Chemical weapon used on civilians in Syria + Airstrikes

Gringo180

Gatling wrote: »

Rape and sexual assault is not free speech

Snowden is a common garden thief who had delusions of being James bond 007 and all he ended up with was life stuck in Moscow

Snowden is possibly one of the greatest whistle blowers of all time. He should be classed as a hero not a villain.

Have you any proof of those accusations against Assange or is it just another way to blacken his name?

Dohnjoe

Gringo180 wrote: »

Have you any proof of those accusations against Assange or is it just another way to blacken his name?

Way off topic here, but hey this is an afterhours thread so

Assange started out well enough, Wikileaks used to be generally a force for good.. I even donated to them in the past

But over time, it's obvious the man has or developed a distinct agenda. Leaked internal logs (ironically) show they became partisan. It became a tool to attack certain targets rather than a genuine objective platform for whistle-blowing and information leaking

He's the direct opposite of Snowden.

Cheerful Spring

Iraq 2003 chemical weapons excuse they used to invade. Syria the same thing.

Some people brains don't seem to be working.

Anyone who got intelligence would realise Trump revealing he is about to leave Syria would allow Iran and Russia to dominant. Somebody decided they not having that and they staged a chemical attack 3 days later. Use your brain on this!

Gatling

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Iraq 2003 chemical weapons

Yeah we know that nobody disagrees .

But russia is lying

Can the OPCW run an impartial , independent investigation into the use of chemical biological and nerve agents

Vladimir Poontang

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xaw46vmqhTw

Elmer Blooker

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Some people brains don't seem to be working.

At the end of March 2017 Trump declared that Assad had a future as President of Syria, within a few days came the Khan Sheiktoun false flag.
Some peoples brains don't seem to be working.

mcmoustache

Vladimir Poontang wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xaw46vmqhTw

Is this the same Peter Ford lobbies on behalf of Assad's father in law?

mcmoustache

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

At the end of March 2017 Trump declared that Assad had a future as President of Syria, within a few days came the Khan Sheiktoun false flag.
Some peoples brains don't seem to be working.

False flags - the answer to everything.

Gatling

Seems people have gone very quite all of a sudden..
But want to talk about WMDs

cnocbui

Gatling wrote: »

Rape and sexual assault is not free speech

Snowden is a common garden thief who had delusions of being James bond 007 and all he ended up with was life stuck in Moscow

Assange did not rape anyone or commit sexual assault, by any standards commonly held outside of Sweden.

I disagree with you about Snowden.

Elmer Blooker

Gatling wrote: »

Seems people have gone very quite all of a sudden..
But want to talk about WMDs

quite what?

False flags - the answer to everything.

my answer. I would think that for the amount of money that these Oscar winning activist actors are receiving they could come up with something a bit more convincing!

Cheerful Spring

We like to believe our leaders are sane and would not sanction mass killings but this not the truth.


The Obama administration gave green signal to a chemical weapons attack plan in Syria that could be blamed on President Bashar al Assad's regime and in turn, spur international military action in the devastated country, leaked documents have shown.

A new report, that contains an email exchange between two senior officials at British-based contractor Britam Defence, showed a scheme 'approved by Washington'.

The December 25 email was sent from Britam's Business Development Director David Goulding to company founder Philip Doughty.

The emails were released by a Malaysian hacker who also obtained senior executives resumes and copies of passports via an unprotected company server.

According to the paper, the U.S. State Department has declined to comment on the matter.

Dohnjoe

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Iraq 2003 chemical weapons excuse they used to invade.

Fully agreed

But the fact that George Bush and his team lied to go to war in 2003 doesn't automatically mean that e.g. Saddam didn't gas the Kurds in the An-Alfal campaign or Assad hasn't used chemical weapons in Ghouta or Duoma

It has no real bearing, there isn't some sort of "cosmic balance" to satisfy

Evidence points toward the fact that Bush lied, and evidence also points towards Assad's forces using chemical weapons.

You know it's possible to criticise Washington (mercilessly) and also criticise Moscow? Being heavily cynical of one doesn't mean you have to automatically support the other. It's a trap certain people fall into, and some don't seem to emerge from. People like that will often go to great lengths and through all sorts of mental gymnastics to satisfy that narrative rather than trying to satisfy the truth

mcmoustache

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

my answer. I would think that for the amount of money that these Oscar winning activist actors are receiving they could come up with something a bit more convincing!

Do you think the yanks went to the moon? And what are your opinions on extra terrestrial aliens and their input into pyramid construction?

mcmoustache

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

We like to believe our leaders are sane and would not sanction mass killings but this not the truth.


The Obama administration gave green signal to a chemical weapons attack plan in Syria that could be blamed on President Bashar al Assad's regime and in turn, spur international military action in the devastated country, leaked documents have shown.

