Syrai signs the CWC; giess who doesn't?

Oh no you dint wrote:

You should look into it. And notice the words "and other sources" in my previous post. The UN has confirmed that chemical weapons were used, while an independent source verified the shell casings used were from the Syrian military. You lose.

Really. Who is that other source that "verified the shell casings used were from the Syrian military"?

Oh. That's right. You guys don't have to cite your sources. It might prove embarrassing.

Here are some alternative views;

Based on contributions that we had obtained through our contacts, which include a number of active-duty intelligence officers, we concluded that the admittedly fragmentary information that is currently available to us indicates that both British and American intelligence know that Bashar al-Assad did not carry out the chemical attack in Damascus on Aug. 21. Which, absent other information that is so far not forthcoming, means that the White House is either lying or cherry picking its evidence when it asserts that he did. The key finding relating to the nature of the attack is analysis that indicates that the chemical agents used were not military grade, suggesting instead that the incident was caused deliberately by the rebels using over-the-counter chemicals, certainly a lethal concoction but not equivalent to a chemical-weapons attack carried out by a military unit. The Russian government, in a report issued separately, has apparently reached the same conclusion regarding an alleged Sarin attack near Aleppo that Washington blamed on the Syrian government back in July.

There are other anomalies we mention in our letter that also have been noted by others, including the possibility that the attack was premeditated by the opposition and may have been part of a broader offensive on behalf of the rebels and their supporters, with prior planning involving Washington. The Syrian government’s alleged delivery system for the chemicals, reported to be rockets, has not been identified by credible witnesses or through remains that can be plausibly linked to the regime. Other physical evidence is contradictory, with the victims of the attack not demonstrating the symptoms of either Sarin gas or of military-grade chemicals, either of which would induce extreme vomiting and invariably be lethal.

And:

The U.N. says its chief chemical weapons inspector has turned over his team's report on last month's alleged poison gas attack in Syria to Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon.

U.N. spokesman Martin Nesirky said the report was transmitted Sunday and the secretary-general will brief a closed session of the U.N. Security Council on its contents Monday morning. He will also brief the 193-member General Assembly later that day.

The inspection team led by Swedish expert Ake Sellstrom was mandated to report on whether chemical weapons were used in the Aug. 21 attack in the Damascus suburbs and, if so, which chemical agents were used — not on who was responsible.

Butchie wrote:

Really. Who is that other source that "verified the shell casings used were from the Syrian military"?

Human Rights Watch

Let's look at what HRW said, shall we?

A leading international human rights group said Tuesday that evidence strongly suggests Syrian government forces fired rockets with warheads containing a nerve agent — most likely sarin.

Suggests and most likely. Sounds like someone either selling something or covering his ass, doesn't it?

The New York-based group said it examined documents from the alleged chemical attack on Ghouta, and that the nerve agent used was "most likely, sarin."

The group said its activists were unable to go to Ghouta to collect remnants of weapons, environmental and bodily samples such as hair and blood to test for the chemical agent but that they sought technical advice from an expert on the detection and effects of chemical warfare agents.

HRW did not actually see any actual evidence, but relied on advice from an expert. That's right. One expert is the basis for their report.

This evidence strongly suggests that Syrian government troops launched rockets carrying chemical warheads into the Damascus suburbs that terrible morning," said Peter Bouckaert, HRW's emergencies director

HRW said the rockets used in the Aug. 21 attack were "believed to be associated with the delivery of chemical agents":

Evidence that HRW did not actually see for themselves strongly suggests...and believed to be associated with.

Soft language for a reason. They have no hard evidence

Butchie wrote:

Evidence that HRW did not actually see for themselves strongly suggests...and believed to be associated with.

Soft language for a reason. They have no hard evidence

Kinda like, "Based on contributions that we had obtained through our contacts."

Oh no you dint wrote:

Butchie wrote:

Evidence that HRW did not actually see for themselves strongly suggests...and believed to be associated with.

Soft language for a reason. They have no hard evidence

Kinda like, "Based on contributions that we had obtained through our contacts."

Wow. Not even close.

One is citing its sources; the other either covering its a$$ or selling a viewpoint.

Citing anonymous sources is not citing sources. And I'm not sure what "viewpoint" you think they're "selling". Anyway, here's more...

The U.S.-based rights group, in a report issued in New York, said it had reached its conclusion after analyzing witness accounts, information of the likely source of the attacks, remnants of the weapons used and medical records of victims.

"The evidence concerning the type of rockets and launchers used in these attacks strongly suggests that these are weapon systems known and documented to be only in the possession of, and used by, Syrian government armed forces," Human Rights Watch said.

