-old jumped out a
fourth storey window in Trappes, Paris where in July hundreds of Muslim
protesters clashed with riot police (pictured) after attempts were made
to fine a woman for wearing a full Islamic veil
Her attackers fled in a car when another man intervened. Le Parisien newspaper reported that she had ‘light scratch marks’ on her throat and face.
Police in Yveslines are currently investigating the attack and looking at CCTV footage but are struggling because no eye witnesses to the attack have come forward.
It is unclear whether the teenager was wearing a hijab (headscarf) or a niqab (full face veil) which is now prohibited under the French burka ban. Women found guilty of wearing veils which cover the face in public can be fined the equivalent of £130 and be forced to attend citizenship classes.
Trappes riots: During the July riots hundreds of
people surrounded the police headquarters in the area and bombarded
officers with stones while also they started fires and vandalised
property
During the riots in Trappes in July, hundreds of people surrounded the police headquarters in the area and bombarded officers with stones while also they started fires and vandalised property.
A 14-year-old boy suffered a serious eye injury in the violence, while four police were hurt on Saturday, said local prosecutor Vincent Lesclous.
A police source in Trappes said: ‘The disturbances are related to the arrest of a man who objected to his wife being controlled for wearing a veil.
‘He attacked officers and was then arrested. It is this which led to the protests outside the police headquarters in Trappes.’
A 21-year-old pregnant woman was also attacked by suspected vigilantes for covering her face with a veil on the same council estate.
In March, a Frenchman who ripped a Muslim woman's veil off her eyes was given a five-month suspended prison sentence.
The 30-year-old said he was merely trying to 'enforce' his country's laws when he carried out the attack in the city of Nantes.
Controversial ban: The rioting in July started
after after police officers carried out an identity check on a
full-veiled woman and her husband