A new report, that contains an email exchange between two senior officials at British-based contractor Britam Defence, showed a scheme 'approved by Washington'.

The December 25 email was sent from Britam's Business Development Director David Goulding to company founder Philip Doughty.

The emails were released by a Malaysian hacker who also obtained senior executives resumes and copies of passports via an unprotected company server.

According to the paper, the U.S. State Department has declined to comment on the matter.

I checked every word and none of those is a hyperlink.

Gatling

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

We like to believe our leaders are sane and would not sanction mass killings but this not the truth.
eaked documents have shown

To be Fake

We can't be having that fake stories

Cheerful Spring

mcmoustache wrote: »

I checked every word and none of those is a hyperlink.

https://in.news.yahoo.com/us-backed-plan-launch-chemical-weapon-attack-syria-045648224.html

It was originally posted by daily mail in the UK and under severe pressure from the UK establishment, they took it down later.

Elmer Blooker

mcmoustache wrote: »

Do you think the yanks went to the moon? And what are your opinions on extra terrestrial aliens and their input into pyramid construction?

Do you really have to resort to trolling?
Surely you can do better than this?

mcmoustache

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

https://in.news.yahoo.com/us-backed-plan-launch-chemical-weapon-attack-syria-045648224.html

It was originally posted by daily mail in the UK and under severe pressure from the UK establishment, they took it down later.

Why did you change this part?

According to Infowars.com, the December 25 email was sent from Britam's Business Development Director David Goulding to company founder Philip Doughty.

It just seems like a strange thing to leave out.

mcmoustache

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

Do you really have to resort to trolling?
Surely you can do better than this?

I can indeed, but when you wrestle with pigs, anything can happen.

Cheerful Spring

mcmoustache wrote: »

Why did you change this part?



It just seems like a strange thing to leave out.

It has nothing to do with Infowars the email exchange was reported by the Daily Mail, they had the story, not Infowars.

mcmoustache

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

It has nothing to do with Infowars the email exchange was reported by the Daily Mail, they had the story, not Infowars.

But you had to delete that from you copy and paste. Why would you do that?

Cheerful Spring

mcmoustache wrote: »

But you had to delete that from you copy and paste. Why would you do that?

Because Infowars did not carry the story they just reported on it. Daily Mail posted the story why would I give credit to Alex Jones? Do you believe infowars should be credited on here?

Gatling

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

[
It was originally posted by daily mail in the UK and under severe pressure from the UK establishment, they took it down later.

under severe pressure from the UK establishment, they took it down later.

Can you prove this claim .

Or are you afraid to admit it was Fake

Cheerful Spring

Gatling wrote: »

under severe pressure from the UK establishment, they took it down later.

Can you prove this claim .

Or are you afraid to admit it was Fake

The emails exist, but the UK establishment went after the Daily to take it down saying the emails were faked. I think this important news was too explosive to be allowed to be left online.

Gatling

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

the UK establishment went after the Daily to take it down saying the emails were faked.

Can you prove this yes or no

Can you also prove it is not fake yes or no

cnocbui

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

The emails exist, but the UK establishment went after the Daily to take it down saying the emails were faked. I think this important news was too explosive to be allowed to be left online.

How do you know the DM wasn't shown evidence they were fake and so removed the article because it was inaccurate?

mcmoustache

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Because Infowars did not carry the story they just reported on it. Daily Mail posted the story why would I give credit to Alex Jones? Do you believe infowars should be credited on here?

Is there a link to the Daily Mail article? I'd like to know the author's background. If it was taken down, I'd be curious about the reason - the Daily Mail can be a bit loose with the truth so maybe they were entering libel territory.

I think that the daily mail is so bad that I didn't use their report about Russian transmissions being intercepted prior to the poisonings in any points that I made. Reliable sources are important.

Cheerful Spring

cnocbui wrote: »

How do you know the DM wasn't shown evidence they were fake and so removed the article because it was inaccurate?

Qatar was named in the emails, so I would not rule it out this story is true?

Qatar is widely believed to have been the main supplier of weapons to the rebels.

The Gulf emirate has denied providing any arms, although it has promised to support the opposition "with whatever it needs".

Most of the weapons are thought to have been given to hardline Islamist rebel groups, particularly those aligned with the Muslim Brotherhood, which has acted as an intermediary.

This has reportedly drawn criticism from Western officials who say many of the groups are extremist.

Qatar Emiri Air Force transporter planes flew to Turkey with supplies for the Syrian rebels as early as January 2012, according to the New York Times

By autumn 2012, Qatari aircraft were landing at Esenboga airport, near Ankara, every two days.

Qatari officials insisted they were carrying non-lethal aid

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-22906965

Gringo180

Google Genie Energy. A certain Rupert Murdoch is on the board of directors. He also owns Sky News. I wonder would his energy company love to drill for oil in Syria. Hmmmmm