Yes, the Syrian Rebels DO Have Access to Chemical Weapons

anatta

100% recycled karma
One of the U.S. government’s main justifications for its claim that the Syrian government carried out a chemical weapons attack is that the rebels don’t have chemical weapons.

However, multiple lines of evidence show that the rebels do have chemical weapons.

Potential Looting of Syrian Weapons

The Washington Post noted last December:


U.S. officials are increasingly worried that Syria’s weapons of mass destruction could fall into the hands of Islamist extremists, rogue generals or other uncontrollable factions.

Last week, fighters from a group that the Obama administration has branded a terrorist organization were among rebels who seized the Sheik Suleiman military base near Aleppo, where research on chemical weapons had been conducted
. Rebels are also closing in on another base near Aleppo, known as Safirah, which has served as a major production center for such munitions, according to U.S. officials and analysts.

***

A former Syrian general who once led the army’s chemical weapons training program said that the main storage sites for mustard gas and nerve agents are supposed to be guarded by thousands of Syrian troops but that they would be easily overrun.

The sites are not secure, retired Maj. Gen. Adnan Silou, who defected to the opposition in June, said in an interview near Turkey’s border with Syria. “Probably anyone from the Free Syrian Army or any Islamic extremist group could take them over,” he said.

***

As the Syrian opposition steadily makes territorial gains, U.S. officials and analysts said the odds are increasing that insurgents will seize control of a chemical weapons site or that Syrian troops guarding the installations will simply abandon their posts.

It’s almost inevitable,” [Michael Eisenstadt, a retired Army officer who directs the military and security studies program at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy] said. “It may have already happened, for what we know.”

***

Last week, the Syrian Foreign Ministry said the al-Nusra Front — an anti-Assad group that has been labeled a terrorist organization by the United States and is also known as Jabhat al-Nusra — had seized a chlorine factory near the town of Safirah, east of Aleppo. “Terrorist groups may resort to using chemical weapons against the Syrian people,” the ministry cautioned

AP reports:

Questions remaining about who actually controls some of Syria’s chemical weapons stores ….

A report by the Office of the Director for National Intelligence outlining that evidence against Syria includes a few key caveats
— including acknowledging that the U.S. intelligence community no longer has the certainty it did six months ago of where the regime’s chemical weapons are stored ….

U.S. and allied spies have lost track of who controls some of the country’s chemical weapons supplies, according to the two intelligence officials and two other U.S. officials.

***

U.S. analysts … are also not certain that when they saw what looked like Assad’s forces moving chemical supplies, those forces were able to remove everything before rebels took over an area where weapons had been stored.

AP hit the nail on the head when it wrote:

U.S. intelligence officials are not so certain that the suspected chemical attack was carried out on Assad’s orders, or even completely sure it was carried out by government forces, the officials said.

***

Another possibility that officials would hope to rule out: that stocks had fallen out of the government’s control and were deployed by rebels in a callous and calculated attempt to draw the West into the war.


Looting of Libyan Chemical Weapons

Fox News reported in 2011:


In August, Fox News interviewed Rep. Mike Rogers, R.-Mich., who said he saw a chemical weapon stockpile in the country during a 2004 trip. At the time, he said the U.S. was concerned about “thousands of pounds of very active mustard gas.”

He also said there is some sarin gas that is unaccounted for.



The Wall Street Journal noted in 2011:


Spread across the desert here off the Sirte-Waddan road sits one of the biggest threats to Western hopes for Libya: a massive, unguarded weapons depot that is being pillaged daily by anti-Gadhafi military units, hired work crews and any enterprising individual who has the right vehicle and chooses to make the trip.

In one of dozens of warehouses the size of a single-family home, Soviet-era guided missiles remain wrapped inside crates stacked to the 15-foot ceiling. In another, dusted with sand, are dozens of sealed cases labeled “warhead.” Artillery rounds designed to carry chemical weapons are stashed in the back of another. Rockets, antitank grenades and projectiles of all calibers are piled so high they defy counting….

