Assad tells Charlie Rose no evidence he is responsible for Syria chemical attack.

[another_liberal]

Source: The Guardian

The Syrian president, Bashar Assad, has said there is no evidence he is responsible for the deadly gas attacks the US government claims left 1,429 people dead, including 426 children. In an exclusive interview secured by Charlie Rose of PBS, Assad said: "There has been no evidence that I used chemical weapons against my own people." Assad refused to confirm or deny that he had chemical weapons but said if he did, they were under "centralized control". The interview will air in its entirety on PBS on Monday night, as president Barack Obama is due to sit down with six television networks for recorded interviews and press his case for a targeted attack on Syria.

Rose said Assad "does accept some of the responsibility" for the attack. He said: "I asked that very question: 'Do you feel any remorse?' He said, 'Of course I do,' but it did not come in a way that was sort of deeply felt inside. It was much more of a calm recitation of anybody who's a leader of a country would feel terrible about what's happened to its citizens." Rose said Assad "suggested that there would be, among people that are aligned with him, some kind of retaliation if a strike was made". Assad, however, "would not even talk about the nature of the response". Rose said: "He had a message to the American people that it had not been a good experience for them to get involved in the Middle East in wars and conflicts … that the results had not been good."

(snip)

Michael McCaul, a Texas Republican and chairman of the House homeland security committee, gave voice to Congressional opposition to strikes on Syria when he told Meet The Press: "The problem is I think lobbing a few Tomahawk missiles will not restore our credibility overseas. It's kind of a face-saving measure for the president after he drew the red line. "Little wars start big wars and we have to remember that. Who are we supporting in this war? We are supporting a rebel faction, a rebel cause, that has now been infiltrated and hijacked by many al-Qaida factions."

McCaul said there was a risk that chemical weapons could end up in the hands of al-Qaida operatives after a US attack. McCaul said, "ironically", that Congress had been debating its next step in Syria on the eve of 9/11. McCaul also said that while images of victims of the gas attacks were "horrific" and Assad was "a brutal dictator", "I don't want to see those images broadcast in the United States with American kids."

Read more: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/08/bashar-assad-charlie-rose-chemical-weapons

---

"Little wars start big wars, and we have to remember that."

I certainly hope that we do remember it.

[MADem]

1. There's "no evidence" I ate that cookie--I brushed away the crumbs before you walked in!!!

Ergo, I didn't eat that cookie!

My brother, Maher...who keeps the cookie jar for me....why, HE ate the cookie!

And I told him to eat the cookie...

But no way "I" ate that damn cookie!!!!

[another_liberal]

2. Hi there, MAD. Having a good weekend?

Me? Yeah, I'm just aces. Nice to hear from you again.

[cheapdate]

3. I'm sure that, if asked, Assad would also say that

he never fired on demonstrators, imprisoned dissidents, or killed civilians in Homs, Aleppo, and elsewhere.

[another_liberal]

5. You are undoubtedly correct about that, however . . .

I still think it is unlikely he ordered the much debated sarin gas attack in Damascus. He is clearly a liar, but he doesn't strike me as stupid enough to choose to bring our superpower retaliation down on his own head.

More to the point: I definitely do not think any of the evidence we have yet been shown proves Assad was behind the gassing of his own people.

[bhikkhu]

8. He was stupid enough to lead his country into a disastrous civil war

...much of which was the result of his own mismanagement of circumstances and situations. It took a whole long chain of bad decisions and failures to get where he is today, even without the chemical weapons charge.

[another_liberal]

14. Assad is a dictator, he will do whatever he can to hold onto power.

He did not "lead his country" into a civil war, he was confronted with a rebellion and is doing all he can to cling to power.

All I am saying is that it unlikely he ordered a sarin gas attack on civilians in Damascus. It makes no sense for him to have done so, unless he has an enormous death wish.

[arewenotdemo]

23. It's actually been an illegal, covert war on Syria by the U.S.,

Qatar, Turkey, Jordan and Saudi Arabia.

Obama has the CIA training the rebels in Turkey and Jordan...which is ILLEGAL.

And he has Saudi Arabia and Qatar funding the weapons and ammo acquisitions.