"Human Rights Watch and arms experts monitoring the use of weaponry in Syria have not documented Syrian opposition forces to be in possession of the 140mm and 330mm rockets used in the attack, or their associated launchers."

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/10/us-syria-crisis-rights-idUSBRE98904R20130910

You left out a key aspect -- which I already gave to you:

"HRW did not actually see any actual evidence, but relied on advice from an expert."

That's right. One expert is the basis for their report.

Read more:

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=5395099&page=3#ixzz2f5SH1kXZ

What is it about the words "arm experts" that you don't understand?

What is it about the words "arm experts" that you don't understand?[/quote]

Let me try again. Maybe you missed it.

"HRW did not actually see any actual evidence, but relied on advice from an expert."

That's right. One expert is the basis for their report.

So they had an EXPERT determine the weapons casings were from the Syrian army. Sounds good to me.

Sounds like the UN is pointing the finger at the Syrian military...

The rocket systems identified by the UN as used in the attack – truck-launched 330mm rockets with around 50 to 60 liters of Sarin, as well as 140mm Soviet-produced rockets carrying a smaller Sarin-filled warhead – are both known to be in the arsenal of the Syrian armed forces. They have never been seen in rebel hands. The amount of Sarin used in the attack – hundreds of kilograms, according to Human Rights Watch’s calculations – also indicates government responsibility for the attack, as opposition forces have never been known to be in possession of such significant amounts of Sarin.

NickyT wrote:

So they had an EXPERT determine the weapons casings were from the Syrian army. Sounds good to me.

An expert from Israel.

yes very official wrote:

NickyT wrote:

So they had an EXPERT determine the weapons casings were from the Syrian army. Sounds good to me.

An expert from Israel.

I would take pretty steep odds that you are correct

Let's see what the Zi*nist congressman from FLA has to say:

Rep. Alan Grayson, D-Fla. says the Obama administration has manipulated intelligence to push its case for U.S. involvement in the country's two-year civil war.

Grayson made the accusation in an interview published Wednesday by The Atlantic and offered more detail in a Thursday discussion with U.S. News. He says members of Congress are being given intelligence briefings without any evidence to support administration claims that Syrian leader Bashar Assad ordered the use of chemical weapons.

Grayson said he cannot discuss the classified briefings, but noted details in the administration's public, non-classified report are being contested.

The White House released its four-page public report Aug. 30, arguing that Assad's government killed 1,429 people on Aug. 21 with a planned chemical weapon attack. Evidence cited in that report included "intercepted communications involving a senior official intimately familiar with the offensive who confirmed that chemical weapons were used."

Grayson, however, says "the claim has been made that that information was completely mischaracterized."

He points to an article published by The Daily Caller that alleges the communications actually showed Syrian officers were surprised by the alleged chemical weapon attack. The communications, according to unnamed sources paraphrased in article, were intercepted by Israeli intelligence and "doctored so that it leads a reader to just the opposite conclusion."

Members of Congress are "not being given any of the underlying elements of the intelligence reports," according to Grayson. He's not sure if the information will come before the votes on a proposed strike next week.

A United Nations report released Monday confirmed that rockets loaded with sarin gas were used in an August 21 attack in Syria, although inspectors stopped short of saying who was responsible for the attack.

UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon told reporters after the release of the report that the results of the investigation are "overwhelming and indisputable," and he called the use of chemical weapons "a war crime."

But, he said, it is "for others to decide" whether to attempt to determine who perpetrated the attack.

"It was the team’s job to determine whether and to what extent chemical weapons were used – not who used them," he said. "It is for others to decide whether to pursue this matter further to determine responsibility. We may all have our own thoughts on this but I would just simply say that this was a grave crime and those responsible must be brought to justice as soon as possible."

Clearly the UN is offering no opinion on who carried out the attacks. This has not -- and will not -- the war mongers from pointing to the report and stating it shows that the Assad Regime did it.

In fact, Irish-American now Puppet-American Samantha Powers already did so --immediately after the report's release.

The UN experts collected “clear and convincing evidence that surface-to-surface rockets containing the nerve agent Sarin were used in Ein Tarma, Moadamiya, and Zamalka in the Ghouta area of Damascus.”

The experts’ mandate does not allow them to say who was responsible for the deadly barrage. But if you read between the lines, it isn’t difficult to figure it out.

The rocket systems identified by the UN as used in the attack – truck-launched 330mm rockets with around 50 to 60 liters of Sarin, as well as 140mm Soviet-produced rockets carrying a smaller Sarin-filled warhead – are both known to be in the arsenal of the Syrian armed forces. They have never been seen in rebel hands. The amount of Sarin used in the attack – hundreds of kilograms, according to Human Rights Watch’s calculations – also indicates government responsibility for the attack, as opposition forces have never been known to be in possession of such significant amounts of Sarin.