Convoys of armed groups from all over Libya have made the trek here and piled looted weapons into trailer trucks, dump trucks, buses and even empty meat trucks….

The highly-regarded NTI reported the same year:

In the desert near Sirte, there was no security for dozens of small armories at the complex, where weapons are removed every day by opposition fighters, paid contractors and others. In one structure, the word “warhead” was stamped on dozens of sealed containers. At another depot, empty chemical agent munitions were found.

There is at present no viable Libyan government-sanctioned force with the capacity to keep freelancer fighters from taking what they please from the warehouses, according to the Journal.

***

U.S. Senator John McCain (R-Ariz.) visited the Libyan capital, where he said gaining control over the country’s armories was a “very big topic.”

“We have a game plan to secure the weapon caches, particularly biological and chemical weapons,” McCain said.

The Telegraph reported last year:


Al Qaeda terrorists in North Africa could be in possession of chemical weapons, a leading Spanish intelligence officer said on Monday.

The head of National Police counter-terrorist intelligence, Commissioner-General Enrique Baron, told a strategic security conference in Barcelona that it was believed that the self-styled Al Qaeda of the Islamic Maghreb – AQMI – could have acquired such arms in Libya or elsewhere during the Arab Spring last year.

***

Commissioner Baron told his audience: “The Al Qaeda of the Islamic Maghreb has acquired and used very powerful conventional arms and probably also has non-conventional arms, basically chemical, as a result of the loss of control of arsenals.”

The most likely place where this could have happened was in Libya during the uprising which overthrew the Gaddafi regime, said Commissioner Baron.

In his position as the head of Spanish National Police intelligence the Commissioner-General works closely with MI6, the CIA and other Western European intelligence services.

Remember, the head of the Libyan rebels admitted that the rebels were largely Al Qaeda.
CNN, the Telegraph, the Washington Times, and many other mainstream sources confirm that Al Qaeda terrorists from Libya have since flooded into Syria to fight the Assad regime … bringing their arms with them.
And the post-Gaddafi Libyan government is also itself a top funder and arms supplier of the Syrian opposition. (CNN notes that the CIA may have had a hand in this operation.)
 
Other Countries

A reporter who has written extensively for Associated Press, BBC and National Public Radio reports that locals in the area hit by chemical weapons allege that Saudi Arabia supplied the chemicals. And see this.

Bush administration official Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson and British MP George Galloway speculate that Israel or another country may have given chemical weapons to the Syrian rebels.


Evidence of Possession and Use

The above, of course, is simply speculation. More important is actual evidence of possession and use.

Turkish state newspaper Zaman reported earlier this year (Google translation):


The Turkish General Directorate of Security … seized 2 kg of sarin gas in the city of Adana in the early hours of yesterday morning. The chemical weapons were in the possession of Al Nusra terrorists believed to have been heading for Syria.

Haaretz reported on March 24th, “Jihadists, not Assad, apparently behind reported chemical attack in Syria“.

UN investigator Carla Del Ponte said that there is strong evidence that the rebels used chemical weapons, but that there is not evidence that the government used such weapons:

There is also evidence that the rebels have recently used chemical weapons. See this and this.

No wonder experts are skeptical.

We don’t know which countries did or didn’t give chemical weapons to the rebels. The point is that there are quite a few opportunities or possibilities
http://www.globalresearch.ca/yes-the-syrian-rebels-do-have-access-to-chemical-weapons/5347611

hotlinks at site - same source for both posts
 
Other Countries

A reporter who has written extensively for Associated Press, BBC and National Public Radio reports that locals in the area hit by chemical weapons allege that Saudi Arabia supplied the chemicals. And see this.

Bush administration official Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson and British MP George Galloway speculate that Israel or another country may have given chemical weapons to the Syrian rebels.