[bhikkhu]

35. Since December, 2012, when the civil war was already a thorough disaster

at least according to this article - http://www.thenation.com/blog/173149/cia-training-syrias-rebels-uh-oh-says-top-iraqi-leader#

Not that I like it, but its hardly leaves Assad blameless for the mess of the last few years. In 2010, for instance, before the civil war started, Obama removed the long-standing US objection to Syrian WTO membership, as a measure of guarded support for Assad. There were opportunities at one time for good relations.

His response to the Arab spring was deplorable, however, and led directly to where he is now. There is a very good chronology here: http://www.tiki-toki.com/timeline/entry/34854/Syria-Arab-Spring/#vars!date=2011-03-19_14:03:59!

[arewenotdemo]

47. Timeline doesn't exactly jibe with that of Brzezinski.

Also note that he charges our allies with foreign intervention from the beginning.

And does anyone here actually believe that these allies would foment rebellion in Syria without our consent, if not encouragement?

Brzezinski: I can’t engage either in psychoanalysis or any kind of historical revisionism. He obviously has a difficult problem on his hands, and there is a mysterious aspect to all of this. Just consider the timing. In late 2011 there are outbreaks in Syria produced by a drought and abetted by two well-known autocracies in the Middle East: Qatar and Saudi Arabia. He all of a sudden announces that Assad has to go—without, apparently, any real preparation for making that happen. Then in the spring of 2012, the election year here, the CIA under General Petraeus, according to The New York Times of March 24th of this year, a very revealing article, mounts a large-scale effort to assist the Qataris and the Saudis and link them somehow with the Turks in that effort. Was this a strategic position? Why did we all of a sudden decide that Syria had to be destabilized and its government overthrown?

http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/brzezinski-the-syria-crisis-8636

[cosmicone]

39. Don't forget Israel

This whole Syrian attack is championed by AIPAC and Israel to weaken or destroy the only force that can stand up to the IDF -- Hizbollah.

It wouldn't surprise me if it is found that Mossad was behind the chemical attack in Damascus.

[cheapdate]

41. The US influence over the course of this 2-1/2 year conflict in Syria

is dwarfed by the influence of Iran, Hezbollah, Russia, the Gulf Arab states, and most importantly, by the principal parties themselves (the Assad government and the rebels).

[cstanleytech]

9. Russia so far still has his back so I doubt he feels much fear about any retalition because even if

the US did remove his ability to use chemical weapons he still outnumbers the rebels and he has Russia backing him with advanced weapons and other support were as the rebels are getting only limited support from the US.

[another_liberal]

17. Russia wants to keep its last naval base in the Eastern Med.

To do that, they need Assad to retain control of Syria.

[cstanleytech]

42. I am willing to lay odds that base would probably remain regardless as

the rebels couldnt hope to beat Russia and would be afraid of pissing them off.

[another_liberal]

43. The base is on Syrian soil.

I doubt the rebels, if they remove Assad, would be willing to renegotiate basing rights with the former regime's biggest sponsor.

[cstanleytech]

44. Oh they probably would, Russia after all has a bigger army than Assad with a hell of alot

more weapons at his disposal so if the rebels are smart they will play ball with Russia.
Russia right now just does not want to waste their money on a big deployment of their military (like the US did in Iraq) if they dont have to which is largely why I believe they are supporting Assad right now.

[Iliyah]

4. LOL

yeah right

[another_liberal]

6. Meaning . . .

What exactly?

[bhikkhu]

7. In the long history of indivudual denials...

"there is no evidence" is a pretty common one. People in any situation have difficulty lying, so "there is no evidence" is a first resort, then denigrating the flaws in evidence is another, then denigrating the integrity of any investigation follows, along with things such as "why would I do that, it makes no sense?". Then the dire and unfortunate consequences for innocent parties if he were to be judged guilty.

What comes to my mind first is that Assad sounds more like Lance Armstrong than anyone else I can think of recently.

[another_liberal]

15. Maybe.

Still, it makes no sense for him to have used chemical weapon on civilians in his own Capital City, especially with the World closely watching for just such an event to happen. I despise Assad, but I do not believe he ordered the gas attack. Look to those who had a motive for the real perpetrators.

[bhikkhu]

19. "It doesn't make sense" isn't much of an argument

...but evidence is always better than hypothetical arguments anyway. Last weekend I heard enough evidence to convince me, in some good coverage and interviews on NPR from people involved on various sides. The "Assad did it" side generally relies on evidence, while the "Assad didn't do it" side generally revolves around the "it doesn't make sense" thing.

