U.S. and Allies strike Syria’s chemical weapons program

@Eunos_Cosmo

The White Helmets are claimed by Western media to be civilian defense first-responders, but in the counter narrative they are Islamist activists connected to jihadist radical groups funded by Saudi Arabia.
 
The bottom line is it's a extremely confused & confusing situation. There are a variety of players on the ground with varying agendas ... & then there are all the players on the outside trying to influence events on the ground: Iran, Saudia Arabia, Israel, Russia, the US, Britain, France, Turkey & others. I wouldn't trust any of these to provide an entirely truthful narrative.
 
About whether the picture of the boy(s) several posts above is the same kid or two different kids.
Just watched a video on this. Forget about the kid's face, you only need look at his ears. I'd bet the farm it's the same kid unless there are two nearly identical looking kids with the exact same ear cartilege. I haven't followed the story at all so I have no idea of the significance of this and who is promoting what but I'd bet a huge amount of money at long odds it's the same kid.
 
Because if he is then apparently the White Helmets become a western pawn, Assad turns into the second coming of Christ, Putin ascends to the heavens and all of Europe and the US are exposed as the real Satan.

Or something like that.

Why? If the rebels did fake a gas attack it wouldn't make Assad or Putin any less culpable for the things they have done.
 
Maybe... of course, nothing here really effects world policy, so we are free to make the wildest claims ever.

You are free to do so. But the world is free to look at you as an Alex I don't like em putting chemicals in the water that turn the freakin frogs gay Jones type of person. :P
 
Why? If the rebels did fake a gas attack it wouldn't make Assad or Putin any less culpable for the things they have done.
Those pushing the 'fake gas attack' agenda are also pushing the 'Assad and Putin as just fighting terrorists and not doing anything naught at all' agenda.

Does that in reality make them any less culpable? No, but that doesn't stop the PR machine from that side churning along, take the 'independent' journalists who are 'on the ground' feeding back that the attack was a fake, they are the same ones that are saying Assad is loved by all, that the Syrian and Russian government troops are kind and benevolent. They are however far from independent, with the 'on the ground' trips arranged and managed by the Syrians and Russians and little to no attempt to hide the direct contact and praise they have for Assad or the work they do directly for Russia.

Vanessa Beeley for example described meeting Assad as her 'proudest moment' and tweats praise of Assad's wife, her work was also used directly by the Russian state. Then we have Eva Bartlett, who again presents herself as independent, while giving Syrian stat back presentations at the UN, working for RT and said on her own website “I support Syria against a ‘civil’ war that is funded, armed and planned by the western powers and their regional allies with a view to wiping out all resistance to imperialism in the Middle East…”.

As such its not a single sided media campaign looking to just discredit one group (the white Helmets), but one that also aims to in tandem legitimise any and all actions of Assad and Russia in Syria.
 
You are free to do so. But the world is free to look at you as an Alex I don't like em putting chemicals in the water that turn the freakin frogs gay Jones type of person. :P
Should have mined up a different Alex Jones quote, cause of all of them, that one actually has truth to it. Its more in a Caitlyn Jenner (had he gotten the surgery) sorta way rather than straight out gay though.
 
Should have mined up a different Alex Jones quote, cause of all of them, that one actually has truth to it. Its more in a Caitlyn Jenner (had he gotten the surgery) sorta way rather than straight out gay though.

Citation required as that's a rather special claim to make without providing evidence for it. I really hope you provide some evidence.

Btw there are a lot of qoutes one can use that one just keeps on being funny and must be his most known rant therefor the best one to pick.

Edit and how is this considered a qoutemine it was his actual conclusion of the segment that reported on fluoride and such in tap water. It 'accurately' represents his position.
 
Last edited:
Citation required as that's a rather special claim to make without providing evidence for it. I really hope you provide some evidence.

Btw there are a lot of qoutes one can use that one just keeps on being funny and must be his most known rant therefor the best one to pick.

Edit and how is this considered a qoutemine it was his actual conclusion of the segment that reported on fluoride and such in tap water. It 'accurately' represents his position.
He said fluoride does? He must be getting his conspiracies confused, cause that is what they put in the water to make us more susceptible to mind control. No, its a chemical in herbicides and pesticides that are cause frogs and fish to morph from male to female. Had no idea he was claiming it was flouride.
And its quote mining because you used only a specific portion of a specific quote to convey a specific point, that being apparently i am some crazy loon because i feel that the two kids might be the same person. Whether for good or bad, right or wrong, or just as a joke, that is what quote mining is.
 