Evidence of Possession and Use

The above, of course, is simply speculation. More important is actual evidence of possession and use.

Turkish state newspaper Zaman reported earlier this year (Google translation):


The Turkish General Directorate of Security … seized 2 kg of sarin gas in the city of Adana in the early hours of yesterday morning. The chemical weapons were in the possession of Al Nusra terrorists believed to have been heading for Syria.

Haaretz reported on March 24th, “Jihadists, not Assad, apparently behind reported chemical attack in Syria“.

UN investigator Carla Del Ponte said that there is strong evidence that the rebels used chemical weapons, but that there is not evidence that the government used such weapons:

There is also evidence that the rebels have recently used chemical weapons. See this and this.

No wonder experts are skeptical.

We don’t know which countries did or didn’t give chemical weapons to the rebels. The point is that there are quite a few opportunities or possibilities
http://www.globalresearch.ca/yes-the-syrian-rebels-do-have-access-to-chemical-weapons/5347611

hotlinks at site - same source for both posts

I am sorry but Global Research is not a credible website. It is where BAC goes to find succour for many of his bullshit theories.

Globalresearch.ca (also under the domain name globalresearch.org) may best be described as a left-wing equivalent to WingNutDaily. It is the website of the Montreal-based non-profit The Centre for Research on Globalisation (CRG), founded by Michel Chossudovsky. The website describes itself as an "independent research and media organization." Globalresearch.ca takes pride in being a reliable "alternative news" source serving as a major repository of a broad range of "news articles, in-depth reports and analysis on issues which are barely covered by the mainstream media" (such as the New World Order). Its politico-economic stance is strongly anti-capitalist, anti-imperialist, anti-militarist, "internationalist but anti-globalization." Its view of science, the economy and geopolitics seems to be broadly conspiracist.

Many of globalresearch.ca's articles discuss legitimate humanitarian or environmental concerns, but the site has a strong undercurrent of reality warping and bullshit throughout its pages. Despite presenting itself as a source of scholarly analysis, globalresearch.ca mostly consists of polemics many of which accept (and use) conspiracy theories, pseudoscience and propaganda.

The prevalent conspiracist strand relates to global power-elites (primarily governments and corporations) and their New World Order. Specific featured conspiracy theories include those addressing 9/11, vaccines, genetic modification, Zionism, HAARP, global warming, and David Kelly. Analyses of these issues tend follow the lines of the site's political biases. Apparently, contributors to globalresearch.ca consider information sourced from anyone who seems aligned to their ideology as reliable; during the 2011 Libyan civil war the site was an apologist for Muammar al-Gaddafi, reproducing his propaganda and painting him as a paragon of a modern leader.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Globalresearch.ca
 
What's curious about all this reporting is that it all pre-dates the most recent report of the UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry on Syria's report of July 18, 2013 which found that there is "no compelling evidence that these groups possess [chemical] weapons or their requisite delivery systems."

So, yes it's conceivable that the rebels could access chemical weapons, there is no compelling evidence that they have done so or have the requisite delivery systems to use them.

http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/G13/156/20/PDF/G1315620.pdf?OpenElement
 
Last edited:
I should have known someone would attack the secondary source without bothering to attempt to verify the primary sources, but I thought it would be Desh.
 
I am sorry but Global Research is not a credible website. It is where BAC goes to find succour for many of his bullshit theories.

Globalresearch.ca (also under the domain name globalresearch.org) may best be described as a left-wing equivalent to WingNutDaily. It is the website of the Montreal-based non-profit The Centre for Research on Globalisation (CRG), founded by Michel Chossudovsky. The website describes itself as an "independent research and media organization." Globalresearch.ca takes pride in being a reliable "alternative news" source serving as a major repository of a broad range of "news articles, in-depth reports and analysis on issues which are barely covered by the mainstream media" (such as the New World Order). Its politico-economic stance is strongly anti-capitalist, anti-imperialist, anti-militarist, "internationalist but anti-globalization." Its view of science, the economy and geopolitics seems to be broadly conspiracist.

