Saudi Arabia's intelligence behind the chemical attack near Damascus
A report by Yahya Ababneh, which was contributed to by Dale Gavlak, has collected the testimonies of witnesses who say that "certain rebels received chemical weapons via the Saudi intelligence chief, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, and were responsible for carrying out the gas attack."
The Mint Press News report adds an important dimension to the story, totally contradicting the claims of the US government. It quotes a female insurgent fighter who says things that make a link to Saudi Arabia clear. She says that those who provided them with weapons "didn't tell them what these arms were or how to use them" and that they "didn't know they were chemical weapons."
"When Saudi Prince Bandar gives such weapons to people, he must give them to those who know how to handle and use them," she is quoted.
There is also another Saudi link in the report: "Abdel-Moneim said his son and 12 other rebels were killed inside a tunnel used to store weapons provided by a Saudi militant, known as Abu Ayesha, who was leading a fighting battalion. The father described the weapons as having a "tube-like structure" while others were like a "huge gas bottle."
So it seems that the Saudis enabled the chemical attack while the Israelis provided them cover to ignite a full-scale war, or at the very least enable a bombing campaign against Damascus. Israel and Saudi Arabia have empowered the Obama Administration to threaten war on Syria.
It turns out that the Syrian militants themselves prevented the success of the "literate" propaganda campaign widely deployed against the Assad government by the West. It's no secret that foreign mercenaries and untrained illiterate Syrians are fighting in the opposition. By the way there are fewer and fewer Syrians every day on the side of the opposition.
U.S., Britain, France and other Western countries continue to blame the Assad government in the chemical attack on August 21 in Ghouta near Damascus, using it as the main pretext for the invasion in Syria. However, many facts point to the discrepancies in the circumstances of this incident. The insurgents have already managed to annoy their "patrons", giving naivety comments full of enthusiasm to independent journalists.
CNN reported that the US military was training anti-government fighters with the securing and handling of chemical weapons. Under the name of theDestructive Wind Chemical Battalion, the insurgents themselves even threatened to use nerve gas and released a video where they killed rabbits as a demonstration of what they planned on doing in Syria.
Against this background, statements by officials of Saudi Arabia look nothing but strange. Kingdom's Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal Al-Saud right after the August 21 events said that the government of Bashar al-Assad does not even try to find a political solution to the crisis and wants to get out of it only by military means. Although it is known that Assad has repeatedly publicly stated its willingness to engage in dialogue with the opposition.
During his speech, the minister also made it clear that the kingdom is interested in intervention by the West in the Syrian conflict. "We support all efforts to end the bloodshed in Syria," he added.
Comparing to the United States Saudi Arabia does not have such military capabilities. However, the kingdom has something more powerful - huge financial capabilities. They have enough money to pay for an operation in Syria. By the way, do not rule out the possibility that Saudi Arabia might offer itself as a sponsor of, say, the U.S. Health care reform, which also requires significant financial investment and is one of the reasons for the Americans to be dissatisfied with the Barack Obama internal policy.