You know, sometimes you just have to throw up your hands.
There’s a difference between questioning the prevailing narrative and buying into the patently absurd.
One example of the patently absurd is this: Bashar al-Assad would never use barrel bombs, or cluster munitions, or chemical weapons.
Chemical attacks in Syria have been a favorite target for conspiracy theorists for years. And the silly thing is, it’s not really clear why. That is, everyone knows the CIA has “covertly” supported the resistance in Syria and collaborated with Sunni benefactors to fund and arm some of the very same extremists that commit terrorist attacks against “soft” targets in the West.
And everyone knows that the whole “train and equip” mission in Syria was a complete disaster at every turn. So there’s no shortage of real evidence to support the idea that Washington has employed questionable tactics in an effort to implement regime change in Damascus and it doesn’t take a leap of logic to draw a line directly from that to the will of Riyadh and Doha who are keen on breaking the Shiite crescent and curtailing Tehran’s ability to support Hezbollah.
None of this is a damn secret. Everyone in the world has America dead to rights “guilty as charged” in perpetuating the cycle of violence in Syria and hypocritically supporting Sunni extremism. This has been plastered all over every mainstream media outlet for half a decade and any expert on Mideast affairs will confirm the narrative.
So what’s with the insistence on perpetuating the “false flag” chemical attack story? What’s the point of that?
I can tell you definitively that one reason the false flag story is perpetuated on alt-Right websites is because their proprietors are so ignorant about the Mideast that they didn’t even realize in 2013 that their case had already been made for them.
They shouted “false flag!!” and anyone who knew anything about the conflict was thinking “ummm, you know you don’t need that to make the case about US interference in Syria, right?”
But beyond that, the new reason for perpetuating the “false flag” narrative (and this was part of the reason before, but it’s taken on a new urgency since Russia began flying combat sorties from Latakia in September, 2015) is to dispel the notion that the Kremlin is complicit in war crimes. Plain and simple.
Witness “Exhibit A” out this morning from Reuters:
President Vladimir Putin said on Tuesday that Russia had information that the United States was planning to launch new missile strikes on Syria, and that there were plans to fake chemicals weapons attacks there.
Putin, standing alongside Italian President Sergio Mattarella who was in Moscow for talks, said Russia would tolerate Western criticism of its role in Syria but hoped that attitudes would eventually soften.
When asked whether he expected more U.S. missile strikes on Syria, he said:
“We have information that a similar provocation is being prepared … in other parts of Syria including in the southern Damascus suburbs where they are planning to again plant some substance and accuse the Syrian authorities of using (chemical weapons).”
He did not offer any proof for that assertion.
That is so laughable that it eludes attempts to lampoon it.
And not even the part about faking a chemical attack in order to justify another missile strike.
Rather, the part about it coming from Putin citing “information” he has about “substance” planting. So this is Putin suggesting that a Putin puppet in Washington is going to fake a chemical attack to frame… wait for it… Putin.
This is a guy who routinely has political rivals murdered talking about other people planting evidence and the “other people” he’s talking about are simultaneously accused of collaborating with him to rig a US election.
It boggles the mind.
Coming full circle, just note that when you see people creating new excuses for shit (false flag chemical attacks) when everyone on God’s green earth accepted the general premise (that the US is angling for regime change in Syria) years ago, there must be some other reason why new excuses are being made for a premise that everyone already agrees with.