Many of globalresearch.ca's articles discuss legitimate humanitarian or environmental concerns, but the site has a strong undercurrent of reality warping and bullshit throughout its pages. Despite presenting itself as a source of scholarly analysis, globalresearch.ca mostly consists of polemics many of which accept (and use) conspiracy theories, pseudoscience and propaganda.

The prevalent conspiracist strand relates to global power-elites (primarily governments and corporations) and their New World Order. Specific featured conspiracy theories include those addressing 9/11, vaccines, genetic modification, Zionism, HAARP, global warming, and David Kelly. Analyses of these issues tend follow the lines of the site's political biases. Apparently, contributors to globalresearch.ca consider information sourced from anyone who seems aligned to their ideology as reliable; during the 2011 Libyan civil war the site was an apologist for Muammar al-Gaddafi, reproducing his propaganda and painting him as a paragon of a modern leader.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Globalresearch.ca
go to the site's hotlinks, I just stumbled across it.

One can find the site itself impeachable, bnut still look at the hotlinks (AP/WAPO).(Telegraph, CNN)

The redacts from those sites certainly look real -not particurally taking time to go thru them.

(and yes it does lable itself as "speculative")

It's enough to raise some doubts, not that it is really needed in this mess, where the intervention is most questionable, if not the source of the chem weapons.
 
What's curious about all this reporting is that it all pre-dates the most recent report of the UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry on Syria's report of July 18, 2013 which found that there is "no compelling evidence that these groups possess [chemical] weapons or their requisite delivery systems."

So, yes it's conceivable that the rebels could access chemical weapons, there is no compelling evidence that they have done so or have the requisite delivery systems to use them.

http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/G13/156/20/PDF/G1315620.pdf?OpenElement
i can't get the link to open -
the Libyan weapons are there (Syria) -artillery shells, which could be enough.

http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=13596&LangID=E

my ADOBE reader doesn't work, so I can't read it -i did read this omnibus statement -where it says the UN cannot get into Syria.

It's enough doubt, we know SA recently sent shoulder fired missiles, though I don't know if they have reached into theater as of yet.

I simply find the US willing to lie/distort/ massage info to go to war often enough, not to just buy into this.

But TY for the post. in other words i simply cannot trust western sources anymore then so called unreliable sources.
 
US political infighting is really causing us to think that it could be factor that will save the world from a further US war in Syria. At least as long as Obama is president that's an extremely positive thing!

Fox News inadvertently does some good and all because of the hate for a black president.
 
One of the U.S. government’s main justifications for its claim that the Syrian government carried out a chemical weapons attack is that the rebels don’t have chemical weapons.

However, multiple lines of evidence show that the rebels do have chemical weapons.

Potential Looting of Syrian Weapons





The Washington Post noted last December:


U.S. officials are increasingly worried that Syria’s weapons of mass destruction could fall into the hands of Islamist extremists, rogue generals or other uncontrollable factions.

Last week, fighters from a group that the Obama administration has branded a terrorist organization were among rebels who seized the Sheik Suleiman military base near Aleppo, where research on chemical weapons had been conducted
. Rebels are also closing in on another base near Aleppo, known as Safirah, which has served as a major production center for such munitions, according to U.S. officials and analysts.

***

A former Syrian general who once led the army’s chemical weapons training program said that the main storage sites for mustard gas and nerve agents are supposed to be guarded by thousands of Syrian troops but that they would be easily overrun.

The sites are not secure, retired Maj. Gen. Adnan Silou, who defected to the opposition in June, said in an interview near Turkey’s border with Syria. “Probably anyone from the Free Syrian Army or any Islamic extremist group could take them over,” he said.

***

As the Syrian opposition steadily makes territorial gains, U.S. officials and analysts said the odds are increasing that insurgents will seize control of a chemical weapons site or that Syrian troops guarding the installations will simply abandon their posts.

