Robert Parry: Murky Clues from UN’s Syria Report

[Junkdrawer]

A United Nations field report about the Aug. 21 chemical weapons assault in Syria suggests a more limited area of attack than an earlier U.S. government report claimed and reveals that some inspected sites showed signs of possible manipulation of evidence.

Though the mainstream U.S. news media and some non-governmental organizations highlighted the UN findings that tended to bolster the U.S. government’s case against the Syrian government, a close reading of the 38-page report reveals contradictions to that conclusion.

For instance, the UN inspectors found surprisingly little evidence of Sarin gas at the first neighborhood that they visited on Aug. 26, Moadamiyah, south of Damascus. Of the 13 environmental samples collected that day, none tested positive for chemical weapons and the two laboratories used by the inspectors had conflicting results regarding chemical residue that can be left behind by degraded Sarin.

....

One is why would the Syrian regime – having invited UN inspectors in on Aug. 18 to inspect suspected chemical attack sites elsewhere in Syria, cases that the government blamed on the rebels – then launch a major chemical-weapons attack around Damascus, knowing that such an assault would divert the UN’s attention and invite U.S. military intervention, something sought by the rebels, not the government.

...

The refusal of the U.S. government to release any verifiable evidence to establish the Syrian regime’s guilt is another curious element of this mystery. If the U.S. evidence – supposedly including intercepts of Syrian government communications – was conclusive enough to justify military strikes, why couldn’t at least some of it be shared with the American people?

....

http://consortiumnews.com/2013/09/17/murky-clues-from-uns-syria-report/

[Uncle Joe]

1. There are a lot of questions and it doesn't make sense for the Syrian Government to be using

chemical weapons after they had already invited the U.N. in to inspect supposed other attacks which they blame on the rebels.

There would be little to no motivation for them to do it.

On the other hand elements within the rebels would have great motivation to commit sabotage of one form or another.

The have many internationals fighting for them and they would have motivation to bring the U.S. into a greater war with Russian over Syria.

I'm just wondering how many Al Qaida forces are fighting with the rebels and were in they area?

These mainstream U.S. news reports did not cite the cautionary comments contained in the UN report about possible tampering with evidence, nor did they take into account the conflicting lab results in Moadamiyah compared with Zamalka/Ein Tarma. [For more on rebel capabilities, see Consortiumnews.com's "Do Syrian Rebels Have Sarin?"]

Thanks for the thread, Junkdrawer.

[Junkdrawer]

2. I sense of a divided UN mission:

Some skeptical of the claims, some with a desire to stretch the conclusions as far as possible to implicate Assad.

[Uncle Joe]

3. I agree but I also believe the U.N. is the only possible peaceful solution to this mess. n/t

[ProSense]

4. Good grief!

"The refusal of the U.S. government to release any verifiable evidence to establish the Syrian regime’s guilt is another curious element of this mystery. "

The spin is ridiculous. I mean, after demanding a UN investigation, people are now dismissing the UN investigation to ask for the US evidence they claimed they didn't trust.

The UN report is damning. It includes photos of Russian rockets, massive use of high quality sarin, forensic, scientific evidence.

Produce evidence that the rebels did it or this is no different from demanding Obama's birth certificate.

[Uncle Joe]

5. We're not dismissing the U.N. Report we're citing it, something the corporate media hasn't done.

Here is a link to the U. N. Report, for some reason, I can't copy it but scroll down to page 18 under the heading "Limitations"

But it basically states the sites were well traveled and the evidence was moved or tampered with.

That's just one example which Parry brings up in his report.

http://www.un.org/disarmament/content/slideshow/Secretary_General_Report_of_CW_Investigation.pdf

For some reason "Limitations" isn't mentioned by the corporate media.

[ProSense]

7. Parry:

I was told by one intelligence source on Monday night that there continues to be skepticism among intelligence analysts about the White House claims and conclusions being drawn from the UN report. So, as U.S. pundits and pols cite the UN report as confirming Syrian government guilt, the remaining skeptics might still want to press the Obama administration to release the evidence that it claims to possess – if it really wants to solve the mystery.

Anonymous rumors.

"For some reason "Limitations" isn't mentioned by the corporate media. "

It's a scientific report. Like I said, read the rest of the report and look at the pictures too. I mean, "limitations" is not a rejection of the evidence presented, and it doesn't suggest that the evidence points to an entity other than the Assad regime.

Also, Parry's claim that only the US is drawing the conclusion that Assad did it is completely baseless. The only skeptic is Russia.

