Airstrikes by the US, France, and the UK over an alleged chemical attack in Syria were a case of “execution before the trial,” author Charles Glass told RT’s Going Underground, citing their refusal to wait for an OPCW probe.

Unlike the alleged attack in Syria, real atrocities by Saudi Arabia in Yemen do not get the same response, Yemeni journalist Hussain Albukhaiti told Afshin Rattansi, the host of Going Underground.

Glass, a former Middle East correspondent for ABC News, who has written extensively about the use of chemical weapons, said there has been great inconsistency in Western policies on this issue, pointing out that the US favoured the use of chemical weapons by Saddam Hussein during the Iran-Iraq war, causing the deaths of thousands of Iranian soldiers.

“The British, the French and the Americans have all been involved by proxy, they’ve all been involved in supplying weapons to the opposition groups in Syria, most of whom are Jihadis. They’ve been involved in training them in southeast Turkey and Jordan and in facilitating their passage in and out of Syria. This is indisputable.”

READ MORE: Western journos formed their Syria ‘chemical attack’ opinion from faraway newsrooms – Galloway to RT

In the same episode, Albukhaiti called out Britain for its crocodile tears over Yemen. “The British heart is not towards Yemen, the British heart is towards the Saudi pocket.”

The British government responded to the news of a deadly Saudi-coalition strike on a wedding in Yemen last week by saying that its “heart goes out” to all those affected. It refused, however, to halt arms sales to the country, accepting the word of the Saudi government that the attack would be investigated. Almost 100 people, including men, women and children were killed or injured in the strike.

Albukhaiti contrasted the muted reaction to the rash response of the alleged chemical attack in Syria.

“We see them crying about what’s happening in Syria, about what was a claim about a chemical attack and it wasn’t true and they went and bombed Syria and they did all the things they say to protect the Syrian people.”

On the other hand, evidence of the atrocities in Yemen is met with ongoing support to Saudi Arabia in the form of money and weapons, Albukhaiti said. “They smile at you and stab you in the back.”

The journalist said he has proof that US-made bombs were used in the wedding party strike, posting a photo of a fragment of an MK82 bomb found in the area.

Albukhaiti claimed that there are cluster bombs everywhere in Sa’dah and presented an example on the air of a US-made cluster bomb given to him by the children who found it in a village in east Sa’dah.

In 2016, Saudi Arabia admitted that it used UK-manufactured cluster bombs against Houthi rebels in Yemen. Prior to the revelation, Britain denied their cluster munitions were being used by the Saudi-led coalition. The British government now denies selling cluster bombs to the Saudis.



Ignore, deny, downplay: Accounts of Syrians from Douma have no place in Western narrative

Ignore, deny, downplay: Accounts of Syrians from Douma have no place in Western narrative
Whatever the Douma residents, who had first-hand experience of the shooting of the ‘water dousing after chemical attack’ video, have to say, their words simply don’t fit into the narrative allowed in the West, analysts told RT.

Footage of screaming bewildered civilians and children being doused with water, presumably to decontaminate them, was a key part in convincing Western audiences that a chemical attack happened in Douma. Russia brought the people seen in the video to Brussels, where they told anyone interested in listening that the scene was staged. Their testimonies, however, were swiftly branded as bizarre and underwhelming” and even an “obscene masquerade” staged by Russians.

“They refuse to see this as evidence, obviously pending what the OPCW team is going to come up with in Douma,” Middle East expert Ammar Waqqaf said in an interview with RT. The alleged chemical incident, without any investigation, has already become a “solid fact” in the West, which the US, Britain and France based their “retaliatory” strike on.

“These three actors were quick to do what they did, to bomb the place, because they knew they didn’t have a solid case. They wanted to bomb with disregard to whatever was happening over there,” Waqqaf stated.

If the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) fails to confirm that there was an attack or even any chemical incident, it would be ignored or at least heavily downplayed, the former British ambassador to Syria, Peter Ford, predicted.

“It will be either ignored or an attempt will be made to downplay and undermine it,” Ford told RT.