It’s almost inevitable,” [Michael Eisenstadt, a retired Army officer who directs the military and security studies program at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy] said. “It may have already happened, for what we know.”

***

Last week, the Syrian Foreign Ministry said the al-Nusra Front — an anti-Assad group that has been labeled a terrorist organization by the United States and is also known as Jabhat al-Nusra — had seized a chlorine factory near the town of Safirah, east of Aleppo. “Terrorist groups may resort to using chemical weapons against the Syrian people,” the ministry cautioned

AP reports:

Questions remaining about who actually controls some of Syria’s chemical weapons stores ….

A report by the Office of the Director for National Intelligence outlining that evidence against Syria includes a few key caveats
— including acknowledging that the U.S. intelligence community no longer has the certainty it did six months ago of where the regime’s chemical weapons are stored ….

U.S. and allied spies have lost track of who controls some of the country’s chemical weapons supplies, according to the two intelligence officials and two other U.S. officials.

***

U.S. analysts … are also not certain that when they saw what looked like Assad’s forces moving chemical supplies, those forces were able to remove everything before rebels took over an area where weapons had been stored.

AP hit the nail on the head when it wrote:

U.S. intelligence officials are not so certain that the suspected chemical attack was carried out on Assad’s orders, or even completely sure it was carried out by government forces, the officials said.

***

Another possibility that officials would hope to rule out: that stocks had fallen out of the government’s control and were deployed by rebels in a callous and calculated attempt to draw the West into the war.


Looting of Libyan Chemical Weapons

Fox News reported in 2011:


In August, Fox News interviewed Rep. Mike Rogers, R.-Mich., who said he saw a chemical weapon stockpile in the country during a 2004 trip. At the time, he said the U.S. was concerned about “thousands of pounds of very active mustard gas.”

He also said there is some sarin gas that is unaccounted for.



The Wall Street Journal noted in 2011:


Spread across the desert here off the Sirte-Waddan road sits one of the biggest threats to Western hopes for Libya: a massive, unguarded weapons depot that is being pillaged daily by anti-Gadhafi military units, hired work crews and any enterprising individual who has the right vehicle and chooses to make the trip.

In one of dozens of warehouses the size of a single-family home, Soviet-era guided missiles remain wrapped inside crates stacked to the 15-foot ceiling. In another, dusted with sand, are dozens of sealed cases labeled “warhead.” Artillery rounds designed to carry chemical weapons are stashed in the back of another. Rockets, antitank grenades and projectiles of all calibers are piled so high they defy counting….

Convoys of armed groups from all over Libya have made the trek here and piled looted weapons into trailer trucks, dump trucks, buses and even empty meat trucks….

The highly-regarded NTI reported the same year:

In the desert near Sirte, there was no security for dozens of small armories at the complex, where weapons are removed every day by opposition fighters, paid contractors and others. In one structure, the word “warhead” was stamped on dozens of sealed containers. At another depot, empty chemical agent munitions were found.

There is at present no viable Libyan government-sanctioned force with the capacity to keep freelancer fighters from taking what they please from the warehouses, according to the Journal.

***

U.S. Senator John McCain (R-Ariz.) visited the Libyan capital, where he said gaining control over the country’s armories was a “very big topic.”

“We have a game plan to secure the weapon caches, particularly biological and chemical weapons,” McCain said.

The Telegraph reported last year:


Al Qaeda terrorists in North Africa could be in possession of chemical weapons, a leading Spanish intelligence officer said on Monday.

The head of National Police counter-terrorist intelligence, Commissioner-General Enrique Baron, told a strategic security conference in Barcelona that it was believed that the self-styled Al Qaeda of the Islamic Maghreb – AQMI – could have acquired such arms in Libya or elsewhere during the Arab Spring last year.

***

Commissioner Baron told his audience: “The Al Qaeda of the Islamic Maghreb has acquired and used very powerful conventional arms and probably also has non-conventional arms, basically chemical, as a result of the loss of control of arsenals.”

