Like many on the Alt Right, I have been feeling pretty black-pilled over the last couple of weeks for reasons I probably do not need to list.
As the Alt Right’s premier consumer of video games, I sought comfort through nostalgia by playing old-school Sonic the Hedgehog titles for Sega Genesis. Something about an anthropomorphic rodent breaking the sound barrier and fighting against a robot supremacist to save the world brought me temporary solace. After beating Sonic 3 and then Sonic and Knuckles (completing the game as both Sonic and Knuckles), I realized that I had to make some kind of contribution to the discussion about Trump’s Syria debacle.
I do not wish to sit here and condemn Trump left and right, nor to drop black pills on everyone. If you want to see distressed brooding on the matter while “Hello Darkness My Old Friend” plays in the background, you can get plenty of that on The Daily Stormer, AltRight.com, The Right Stuff, and even elsewhere here at Counter-Currents. The topic I would like to discuss today is whether or not Bashar al-Assad used sarin gas to mass-murder civilians for no reason other than that he is a meanie-bellini.
To summarize my whole spiel in advance: Assad dindu nuffin.
In order to fully explain why I feel that he dindu nuffin, it is necessary to briefly explain the nuffin that he dindu.
Here is what we know for certain: on April 4, the Syrian government conducted an airstrike against the rebel (jihadist)-held province of Idlib. In the wake of the bombing, some kind of gas was released that caused several dozen deaths, including those of some “beautiful babies” (for the sake of full disclosure, we cannot confirm exactly how beautiful any of them really were). The Syrian and Russian governments have admitted to conducting airstrikes in the area, because it is, after all, held by Assad’s enemies – enemies, mind you, who have a history of carrying out chemical attacks as well as mass rapes, ethnic cleansing of Christian and Yazidi minorities, and other horrific war crimes. It is when we get beyond these established facts that the case against Assad becomes mired in doubt.
The narrative goes something like this: Bashar al-Assad was on the cusp of victory against the opposition forces (both US-backed rebels, al-Qaeda, and ISIS), so he decided to carry out a sarin gas attack against a civilian population and earn himself international scorn.
There are many problems with these assertions.
The Alleged Weapon
Firstly, the charge that sarin gas was used is highly suspect. The first time it was described as a sarin gas attack, it came from the mouth of a none too credible source :
The statement from Turkey, where many of the stricken Syrians were taken after the assault on Tuesday, was the most specific about the cause.
“According to the results of preliminary tests,” the statement said, “patients were exposed to chemical material (Sarin).”
The Turkish statement said the sarin conclusion had been based on autopsies on three victims performed at Turkey’s Adana Forensic Medicine Institution with the participation of representatives from the World Health Organization and the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, a group based in The Hague that monitors compliance with the global treaty that bans such munitions.
The Turks say that sarin gas was used, ergo it must be true. Turkey: a nation ruled by an Islamist dictator who may have staged a false coup last summer in order to snatch sweeping authoritarian powers for himself, and who routinely threatens to flood Europe with migrants. Turkey: whose government is suspected of purchasing oil from ISIS, and which has been one of Syria’s biggest rivals in the region for many years and has a vested interest in seeing Assad’s ouster. If you cannot trust the Turks, or a Turkish tyrant with the physiognomy of a psychopath, I suppose you can’t trust anybody.
But if the words of fanatical mongrels from the Asian steppes don’t sway you, perhaps the claims of the Idlib survivors will. From CNN :
But survivors being treated in a hospital on the Turkish side of the border told a CNN team they saw chemical bombs dropped from the air.
From  The New York Times:
Syrian Su-22 aircraft were then seen circling above Khan Sheikhoun at 6:47 a.m. and again at 6:51 a.m. One of the observers — based on long experience — believed that the planes might be carrying a chemical payload.
“Guys, tell people to wear masks,” he warned.
There you have it. “Survivors” in Turkish territory saw a government jet drop what they knew could only be chemical bombs. You see, the common people of Syria and other Middle Eastern countries have been systematically trained from birth to be able to distinguish airborne chemical bombs from your run-of-the-mill incendiary bombs. The second that one of Assad’s jets jettisoned its cargo – from several hundred feet above the ground – the villagers below were able to determine its composition based on the sound it made, the way it reflected the sunlight, and the shape of the dot that it appeared as when it was still in the air. Checkmate, Bashar.
