Breaking: WMD in Syria

Brown Bomber

Was hoping this wouldn't happen so soon after Boston. I believe that the two events may be connected. Russia is the main reason the US hasn't destroyed Syria yet and the US is the main reason the Russians haven't eliminated their Chechen problem.
Have they both come to a secret agreement to stand aside?

It begins

FSB: 140 detained in Moscow for connection to ‘Islamist extremist groups’
http://rt.com/news/moscow-islamist-extremist-detained-456/

shanered

Could be an agenda alright

the great purveyor of mediocrity

The Americans laid down the precursor for invading Syria months ago by declaring that use of chemical weapons would result in unilateral action. As soon as they said that, they were just waiting to pick a time to say "We have evidence that they have used chemical weapons, so we are going in".
They can't wait to get in there and then take Iran down.
The manner in which the Nato nations have been supplying arms to the rebels has been disgusting. The entire country is absolutely wrecked and tens of thousands dead, ten of thousands mangled, millions displaced and left in poverty.
It would have been better to support Assad and push for gradual change.
When Assad falls, there is going to be serious genocide there, it's going to be hell on Earth and what replaces him will almost certainly be worse.

Tony EH

Only the most extreme fools are going to fall for this one.

let's look at the facts.

Obama states that the "red line" is the use of chemical weapons or so-called "WMD". This is a clear warning to Assad.

Now, supposedly Assad's forces have used Sarin on the so-called "rebels". Although, there is really ZERO evidence who used what, or that anything at all was used.

Assad is still in control of the country, he isn't going anywhere soon and his uppermost desire is to see the "West" (ie the US) remain out of this conflict. The "West" (ie the US), has laid down the line in the sand, as it where, of chemical weaponry. This is also the only game-changer that will allow action that can bypass Russia and China's veto.

...and now we're supposed to believe that Assad would be foolish enough to do it and shoot himself in the foot.

Pull the other one.

The last time the Americans and British told me that a country had WMD and could use them...they turned out to have been lies, oops sorry, "mistakes" and up to a million people died.

Ken_Is_Here

I remember a time when WMDs meant nuclear warheads. Now it ranges from anything down to a makeshift pot with gunpowder. In that case we are all in possesion of WMDs. Do they now have to prove intent to use them or is posseision excuse enough to act.

They could even go as far as saying gunpowder has a chemical compound so we are classing it as a chemical weapon.

It was only a matter of time til someone made a move on Syria.

the great purveyor of mediocrity

I wouldn't mind but where did they buy the chemical gases. I guarantee they wouldn't have a clue how to manufacture it themselves. It was obviously sold to them by the States or Germany or one of the Nato nations.
Here, have a rake of chemical weapons, but don't use them now.
I can remember Robert Fisk saying the first people to use chemical weapons in the Middle East were the Brits under General Appleby. He also said the last time the Syrian regime were supposed to have used chemical weapons in a certain town, he was there at the time, and it was a complete lie.

Brown Bomber

As an indication of how insane and contradictory this policy of supporting "good" Islamic and terrorists and fighting "bad" Islamic terrorists is the younger of the two supposed Boston bombers was a supporter of the "rebels" in Syria.

stuar

Good thread as usual Bomber, sorry only got around to reading it now, I was just jumping in and out of the Boston thread in between what I "should" be doing, I saw pics on the tv of the alleged chemical weapon attack and instantly thought BS, but hadn't time to look a little deeper.

I'll try add something when I know a little more than I do now...........did Assad kill all "other side" coz so far I haven't seen any of "them" posting....??????:D

Hey that's a joke MODS, no need for a ban.................

stuar

The images the world has seen from Syria these last few days are peddled by whom? Why, the two international queens of lies, Washington and London. Remember Iraq? Remember Libya? Who perpetrated chemical weapons attacks in Vietnam? Who perpetrated a twin-nuclear terrorist attack in Japan? Let us examine the data on Syria...
http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/28-04-2013/124432-syria_lies-0/


I'm stating without fact nor fiction.............uncle sam was behind any/all chemical weapons that exist, paperclip etc.........Iraq/Iran.....if you dont know, look it up, too many amateurs here, end up like a fucking parrot......

discus

the great purveyor of mediocrity wrote: »

I wouldn't mind but where did they buy the chemical gases. I guarantee they wouldn't have a clue how to manufacture it themselves. It was obviously sold to them by the States or Germany or one of the Nato nations.
Here, have a rake of chemical weapons, but don't use them now.
I can remember Robert Fisk saying the first people to use chemical weapons in the Middle East were the Brits under General Appleby. He also said the last time the Syrian regime were supposed to have used chemical weapons in a certain town, he was there at the time, and it was a complete lie.

Nerve agents are not particularly difficult to make. Storage and handling is obviously a little different. As a matter of fact, I've witnessed a lot of material online in journals and publications that shows how these could be made in a clandestine lab, so I can imagine a state funded lab would have no issues.