He said fluoride does? He must be getting his conspiracies confused, cause that is what they put in the water to make us more susceptible to mind control. No, its a chemical in herbicides and pesticides that are cause frogs and fish to morph from male to female. Had no idea he was claiming it was flouride.
And its quote mining because you used only a specific portion of a specific quote to convey a specific point, that being apparently i am some crazy loon because i feel that the two kids might be the same person. Whether for good or bad, right or wrong, or just as a joke, that is what quote mining is.

He's necer clear avoyt his statementd therefor the viewer can fill in the blancs... also do we put pesticides in our tapwater? I'll read the article properly when I get home.

Also fluoride makes us susceptible to mind control? Do you believe this and if so again citation? :P

The fact that you came to his defense makes me believe you do so please correct me if I'm wrong.
 
He's necer clear avoyt his statementd therefor the viewer can fill in the blancs... also do we put pesticides in our tapwater? I'll read the article properly when I get home.
not directly. But then, frogs arent really swimming in our drinking water either. No, in this case it would be caused by runoff from farms getting to streams which lead eventually to lakes. Though, there is a case i thinknto be made that pesticides do evetually make it into the wells which farming communities would be drawing their drinking water from.
Also fluoride makes us susceptible to mind control? Do you believe this and if so again citation? :P
mind control? Im not sure, but studies are showing that flouride in our water are having negative effects in infants, those being damage to cognitive abilities as well as the penial gland. In fact, many municipalities are no longer adding it into their water systems. Here is one of countless reports, which includes a link to the study they cite. https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/features/fluoride-childrens-health-grandjean-choi/
The fact that you came to his defense makes me believe you do so please correct me if I'm wrong.
Came to who's defense, Alex Jones? Id hardly defend anything hes about, but, that doesnt mean everything he says, misinformed or not, is untruthful.

Edit. One more bit then lets perhaps get back on topic? There is also growing research into the effect of what other chemicals in our water is doing to us. These chemicals are things like hormones from birth control and active ingredients from prescription pmdrugs such as antidepressants that are not completely absorbed and pass into our water systems through, well, our urine. In most large cities, waste water is "cleaned" and returned back into either the waterways or back into the potable water system. However, I do not believe anything is conclusive in this regard yet.
 
Snippet from Antiwar.com, a leading US libertarian source for news and viewpoints,

"...Douma was attacked by Syrian forces on that day, and the day prior. Those strikes, however, were insisted by the Syrian government to be purely conventional strikes. There is little to suggest anything else, beyond claims from the White Helmets, and Western nations claiming to have secret proof.

Syria and Russia have both denied from the start that the attack took place, and they have believed the OPCW visit would reveal the truth. Russia in particular was pushing for an investigation to take place before any rash action against Syria. Ultimately, US-led attacks on Syria happened Friday night.

The US seems to have been anticipating the OPCW probe not going their way, and is already accusing Syria and Russia of plotting to tamper with the site. There’s no evidence of tampering of any kind. Despite this, Western officials complain the UNDSS delays are making tampering easier. Moreover, those same officials warn “time is of the essence” for the OPCW to be able to review evidence, since the bodies of those slain in Douma are mostly buried.

Yet it was Western officials who led the UN Security Council to reject a Russian proposal for an investigation in the first place. The US-led coalition attacked multiple sites in Syria before the investigation could happen.

Since the US, Britain, and France already attacked Syria, they have little reason to want the OPCW visit to be successful. They clearly weren’t interested in getting the facts before the strike, and facts that don’t support their narrative could be very embarrassing.

Speculation is only growing that the UNDSS delays are an effort to block the OPCW long enough that a conclusion that the chemical attack never took place could be contested on the grounds that they waited too long."

Full article:
UN Team’s Security Concerns Keep Inspectors Out of Douma
Still No Timetable for Getting Inspectors to Sites
Jason Ditz Posted on April 19, 2018Categories NewsTags opcw, Syria, UN


Chemical weapons inspectors still remain unable to enter the Syrian town of Douma. Once anticipated to visit the site of an alleged April 7 attack on Monday, inspectors have been repeatedly delayed by a UN Department of Safety and Security (UNDSS) team refusing to clear the visit as safe.

Originally, there were many allegations exchanged as to why the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) was delayed. Britain blamed Russia, initially, though the OPCW has since clarified it is holding off purely on the UNDSS’ say-so.

On a Wednesday visit, the UNDSS visited two Douma sites, but fled both times. They complained the first site was too crowded, and they were concerned about safety. There was a shooting incident at the second site, though the only casualty was a Syrian hired as extra security.

Either way, claims about security appear to be overstated. The Syrian government managed to facilitate a visit by CBS reporters days ago without incident. Many media groups seem to have no problem getting into Douma safely.

There have been numerious media attempts to turn conjecture into fact. One of the most egregious examples of war propaganda is a CNN reporter in Douma, handling and even sniffing supposed evidence.


