The so-called “rebels” have a stronger motive for gassing their own people and saying Assad did it, than Assad has for using the weapons at a time when his forces have made significant military gains and when the use of chemical weapons threatens to bring an international response.
However, as the article states, if Assad didn't use the weapons, why hinder the access of UN personnel to the attack site, which the Assad regime undoubtedly has?
If I were Assad, I would worry that the order of events would go like this:
Monday -- western observers type up the report indicating that Assad is guilty of war crimes.
Tuesday -- western observers tour the site where chemical weapons may have been used.
Wednesday -- western observers mail the report they typed on Monday.
Leaders like Assad are paranoid, and they probably have good reason to be paranoid.
“The so-called “rebels” have a stronger motive for gassing their own people and saying Assad did it, than Assad has for using the weapons at a time when his forces have made significant military gains and when the use of chemical weapons threatens to bring an international response.”
Bingo! I don’t Asshat er Assad had anything to do with it.
It gives the UN personnel the opportunity to say they were on site before they lie? False credibility?