On top of this, there has been testing done by the laboratory in Porton Down. I can't imagine a whole laboratory worth of staff being told to fake results, especially in a country like England. How would a government achieve that? By threatening to kill them?! Ha!

Anynama141

the great purveyor of mediocrity wrote: »

I wouldn't mind but where did they buy the chemical gases. I guarantee they wouldn't have a clue how to manufacture it themselves.

What makes you think this?

Tony EH

Syria and sarin gas: US claims have a very familiar ring



Reports of the Assad regime's use of chemical weapons are part of a retold drama riddled with plot-holes



Robert Fisk


Is there any way of escaping the theatre of chemical weapons? First, Israeli "military intelligence" says that Bashar al-Assad's forces have used/have probably used/might have used/could use chemical weapons. Then Chuck Hagel, the US Defence Secretary, pops up in Israel to promise even more firepower for Israel's over-armed military – avoiding any mention of Israel's more than 200 nuclear warheads – and then imbibing all the Israeli "intelligence" on Syria's use/probable use/possible use of chemical weapons.


Then good ol' Chuck returns to Washington and tells the world that "this is serious business. We need all the facts." The White House tells Congress that US intelligence agencies, presumably the same as Israeli intelligence agencies since the two usually waffle in tandem, have "varying degrees of confidence" in the assessment. But Senator Dianne Feinstein, chairman of the Senate intelligence committee – she who managed to defend Israel's actions in 1996 after it massacred 105 civilians, mostly children, at Qana in Lebanon – announces of Syria that "it is clear that red lines have been crossed and action must be taken to prevent larger-scale use". And the oldest of current White House clichés – hitherto used exclusively on Iran's probable/possible development of nuclear weapons – is then deployed: "All options are on the table."
In any normal society the red lights would now be flashing, especially in the world's newsrooms. But no. We scribes remind the world that Obama said the use of chemical weapons in Syria would be a "game changer" – at least Americans admit it is a game – and our reports confirm what no one has actually confirmed. Chemical arms used. In two Canadian TV studios, I am approached by producers brandishing the same headline. I tell them that on air I shall trash the "evidence" – and suddenly the story is deleted from both programmes. Not because they don't want to use it – they will later – but because they don't want anyone suggesting it might be a load of old cobblers.


CNN has no such inhibitions. Their reporter in Amman is asked what is known about the use of chemical weapons by Syria and replies: "Not as much as the world would want to know … the psyche of the Assad regime …." But has anyone tried? Or simply asked an obvious question, posed to me by a Syrian intelligence man in Damascus last week: if Syria can cause infinitely worse damage with its MiG bombers (which it does) why would it want to use chemicals? And since both the regime and its enemies have accused each other of using such weapons, why isn't Chuck as fearful of the rebels as he is of the Assad dictatorship?
It all comes back to that most infantile cliché of all: that the US and Israel fear Assad's chemical weapons "falling into the wrong hands". They are frightened, in other words, that these chemicals might end up in the armoury of the very same rebels, especially the Islamists, that Washington, London, Paris, Qatar and Saudi Arabia are supporting. And if these are the "wrong hands", then presumably the weapons in Assad's armoury are in the "right hands". That was the case with Saddam Hussein's chemical weapons – until he used them against the Kurds.
Now we know that there have been three specific incidents in which sarin gas has supposedly been used in Syria: in Aleppo, where both sides accused each other (the hospital videos in fact came from Syrian state TV); in Homs, apparently on a very small scale; and in the outskirts of Damascus. And, although the White House appears to have missed this, three Syrian child refugees were brought to hospital in the northern Lebanese city of Tripoli with deep and painful burns on their bodies.


But now for a few problems. Phosphorus shells can inflict deep burns, and perhaps cause birth defects. But the Americans do not suggest that the Syrian military might have used phosphorus (which is indeed a chemical); after all, American troops used the very same weapon in the Iraqi city of Fallujah, where there is indeed now an explosion of birth defects. I suppose our hatred of the Assad regime might better be reflected by horror at reports of the torture by Syrian secret policemen of the regime's detainees. But there's a problem here, too: only 10 years ago, the US was "renditioning" innocent men, including a Canadian citizen, to Damascus to be interrogated and tortured by the very same secret policemen. And if we mention Saddam's chemical weapons, there's another glitch: because the components of these vile weapons were manufactured by a factory in New Jersey and sent to Baghdad by the US.


That is not the story in our newsrooms, of course. Walk into a TV studio and they're all reading newspapers. Walk into a newspaper office and they're all watching television. It's osmotic. And the headlines are all the same: Syria uses chemical weapons. That's how the theatre works.

morison4642

as insane as david icke seems to be he said syria was on the list for the NWO, ian r crane said it too

Torakx

Thats because they are false prohpets its their job to "guess" things correctly now and then.