France says ‘no doubt’ Damascus behind suspected chemical attack

AFP reports: French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius said on Sunday there was “no doubt” the Damascus regime was behind a suspected chemical weapons attack near the capital last week.

“The indications are totally convergent on the scale of the massacre and the overwhelming responsibility of the regime… As far as we are concerned, there is no doubt concerning the substance of the facts and their origin,” Fabius told a Jerusalem press conference.

Asked about the Syrian regime’s decision on Sunday to grant UN inspectors permission to inspect the sites of the suspected chemical strikes, Fabius replied that “this request was already made several days ago”.

“The site has been bombed since,” he said.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

3 thoughts on “France says ‘no doubt’ Damascus behind suspected chemical attack

  1. Master Adrian

    Fabius has no proof PERIOD
    Fabius can not do anything else, then put the blame on Assad, as France supports (propaganda and military) the opponents of the Syrian regime, and when Fabius would start blaming the opposition of the chemical attack, he would be banned from any table were opponents talk!

    BUT… nobody has any proof of who used chemical weapons, not even the Medics Sans Frontier, as they were not there and depend on what local doctors tell the MSF! The UN can not determine after five days who used the chemical weapons, evidence is now fabricated, evidence is lost, and the regime as well as the opponents of the regime had time enough to plant evidence!

    So many people died for nothing.. again!

  2. dickerson3870

    RE: “France says ‘no doubt’ Damascus behind suspected chemical attack”

    MY COMMENT: Of course they do. Just like they said Quadafi was about to massacre 50,000-100,000 Libyans in Benghazi!

    SEE: “Obama’s Limited Options: Bombing Syria unlikely to be Effective”, by Juan Cole, Informed Comment, 8/25/13

    [EXCERPT] … Obama has also been getting substantial pressure from the French and British to do something, and French intelligence has been the most vigorous in pressing the case that the Baath regime in Syria crossed the red line of chemical weapons use. France and Britain have longstanding imperial interests in the Levant, and both fear that the Syrian civil war could produce terrorism that spills over onto Western Europe. Unstated is that it may also produce a refugee crisis in which tens or hundreds of thousands of new immigrants wash up on European soil. Immigrants and terrorism are two key issues in French and British politics, and may be spurring them to action.
    Likewise, the Baath and Hizbullah counter-attacks against the opposition in the past two months have yielded battlefield victories and the reassertion of Damascus over parts of the country that had been lost. Russian support appears to have increased in kind and quality, and Iran is playing the Shiite card. If someone doesn’t intervene soon on the rebel side, Washington hawks realize, the war might soon be over and the pro-Iranian regime will survive (just as Algeria’s did). . .


    P.S. ALSO SEE WIKIPEDIA [French Mandate for Syria and the Lebanon] –

    P.P.S. AND SEE WIKIPEDIA [Sykes–Picot Agreement] –

    P.P.P.S. SMOKEY SEZ: Remember boys and girls, only you can prevent illegal wars! ! !

  3. rackstraw

    French Foreign Minister Favius on Syrian invitation to UN Inspectors: the “request was already made several days ago..the site has been bombed since,” he said.

    What site? How does he know where it is, much less that it was bombed? How does he know the agent was weaponized CW as opposed to barrels of some highly toxic insecticide discovered or looted by the jihadists?

    This is the Big Lie in action: some anonymous “highly placed official” in DC started the meme going earlier today and was quoted in several press reports in the exact same words.

    All Favius has to do is repeat the same lies for the benefit of the RTP echo chamber.

    Why does the “highly placed official” in DC have to speak without attribution? What is the big secret he is protecting by his anonymity? Could it be that he is speaking with reckless disregard for the truth, or knowing falsehood?

    Forensic analysis would soon determine the truth, but that’s too slow when there is a good war in the offing.

    If Bashar Assad was named Ibn al Saud, or Reza Pahlavi, you wouldn’t hear a peep.

Comments are closed.