Actually, none of the above is true, but after all, have you not seen the pictures of the dead children?
Another source of my skepticism about whether sarin was the weapon of choice comes from the nation of Cuck Island.
According  to CNN, with my own emphasis:
A Ministry of Defense spokesperson told CNN on Thursday that the scientists had conducted the tests in British labs on blood and hair samples from victims, collected at Khan Sheikhun in Syria’s idlib province, where 89 people were killed in the April 4 gas attack.
“These have tested positive for the nerve agent Sarin, or a Sarin-like substance,” the spokesperson said.
The spokesperson did not say how the samples had reached the United Kingdom but explained that Britain chose to carry out its own analysis and was not working on behalf of any other country or body.
The tests were not part of an official investigation launched by the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons in the wake of the attack.
In other words, they conducted a super-secret test that we should all just trust, and are still not even certain that it was sarin.
So one minute we are told by suit-and-tie mujahideen that it was definitely sarin, but now it seems it might not even be sarin, but something sarin-like. I wonder how long it will be before they conclude that it was actually chlorine or mustard gas, but refuse to address the massive implications this would have about who the culprit was?
My skepticism comes not just from the unreliability of the intel, but also from the filmed coverage of the attack’s immediate aftermath. The news blog ZeroHedge makes a point  worth considering:
Additionally, footage from the scene of the incident taken by the Syrian White Helmets appears to show that their operatives were not assisting victims in a manner that was consistent with established protocol on how to handle sarin saturated bodies. Images appear to show that Syrian White Helmet operatives were handling purported sarin victims with their bare hands, rather than with gloves, which is necessary to prevent the rescuer being injured by the chemical themselves. They also appear to be using simple dust masks, which are not suitable protection in the event of a sarin attack.
Jewish radio host and formerly staunch Trump shill Michael Savage discussed his own suspicions  about this on his show, adding that many of the first responders (White Helmets) were wearing sandals while handling contaminated victims. He began with:
This was not sarin gas, number one. It looks like phosgene gas. I realize those are big words for those in the media who are ready to put on military uniforms on their radio and television shows. This was a complete false flag event.
I understand that Savage is not an expert on chemical weapons, but these observations are still worthy of consideration.
I will consider the possibility, though, that the gas released at Khan Sheikoun actually was sarin. I am no scientist, after all. Maybe the Turkish doctors conducted perfectly standard autopsies and achieved entirely reliable results. Hell, maybe these particular Turks don’t even like Erdogan or care about what happens in Syria. Perhaps the British actually did procure samples of the chemical material used to create the gas that was released, and also managed to airlift some corpses or some urine back to Cuck Island so that they could use Western science to determine that the chemical agent was definitely sarin-like. I’ll even grant the possibility that Syrian village people are able to identify chemical bombs in mid-air; maybe it’s a unique racial skill, like they have in The Elder Scrolls games.
None of this proves that it was Bashar al-Assad who did the gassing. When you look at the data that the mainstream media chooses not to present, it becomes clear that Assad probably did not do it, in fact. You will likely have heard some of these talking points already.
Firstly, Assad had no motive to attack civilians with an internationally condemned chemical agent that would turn the world against him. He was essentially winning the civil war with Russian, Iranian, and Hezbollah’s help. The US had recently declared that regime change in Syria was no longer on the agenda. Why would he completely self-sabotage?
Even the Trump administration itself can’t seem to pin it down. According  to Politico (my emphasis added):
U.S. officials and Syria experts are still debating what Syrian President Bashar Assad was thinking when he ordered a chemical attack sure to spark international outrage. Maybe Assad was hoping to terrorize his opponents. Perhaps he was testing Trump’s limits for his military planning. Trump officials even initially considered the possibility that Assad had not ordered the strike at all, according to one administration official, and that a military commander might have gone rogue without Assad’s knowledge.
