According to reports in Mint Press News made by veteran Associated Press reporter Dale Gavlak, the chemical attack came from Syrian rebel arms by Prince Bandar, not the Assad regime.
Gavlak writes, “The U.S., Britain, and France as well as the Arab League have accused the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad for carrying out the chemical weapons attack, which mainly targeted civilians. U.S. warships are stationed in the Mediterranean Sea to launch military strikes against Syria in punishment for carrying out a massive chemical weapons attack. The U.S. and others are not interested in examining any contrary evidence, with U.S Secretary of State John Kerry saying Monday that Assad’s guilt was ‘a judgment … already clear to the world.’”
Gavlak’s report states that the U.S. is not interested in differing opinion, despite evidence that points to Saudi Arabian Prince Bandar.
The report continues, “However, from numerous interviews with doctors, Ghouta residents, rebel fighters and their families, a different picture emerges. Many believe that certain rebels received chemical weapons via the Saudi intelligence chief, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, and were responsible for carrying out the dealing gas attack.”
“They didn’t tell us what these arms were or how to use them,” complained a female fighter named ‘K.’ “We didn’t know they were chemical weapons. We never imagined 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 warned. She, like other Syrians, do not want to use their full names for fear of retribution.”
Prince Bandar is said to have close ties to Washington, serving as Saudi Arabia’s ambassador. According to a report in the UK’s The Independent, Prince Bandar has re-emerged as a pivotal figure in the struggle by America and its allies to tilt the battlefield balance against the regime in Syria.
According to the Independent, it was Prince Bandar’s intelligence agency that first alerted Western allies to the alleged use of sarin gas by the Syrian regime in February.
According to the report, “It is a long-term Saudi goal that in the past several days has been subsumed by the more immediate crisis over the purported use of chemical weapons by Damascus … That message is being delivered to President Barack Obama by the current Saudi Ambassador in Washington, Adel al-Jubeir, who is a Bandar protégé.”
This situation continues to become eerily similar to President George W. Bush’s intel on weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
In fact, according to Washington Post journalist Bob Woodward, on January 11, 2002, Rumsfeld, Cheney and Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Richard Myers met in Cheney’s office with Prince Bandar, the Saudi ambassador to the United States to discuss plans to attack Iraq.
The Washington Post reported that Bandar, who helped arrange Saudi cooperation with the U.S. military, feared Saudi interests would be damaged if Bush did not follow through on attacking Hussein, thus Bandar became another advocate for war.
“Months of applying pressure on the White House and Congress over Syria have slowly born fruit. The CIA is believed to have been working with Prince Bandar directly since last year in training rebels at base in Jordan close to the Syrian border,” the Independent reported.
The Saudis are “indispensable partners on Syria” and have considerable influence on American thinking, a senior US official told The Wall Street Journal yesterday. He added: “No one wants to do anything alone.”
And right now, Secretary of State John Kerry is trying to justify intervening in Syria on the basis of crimes against humanity. But it makes you wonder: Whose crimes?
Is Saudi Arabia using an attack on Syria by the west as a way to advance its own agenda?