Chemical weapon used on civilians in Syria + Airstrikes

mulbot

Gringo180 wrote: »

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

Isn't Richard Cheney on this board too?

Gringo180

mulbot wrote: »

Isn't Richard Cheney on this board too?

Yes.

cnocbui

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

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

So what? Mentioning Qatar has absolutely no significance as to validity.

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

Thought that was supposed to be the US supplying arms to the rebels? Misplace your script?

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

'thought, reportedly' you seem to have double standards when it comes to evidence. Is it OK for the UK, US and France to retaliate against Syria on the basis of thinking Syria used chemical weapons or just on reports of them having done so?

You state as fact that the article was pulled because of establishment pressure yet provide no evidence to support your assertion.

Cheerful Spring

mcmoustache wrote: »

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.

The story is complicated as the hacker was arrested and disappeared. The British Establishment claimed the emails were faked and the British officials applied pressure and daily mail removed the story and apologised.

You find the article in this.
https://syriathetruth.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/syria-email-daily-mail-january-29-20132.png

mcmoustache

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

The story is complicated as the hacker was arrested and disappeared. The British Establishment claimed the emails were faked and the British officials applied pressure and daily mail removed the story and apologised.

You find the article in this.
https://syriathetruth.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/syria-email-daily-mail-january-29-20132.png

Thanks for that. From the Daily Mail. Facts are important.

An article on 29 January reported allegations on the internet that the US Government had backed a plot to launch a chemicals weapons attack in Syria and blame it on the Assad regime.
The reports made reference to an email said to have been from David Goulding, the Business Development Director of Britam Defence, to company founder, Philip Doughty. The email had been published on the internet after Britam’s computer system was illegally hacked in Singapore. It referred to a proposal that Britam would deliver chemical weapons to Syria for enormous financial reward and suggested that the directors were willing to consider the illegal proposal.
We now accept that email was fabricated and acknowledge there is no truth in any suggestion that Britam or its directors were willing to consider taking part in such a plot, which may have led to an atrocity.
We apologise to each of them and have agreed to pay substantial damages.

The Daily Mail‘s publisher paid £110,000 in damages to the firm.

Gatling

mcmoustache wrote: »

Thanks for that. From the Daily Mail. Facts are important.

Oh Dear .

Bet you it gets ignored like the other questions been ignored

Cheerful Spring

mcmoustache wrote: »

Thanks for that. From the Daily Mail. Facts are important.

The emails are not fabricated, the daily mail just accepted what the British establishment actors told them they bottled it.

ArchXStanton

Gatling wrote: »

Oh Dear .

Bet you it gets ignored like the other questions been ignored

Like that link request you keep ignoring...

mcmoustache

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

The emails are not fabricated, the daily mail just accepted what the British establishment actors told them they bottled it.

That's a rather extraordinary claim. You know what that means?

Gringo180

Its great to see the mask slipping from western media outlets. Sky News blatantly suppressing what in all likelyhood is the truth.

Gringo180

I would advise anyone to read up about COINTELPRO. It was a covert and illegal project conducted by the FBI at discrediting influential figures who were a threat to the establishment in the 60s and 70s.

Cheerful Spring

mcmoustache wrote: »

That's a rather extraordinary claim. You know what that means?

I show you how easily people in the West are manipulated by Jihadists.

Is this same girl appearing in 3 different White Helmet scenes?



A guy found in the rubble by the, injured, pictured with his buddies the same location (staged?)






Here is a movie set up by the white helmets. Syria is a warzone why are they faking bodily injuries?

mcmoustache

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

I show you how easily people in the West are manipulated by Jihadists.

Is this same girl appearing in 3 different White Helmet scenes?



A guy found in the rubble by the, injured, pictured with his buddies the same location (staged?)






Here is a movie set up by the white helmets. Syria is a warzone why are they faking bodily injuries?

First of all, those pictures all look the same. It looks like 3 kids in a trench coat trying to get into a cinema.

Second, did the gas attack happen or not or did the British do it. I've forgotten the Kremlin line.

donegaLroad

Former head of British Armed Forces gets cut off by Sky when he goes off script on Syria

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43_dPKJmbBc

Cheerful Spring

mcmoustache wrote: »

First of all, those pictures all look the same. It looks like 3 kids in a trench coat trying to get into a cinema.

Second, did the gas attack happen or not or did the British do it. I've forgotten the Kremlin line.

