There are too many red flags about the chemical weapons attack in northern Syria to believe the official version of events that immediately assigned guilt to the Assad government.
Each of the red flags, on the other hand, strongly suggests that the incident was (yet another) false flag operation perpetrated by the terrorists with a view to destroying the peace process and prolonging the war.
A key consideration would be Cui bono?
Does the Assad government benefit from a chemical weapons attack on innocent people when he is winning the war and a just peace is on the horizon? No. The Assad government in no way benefits.
Do imperial terrorist proxies benefit from demonizing Assad and hastily accusing him of “killing his own people”? Yes they do.
Was there foreknowledge of the event? Apparently so.
Reporter Feras Karam announced before the event, that it was going to occur.
And what about the chemical agent itself? The hasty conclusion that the gas was sarin is unreasonable, not only because the conclusion was reached almost immediately, but also because videos of the alleged victims contradict symptoms that would normally be associated with sarin gas exposure.