It is not possible to eradicate "evidence" of chemical weapons spread over 100 square miles in less than a month. No evidence = no chemical weapons!Quote:
Originally Posted by oldcolner
Why are we not seeing images of hundreds of UN personnel and Russian policemen dressed like this..?
Attachment 9202
This is what happens when you use "liquid" nerve gas on a front door handle in Salisbury...Quote:
Originally Posted by sinkov
Attachment 9203
So why are we sending weapons inspectors into Syria wearing tee shirts and jeans, armed only with clipboards..?.
From footy's French Intelligence source,
"The tactic adopted by pro-regime forces involved separating the various groups (Ahrar al-Sham, Faylaq al-Rahman, and Jaysh al-Islam) in order to focus their efforts and obtain negotiated surrender agreements. The three main armed groups therefore began separate negotiations with the regime and Russia. The first two groups (Ahrar al-Sham and Faylaq al-Rahman) concluded agreements that resulted in the evacuation of nearly 15,000 fighters and their families.
During this first phase, the Syrian regime’s political and military strategy consisted in alternating indiscriminate military offensives against local populations, which sometimes included the use of chlorine, and pauses in operations for negotiations.
Negotiations with Jaysh al-Islam began in March but were not fully conclusive. On 4 April, part of the Jaysh al-Islam group (around one quarter of the group according to estimates) accepted the surrender agreement and fighters and their families were sent to Idlib (approximately 4,000 people, with families).
However, between 4,500 and 5,500 Jaysh al-Islam fighters, mostly located in Douma, refused the terms of negotiation. As a result, from 6 April onwards, the Syrian regime, with support from Russian forces, resumed its intensive bombing of the area, ending a pause in ground and aerial operations that had been observed since negotiations began in mid-March. This was the context for the chemical strikes analysed in this document."
So the Assad regime has been attempting a negotiated settlement with the Jihadis, two of the groups have negotiated agreements, Jaysh al islam has not and has continued to fight. This is not something you'll ever hear from our government or media, who continue to insist that Assad is the aggressor, while the truth is he didn't start this war, and as the above from French Intelligence shows, he is trying to negotiate an end to it. Why does our government continue to lie to us about the actual situation on the ground ? And if they'll lie about this, what else are they prepared to lie about ?
The report also claims that the Assad regime is using chemical weapons as a matter of course,
"the Syrian regime’s political and military strategy consisted in alternating indiscriminate military offensives against local populations, which sometimes included the use of chlorine,"
That's odd, given the enthusiasm with which the last alleged attack has been reported, I can't believe there has been one in the last 12 months since Khan Shaykhun that has gone under the radar, but that's what they seem to be saying if their claim that the use of chlorine is part of their strategy is at all valid. So is Assad using chlorine gas and no one is noticing, or is that report wrong ?
Peter Oborne with some wise words for those who seem to have totally forgotten our recent history, and are naive enough to believe everything the government and media tells them.
"Last weekend it was as if the Chilcot report never happened. Britain, cheered on by a bellicose press and a largely docile Parliament, launched airstrikes that showed the same disregard for due process against which Chilcot warned.
Remember what Chilcot told us: ‘The judgements about the severity of the threat posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction – WMD – were presented with a certainty that was not justified.’
He concluded: ‘the UK chose to join the invasion of Iraq before the peaceful options for disarmament had been exhausted. Military action at that time was not a last resort.’
Chilcot judged that Blair and George W Bush were mistaken to invade Iraq before the inspectors had finished their search for Saddam’s alleged weapons of mass destruction.
It’s déjà vu all over again. Britain, France and the United States ignored the United Nations, international law and due process.
Remember Tony Blair and George W Bush’s lacerating contempt for Hans Blix and his weapons inspectors? We saw a repeat last weekend.
When the bombing started the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) was actually in Damascus and preparing to travel to the area where the alleged chemical attacks took place.
Britain justified our action by claiming that Russia vetoed UN Security Council resolutions for chemical inspectors to investigate what happened. These claims are disingenuous.
It‘s true that Russia blocked a proposal to create a new joint UN OPCW investigative mechanism which would have a new and broader mandate to apportion blame for any attack it concluded had happened. But it was actually Syria and Russia who asked for the OPCW fact-finding mission.
This is extremely significant. Had we wanted independent verification on this occasion in Syria surely we ourselves would have demanded the OPCW send a mission to Douma. Yet we conspicuously omitted to ask for it.
Britain and the US claimed on Monday that Russia and Syria are delaying the OPCW. Another dodgy assertion.
Russia has stated that UN bureaucracy is to blame. Those familiar with the UN tell me that this claim is all too credible.
