Former Iranian president blames Syria for the chemical attacks

I read this in the Independent today and it is on the web that the former president Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani told a newspaper that Syria's government to blame for chemical attack. This was posted in a semi official Syrian newspaper and then very quickly withdrawn.

I tried to look for further proof to back this outrageous claim up and came across the Official Syrian news refuting the claim in the strongest possible way (suggesting to me that they had something real to refute in the first place).

Appreciate that this could be the first victim of war - truth. But you must remember that Iran has its own chemical weapons horrors in the near past. However, if this does exist then ironically, Iran vould have provided the best evidence yet for the US to go to war

Now being reported on Reuters

Originally posted by templar knight
Now being reported on Reuters

Here is the quote from the former President:

"The people have been the target of chemical attacks by their own government and now they must also wait for an attack by foreigners," Rafsanjani said, according to ILNA. "The people of Syria have seen much damage in these two years."

Remember the last country to fall victim to a similar chemical attack was Iran.
It looks like Iran may play neutral on this issue.

Interesting.

Seriously now....are you a rogue social network packet flow i do need to chew some 4ss ? Its been signed sealed and delivered.

I wanted to get some proof so this video clip on the Radio free Europe web site (half way down the page) shows the ex president giving a speech. If the translation is to be believed, (and I do not know Persian) then this is pretty good proof.

Originally posted by clay2 baraka
Remember the last country to fall victim to a similar chemical attack was Iran.
It looks like Iran may play neutral on this issue.

Interesting.

Yeah, it is rather interesting, isn't it? There's that nasty little pact which was drawn up as well. It's anyone's guess what Iran will do if and when Syria is attacked by western powers.

Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has warned that a U.S. intervention would be a “disaster for the region” and Revolutionary Guard Chief Mohammad Ali Jafari suggest thatattack could lead to the “immediate destruction of Israel.”
But Iranian leaders have stopped short of actually vowing to take action. As the Guardian’s Tehran Bureau blog has noted, the Iranian government has framed the consequences of U.S. intervention in terms of divine retribution rather than an actual Iranian response. "God willing, the flames of this conflagration will set Zionism's robe ablaze," Gen. Masoud Jazayeri, the deputy chief of staff of Iran's armed forces said, in one representative statement.
This is notable given that Iran and Syria signed a mutual defense pact in 2005, and about a year ago a spokesman for the Revolutionary Guard Corps vowed that "In the case of American stupidity and a military attack by this country on Syria, the joint military pact of Syria's allies would be implemented." Some have suggested Iran could retaliate by trying to shutting down shipping through the strategically important Strait of Hormuz or attacking Israel through its proxy, the Lebanese Shiite militia Hezbollah.
www.slate.com...

Originally posted by templar knight
I wanted to get some proof so this video clip on the Radio free Europe web site (half way down the page) shows the ex president giving a speech. If the translation is to be believed, (and I do not know Persian) then this is pretty good proof.

Templar....trust me, what you posted is what you has been proposed, either directly or indirectly. To assume is not reality, to access is a human inbuilt flaw mechanism.

That's interesting and all. But I don't really care which side used them.
It doesn't change the fact that we shouldn't go over there and get involved at all.

naaa I bet it was the see eye ah

Originally posted by masqua

Originally posted by clay2 baraka
Remember the last country to fall victim to a similar chemical attack was Iran.
It looks like Iran may play neutral on this issue.

Interesting.

Yeah, it is rather interesting, isn't it? There's that nasty little pact which was drawn up as well. It's anyone's guess what Iran will do if and when Syria is attacked by western powers.

I am not interested in anyone's guess...but rather your interpretation in the matter.

Its come to a point, that lines have been drawn and sides have been taken and those that have not sided need to make their stand made public. We/You/Us/Anyone is no long shielded by anonymity. The apparatus of communication and its access is a tool. That tool we know very well and how well it can be forged into a sword. So...what is your stand, regardless of the fact you being a mod or not.

Everything is an equation

reply to post by Manipulativebehavior


You want my opinion (as if it matters)?

America should stay out of Syria and allow the Arab States to come to terms with Assad

Originally posted by masqua
reply to post by Manipulativebehavior

 

You want my opinion (as if it matters)?

America should stay out of Syria and allow the Arab States to come to terms with Assad

What did you assume that your within level current standing has not, will not sway opinions had i not posed a question ? Was / Is my question a questionable question ?

3OD1u9mn6Sg