High Noon, High Stakes and Syrian Chemical Weapons Allegations

by Max Musson

BEFORE WE HERE in the West climb right up onto our high horse and fueled by hubris and misplaced self-righteousness participate in what could potentially be a catastrophic military intervention in the Syrian civil war, escalating that conflict into World War III, let us pause for a moment of reflection and consider where our own national interests lie. And let us consider also the possibility that there are two sides to any conflict.

Western governments emboldened by the US President Donald Trump are presently poised to launch a missile attack against the Syrian government in retaliation for the alleged use of chemical weapons by the Syrian Army in the town of Duma in the northern part of Eastern Ghouta near Damascus last Saturday.

Western intelligence sources claim that chemical weapons were used by the Syrian Army based upon reports reaching them from rebel held areas of Syria together with video footage showing both adults and children being doused with water, allegedly to wash away the chemicals to which they had been exposed. As a consequence Donald Trump has lashed out at Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and his allies Russia and Iran, saying there will be a “big price to pay”.

On Monday at a session of the UN Security Council, Russia used their veto to prevent moves by the US and her allies including Britain and France from passing a resolution condemning the Syrian government and authorising military retaliation against Bashar al-Assad.

Both Syria and Russia deny that a chemical attack took place and the Syrians have pointed out that the current accusation follows a pattern that has evolved in recent times, in which accusations of the use of chemical weapons are made every time the Syrian Army are poised to clinch a significant military victory against rebel forces. The inference here being that such allegations are false and cynically timed to provoke outside intervention in the desperate hope that such intervention will avert defeat.

So, what do we know about the alleged attack?

One video, recorded by rescue workers shows a number of men, women and children lying lifeless inside a house, many with foam at their mouths. Other unverified footage shows young children crying as they are treated in a makeshift medical unit. It has not been possible however to verify independently what actually happened, or the actual number of dead.

Relief organisations such as the Union of Medical Care and Relief Organizations and the US-based Syrian American Medical Society, which run medical facilities in the Eastern Ghouta, told BBC News that up to 500 people had been brought to medical centres showing symptoms consistent with exposure to toxic substances and that as many as 70 people had died.

The Syrian government have denied the use of chemical weapons and we have to question why they would resort to the use of such weapons each time they are poised for victory in rebel held areas? When victory is almost assured, the last thing the Syrian government would want is to inflame international opinion and invite foreign intervention. Logically therefore, President Assad is the least likely suspect to have authorised the use of chemical weapons at such times.

Since the weekend the Syrian Army has agreed with rebel forces an end to the siege of Duma, and the rebel forces have been able to leave the area in return for the release of dozens of pro-government detainees they were holding hostage.

Having retaken Duma, the Russians and the Syrian government have invited a team from the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) to send a fact-finding mission to Duma in order to investigate and establish whether chemical weapons were used, and if so by whom.

At the UN the Russian permanent representative, Vasily Nebenzya, stated that Russian experts entering Duma after its fall to Syrian government forces could find no evidence of the use of chemical weapons, although they claim to have uncovered a factory near Duma which they claim has been used by the Jaish al-Islam rebel group to manufacture military-grade chemical agents. The implication here is that rebel terrorist groups may have used home-made chemical agents with which to fabricate evidence of the use of chemical weapons by government forces, and the rebels will obviously have had a vested interest in fabricating such allegations.

Clearly there are two sides to this story and as yet no clear evidence exists to establish the truth of the matter. It would therefore appear to be grossly provocative and premature for the Americans, the French and the British government to make unconditional accusations, to issue public insults calling President Assad an “animal” and threatening imminent military strikes against the Syrian government.

This situation is reminiscent of the recent incident in which Soviet double-agent Sergie Skripal and his daughter Yulia are alleged to have been poisoned with Novichok by Russian agents in Salisbury.

In the immediate aftermath of that incident British Prime Minister Theresa May accused the Russians of culpability despite there being no evidence to support such an accusation and Britain’s allies among Western governments immediately began expelling Russian diplomats in retribution.

In response to these accusations by the British government, Russian President Vladimir Putin pointed out that if military grade nerve agent had been used against the Skripals, they would already be dead, however both Skripal and his daughter have made a surprising recovery in less than six weeks, suggesting that the cause of their illness may not have been Novichok at all and certainly not military grade Novichok.

Novichok is alleged to be up to eight times more toxic than the VX nerve agent developed by the Americans, which means that just 80 micrograms would be a lethal dose, equivalent in liquid form to just 1/50th of a drop of water, or in solid form, much smaller than a single grain of table salt.

In May 1987 Andrei Zheleznyakov, one of the scientists involved in the development of Novichok was apparently accidentally exposed to merely some of the residue of the Novichok he had been working with. At the time he would presumably have been wearing protective clothing and medical treatment would have been administered immediately. Never-the-less he became critically ill and took ten days to recover consciousness after the incident. He lost the ability to walk and was treated at a secret clinic in Leningrad for three months afterwards. The agent caused permanent harm, with effects that included chronic weakness in his arms, a toxic hepatitis that gave rise to cirrhosis of the liver, epilepsy, spells of severe depression, and an inability to read or concentrate that left him totally disabled and unable to work. He never recovered and died in July 1992 after five years of deteriorating health.

Evidently, if the Skripals have been exposed to Novichok it would not appear to have been military grade Novichok and there is speculation that the alleged poisoning of the Skripals was a propaganda charade intended to discredit Vladimir Putin in preparation for this subsequent accusation that the Russians have colluded with the Syrian government in the use of chemical weapons against Syrian rebel forces.

In both these instances, allegations have been made of the use of chemical weapons in situations in which the accused would have nothing to gain and much to lose by such action.

