On April 7, 2017, at 04:40 EEST, the USS Ross and the USS Porter launched 59 Tomahawk missiles at the Shayrat Air Base in Homs, Syria.
The strike was retribution for the supposed chemical attack in Khan Shaykhun, a town in the rebel-held Idlib province.
The targets of the attack were most likely the 677th and the 685th Fighter Squadron of the Syrian Arab Air Force. These squadrons utilize Soviet era Sukhoi Su-22 bombers, the same bombers that Russia and Syria admit struck a weapons depot in Khan Shaykhun on the same day as the chemical attack.
In analyzing the coverage of the attack, there are glaring inconsistencies in the timeline of events of that day.
The chemical attack is reported to have occurred around 06:30 EEST (local Syrian time) on April 4, 2017. Soon after, residents from Khan Shaykhun started flooding into hospitals. In various photos and videos, people are seen carrying victims and doctors are seen treating people affected by toxins.
The Russian and Syrian government confirmed that they hit a weapons depot on the outskirts of Khan Shaykhun at around 11:30 EEST.
Based on the available media reportage, there wasn't a second release of chemicals that could have coincided with the Syrian strike around noon. The Russian government claimed that the Syrian air force struck a chemical weapons depot in the area, which caused the release of gas, but this is unsubstantiated as there were not reports of a gas attack around noon local time, only in the early morning hours.
The stories of the hospital damaged during the second strike most likely confirm Russia and Syria's timeline of the depot strike. However, based on the available video evidence I've located of a second strike, it's hard to confirm it, as there is no time stamp for the video, nor did the activists who released it say when it took place. Regardless, the video coincides with reports of another strike taking place while victims were being treated, which would make sense with a second bombing occurring hours later.
Additionally, there are several issues in the chemical attack here. The photo and video evidence provided to us rules out the use of sarin because the gas is absorbable through the lungs and skin and physical effects will occur within seconds, according to the CDC.
Sarin can even contaminate the water supply, which makes this photo released by the White Helmets questionable. Spraying a body with water would actually spread the toxin as water can transmit sarin. As the White Helmets and other nearby doctors were one of the first to claim the use of sarin, it is strange also that the rescue workers in the above photo are coming into contact with victims without the use hazmat suits.
(The White Helmets have been brought into question before as they used their time and resources to produce a 'mannequin challenge' video, based on the viral meme.)
While it is not my intention to make light of the issue, much of the photo and video evidence released on the day of the attack is not consistent with sarin gas because anyone coming into contact with it would have been immediately effected, had they not been donning the appropriate protective gear.
Update:
This article released yesterday by the Guardian gives more concrete details and sheds light on the two separate strikes that morning.
It appears that the early morning chemical attack was a rather small strike whose primary effect was the gas release. Residents in Khan Shaykhun didn't report much damage from the 06:30 EEST strike:
"There was no evidence of any building being hit in recent days or weeks near where so many people were killed and wounded by a nerve agent. The homes across the street appeared undamaged from the outside. There was no contamination zone near any building. Instead, the contamination area radiated from a hole in a road."
The article actually provides a picture of said hole. Assuming that the hazard sign that someone placed into the hole (which was still contaminated with sarin?) is about poster size, the hole is quite small, and probably wasn't the result of a strike from a Su-22 bomber.
(I would also hope that in the coming days someone can identify the strange metal pipe that is sticking out of the contamination hole.)
The article goes on and gives further confirmation of the depot strike. Pictures are provided as well.
It appears the depot wasn't in use at all since being damaged in an earlier strike months ago:
"The Guardian, the first western media organisation to visit the site of the attack, examined a warehouse and silos directly next to where the missile had landed, and found nothing but an abandoned space covered in dust and half-destroyed silos reeking of leftover grain and animal manure.
"Residents said the silos had been damaged in air raids six months ago, and had stood unused since then."
(I find it strange that the Guardian was given safe passage into an area that is controlled by a group that has long been branded as a terrorist organization by the United States.)
Moving on. The testimonies by witnesses also establish the attack as not being sarin. A White Helmet volunteer said, “They told us ‘HQ, we are losing control’. We had no idea what they were trying to say. Then they said, ‘come save us, we can no longer walk’. So the second and third teams went with just face masks. We could smell it from 500 metres away (again, from the Guardian article).”
Exposure to sarin effects the nervous system, but one bonafide hallmark of the poison is that is has no odor. Despite Turkey's claims, the gas can simply not be sarin if people could 'smell' it.
