Tuesday, 17 April 2018

What actually happened in Douma


The information and misinformation continues and the truth becomes forever veiled under the lies being told by the major players. 

What is the truth? We will probably never know, however its easier to accept that a respected investigative journalist like Robert Fisk, who is actually on the ground in Douma, might be able to shed some light on what might have happened.

You can read his report here


"How could it be that Douma refugees who had reached camps in Turkey were already describing a gas attack which no-one in Douma today seemed to recall?"



LINKS
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Fisk
The search for truth in the rubble of Douma – and one doctor’s doubts over the chemical attack

Monday, 16 April 2018

Tear Gas is a Chemical Weapon, ain't that Ironic



Whether this meme depicts a US warship or even US protesters is irrelevant. The message and irony were obvious.

However some were out claiming that Pepper spray or CS gas is not a chemical weapon. 

Well sorry to disappoint you folks but they are chemical weapons and they are banned for use in warfare under article 1.5 of the Chemical Weapons Convention.

But there are no restrictions to their domestic use as a “riot control agent.”

That's whats Ironic


Pepper spray is banned for use in war by Article I.5 of the Chemical Weapons Convention, which bans the use of all riot control agents in warfare whether lethal or less-than-lethal.

Article I. General Obligations
1. Each State Party to this Convention undertakes never under any circumstances:
(a) To develop, produce, otherwise acquire, stockpile or retain chemical weapons, or transfer, directly or indirectly, chemical weapons to anyone;
(b) To use chemical weapons;
(c) To engage in any military preparations to use chemical weapons;
(d) To assist, encourage or induce, in any way, anyone to engage in any activity prohibited to a State Party under this Convention.
2. Each State Party undertakes to destroy chemical weapons it owns or possesses, or that are located in any place under its jurisdiction or control, in accordance with the provisions of this Convention.
3. Each State Party undertakes to destroy all chemical weapons it abandoned on the territory of another State Party, in accordance with the provisions of this Convention.
4. Each State Party undertakes to destroy any chemical weapons production facilities it owns or possesses, or that are located in any place under its jurisdiction or control, in accordance with the provisions of this Convention.
5. Each State Party undertakes not to use riot control agents as a method of warfare.
Riot control agents including tear gas and pepper spray are banned in international warfare under both the 1925 Geneva Protocol and the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC). The CWC defines chemical weapons as “munitions and devices that are designed to cause death or other harm through toxic chemicals” that lead to “death, temporary incapacitation or permanent harm to humans or animals.”  While tear gas and pepper spray, under international law, are banned as a “method of warfare”, there are no restrictions to their domestic use as a “riot control agent.” According to the CWC, “riot control agents” are any chemicals which are not specifically listed in their list of prohibited chemicals and that can cause in humans rapid “sensory irritation or disabling physical effects which disappear within a short time following termination of exposure.”  Under Article II Section 9 of the CWC, the use of such chemicals for “law enforcement including domestic riot control purposes” is not prohibited under the Convention.

LINKS
https://www.opcw.org/chemical-weapons-convention/articles/article-i-general-obligations
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pepper_spray
http://teargasresearch.com/?page_id=16


Sunday, 15 April 2018

Abrey Bailey we salute you


Well this is class, don't know who Aubrey Bailey is but they certainly have a handle on the Middle East.



“Are you confused by what is going on in the Middle-East? Let me explain. We support the Iraqi government in its fight against Islamic State (IS/ISIL/ISIS). We don’t like IS but IS is supported by Saudi Arabia whom we do like. We don’t like President Assad in Syria. We support the fight against him, but not IS, which is also fighting against him.
“We don’t like Iran, but the Iranian government supports the Iraqi gov’t against IS. So, some of our friends support our enemies and some of our enemies are our friends, and some of our enemies are fighting our other enemies, whom we don’t want to lose, but we don’t our enemies who are fighting our enemies to win.
“If the people we want to defeat are defeated, they might be replaced by people we like even less. And, all this was started by us invading a country to drive out terrorists who weren’t actually there until we went in to drive them out – do you understand now?”

Saturday, 14 April 2018

National Assessment document on Chemical attack of 7 April 2018

Ok well this is the 1st official document that Ive found

If you can call it official.

National Assessment document on Chemical attack of 7 April 2018 (Douma, Eastern Ghouta, Syria) and Syria’s clandestine chemical weapons programme - 14.04.2018
"Several lethal chemical attacks took place in the town of Douma in the late afternoon of saturday, 7 April 2018, and we assess with a high degree of confidence that they were carried out by the Syrian regime."




Again there are no definite's in this document with a range of comments like...

"We asses with a high degree of confidence"

"Sufficient to attribute responsibility"

But the limited evidence is there, in the document so i suggest you read it.

Maybe definite's are not available in this time of technology, I don't know. Be nice if there is a possibility of starting WW3, that there were a few definite's, before doing so.

Document was released after the UK, US and France airstrikes.

Suspected use of chemical weapons in Douma



"Time and again at a press conference at Downing Street this morning the prime minister spelled out the strikes that took place overnight were limited, targeted and a response to the suspected use of chemical weapons in Douma"

Why do we think we have the right to police other countries that are not threatening us?

