In his first interview following the chemical attacks in Syria, Syrian President Bashar Assad said that his government was neither involved in the attacks and did not have chemical weapons to attack with. He called the accusations against his government “100 percent fabrication.”
Assad told Agence France Presse, in an interview, that he gave “no order to make any attack” and said, “even if we had [chemical weapons], we wouldn’t use them.”
“There was no order to make any attack. We don’t have any chemical weapons. We gave up our arsenal a few years ago,” he said.
“Our impression is that the West, mainly the United States, is hand-in-glove with the terrorists,” he added. “They fabricated the whole story in order to have a pretext for the attack.”
“Definitely, 100 percent for us, it’s fabrication,” he said.
He even questioned whether an attack occurred at all, something that some of America’s representatives have also questioned.
Russian President Vladimir Putin called the chemical attack a “false flag” and claimed that more were to come. He blamed the attack on Islamic State jihadis.
Borrowing a line from President Donald Trump, Assad said, “You have a lot of fake videos now. We don’t know whether those dead children were killed in Khan Sheikhun. Were they dead at all?”
Assad then added that he would allow an investigation into the attack “when we make sure that unbiased countries will participate in this delegation in order to make sure that they won’t use it for politicized purposes.”
The important question that I and many others have asked is, how in the world would a chemical attack benefit Assad? What does he stand to gain? Absolutely nothing.
Following the attack, President Trump authorized a missile strike on a Syrian airfield without congressional approval per the Constitution. The airfield was back up and running in a day, but the attack cost American taxpayers of at least $70 million.
Trump insists America is not going into Syria.
“We’re not going into Syria,” Trump told Maria Bartiromo during an exclusive interview on FOX Business. “But when I see people using horrible, horrible chemical weapons… and see these beautiful kids that are dead in their father’s arms, or you see kids gasping for life … when you see that, I immediately called General Mattis.”
“What I did should have been done by the Obama administration a long time before I did it,” said Trump. “I think Syria would be a lot better off right now than it has been.”
Somehow, I’m not seeing the same reaction to the abortion mills here in America where more than 3,000 children are beheaded, dismembers, burned alive with chemicals and their body parts sold every single day under the watchful eye of Washington, DC. Why is there no effort to destroy these facilities? Oh, the hypocrisy.
The United Nations Security Council drafted a resolution to condemn the chemical attack in Syria, but failed on Wednesday with a veto by Russia and Bolivia. China abstained from the vote.
Trump said it was “wonderful” that China abstained and the US was “honored by that vote.” He also added that it was “certainly possible, but probably unlikely,” that Russia knew of the chemical weapons attack.
Fox News reports on why Russia voted against the resolution.
The final draft of the resolution included a paragraph that the Russians objected to last week, which stressed Syria’s requirement to provide investigators with flight plans and information about air operations on April 4 when Khan Sheikhoun was attacked, names of helicopter squadron commanders, and immediate access to air bases where they believe an attack may have been launched.
Before the vote, Russian Deputy U.N. Ambassador Vladimir Safronkov said the Western draft resolution “does not serve a useful purpose.”
He later said the resolution “appointed the guilty party prior to the investigation,” which he said is “incompatible with the legal norms.”
Safronkov added that the American missile strikes conducted last week were carried out “in violation of international norms.”
That is a bit of an issue, isn’t it? Presuming guilt before actually proving it. This is especially a problem when from past indicators, chemical weapons were more than likely used by the Obama backed jihadis in Syria, which became the Islamic State. We know they stage war propaganda videos to draw us into a war in Syria to remove Bashar Assad. We know that doctors have called on these jihadis to stop murdering children for this war propaganda. We know that journalists have called out who is actually conducting the chemical attacks and we know that in 2013, the same jihadis that are the Islamic State were the ones who had chemical weapons, freely admitted it, and had been caught with them. They were to use them to put the blame on the Assad government.
From all I have seen in the past, and the way the news media and Democrat leaders are lining up to call for and praise the missile strike, I’m just a bit more careful to recognize I’ve seen this stuff before, and it wasn’t Assad doing it.
I can tell you this, if Assad is removed from power, the same thing will happen there that has happened in all these other places we’ve done that in, Christians and others will be slaughtered and Islamic jihadis will fill the vacuum.