Friday, April 7, 2017
Thursday, July 18, 2013
Western World Prepping to Hand Over its Weapons to a Traitor
There are some very interesting developments in the Syria conflict. We're now at the 28th month mark, and estimates have the casualty toll at 100,000.
Of course, I don't use these numbers in the typical context of "someone stop the violence," which the mainstream media repeats ad nauseum, but rather to highlight of the importance of the matter.
Before getting onto the meat of the story, it would be good to point out this podcast from the Corbett Report that explains how chaotic situations are used to then increase the amount of control by a certain group. In fact, this theory is so ancient that, yes, it is even used by the notorious Freemasons in one of their degrees.
To get to the matter at hand though, I found it interesting that the "moderate" leader of the Free Syrian Army is set to visit Washington soon.
Salim Idris, the one-time confidante of the Assad regime (yes, a traitor, as they put it in the old days), is now confidently parroting around in Europe and talking to American reporters asking for more weapons to defeat the evil Assad.
I think now would be a good time to take a closer look at just who is Salim Idris to understand whether or not he, in fact, is trustworthy.
Idris took over from another defector, the Syrian Air Force commander Riad al-Assad. He led the army in some capacity, even forming the group known as the FSA (Free Syrian Army), but has been replaced.
(It is also worth noting that Riad al-Assad's family was reported executed by the UN, but the reports have not been confirmed as their was no on-site investigation.
Riad al-Assad also recently lost his leg from an alleged car bomb in. Video footage shows him screaming "I want to die!" on the hospital bed.)
Back to Idirs, however, he took over from the now one-legged Riad al-Assad back in December, and quickly proclaimed that Bashar al-Assad might use chemical weapons.
(Could the recent determination that the Syrian regime DID use chemical weapons have been pushed by the new FSA leader?)
In the same article, he said that Jabhat al-Nusra was 'not' a terrorist organization and last month he told the BBC that he "respect(s) Sharia." And that "nobody is against Sharia."
Strange choice of words for a freedom fighter.
Of course, Jabhat al-Nusra IS a terrorist organization, and this is a fact that even the United States government agrees with me on.
If you're a person who happens to not agree, well then, you can take a look at a timeline of attacks by the organization, and decide whether or not all the car bombings and executions of civilians are necessary to bring democracy.
(As a follow-up to this post, I will examine the weapons inspectors that have been chosen by the United Nations, and ascertain whether or not they are trustworthy in doing a fair search for sarin gas in Syria.)
Of course, I don't use these numbers in the typical context of "someone stop the violence," which the mainstream media repeats ad nauseum, but rather to highlight of the importance of the matter.
Before getting onto the meat of the story, it would be good to point out this podcast from the Corbett Report that explains how chaotic situations are used to then increase the amount of control by a certain group. In fact, this theory is so ancient that, yes, it is even used by the notorious Freemasons in one of their degrees.
To get to the matter at hand though, I found it interesting that the "moderate" leader of the Free Syrian Army is set to visit Washington soon.
Salim Idris, the one-time confidante of the Assad regime (yes, a traitor, as they put it in the old days), is now confidently parroting around in Europe and talking to American reporters asking for more weapons to defeat the evil Assad.
I think now would be a good time to take a closer look at just who is Salim Idris to understand whether or not he, in fact, is trustworthy.
Idris took over from another defector, the Syrian Air Force commander Riad al-Assad. He led the army in some capacity, even forming the group known as the FSA (Free Syrian Army), but has been replaced.
(It is also worth noting that Riad al-Assad's family was reported executed by the UN, but the reports have not been confirmed as their was no on-site investigation.
Riad al-Assad also recently lost his leg from an alleged car bomb in. Video footage shows him screaming "I want to die!" on the hospital bed.)
Back to Idirs, however, he took over from the now one-legged Riad al-Assad back in December, and quickly proclaimed that Bashar al-Assad might use chemical weapons.
(Could the recent determination that the Syrian regime DID use chemical weapons have been pushed by the new FSA leader?)
In the same article, he said that Jabhat al-Nusra was 'not' a terrorist organization and last month he told the BBC that he "respect(s) Sharia." And that "nobody is against Sharia."
Strange choice of words for a freedom fighter.
Of course, Jabhat al-Nusra IS a terrorist organization, and this is a fact that even the United States government agrees with me on.
If you're a person who happens to not agree, well then, you can take a look at a timeline of attacks by the organization, and decide whether or not all the car bombings and executions of civilians are necessary to bring democracy.
