On the eve of the arrival in Syria of the inspectors of Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), the UN chemical weapons agency, to investigate the use of chemicals in Douma, Syria last week that reportedly killed 42 persons, the decision for the US/UK/France to attack Syrian government chemical facilities, without United Nations authorization and for the US, without Congressional authorization, is a bit suspicious -- to put it mildly.
For the US/UK/French to attack Syrian government chemical facilities before the international inspectors could check the bodies of those killed for chemicals, talk to survivors and compare the results with what is in the Syrian government chemical facilities is bewildering -- unless the US/UK/France knew the UN inspectors were going to find NOTHING to substantiate their assessment -- and that without evidence, but merely a "high possibility," the three countries were going to attack Syria anyway.
With the alphabet soup of militias in Syria, hired and equipped by the US, UK, France, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran, Russia, UAE, Qatar, Israel, each group has the capability of executing a Douma attack. The chemical attacks are easy to do, especially by groups that have access to the targeted area.
The question of why a group would execute such an attack should be the fingerprints on the operation.
What would be the purpose for the Syrian government to use chemicals when they know the Western countries are itching to use missiles on locations where their militias have been unable to reach?
Would the Syrian government and their Russian allies purposefully use chemicals to invite an attack?
Are militia groups trying to keep their international sponsors and need an immediate reason to get continued funding especially when President Trump tweeted last week that he wants to get the US out of Syria?
The evidence of whom was responsible for the attack was still missing one day ago on Thursday, April 12, when Secretary of Defense Mattis said, "the US is looking for evidence," and the UK government said "it is highly likely the Syrian government did the attack."
This US attack follows in the line of other Presidential administrations that have ordered US military attacks that have gotten our country into civil wars, invasions, and occupations by telling our Congress and the American people lies:
Remember the Maine? (Cuba)
Remember the "Tonkin Gulf Attack"? (Viet Nam)
Remember US medical students "at risk" in Grenada? (Grenada)
Remember "I saw Saddam's troops throw Kuwaiti babies out of incubators"? (Gulf War 1)
Remember Iraq's "Weapons of Mass Destruction"? (Iraq war)
Remember the earlier gas attacks in Syria in which the UK Parliament refused to authorize an attack on the Syrian government because it was unclear who was responsible -- and Obama threw the decision of a US attack to Congress -- which to their credit voted NO?
Remember Gaddafi is going to massacre the people of Benghazi and is giving viagra to his troops to rape the women? (Libya)
Remember the UK "nerve gas" attack that still has not been linked to Russia?
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).