I guess who uploaded the videos of the last two chemical attacks to the internet, the white helmets that's who.

Sierra Oscar

mcmoustache wrote: »

First of all, those pictures all look the same. It looks like 3 kids in a trench coat trying to get into a cinema.

Second, did the gas attack happen or not or did the British do it. I've forgotten the Kremlin line.

It's hard to keep up with the Kremlin line. First there was no attack whatsoever, then there was an actual chemical attack but it was staged by unknown actors, then it was there was no chemical attack, but it was staged by unknown actors to make it seem as if there was one, then there was a chemical attack again and a State intelligence agency was involved and now the latest line is that there was no chemical attack, but Britain staged an attack to make it seem like there was one. It's all simple and straight forward according to Russia, right? :rolleyes:

We'll see what the Kremlin line is tomorrow.

mcmoustache

donegaLroad wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43_dPKJmbBc

You should really try to keep up with the thread. This was done many pages ago.

JenovaProject

mcmoustache wrote: »

You should really try to keep up with the thread. This was done many pages ago.

It really wasnt.
It was brushed off as "sure that always happens"

The narrative was being questioned and it wasnt allowed to continue.

Sierra Oscar

JenovaProject wrote: »

It really wasnt.
It was brushed off as "sure that always happens"

The narrative was being questioned and it wasnt allowed to continue.

Have you actually watched Sky News much since the chemical attack? They've had many commentators on, some of who did in fact question why the Syrian Government would launch such an attack. They weren't cut off air.

Interviewers are cut off all the time, it's the nature of live television. You're just cherry-picking here.

donegaLroad

mcmoustache wrote: »

You should really try to keep up with the thread. This was done many pages ago.

Im a busy man, sorry I can't wade through 105 pages of posts to see if this had been posted already.

Don't you think it is a bit strange that he was cut off like that?

Cheerful Spring

It was staged we have pictures and videos of White Helmets staging mock-ups of attacks and people getting injured. Even with this evidence, you people seem unable to take it on board your being played.

JenovaProject

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

Have you actually watched Sky News much since the chemical attack? They've had many commentators on, some of who did in fact question why the Syrian Government would launch such an attack. They weren't cut off air.

Interviewers are cut off all the time, it's the nature of live television. You're just cherry-picking here.

these commentators were not former heads of the army.

JenovaProject

JenovaProject wrote: »

It was brushed off as "sure that always happens"

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

Interviewers are cut off all the time, it's the nature of live television.

First responder to the rescue lol

Gatling

donegaLroad wrote: »

.

Done to death already unfortunately it's not unusual sorry

Gatling

mcmoustache wrote: »

That's a rather extraordinary claim. You know what that means?

He's caught ..

Expect a random rant while trying to ignore his own claims in the hope people some how forgets his claims.

Oh no that's not happening

Gatling

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

It was

Care to explain your bold claims at all

mcmoustache

JenovaProject wrote: »

It really wasnt.
It was brushed off as "sure that always happens"

The narrative was being questioned and it wasnt allowed to continue.

Then perhaps we should take sky news off the air because they are always doing that.

Cheerful Spring

Gatling wrote: »

He's caught ..

Expect a random rant while trying to ignore his own claims in the hope people some how forgets his claims.

Oh no that's not happening

What you even talking about? I still waiting for links from you for the last month and some other people on here same, waiting.

Cheerful Spring

Gatling wrote: »

Care to explain your bold claims at all

I already have. I told you what I believe happened.

Cheerful Spring

WASHINGTON—President Donald Trump is prodding his military advisers to agree to a more sweeping retaliatory strike in Syria than they consider prudent and is unhappy with the options they have presented to him, White House and other administration officials said.

In meetings with Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis, Mr. Trump has been pushing for an attack that not only would punish the Syrian regime but also exact a price from two of its international patrons, Russia and Iran, a White House official said.

“He wants Mattis to push the limits a little bit more,” the official said.

Mr. Mattis and other military advisers have resisted, worried that the administration lacks a broader strategy in Syria and that military strikes could trigger a dangerous clash with Russia and Iran, U.S. officials said.

Over the past two days, the Pentagon has had two opportunities to launch attacks against Syria in reprisal for a suspected chemical weapons attack, but Mr. Mattis halted them, according to U.S. and defense officials.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-seeks-large-strike-in-syria-mattis-urges-caution-1523651589?mod=e2tw

Mattis could be next out the door? We spoke about this before the only person left to stop Trump and Bolton and Pompeo.