EEV: Requesting 2nd source confirmation
In an interview with Dale Gavlak, a Middle East correspondent for the Associated Press and Mint Press News, Syrian rebels tacitly implied that they were responsible for last week’s chemical attack. Some information could not immediately be independently verified.
“From numerous interviews with doctors, Ghouta residents, rebel fighters and their families….many believe that certain rebels received chemical weapons via the Saudi intelligence chief, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, and were responsible for carrying out the (deadly) gas attack,” he writes in the article.
As Gavlak reports, Abdel-Moneim said his son and 12 other rebels died in a weapons storage tunnel. The father stated the weapons were provided to rebel forces by a Saudi militant, known as Abu Ayesha, describing them as having a “tube-like structure” while others were like a “huge gas bottle.”
“When Saudi Prince Bandar gives such weapons to people, he must give them to those who know how to handle and use them,” she warned. She, like other Syrians, do not want to use their full names for fear of retribution.
Gavlak also refers to an article in the UK’s Daily Telegraph about secret Russian-Saudi talks stating that Prince Bandar threatened Russian President Vladimir Putin with terror attacks at next year’s Winter Olympics in Sochi if Russia doesn’t agree to change its stance on Syria.
“Prince Bandar pledged to safeguard Russia’s naval base in Syria if the Assad regime is toppled, but he also hinted at Chechen terrorist attacks on Russia’s Winter Olympics in Sochi if there is no accord,” the article stated.
Recent publication by the Voice of Russia ‘Syrian rebels take responsibility for the chemical attack admitting the weapons were provided by Saudis’ received a strong outcry among the Internet users as some of them claiming that the company’s reports are more credible than allegations against Syrian government made by US authorities.
‘It’s more credible than the US saying we have real evidence of Assad using them [chemical weapons]. Assad doesn’t get weapons from Saudi Arabia. They don’t have ties. The US will use any reason it can to go to war. Even if it means creating one’, writesDylanJamesCo on Reddit.
KoreyYrvaI writes that ‘The Voice of Russia wants us to believe that the Rebels totally were responsible for the chemical attack, and it was an accident… because Russia has been impartial throughout all of this and I don’t think America(or anyone) needs another war, but this is hardly credible’.
‘America is just getting better at proxy wars. They have firm ties with the Saudis, and they would have no problem destabilizing Syria if it meant the US could eventually target Iran and its oil reserve’, writes NineteenEightyTwo.