There are also question marks around the veracity of British and American assertions about the bombing raids. The US said it struck three known chemical weapons facilities in Syria – including at Barzeh and Jamraya outside Damascus. Yet the OPCW itself found these sites to have no chemical weapons as recently as last November.
In order to help prove the existence of chemical weapons, Theresa May said in her statement to Parliament on Monday that Asad’s helicopters were operating over Douma shortly before reports of a chemical weapons attack emerged.
This was true, but completely irrelevant. Nobody disputes that bombings was occurring and that helicopters were in the area. The real question is, what was the payload?
The alternative explanation of the incident offered by the Syrians is that conventional bombing caused it. The presence of helicopters is consistent with this explanation.
As for Mrs May’s excuse for not going to Parliament, it’s laughable. She cited security concerns, but Trump had signalled to the world as early as last Wednesday that there would be reprisals.
There are big questions here. Courtesy of Chilcot we all know that British and American intelligence were deeply complicit in the falsehoods told about WMDs to justify Iraq.
We also know that the official justification for the intervention in Libya – that atrocities were about to take place in Benghazi – wasn’t true.
In view of those twin disasters surely we all have a duty to be sceptical this time?
This makes it all the more important significant that we pay attention to the respectable voices who are questioning the government’s narrative of events. Former First Sea Lord Admiral West, former SAS commander Jonathan Shaw, and former British ambassador to Syria Peter Ford have all made interesting contributions to the debate.
They have either been ignored or been trashed. I wonder. As a journalist I also dislike the character assassination which has been carried out against the only British journalist who has gone to Douma since the attack supposedly took place.
This is Robert Fisk.
I know he’s controversial and that he has made serious mistakes. Whatever else you say about Fisk, he has a massive record of reporting from Northern Ireland and the Middle East.
He has won most prizes available to journalists including the Orwell Prize and the British Press Awards’ International Journalist of the Year seven times.
I’ve read his report from Douma, which I recommend. It seems even-handed and balanced. Fisk is not justifying the Assad regime. All he has done is to record testimonies from individuals including a named medic on the ground.
This is important. Karl Marx said that history happened first in tragedy and second in farce. This time it could be the other way around. The gesture bombing in Syria last weekend was farcical. But next time farce could turn to tragedy.
It’s all too likely that there will a repeat of an alleged chemical attack. We are already painting ourselves into a position where we will have no choice but to launch much bigger attacks of our own, again based on the flimsiest of evidence.
I don’t claim to know what happened in Douma. But I do know from bitter and ugly experience that official sources and media narratives can’t be trusted. And I can see that we are making it easy for ourselves to be manipulated.
So let’s not jump to conclusions. Let’s listen to those who challenge our assumptions. We have a profound moral duty to doubt the official version of events. The next attack could take us into the regional conflagration which was only narrowly avoided last weekend. So let’s pay attention to the advice proffered by boring old Sir John Chilcott."
Zillions of hours, millions and trillions of pounds sterling to clean up the door handle mess and OC still believes Syria is being swept clean in a week.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-new...ws_image&utm_c
I have decided this is taking over from football and my football posts generate little response. My comments on this and a few other non footie topics generate a maelstrom of distortions so I’m not responding any more.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Bedlington Terrier
I will only say on this that I never said the whole of Syria would be cleaned up, there is also a world of difference between novichok and chlorine gas. The gas blows away in the wind and dissolves in water, so the Russians and Syrians only have to find and remove containers. Novichok appears to linger and is not soluble.
As the inspectors have still not gone in they Russians have now had 10 days to clean up. I guess they won’t be allowed in till it’s squeaky clean.
Anyway that’s my last contribution on this topic. I’m also giving up on Jeremy and Theresa discussions which seem far more than the thread titles as many get diverted to those too.
If the site doesn’t start to generate sensible football discussions then my contributions there will finish.
It will be a sad day OC if you stop posting. From the other OC.Quote:
Originally Posted by oldcolner
It will be a sad day OC if you stop posting. Come on O C everyone has an opinion and I value yours if we all stopped posting what would be? I think our Footy mad forum is the BEST ,because we do debate ,we debate all things under the sun!Some of us ,but not me of course, get a little over heated ,Yes, mad pasionate love and all that Jazz! seeing how our team keeps us on our toes !!!!Tomorrow is ,nay will be another day. Do not stop posting on these matters ! Every little drop of wisdom adds to the ocean!You don't want to read about me 'fasting 'as a protest.Nor jumping off the 'Tower of Babel'?....But I may consider not to do those things ,if you knock off some 12 points from your Prediction table ,BT will enjoy that also.