Not trying to be snarky, really. More troubling than the current attack is possible previous attacks, less publicized, suggesting the rebels have used chemical weapons as well. That's what the Russians have been basing their doubts on. In any case, I hope the president makes his case Tuesday, using evidence, and I hope the upcoming UN report is conclusive one way or another.

[mimi85]

21. Well said! nt

[daleo]

27. Actually, one of President Obama's spokespeople just said their case is based on "common sense"

And not evidence beyond a reasonable doubt.

[another_liberal]

30. Thank you for pointing that out.

Good catch.

[another_liberal]

34. Lack of an established motive . . .

I disagree. When there is no direct evidence of guilt, as in this case, the lack of an established motive has gotten many a potential criminal charge dropped.

[jessie04]

10. Chinless murdering liar.

nt

[Mysterysouppe]

11. I think it was an accident.

A government missile hit a rebel sarin storehouse. Or incompetent rebels mishandled the cannisters and gas was inadvertently released. If so, it makes no sense for the US to attack Damascus. In fact, it is downright dangerous.

What if I'm right?

[tarheelsunc]

12. I'm not saying he did or didn't...

but why, if innocent, would he say "there is no evidence I did" rather than "I didn't do it and if you review the evidence you will see that"?

[YvonneCa]

13. Agreed. And if he does feel ANY remorse, he should step down. Period.n/t

[another_liberal]

16. Step down!

He should be stood up against a wall and shot!

It is not, however, our business as Americans to see that is done.

[mimi85]

24. No matter who is responsible

It needs to stop. The blame game could go on forever.

[Maedhros]

18. If the U.S. has probative evidence, it should present it.

Until the Administration does that, they are simply posturing.

At present, it looks like they don't actually have any evidence:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-calderone/obama-administration-ap-syria_b_3890207.html

[otohara]

20. President Obama Is Responsible

I read it on DU

[mimi85]

26. Who gives a flying fuck

at this point? Maybe it was Malia or Sasha. Or Bo. The fact is that it DID happen, the pics of dead children weren't created by CGI. The blame game is getting totally out of hand. Meanwhile more people are dying. Should we be like Alan Grayson (who I used to respect) and say it's not our problem? If so, then let's just move along.

DU seems to be lurching from one crisis to the next. Last week was all Snowden and GG. Wonder what next week will bring?

[daleo]

28. So what's the solution?

Bomb both sides and hope for the best?

[otohara]

33. I Agree

DU is trashing the wrong President - and as far as Alan Grayson goes, if Israel was in trouble, we'd be there in a heartbeat with his urgent blessings.

[rickford66]

22. Imagine 2002

Phil Donahue interviewing Saddam Hussein. What would the war cheerleaders say? Would Phil even be allowed back into the country?

[iamthebandfanman]

25. The nazis said there was no evidence

they were gassing jewish folks either.

in fact, they went out of there way to make sure most orders were given verbally and that nothing was written down....


just sayin'.

[daleo]

29. Yes, but the Nuremberg trials showed otherwise.

[another_liberal]

36. Is that your go-to comparison?

Assad is horrible, but he is hardly a Hitler. Calling on the six million who died in the Holocaust to justify a war on Syria is a little sickening.

[msanthrope]

45. Dr. Assad's conduct during the occupation of Lebanon indicates that he only lacks access to

enough victims to be "hardly a Hitler."

I am rather surprised that so few DUers remember that this butcher personally oversaw the Syrian occupation of Lebanon. His medical degree came in handy for him, apparently.

[another_liberal]

46. You should learn a little more World history.

World War Two was no mere "occupation of Lebanon." The Nazi regime was a different animal altogether than some tin pot, Middle East dictatorship.

[msanthrope]

48. It's apparent from your post that you had no idea Assad oversaw the brutal occupation of

Lebanon, personally. So I don't think I am the one who needs a history lesson.

[another_liberal]

49. Yes, you do.

I remember a great number of things about Lebanon. That is hardly the point.

Assad is a tiny piss ant in comparison to the monster you equated him with.

[Cryptoad]

31. geez

"Assad tells Charlie Rose no evidence he is responsible for Syria chemical attack."

What a shocker! LMAO

[another_liberal]

37. That is not my title . . .

It was chosen by the Guardian.

[Cryptoad]

38. I wasnt

accusing you of the title,,,Sorry if I implied that.

[another_liberal]

40. No problem.

I just wanted to be sure you understood.