(As a follow-up to this post, I will examine the weapons inspectors that have been chosen by the United Nations, and ascertain whether or not they are trustworthy in doing a fair search for sarin gas in Syria.)
Sunday, June 30, 2013
Debunking Al Jazeera, Part One
Al Jazeera is generally looked upon with suspicion in the West because of its criticism of the Zionist regime in Israel. Based in the Muslim nation of Qatar, the media outlet expresses the solidarity with fellow Muslims in Palestine that one can generally find throughout the Middle East.
However, their network has been a source of blatant propaganda regarding the Syria conflict. Often parroting the same line of Assad "killing his own people," and quick to point out any civilian casualties taking place in an area, instead of analyzing just who the rebels are, where they are from, and just what they are doing in Syria.
It is obvious that the Sunni-led Arab League has been instrumental in fomenting the rise of radical Islam during this two-year long Arab Spring. In Libya and Syria, radical Sunni forces have stood up against moderate governments who, while they had progress to make as far as inclusion of the full political spectrum, were not leaning towards the fundamentalist variety of lifestyle and policy.
Early on in the conflict, Assad had to make reforms to these groups, even lifting the ban on the full body-covering niqab, as an appeal to the Islamists.
That particular piece was mentioned by Al Jazeera, but let me direct your attention to a recent article, which sums up the propagandist line used by the station, and by most Western media outlets in general.
The article is entitled "Syria army launches intense bombing of Homs," and right from the get-go, the sub-header is "Civilian deaths reported as air strikes and shelling . . . ", well, you know the rest.
The article follows up with reports of the deaths of a woman and two children, without naming them, and states that this information came from the oft-cited Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, which passed on the casualty reports to the AFP news agency.
It then goes on to detail the "barbaric shelling," as described by one unnamed person who recorded video. The video states that Homs is an important city to retake because of its proximity to Lebanon, and then uses the strange language that the regime is trying to eliminate what "IT describes as terrorists."
(Yes, the narrator even emphasizes the it.)
This statement is used to make us question the validity of the terror threat there. The video does not show the Syrian rebels, only carefully placed images of injured children and the most decrepit but still standing buildings, which were damaged in the fighting.
Al Jazeera refuses to let us see the real rebels that are living and fighting in Homs, but does implant interviews with them in another section of the site. I will dedicate future posts to the station's documentaries on Syria, but it should be noted that they assume it's alright to mention the rebels (or terrorists) in one report, but NOT to mention them when the focus of the article is meant to exaggerate civilian casualties.
The most curious piece of this article in question, Syria army launches intense bombing of Homs, is the way it ends. Another unnamed "spokesman" for the Assad government states, "What's important is to cleanse those neighborhoods of Homs that are in the hands of armed terrorists."
One may think I'm nitpicking, but it's very important to scrutinize the language used here, which is "cleanse". What does that make one think of in a situation like this?
Ablutions?
No.
Bowel purge?
Nay.
Ethnic cleansing?
YES!
The article, by the unnamed speaker, who has been translated by another unnamed source, is specifically designed to make us register ethnic cleansing in our brains by using that word cleanse.
And what else is related to ethnic cleansing? Yes, genocide.
And both these terms have been used by the aforementioned Arab League when referring to the Syrian conflict. But of course, these are totally uninterested parties who are simply casual observers, correct?
Wrong again, Tony!
These are the very heads of state from those Arab league countries who have dogs in the fight in Syria, two of which are Lebanon and Saudi Arabia.
I'm not even going to repeat myself again to show that those two countries are INSTRUMENTAL in starting, training, and funding the mostly foreign Syrian rebels. If you need examples for state collusion by Lebanon and Saudi Arabia just go into Google and search "Lebanon funding Syrian rebels" or "Saudi Arabia funding Syrian rebels," put the popcorn on, and enjoy reading about all the international manipulation.
To end this post, I'll provide the link to a video of what the Syrian rebels in Homs do, which is what they've always been doing, executing defenseless people in public. Yes, we can criticize the government for civilian casualties. It is a failure and is irresponsible. But don't do it and ignore the crimes that have been committed by the other side. If you do, then you're just part of the propaganda machine.
Part two of 'Debunking Al Jazeera' will scrutinize the station's documentary programs, and I will follow the deconstruction of the Syria coverage with articles focusing on the "humanitarian groups," Syrian Observatory for Human Rights and Human Rights Watch.
Thank you.
However, their network has been a source of blatant propaganda regarding the Syria conflict. Often parroting the same line of Assad "killing his own people," and quick to point out any civilian casualties taking place in an area, instead of analyzing just who the rebels are, where they are from, and just what they are doing in Syria.