There is no public proof that the April 7 strike took place, and a mounting amount of doubt that it didn’t, driven by inquiries from Robert Fisk. Residents within Douma have also expressed doubts about the strike.

OAN investigators weren’t able to confirm any evidence of a chemical weapons attack on Douma, either. To the extent that investigations are happening, they suggest there was no chemical strike.

Clearly, Douma was attacked by Syrian forces on that day, and the day prior. Those strikes, however, were insisted by the Syrian government to be purely conventional strikes. There is little to suggest anything else, beyond claims from the White Helmets, and Western nations claiming to have secret proof.

Syria and Russia have both denied from the start that the attack took place, and they have believed the OPCW visit would reveal the truth. Russia in particular was pushing for an investigation to take place before any rash action against Syria. Ultimately, US-led attacks on Syria happened Friday night.

The US seems to have been anticipating the OPCW probe not going their way, and is already accusing Syria and Russia of plotting to tamper with the site. There’s no evidence of tampering of any kind. Despite this, Western officials complain the UNDSS delays are making tampering easier. Moreover, those same officials warn “time is of the essence” for the OPCW to be able to review evidence, since the bodies of those slain in Douma are mostly buried.

Yet it was Western officials who led the UN Security Council to reject a Russian proposal for an investigation in the first place. The US-led coalition attacked multiple sites in Syria before the investigation could happen.

Since the US, Britain, and France already attacked Syria, they have little reason to want the OPCW visit to be successful. They clearly weren’t interested in getting the facts before the strike, and facts that don’t support their narrative could be very embarrassing.

Speculation is only growing that the UNDSS delays are an effort to block the OPCW long enough that a conclusion that the chemical attack never took place could be contested on the grounds that they waited too long.

Russia and Syria have both been pushing for the investigation from the start, and guaranteed security for them. They’ve further deployed Russian military police to the site to deter Western strikes from targeting Douma itself and destroying evidence.The UNDSS expressed concern at the lack of Syrian government control on the ground, though this can’t be helped, as it’s part of the terms of the ceasefire in Douma that Syrian troops stay out.
https://news.antiwar.com/2018/04/19/un-teams-security-concerns-keep-inspectors-out-of-douma/
 
Im not sure, but studies are showing that flouride in our water are having negative effects in infants, those being damage to cognitive abilities as well as the penial gland. In fact, many municipalities are no longer adding it into their water systems. Here is one of countless reports, which includes a link to the study they cite. https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/features/fluoride-childrens-health-grandjean-choi/
That's a meta study and it doesn't say that fluoride is having an affect, its saying it may. Its showing a correlation, but not causality. It being used as support for studies to look at if it is a causal factor, rather than concluding it is a causal factor.

"The results support the possibility of an adverse effect of high fluoride exposure on children’s neurodevelopment. Future research should include detailed individual-level information on prenatal exposure, neurobehavioral performance, and covariates for adjustment."
https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/1104912/
 
not directly. But then, frogs arent really swimming in our drinking water either. No, in this case it would be caused by runoff from farms getting to streams which lead eventually to lakes. Though, there is a case i thinknto be made that pesticides do evetually make it into the wells which farming communities would be drawing their drinking water from.
mind control? Im not sure, but studies are showing that flouride in our water are having negative effects in infants, those being damage to cognitive abilities as well as the penial gland. In fact, many municipalities are no longer adding it into their water systems. Here is one of countless reports, which includes a link to the study they cite. https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/features/fluoride-childrens-health-grandjean-choi/

Came to who's defense, Alex Jones? Id hardly defend anything hes about, but, that doesnt mean everything he says, misinformed or not, is untruthful.

Edit. One more bit then lets perhaps get back on topic? There is also growing research into the effect of what other chemicals in our water is doing to us. These chemicals are things like hormones from birth control and active ingredients from prescription pmdrugs such as antidepressants that are not completely absorbed and pass into our water systems through, well, our urine. In most large cities, waste water is "cleaned" and returned back into either the waterways or back into the potable water system. However, I do not believe anything is conclusive in this regard yet.

The hormones thing is true. It's als harddrugs :P and well often times the basis from whoch jones starts isn't completely false but to draw the conclusions he's pushing there are a lot of assumptions some of which are suige a stretch.

Take for instance the fluoride we are being told it's added as it slows tooth decay. How do we get from there to it's the government to make us more 'docile'.

And that's why people laugh with jones and people who make similar claims.
 
The hormones thing is true. It's als harddrugs :P and well often times the basis from whoch jones starts isn't completely false but to draw the conclusions he's pushing there are a lot of assumptions some of which are suige a stretch.

Take for instance the fluoride we are being told it's added as it slows tooth decay. How do we get from there to it's the government to make us more 'docile'.