Trump and May were very quick to respond launching attacks before inspectors had visited. Why?

Hundreds of atrocities happen all over the world and we do nothing, why?

Strange that this has happened, so close to the Chemical attack in Salisbury, allegedly by Russia. No proof has yet been released.

Lets just hope that they are right because if the Rebels managed to somehow release chemical weapons and make it look like Assad then they achieved their goal.

Or did the US, UK and France want a reason to attack?



LINKS
PM faces 'almighty row' over Syria strikes

Friday, 13 April 2018

What possible motive might have triggered Syria to launch a chemical attack

What possible motive might have triggered Syria to launch a chemical attack at this time in this place.


Former British Commander in Iraq Gets Abruptly Cut Off

"What possible motive might have triggered Syria to launch a chemical attack at this time in this place."



We can only wonder what he was going to say next.

Thursday, 12 April 2018

Syrian Chemical attack


  • Similar to the Salisbury chemical attack; Where no proof has been made public that confirms Russia did it. (Just that they had the capability and the inclination)
  • In Syria we have no proof that Assad did it?  (Just the capability and the inclination)
  • Both Assad and Rebels have chemical weapons. (Possibility and probability exist on both sides)
  • So the possible scenarios are
    • Assad forces did carry out the attack.
    • Assad forces hit a Chemical weapons dump held by rebels.
    • Rebels carried out the attack to get support from west as they are losing.
    • US/UK covert forces carried out/enable the attack to pave the way for attacks in Syria.
    • There maybe other scenarios that ive not thought of.

  • Lets go to proof
    • All ive seen is comments like "highly likely", "all the indications are that" this is not evidence of proof when there are other possibility's that exist.
    • Trump said "We have irrefutable evidence" but then didn't say what that evidence was.
  • Lets look at reasons for carrying out such an attack
    • Assad
      • Hes possibly a physco its about the only reason for
      • or maybe he thought it would scare the rebels out
      • or maybe he thought it would scare the people out
      • Assad is winning in Syria, the town involved is the last stronghold of the Rebels, why risk international condemnation?
    • Rebels
      • They are losing, enabling by whatever means, the release of chemical agent gets them World Wide support.
    • US/UK
      • Its well known they wanted Assad gone.
      • Assad is backed by Russia, Russia has a Mediterranean military base.
      • Im sure the US would like Russia out of its Mediterranean military base.
Just as in Iraq where we now have various UK and US oil company's running the oil. We now have gas muddying the waters in Syria. Or is that just a nice by product of a much bigger picture?




"Ministers said it was "highly likely" the Assad regime was responsible for a suspected chemical attack"
"Mrs May has said "all the indications" are that the Syrian regime of president Bashar al-Assad, which denies mounting a chemical attack, was responsible for the alleged attack in the formerly rebel-held town of Douma."
"Evidence is still being gathered, but US officials are understood to have results from blood and urine samples that indicate chlorine and a nerve agent were used in the Syrian town of Douma.
But they privately admit they can't be 100% sure."

Is "Cant be 100% sure" good enough?
Is "highly likelygood enough?
Is "all the indications" good enough?

To those that would say we cant possibly let the killing of innocent people go unchecked. There were between 500,000 and 1 million killed in the Rwandan genocide and the UK and the US didn't bat an eyelid.
"During these events and in the aftermath, the United Nations (UN) and countries including the United States, the United Kingdom, and Belgium were criticized for their inaction and failure to strengthen the force and mandate of the UN Assistance Mission for Rwanda (UNAMIR) peacekeepers. Other observers criticized the government of France for alleged support of the Hutu government after the genocide had begun."


LINKS
Syria 'chemical attack': France's President Macron 'has proof'
Top UN Inspector: Assad Not Responsible For Chemical Weapons Attack
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genie_Energy
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gleiwitz_incident
UN Sources Say Syrian Rebels - Not Assad - Used Sarin Gas
Jeremy Corbyn: May waiting for Trump instructions on Syria
Theresa May 'to act on Syria without MPs' vote'
Halliburton Made $39.5 Billion From The Iraq War
UN Mission Report Confirms that “Opposition” Rebels Used Chemical Weapons against Civilians and Government Forces
Yes, the US-Supported Syrian “Rebels” DO Have Access to Chemical Weapons
US says it has proof Syria carried out Douma gas attack
What Really Happened in the Douma Chemical Attack?
Confirmation of Syria chemical attack will take weeks
NOW MATTIS ADMITS THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE ASSAD USED POISON GAS ON HIS PEOPLE: OPINION
Syria Airstrikes Instantly Added Nearly $5 Billion to Missile-Makers' Stock Value
Rwandan genocide



Sunday, 8 April 2018

Questions for Alec



"The police are not asking for extra money, they say they can do it on existing budgets."

Please post a media link that substantiates this claim


"The police where constantly asking for him (Khan) to do something about it he chose not to"

Please post a media link that substantiates this claim


"But he could have listened to the met he could have done something"

Please post a media link that substantiates that the Met have been asking Khan to change something.


"The police are telling khan what needs to be done, focus resources into the gang areas where these crimes are happening and increasing stop and search. To get knives and guns of the streets and arrest those carrying weapons."

Please post a media link that substantiates that the Met have been telling Khan what needs to be done.