It is obvious that the Sunni-led Arab League has been instrumental in fomenting the rise of radical Islam during this two-year long Arab Spring. In Libya and Syria, radical Sunni forces have stood up against moderate governments who, while they had progress to make as far as inclusion of the full political spectrum, were not leaning towards the fundamentalist variety of lifestyle and policy.
Early on in the conflict, Assad had to make reforms to these groups, even lifting the ban on the full body-covering niqab, as an appeal to the Islamists.
That particular piece was mentioned by Al Jazeera, but let me direct your attention to a recent article, which sums up the propagandist line used by the station, and by most Western media outlets in general.
The article is entitled "Syria army launches intense bombing of Homs," and right from the get-go, the sub-header is "Civilian deaths reported as air strikes and shelling . . . ", well, you know the rest.
The article follows up with reports of the deaths of a woman and two children, without naming them, and states that this information came from the oft-cited Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, which passed on the casualty reports to the AFP news agency.
It then goes on to detail the "barbaric shelling," as described by one unnamed person who recorded video. The video states that Homs is an important city to retake because of its proximity to Lebanon, and then uses the strange language that the regime is trying to eliminate what "IT describes as terrorists."
(Yes, the narrator even emphasizes the it.)
This statement is used to make us question the validity of the terror threat there. The video does not show the Syrian rebels, only carefully placed images of injured children and the most decrepit but still standing buildings, which were damaged in the fighting.
Al Jazeera refuses to let us see the real rebels that are living and fighting in Homs, but does implant interviews with them in another section of the site. I will dedicate future posts to the station's documentaries on Syria, but it should be noted that they assume it's alright to mention the rebels (or terrorists) in one report, but NOT to mention them when the focus of the article is meant to exaggerate civilian casualties.
The most curious piece of this article in question, Syria army launches intense bombing of Homs, is the way it ends. Another unnamed "spokesman" for the Assad government states, "What's important is to cleanse those neighborhoods of Homs that are in the hands of armed terrorists."
One may think I'm nitpicking, but it's very important to scrutinize the language used here, which is "cleanse". What does that make one think of in a situation like this?
Ablutions?
No.
Bowel purge?
Nay.
Ethnic cleansing?
YES!
The article, by the unnamed speaker, who has been translated by another unnamed source, is specifically designed to make us register ethnic cleansing in our brains by using that word cleanse.
And what else is related to ethnic cleansing? Yes, genocide.
And both these terms have been used by the aforementioned Arab League when referring to the Syrian conflict. But of course, these are totally uninterested parties who are simply casual observers, correct?
Wrong again, Tony!
These are the very heads of state from those Arab league countries who have dogs in the fight in Syria, two of which are Lebanon and Saudi Arabia.
I'm not even going to repeat myself again to show that those two countries are INSTRUMENTAL in starting, training, and funding the mostly foreign Syrian rebels. If you need examples for state collusion by Lebanon and Saudi Arabia just go into Google and search "Lebanon funding Syrian rebels" or "Saudi Arabia funding Syrian rebels," put the popcorn on, and enjoy reading about all the international manipulation.
To end this post, I'll provide the link to a video of what the Syrian rebels in Homs do, which is what they've always been doing, executing defenseless people in public. Yes, we can criticize the government for civilian casualties. It is a failure and is irresponsible. But don't do it and ignore the crimes that have been committed by the other side. If you do, then you're just part of the propaganda machine.
Part two of 'Debunking Al Jazeera' will scrutinize the station's documentary programs, and I will follow the deconstruction of the Syria coverage with articles focusing on the "humanitarian groups," Syrian Observatory for Human Rights and Human Rights Watch.
Thank you.
Friday, June 14, 2013
Nearly all the Syrian Rebels are Foreign Jihadists: German Intelligence
Even I hadn't heard of this revelation. I'm searching for the original report (which is probably only in German), but an American professor states that, according to German intelligence, 95% OF THE SYRIAN REBELS ARE FOREIGNERS. This doesn't surprise me, as a French doctor confirmed that half of them were, and there are plenty of reports that all of Muslimdom is over their involved in the fighting. Will continue searching for that original document by the BND.
The Road to Damascus: West Now Honest About Arms Selling
Well, we all saw it coming. Obama, the reluctant president, has finally made the move to arm the Syrian rebels. But we know that. We, being people whose information does not solely come from the propaganda arm of the Western corporate media.