Israel's nightmare is to be held to the same standard it applies to its neighbors:

When U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry arrives at the Prime Minister’s Office in Jerusalem on Sunday, he will present Benjamin Netanyahu with a detailed outline of the agreement to dismantle Syria’s chemical weapons.

After the consultants leave the two for a tete-a-tete, Kerry may make a request that has been keeping quite a few top Israeli defense officials awake at night.

Kerry may tell Netanyahu the United States is working to remove one of the gravest threats on Israel’s security, by combining a credible military threat with creative diplomacy. Now, Kerry may say, the U.S. needs Israel’s help by ratifying the treaty prohibiting the use of chemical weapons.

Presumably, senior officials in the Prime Minister’s Office have been playing this scenario in their heads in recent days.

And what of Israel’s nuclear weapons? Ravid claimed “Israeli military deterrence stems from its nuclear ambiguity ” (ha!) but mentioned the U.S. and Russia have been “asking Israel for several years to ratify the chemical weapons treaty, but Israel refuses to do so.” Readers may recall the U.S. backed out of a high-profile Nuclear Nonproliferation conference on banning of WMD’s in the Middle East set to take place in last December, after Iran agreed to show up. Hence, the conference, in Helsinki, Finland, was scrapped altogether.

From Nov. 10, 2012, AP Mideast Nuclear talks called off:

Its key sponsors were the U.S., Russia and Britain, but they said such as meeting was only possible if all countries – especially Israel -agreed to attend.

…..The decision to postpone, if not to scrap it, will cast doubt on the significance of the NPT and its attempts every five years to advance nonproliferation. Any new attempt is unlikely until the NPT conference meets again in 2015.

Hopes for such a meeting were alive as recently as Tuesday, when Iran joined Arab nations in saying that it planned to attend, leaving Israel as the only undecided country.

…….

While Syria’s civil war, nuclear tensions with Iran and other Mideast frictions will be cited as the official reason for the cancellation, one of the diplomats acknowledged that the decision is mainly being taken because Israel has decided not to attend……the Russians have opposed declaring the meeting dead at this point.

Syrian government and pro-government forces executed at least 248 people in the towns of al-Bayda and Baniyas on May 2 and 3, 2013, Human Rights Watch said in a report released today. It was one of the deadliest instances of mass summary executions since the start of the conflict in Syria.

The 68-page report, “‘No One’s Left’: Summary Executions by Syrian Forces in al-Bayda and Baniyas,”is based oninterviews with 15 al-Bayda residents and 5 from Baniyas, including witnesses who saw or heard government and pro-government forces detain and then execute their relatives.Working with survivors and local activists, Human Rights Watch compiled a list of 167 people killed in al-Bayda and 81 in Baniyas. Based on witness accounts and video evidence, Human Rights Watch determined that the overwhelming majority were executed after military clashes ended and opposition fighters had retreated. The actual number of fatalities is probably higher, particularly in Baniyas, given how difficult it is to access the area to account for the dead.

“While the world’s attention is on ensuring that Syria’s government can no longer use chemical weapons against its population, we shouldn’t forget that Syrian government forces have used conventional means to slaughter civilians,” said Joe Stork, acting Middle East director at Human Rights Watch. “Survivors told us devastating stories of how their unarmed relatives were mowed down in front of them by government and pro-government forces.”

The Syrian government acknowledged its military operations in al-Bayda and Baniyas but said that its forces had killed only “terrorists.” Ali Haidar, minister of state for national reconciliation affairs, told the Wall Street Journal that “mistakes” may have been committed in the operations and that a government committee was investigating. But he also said that the government was forced to act to deny rebels a foothold in a part of Syria that many considered the heartland of the Alawites.

Syria’s ratification of the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) brings the number of nations on the planet who aren’t participants down to six, and is bringing some uncomfortable new attention to the one neighboring Syria: Israel.

Israel responded to Syria’s ratification by ruling out doing the same, insisting that they would never agree to abandon even this portion of their WMD stockpile unless every country on the planet agreed to sign permanent peace deals with them.

Former Defense Minister Amir Peretz addressed the situation again today, saying that Syria’s agreement to scrap its chemical arsenal had nothing to do with Israel, and insisting that everyone trusts Israel as a “democratic, responsible regime.”

Israel is on the outside looking in with an awful lot of such treaties, repeatedly refusing to sign the CWC, the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), and the recent ban on cluster munitions, and has often come under criticism for its stances that it uniquely is entitled to spurn international law with regards to such deals.

The old double standard