What’s funny is that they all agree it does not make sense for Assad to have gassed Khan Sheikoun, but at no point do they consider that this might mean the Syrian government did not do it.
(((Others))) have suggested that Assad did it just to be a dick.
The New York Times quotes  a German possible-Jew named Bente Scheller of the Heinrich Böll Foundation:
Militarily, there is no need . . . But it spreads the message: You are at our mercy. Don’t ask for international law. You see, it doesn’t protect even a child.
In another instance, they quote the entirely unbiased “opposition-leaning Syrian economist” Jihad Yazigi: “Assad knows that a large-scale attack against its civilians is a short-term public relations liability but a long-term political asset.” You know you can trust a critic of a secular leader when his name is Jihad.
The National Post says  that Assad did it for the simple reason that he felt he could get away with it. In their minds, he probably stuck his tongue out afterwards as well.
In summation, Bashar al-Assad gassed his own people because he is a brutal dictator who wanted to remind his flock to behave itself, and because he felt he could get away with it. This is certainly possible, but it still leaves some open questions. If you were just trying to discourage your citizenry from being disloyal, why not use a simple incendiary bomb? Why take the chance of rousing international ire by using chemical weapons? And if you were to use a chemical weapon on a hopeless civilian population just to instill fear in them, why not use something cheaper like chlorine or mustard gas? Why break the bank by using something as difficult to manufacture as sarin, which will doubtless get you into trouble internationally?
Assad would have known that the risk of using sarin was still too great. In 2013, he was accused of using it against civilians in Ghouta. As punishment, he was coerced into letting the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) seize all of his chemical weapons, otherwise Obama was going to pursue military action against him. Mind you, it was never fully confirmed that Assad was even the perpetrator of that attack. If he got that much flak for a crime that he was not even proven to have committed, he would have to have known that actually committing such an attack would bring the international community down on him again, regardless of what Trump’s stated agenda was.
This brings me to my next point. Just like the Ghouta attack in 2013, there is a complete lack of reliable evidence that it was Assad who did the gassing. What we have been given are questionable eyewitness accounts and inconclusive speculations. We have people on the “Turkish side of the border” claiming they actually witnessed “chemical bombs” dropping from military planes, which I have already mocked above. Then we have this  bold assertion from Dan Kaszeta, a chemical weapons specialist who assures us that it could not have been anybody but Assad:
“Nerve agents are the result of a very expensive, exotic, industrial chemical process – these are not something you just whip up,” said Kaszeta, managing director of Strongpoint Security, a security consulting firm based in London.
“It’s much more plausible that Assad, who’s used nerve agents in the past, is using them again.”
This assertion is easily debunked. The first part of his argument claims that since sarin gas (which we are still not positive was the weapon used) is tough to make, it could only have been made by a government entity. Ergo, it must have been Assad! He doesn’t even consider the possibility that it could have been other government actors, or that the gas could have been used by the Free Syrian Army or ISIS, each of which is funded and armed by foreign governments. Nor does he consider that the gas could have been manufactured by governments such as Turkey, which has a vested interest in seeing Assad removed from power; or from Israel, which has wanted the Assad dynasty overthrown for a very long time; or from Saudi Arabia, which has a fanatical interest in seeing its secular, Christian-and-Yazidi-protecting rival from the north eliminated. Nah, these guys wouldn’t ever stage false-flag events or use terrorism to knock a rival out of the game! We know from history that Turkey and Saudi Arabia could never be suspected of providing support to ISIS or al-Qaeda, and that Israel has no record whatsoever of attacking or attempting to bomb an ally and frame one of its enemies as the culprit. These kinds of ideas exist only among the tinfoil hat-wearing population.
The second part of Kaszeta’s claim asserts that because Assad used chemical weapons in the past, it only makes sense that he did it again. So how does he explain this point made in the same article (my emphasis):
A UN investigation in August found that chemical weapons had been used in Syria, both by the national air force and ISIS militants. It found two instances where regime forces had used chlorine as a chemical weapon, and one where ISIS had used mustard gas between 2014 and 2015.