There have several reports since the conflict started of an international effort to directly fund and train the rebels. Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah has stated that the selling of arms has been going on for quite some time. Meanwhile in Lebanon, there are open arms sales to the rebels. And Turkey has alleged training bases in its refugee camps along the border. The U.S.' claim to only be providing "non-lethal support" is one not to be taken seriously. Even if they aren't supplying the bullets, assistance is assistance.
But the dam has broke now. Due to the fact that rebels are well, quite frankly, getting their asses handed to them.
The State Department and Pentagon have reacted wildly, and are now ready to openly fund these cannibalistic Islamists (I couldn't make this shit up).
So now, we will see the invasion of Syria take place, or not. Officials are currently scurrying to decide what is the best option. But funds are limited. Advisers say that even a limited no-fly zone (à la Libye et Iraq) will cost a cool $50 million per day. And are asking for international assistance.
We can be sure, however, that the UK will always be following closely behind the United States in such matters, with David Cameron agreeing on the chemical weapons farce. And France, never one to be shy, has been spearheading the Western effort with a constant supply chain via Turkey.
The following weeks are the most important in the conflict, so follow this site to see where the Road to Damascus might turn.
There have several reports since the conflict started of an international effort to directly fund and train the rebels. Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah has stated that the selling of arms has been going on for quite some time. Meanwhile in Lebanon, there are open arms sales to the rebels. And Turkey has alleged training bases in its refugee camps along the border. The U.S.' claim to only be providing "non-lethal support" is one not to be taken seriously. Even if they aren't supplying the bullets, assistance is assistance.
But the dam has broke now. Due to the fact that rebels are well, quite frankly, getting their asses handed to them.
The State Department and Pentagon have reacted wildly, and are now ready to openly fund these cannibalistic Islamists (I couldn't make this shit up).
So now, we will see the invasion of Syria take place, or not. Officials are currently scurrying to decide what is the best option. But funds are limited. Advisers say that even a limited no-fly zone (à la Libye et Iraq) will cost a cool $50 million per day. And are asking for international assistance.
We can be sure, however, that the UK will always be following closely behind the United States in such matters, with David Cameron agreeing on the chemical weapons farce. And France, never one to be shy, has been spearheading the Western effort with a constant supply chain via Turkey.
The following weeks are the most important in the conflict, so follow this site to see where the Road to Damascus might turn.
Monday, June 10, 2013
Sheikh Imran Hosein on the Syrian Rebels
Monday, April 22, 2013
Russia resists efforts in EU to lift ban on weapons sales to Syrian rebels
MOSCOW |
(Reuters) - Russia
warned the European Union on Monday not to lift an arms embargo that
has prevented weapons supplies to Syrian rebels, despite British and
French lobbying.British Foreign Secretary William Hague said on Sunday that EU foreign ministers, who last month rejected a Franco-British proposal to ease the ban, would in coming weeks discuss the question again.
Russia, which says it is continuing to implement weapons contracts with Syria but is no longer delivering arms that could be used in the civil conflict, has vehemently opposed any supplies of weapons to President Bashar al-Assad's opponents.
Russia's Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said an embargo was unnecessary in the first place because such supplies were prohibited by international law.
If the embargo is removed, "the international obligations of the EU countries, which prohibit supplies of arms and ammunition to non-government actors, are not going anywhere", he said at a news briefing after talks with his Guinean counterpart.
Russia has used its U.N. Security Council veto power to shield Assad from Western efforts to push him from power or increase pressure upon him to end violence in a conflict that has killed more than 70,000 people since March 2011.
Moscow has for months been calling for implementation of an declaration agreed by world powers including Russia and the United States in Geneva last June that called for a transitional government. However, Washington disagrees with Moscow's assertion that the agreement requires Assad to step down.
Lavrov said he and U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry would discuss ways to promote a peace process in Syria at talks on the sidelines of a NATO gathering and a Russia-NATO foreign ministers' meeting in Brussels on Tuesday.
"We will discuss what we, Russia and the United States, can do to convince those who ... are resisting the peace process to step onto the path of implementing the Geneva agreements," Lavrov said.
Russian and U.S. diplomats have held several meetings for that purpose since late last year, to little effect.
Lavrov said that in a telephone conversation with Kerry on Saturday, "I sensed confirmation of the intention ... to seek as swift as possible a political solution".
But he said the West had not done enough to encourage all Assad's foes to show readiness for dialogue with the government: "So far there is clearly not enough movement on this."
(Writing by Steve Gutterman; Editing by Kevin Liffey)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)