And that's why people laugh with jones and people who make similar claims.
That claim is older than Jones has been on air. As I said, i had not heard him make that claim, in truth i dont rwally know any of his claims since the only thing ive really seen of him is some hilarious mash up clips of his freak outs on youtube. I dont consume the infowars koolaid.
That's a meta study and it doesn't say that fluoride is having an affect, its saying it may. Its showing a correlation, but not causality. It being used as support for studies to look at if it is a causal factor, rather than concluding it is a causal factor.

"The results support the possibility of an adverse effect of high fluoride exposure on children’s neurodevelopment. Future research should include detailed individual-level information on prenatal exposure, neurobehavioral performance, and covariates for adjustment."
https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/1104912/
Well, as i said, its far from the only one, lots of citations here i believe. But hey, when does science ever speak of absolutes, to include conclusions? (Hint, it doesnt.) https://articles.mercola.com/sites/...3/fluoridated-water-destroys-brain-teeth.aspx
 
Well, as i said, its far from the only one, lots of citations here i believe. But hey, when does science ever speak of absolutes, to include conclusions? (Hint, it doesnt.)
Actually it does (Hint, smoking and cancer). Causality can and is proven.

Now the Chinese study was looking at very high levels of naturally occurring fluoride that had not been removed during water treatment to lower levels (and was still not conclusive).

"Although acute fluoride poisoning may be neurotoxic to adults, most of the epidemiological information available on associations with children’s neurodevelopment is from China, where fluoride generally occurs in drinking water as a natural contaminant, and the concentration depends on local geological conditions. In many rural communities in China, populations with high exposure to fluoride in local drinking-water sources may reside in close proximity to populations without high exposure".


Now if you would like a controlled study with a 38 year follow-up....

https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2105/AJPH.2013.301857

...which found no link between fluoride and IQ reductions.

Opps, you seem to have used a conspiracy theorist who is renowned for making utter nonsense up to make as much money as he can from woo, as a source.
 
Last edited:
Actually it does (Hint, smoking and cancer). Causality can and is proven.
Can is an absolute now? Better inform webster's.
Now the Chinese study was looking at very high levels of naturally occurring fluoride that had not been removed during water treatment to lower levels (and was still not conclusive).

"Although acute fluoride poisoning may be neurotoxic to adults, most of the epidemiological information available on associations with children’s neurodevelopment is from China, where fluoride generally occurs in drinking water as a natural contaminant, and the concentration depends on local geological conditions. In many rural communities in China, populations with high exposure to fluoride in local drinking-water sources may reside in close proximity to populations without high exposure".


Now if you would like a controlled study with a 38 year follow-up....

https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2105/AJPH.2013.301857

...which found no link between fluoride and IQ reductions.


Opps, you seem to have used a conspiracy theorist who is renowned for making utter nonsense up to make as much money as he can from woo, as a source.
You're probably all right. But you seem to get so worked up that i can't help but keep arguing. I'll digress instead.
 
Can is an absolute now? Better inform webster's.
I think you know fully well I'm referring to the fact that you can't use that as an excuse to conflate correlation with causality.


You're probably all right. But you seem to get so worked up that i can't help but keep arguing. I'll digress instead.
I'm worked up?

Nope, I'm not the one getting sources study data mixed up and quoting conspiracy nuts.

However feel free to digress.
 
I think you know fully well I'm referring to the fact that you can't use that as an excuse to conflate correlation with causality.
As long as you can think science works in absolutes i think Im just fine conflating correlation with causality.
 
You don't think that there are scientifically-produced proofs of absolutes?
Since the 1940's, the postmodern premise is that no definite terms, boundaries, or absolute truths exist. You might try to think in terms of relative, or subjective truths.
 
Last edited:
You don't think that there are scientifically-produced proofs of absolutes?
No, and i imagine you would have a hard time finding one. Science is always "the best answer given current techniques, technology, evidence and understanding." We can come pretty damn sure of a thing, but i dont know any scientist that would say something is 100% certain. Not a good one anyway.
Since the 1940's, the postmodern premise is that no definite terms, boundaries, or absolute truths exist. You need to think in terms of relative, or subjective truths.
Oh piss off with your damnable post modernism BS. This isnt about building alternated facts, this is about understanding we are human. We are failable, we dont have a full perception of the world around us, and our brains are built to handle data in very certain ways that effects our judgement.
 
As long as you can think science works in absolutes i think Im just fine conflating correlation with causality.
Good job I explained that wasn't what I did then. Just a shame it got ignored

The second law of thermodynamics comes close enough right now however. It's amusing that you do however mock and abuse others in regard to science while citing Mercola, that's an absolute example of ironic.

.
 
Last edited:
Back