In 2016, The New York Times argued that ISIS used these kinds of weapons at least fifty-two times in Syria and Iraq, in an article appropriately titled “ISIS Used Chemical Arms at Least 52 Times in Syria and Iraq, Report Says.”
By Kaszeta’s logic, then, there is a very good chance that ISIS did the gassing, simply by virtue of the fact that they carried out gassings before.
Even the “moderate rebels” have been caught using chemical weapons. In 2016, the moderately-named Army of Islam (Jaysh al-Islam) actually admitted  to gassing Kurds in Aleppo: “’One of our commanders has unlawfully used a type of weapon that is not included in our list,’ a statement posted on the group’s Twitter account read.”
Say . . . isn’t gassing Kurds one of the justifications the US used for waging war against Iraq during the 1990s? But geopolitics can be a fickle beast, and Kurd-gassers are apparently our friends now – so long as they do not besmirch the saintly name of Israel, of course.
Gassing Kurds is the least of these rebels’ crimes, though. Based Polynesian Democrat and Pilleater’s ultimate MILF fantasy, Tulsi Gabbard, conducted a personal investigation of Syria back in January. When she returned, she argued in an op-ed and on CNN that the various rebel groups being funded by the US are no different from ISIS or al-Qaeda. Of particular note is this passage from her article :
I met with displaced families from Eastern Aleppo, Raqqah, Zabadani, Latakia and the outskirts of Damascus. I heard from Syrian opposition leaders who commanded the 2011 protests, widows and children of men fighting both for and against the government. I listened to Muslim and Christian leaders, humanitarian workers, academics, college students, small business owners and many more . . .
I met a 14-year-old Muslim girl from Zabadani who was kidnapped, beaten repeatedly and raped. She watched in horror as “rebel groups” murdered her father in her family’s living room, emptying their entire magazine of bullets into him because her father, a sheep herder, would not give them his money.
I met a boy who was kidnapped while walking down the street to buy bread for his family. He was tortured, waterboarded, electrocuted, placed on a cross and whipped because he refused to help so-called rebels – he told them he just wanted to go to school. This is how the “rebels” treat the Syrian people who do not cooperate with them, or whose religion is not acceptable to them.
Repeatedly I was told there is no difference between “moderate” rebels and al-Qaeda (al-Nusra) or ISIS – they are all the same.
I’m sure Kaszeta would agree, then, that since “moderate” savages like the Army of Islam have no compunction about committing acts of terrorism against civilian populations, with or without gas, there is a good chance they could do so again with gas. And since ISIS used them a staggering number of times, there’s an even greater likelihood that they would continue doing so. Right, Danny boy?
Another reason why I deem it implausible that Assad gassed Idlib province is because, as noted above, in 2013 he actually cooperated with the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) in removing his chemical weapon stockpiles. Mind you, this obligation was foisted upon him after the sarin gas attack in Ghouta, which was never conclusively proven to be the work of Assad, the rebels, or ISIS. Even so, Assad’s government was anxious to cooperate. According to The Guardian, Syrian diplomat Walid al-Moallem was quick in accepting the obligation. USA Today quotes Syrian minister Ali Haidar as saying, “We welcome these agreements . . . On the one hand, they will help Syrians get out of the crisis, and on the other hand, they averted a war against Syria by removing the pretext for those who wanted to unleash one.”
By 2014, the OPCW reported  that it was content with Assad’s level of cooperation. Of course the Israelis, who had (and still have) a vested interest in seeing Assad get caught red-handed, argued  that they had reason to believe he was still hiding some illegal stockpiles. Mossad helped convince the US that Saddam Hussein had WMDs back in 2003, which we now know was completely false. As a result, a war was fought that knocked out one of Israel’s prime competitors and created massive instability in the Middle East, which culminated in the rise of ISIS. But never mind that, goyim.
So Assad had little motive to gas civilians and the evidence being presented against him is spurious at best. Who, then, could have dun the nuffin that Assad dindu?
As already noted, there are a number of parties who have every reason to want Assad taken out, and these same parties have the means of procuring chemical weapons. The “moderate rebels” are backed by the US and have used chemical weapons before. ISIS has used chemical weapons dozens of times, and back in 2014 they seized an Iraqi facility that actually manufactured sarin.