Denmark's Foreign Minister Søvndal’s remarks on UN report of chemical weapons use in Syria
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023678152

Iceland’s Foreign Minister Welcomes Syria Agreement
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023678152#post4

[Uncle Joe]

8. No where in the U.N. Report does it assign blame, only stating there was an attack.

Read Parry's entire article, it's a good report, there are man contradictions in regards to the Sarin samples as well.

Assad would have little to no logical reason to attack especially after having already invited the U.N. in to Syria to inspect or monitor prior chemical weapons attacks which had already happened that he blamed on the rebels.

Assad would gain nothing by the U.S. attacking him, the rebels on the other hand consisting of many fighters; Al Qaida among them, from outside of Syria would reap a bonanza.

The rebels would have great motivation, particularly lunatics such as Al Qaida; who would love nothing more than for two of their primary enemies, the U.S. and Russia coming to blows over Syria.

[ProSense]

9. Again

"No where in the U.N. Report does it assign blame, only stating there was an attack."

...you're validating and dimissing the report at the same time, and why?

"Assad would have little to no logical reason to attack especially after having already invited the U.N. in to Syria to inspect or monitor prior chemical weapons attacks which had already happened that he blamed on the rebels. "

You seem to believe you know Assad's justifications despite the overwhelming evidence that points to his regime.

"The rebels would have great motivation, particularly lunatics such as Al Qaida; who would love nothing more than for two of their primary enemies, the U.S. and Russia coming to blows over Syria. "

Maybe you should read up on the brutality of the Assad regime instead of trying to assign blame based on a gut feeling.

[Uncle Joe]

10. Now you're misrepresenting what I said, I am citing the U.N. report when I say they don't assign

blame.

Maybe you should read up on Al Qaida, I heard through the grapevine they were some pretty evil people, but maybe you heard otherwise?

[ProSense]

11. So

"Maybe you should read up on Al Qaida, I heard through the grapevine they were some pretty evil people, but maybe you heard otherwise?"

...you're trying to absolve Assad by fearmongering about al Qaeda? Everyone knows it's a terrorist organization.

What does that have to do with Assad's brutality and culpablity for the chemical attack?

[Uncle Joe]

12. Because the rebels have a very strong contingent of Al Qaida mixed in with them and

as I stated before the U.N. doesn't assign blame to Assad.

I'm not stating that's it's an absolute that Assad didn't do it, I am stating there is a strong probability, that rebels particularly Al Qaida or extremist elements launched or sabotaged the attack to place blame on Assad.

[ProSense]

13. "I'm not stating that's it's an absolute that Assad didn't do it"

"I'm not stating that's it's an absolute that Assad didn't do it, I am stating there is a strong probability, that rebels particularly Al Qaida or extremist elements launched or sabotaged the attack to place blame on Assad."

Al Qaeda is only 10 percent of the opposition, and still, the Assad regime has managed to be significantly more brutal than a terrorist organization.

[Uncle Joe]

14. Tell that to the Africans where the two embassies were blown up, or the U.S. Navy where the

U.S. Stark was attacked or the victims of 9/11.

Or to the rebels themselves battling Al Qaida forces within their own ranks.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014595008

BEIRUT — Al-Qaida-affiliated rebels battled more moderate Syrian opposition fighters in a town along the Iraqi border on Saturday, killing at least five people in the latest outbreak of infighting among the forces opposed to President Bashar Assad's regime.

Or the citizens of a Christian village in Syria attacked by Al Qaida.

Al-Qaida-linked rebels launched an assault Wednesday on a regime-held Christian village in the densely populated west of Syria and new clashes erupted near the capital, Damascus — part of a brutal battle of attrition each side believes it can win despite more than two years of deadlock.

As the world focused on possible U.S. military action against Syria, rebels commandeered a mountaintop hotel in the village of Maaloula and shelled the community below, said a nun, speaking by phone from a convent in the village. She spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of reprisals.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023601266

As to the numbers of Al Qaida or Jihadist types that would be about 10,000 with hardline Islamists making up another 30,000-35,000.

http://upload.democraticunderground.com/10023672548

Opposition forces battling Bashar al-Assad's regime in Syria now number around 100,000 fighters, but after more than two years of fighting they are fragmented into as many as 1,000 bands.

The new study by IHS Jane's, a defence consultancy, estimates there are around 10,000 jihadists - who would include foreign fighters - fighting for powerful factions linked to al-Qaeda.

Another 30,000 to 35,000 are hardline Islamists who share much of the outlook of the jihadists, but are focused purely on the Syrian war rather than a wider international struggle.

[Barack_America]

6. Where is the birth certificate?!?!

[Junkdrawer]

15. Translation: Don't read this or we'll subject you to unfair accusations. n/t