Their mandate is only to say IF an attack has happened - not to apportion blame
(Assad would never have allowed them in if he thought they might point the finger at him !)

It took months of negotiations to get the inspectors there at all (to investigate previous attacks), and then last week's much larger attack happened.

At first the inspectors could not visit the (new) site - even though their hotel is only 20 minutes drive away. (What had Assad got to hide?)

Eventually, with world opinion turning against him, Assad finally (six days late !) agreed for the inspectors to visit the new site.

We don't need the inspectors to tell us IF an attack has happened - we already have that knowledge from the highly respected (and totally independent) world organisation "Medicines sans Frontiers"

Do we really need to wait for someone to tell us what we already know?

If only ITK was P.M.

Safe in the No. 10 bunker.

By now he would have been killing even more civilians, and have us getting killed here at home. While Assad and ITK were both safe in their bunkers.

Such a simple global game for immoral simpletons, Ego & Profits v Ego & Prophets.

1839: "It's terrible" that weapons inspectors, bearing witness to the aftermath of an atrocity, are not able to say who they believe is responsible, the former chief UN weapons inspector in Iraq tells BBC World.

Alexander Coker explains that laboratory analysis should be able to determine whether high-grade chemical weapons were used, suggesting Syrian government involvement.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23877247

This is why there must be no delay in dealing with Syria -

Exclusive: Syrian army moves Scud missiles to avoid air strikes

www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/29/us-sy...dUSBRE97S12920130829