Strangely enough, some very suspicious happenings were taking place in northern Syria shortly before the alleged sarin attack. ZeroHedge reports :
On February 22nd, 2017, CNN reported that McCain had made a secret trip to northern Syria the week prior. McCain’s made the trip despite the fact that since late 2015, the Western media has finally admitted that there were no longer any “moderate” rebel groups in Syria…The trip to meet with rebel groups is not McCain’s first. On May 27th, 2013, The Daily Beast ran an exclusive report revealing that Senator John McCain had made another secret trip into Syria to meet with “assembled leaders of Free Syrian Army.” McCain made the trip in spite of the fact that documents obtained by Judicial Watch which state that the United States was fully aware of the growing jihadi presence among Syrian rebel groups, and reports emerging in the American press indicating that rebels were increasingly engaging in war crimes. In August 2013, three months after McCain’s visit, civilians in the Ghouta neighborhood of Damascus were hit with a chemical attack after rockets containing sarin struck the area. Though most of the mainstream press immediately blamed the Syrian government for the tragedy, German paper Die Welt has since run a report alleging that the sarin did not come from the Syrian government, but from stockpiles held by jihadist rebel group Al-Nusra.
There’s also this little ditty:
Observers further noted that on April 1st, 2017, a doctor on the ground in Khan Sheikhoun, Dr. Shajul Islam, had received several shipments of gas masks in the days running up to the chemical incident. The revelations on Twitter fueled speculation that opposition figures were aware of the chemical attack days before it actually happened, contesting the narrative that the Syrian government was responsible. Daily Mail has reported that Dr. Shajul Islam was at one point sought by the British government in connection with the abduction of two journalists in Syria, and security services have stated that Islam and his brother may have had ties to ISIS executioner “Jihadi John.”
You can view the good doctor’s tweets about receiving these gas masks on April 1 here  (links also provided by ZeroHedge).
Let’s sum all of this up. The US is known to be supporting bloodthirsty groups which have committed numerous atrocities, including chemical weapons attacks. Neocon war hawk John McCain meets with representatives from these groups just days before the alleged sarin attack. Also shortly before the attack, gas masks are being distributed to Idlib doctors with checkered pasts. I’m no Alex Jones sycophant, but I must agree with Michael Savage that this seems like a recipe for a false flag.
In order to convict someone of a crime, there needs to be at the very least a preponderance of evidence that they committed it. There needs to be a motive, and there needs to be a good amount of proof that points to the accused as the perpetrator. Assuming Assad is not insane, he had little motive to do it. The evidence against him comes from extremely biased and serially-untrustworthy sources, not only with regard to who they are accusing of committing the crime, but also with regard to the weapon they are accusing him of using. Meanwhile, other parties involved in the civil war do have a motive for committing a chemical attack in Syria, and do have the means of pulling it off in a way that frames Assad. They have the technology and the finances. And they have the thugs on the ground to carry it out, with proven track records of barbarity.
Is Assad completely innocent? Certainly not. When you are the leader of a country that faces enemies on all sides, enemies which have been paid by much stronger powers than yourself to obliterate you, you will often have to resort to the brutal repression of your foes. Is Assad guilty of the chemical attack that struck Idlib province last week? Well, since the jury is still somewhat out on what chemical was even used, and since there is not enough viable evidence pointing to Assad other than the opinions of a few biased experts and pseudo-experts, the answer is: probably not.
To make it clear to any of our black readers, Bashar al-Assad dindu nuffin.
I leave open the possibility that I am completely wrong. Assad did have chemical weapons at one time, which he willingly surrendered to the OPCW. The point, though, is that the truth is leagues away from being uncovered. And when you don’t have the full truth about another government’s actions, you don’t conduct an airstrike against one of their military bases in retaliation. Even if your spoiled brat Jew-American princess (by injection and conversion) of a daughter holds her breath, bites her hand, and stomps her feet around the Oval Office, you need to wait until you have incontrovertible evidence!