The most likely place where this could have happened was in Libya during the uprising which overthrew the Gaddafi regime, said Commissioner Baron.

In his position as the head of Spanish National Police intelligence the Commissioner-General works closely with MI6, the CIA and other Western European intelligence services.

Remember, the head of the Libyan rebels admitted that the rebels were largely Al Qaeda.
CNN, the Telegraph, the Washington Times, and many other mainstream sources confirm that Al Qaeda terrorists from Libya have since flooded into Syria to fight the Assad regime … bringing their arms with them.
And the post-Gaddafi Libyan government is also itself a top funder and arms supplier of the Syrian opposition. (CNN notes that the CIA may have had a hand in this operation.)




prove your claim.
 
They clearly said that the rebels could NOT have done the delivery of the weapons BECAUSE of how they were delivered you lying bottle of rat piss
 
prove your claim.
"Desh" is it? (as you are called?)

read this - One of the U.S. government’s main justifications for its claim that the Syrian government carried out a chemical weapons attack is that the rebels don’t have chemical weapons.

how can I prove a negative?

The source has been called into question, about all that can be said, use your logic here.

we Know there are rocket launchers, the Islamistic have them http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2013/09/among-syria-islamist-fighters.html

coukld be rthe reason for the rocket casing?? we simply do not know -
 
What's curious about all this reporting is that it all pre-dates the most recent report of the UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry on Syria's report of July 18, 2013 which found that there is "no compelling evidence that these groups possess [chemical] weapons or their requisite delivery systems."

So, yes it's conceivable that the rebels could access chemical weapons, there is no compelling evidence that they have done so or have the requisite delivery systems to use them.

http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/G13/156/20/PDF/G1315620.pdf?OpenElement

You're hilarious DH. You just post these calm, reasoned things. How do you keep your head in the middle of this chaotic shitstorm? I am going through these threads in near disbelief...and I thought i had seen it all online.
 
the term fog of war?

The UN cannot even get on the ground there, it is supposition, events can rapidly outpace "reports". Which are basically interviews.

I suppose one has to take the UN as truthful, but not necessarily insightful. It's almost an impossiblity to accurately say what is happening in Syria.

Yet we say we know exactly whatt is happening, the composition of the fighters down to PERCENATGE POINTS -how this is going to be resolved (Islamic state)?

Good enough for the USA, I suppose, typicially American - shoot now ask questions later..

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2013/09/among-syria-islamist-fighters.html
The men were openly disdainful of the Free Syrian Army units, saying they were engaged in “tourism” well behind the front, and were also openly hostile to the Alawites, or Nusayris, as they called them. “Even the Shiites have declared them kuffar [nonbelievers],” said one.

“They are all the same. They view us Sunnis as the enemy; they are all involved in the war against us,” said another.

“They won’t want to stay here after this,” said a third, meaning after they’d swept through the villages. The men also mocked the Muslim Brotherhood as inadequately committed to its faith.

“We call the Muslim Brotherhood ‘whatever the audience wants,’ ” said Mohammad, the Syrian Islamist fighter. He wore green military camouflage pants and a black T-shirt bearing the Islamic shahada in white script
. “If the people say they want Sharia, they say they want it. If the people say they want democracy, they say they want it. They just want power.”

The very concept of moderate Islam was false, Omar claimed.

“There’s no such thing—it is a modern expression,” he said. “A moderate Islamist means an Islamist who walks with them, who agrees with them, with the Americans, the Europeans, and Iran.”

As Omar spoke, there was an explosion nearby.
It was one of nine within the span of an hour, but only twice did the men in the courtyard move: once when an artillery shell whizzed past and crashed into a field near the house, and once when a MIG jet flew very low before bombing a position nearby.

There was robust outgoing fire, too, from a rocket launcher and other artillery.

 
Back
Top