In both these instances Western governments have jumped to conclusions, have made insulting denunciations and in the case of the alleged Skripal poisoning, taken punitive action without waiting for proof of guilt, and we in the West must question why our governments are so impatient to act, especially as Porton Down have since stated that there is no proof of Russian involvement in the poisoning of the Skripals, and especially in view of the catastrophic consequences should these wild accusations result in war with Russia.

We have reports today of President Trump telling the Russians they should expect an imminent missile attack upon Syria, and of Russian diplomats warning that Russian forces will shoot down any incoming American missiles and will retaliate by firing at the source of those missiles. We stand on the brink of World War III and for what?

Where is the British interest here?

Why should we react in knee jerk response to claims made by Syrian rebels, most of whom were recently in cahoots with ISIL and Al Qaida?

After the basket cases that have resulted from Western military intervention in Libya, Afghanistan and Iraq, haven’t we learned that such countries are better left in the hands of pro-Western Ba’athist dictators, despite all of their faults?

Are the peoples of Libya, Afghanistan and Iraq brimming over with gratitude for the chaotic political and economic state we have left them in? I don’t think so!

Are Western nations richer and healthier having accepted millions of disgruntled Libyan, Afghan and Iraqi refugees in recent years? No, not one bit!

The best that can happen in Syria is that the Syrian Army and President Assad regain control of that country and begin the task of rebuilding it as soon as possible. It was a prosperous, pro-Western country before Al Qaida and ISIL began their insurgency and it could become such a country again, if we and the Americans would only stop meddling in matters that have nothing to do with us.

* * *

Source: Western Spring

Previous post

Zionist Cancer in Gaza: Israeli Hyenas Gun Down Protesters, IDF Minister Says They Deserve Medals

Next post

The Terror that is Upon Us: Afro-Americans Gang-Rape 13-Year-Old, Receive Probation

Notify of
Inline Feedback
View all comments
12 April, 2018 2:08 am

Funny how the author, Max Musson, uses the term “we” and “us” and “our” in this article. I realize that it was written for normie consumption, but it’s still pretty telling that so many people aren’t red-pilled to the absolute fact that there is no “we, us, or our” when it comes to geopolitics (or even internal, national politics), but, instead, it all has to do with THEM, THEY and (((THEIR))) issues. I so wish every citizen of every country correctly understood the difference and stopped taking responsibility or credit for anything THEY do.

12 April, 2018 10:00 am

Good observation, JimB.

“WE” is a Federal con word.

Anti-federalist Patrick Henry: “Who authorized them to speak the language of We the People. The people gave them no power to use their name. That they exceeded their power is perfectly clear.” ~ Patrick Henry

Max Musson
Max Musson
12 April, 2018 12:26 pm

Hello JIMB, I think this is a point that has been made before, perhaps by you. There are two things you need to bear in mind: Firstly, that we at Western Spring aim our articles at a broad spectrum of reader, a spectrum that as you have rightly sussed, does include ‘normies’. We are never going to attract mass support unless we couch our arguments in terms that people who have not been ‘red pilled’ can readily understand. Second, the UK where we are based does not uphold the constitutional right to freedom of speech that exists in the US. We are subject to Draconian hate speech legislation that makes it very unwise to employ the kind of unbridled language that you apparently crave. I do identify the ethnicity of… Read more »

Franklin Ryckaert
Franklin Ryckaert
Reply to  Max Musson
12 April, 2018 4:42 pm

If “fighting the Jew without naming the Jew” is dictated by circumstances, then still this battle can be won by :

1) attacking certain policies (in the name of morality or national interest).
2) attacking (non-Jewish) politicians who are implementing those policies as incompetent or corrupt.
3) if Jewish persons are involved, by publishing their names and portraits without explicitly mentioning that they are Jews. Perceptive readers can then draw their own conclusions.

In this way one can “fight the Jew without naming the Jew” and avoid being accused of “anti-Semitism”.

Reply to  Max Musson
15 April, 2018 2:02 pm

Honest, good article Max! Good job. Thank you from Russia.

13 April, 2018 1:51 am

I live here in the land of “We the People” and I have written to my president urging him to allow the Syrian people to discover who was at fault and bring justice to their families. I am not alone in thinking this way “we” the common man (normies) see the left all to often tell us what is right and that we are wrong to think for ourselves.

Sic Semper
Sic Semper
14 April, 2018 9:47 am

The Zionized states of Britain, France and America allied to blow up Syrians, likely Syrian Christians, because the Syrian government allegedly used gas to kill 40 of their citizens. All of this occurring in what is widely viewed as the Israeli frontier lands of the near future.

ONWARD CHRISTIAN SOLDIERS….. your masters have decided it is time for your sacrifice in the name of Israeli expansion!

Reply to  Sic Semper
15 April, 2018 2:06 pm

It’s true. The plan “Greater Israel” has not been canceled and continues to be realized.

Sic Semper
Sic Semper
15 April, 2018 7:04 am

In the last 30+ years out of all the endless bloodshed in the Middle East there has only been one outcome Christianity has been exterminated. The occupiers of Palestine have worked feverishly to have their fellow semites exterminate christians, staring in Lebanon in the 1980’s, the false flag against Assad now makes sense: Christian refugees in the Netherlands say Assad is OK; priest calls him ‘a gift from heaven’ By ENOCH 14 April 2018 The Arameans are a well-integrated Christian minority in the Netherlands. Originally they came from Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and Southern Turkey. Dutch newspaper ‘De Telegraaf’ interviewed several of them and talked about the civil war in Syria. Christian refugee Johnny Shabo says that the same group responsible for the civil war in the eighties is now responsible… Read more »