There is no doubt that Sarin has been used on the citizens in Syria. However, there seems to be doubt about whether or not Assad himself is responsible. Does this matter?
It is heartening to know that world leaders are weighing the question about striking Syria with missiles very seriously even though it is heart breaking to watch the Syrian people suffer immeasurably.
It appears that there is a mounting consensus that the case for "Beyond a reasonable doubt" isn't being met.
Or perhaps the Obama Administration isn't going to rely on reasonable doubt.
This morning, on CNN White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough was clear:
McDonough said the location of the attack and rockets by which the chemicals were delivered show that the regime was behind the attack.
"All of that leads to, as I say, a quite strong common sense test, irrespective of the intelligence, that suggests that the regime carried this out,"
"Do we have a picture or do we have irrefutable, beyond a reasonable doubt evidence?" McDonough said. "This is not a court of law. And intelligence does not work that way," he said, answering his own question.
Common sense? No one thinks, if Assad did order the chemical weapons attacks, that he did so with any measure of common sense in lieu of the fact that President Obama clearly issued the CW Red Line proposition.
Here is some information not being reported which may have huge implications in answering the question "Who used the chemical weapons"
Al Jazeera record of Syrian defections
There are two former Assad Generals of interest who have defected and joined the Assad opposition forces, according to reports:
Adnan Silu, Major General and former head of Syria's chemical weapons program - July 2012 defected to the opposition.
Brig. Gen Mohammed Nour Ezzedeen Khallouf - chief of supplies and logistics of Syrian Armed Forces, March 2013
If anyone knows about chemical weapons and where they are/were stored, it would be these two Generals that joined the rebels prior to the chemical weapon attacks.
People want evidence they can review, not references to secret sources, that presents a solid case that there is NO reasonable doubt that Assad ordered the use of chemical weapons.
For example,
Democratic Rep. Rob Andrews of New Jersey said Friday he cannot support military action in Syria without “proof beyond a reasonable doubt” that Syrian President Bashar Assad’s regime was behind a chemical weapons attack last month.
It is reported that UK
Cameron stated "that motivation for the attack was the issue which the JIC had the hardest task on reaching a conclusion."
In fact the JIC adds there was “no obvious political or military trigger for regime use of CW [chemical weapons] on an apparently larger scale now” – given the presence of the UN inspectors.
If there are still questions about the justification for a military strike, would it make sense for President Obama to postpone a military strike until the case is made that absolutely proves that Assad and his regime are solely reponsible for the August 21 Sarin gas use on Syrian citizens?
Why are there questions about whether or not Assad is responsible for the Sarin attack?
Well, first off the UN report has not been completed and, when it is completed, it won't commit to who used the Sarin.
Thereafter, there are so many conflicting reports some or all of which could be politically motivated. Regardless of motivation, the varying reports are being read by politicians and constituents and contribute to the sense that "reasonable doubt" remains.
In addition to the sources above that question the "reasonable doubt" premise, here are a few presented in no particular order:
Did anyone else notice this? Obama just said that it may have been an unauthorized strike, here:
These all-source assessments are based on human, signals, and geospatial intelligence as well as a significant body of open source reporting.Our classified assessments have been shared with the U.S. Congress and key international partners. To protect sources and methods, we cannot publicly release all available intelligence . . .
The source for the most compelling evidence being used by the Administration to date is revealed:
This is the German Focus Magazine story that provides the source for intercepted dialogue amongst Syrian officials. It is important to read this entire story to learn of some unsettling conclusions if the US were to strike.
Commanders urged Assad for months to use poison gas
For months, apparently Syrian military commissars of President Bashar al-Assad have requested the use of poison gas. This is shown by radiograms, which has intercepted a German spy ship. The use of poison gas in August could not have been approved by Assad.
And this is the story released by the Guardian, which refers to a Focus story, but does't a provide a link.
Israeli intelligence 'intercepted Syrian regime talk about chemical attack' Can't find the Focus Magazine article.
The bulk of evidence proving the Assad regime's deployment of chemical weapons – which would provide legal grounds essential to justify any western military action – has been provided by Israeli military intelligence, the German magazine Focus has reported.
The 8200 unit of the Israeli Defence Forces, which specialises in electronic surveillance, intercepted a conversation between Syrian officials regarding the use of chemical weapons, an unnamed former Mossad official told Focus. The content of the conversation was relayed to the US, the ex-official said.
Russia gave UN 100-page report in July blaming Syrian rebels for Aleppo sarin attack
Father of Dead Syrian Rebel – Rebels Used Chemical Weapons By Accident
Abdel-Moneim said his son and 12 other rebels were killed inside of a tunnel used to store weapons provided by a Saudi militant, known as Abu Ayesha, who was leading a fighting battalion. The father described the weapons as having a “tube-like structure” while others were like a “huge gas bottle.”
This is a compelling analysis of the actual missiles and the strikes:
Syrian "gas rockets" appear homemade and incapable of flying 5-10 miles to target.
Why is the Administration Withholding Israeli-Provided Intercepts That "Prove" Responsibility?