Random I know!!!, been trawling through wikileaks this afternoon
https://wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/1...UT03763_d.html
| + Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
Random I know!!!, been trawling through wikileaks this afternoon
https://wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/1...UT03763_d.html
There were so many groups involved in the Lebanese Civil War it was just impossible to understand what was going on there. I don't think even Splott Dave would dare to pontificate on it. It reminded me of the comment about the Schleswig-Holstein Question :Originally Posted by Nelsonca61
"Only three people have ever really understood the Schleswig-Holstein business—the Prince Consort, who is dead—a German professor, who has gone mad—and I, who have forgotten all about it."
What was it that George Bush said? “Fool me once shame on you. Fool me… can’t get fooled again.”
UN Team Heard Claims of ‘Staged’ Chemical Attacks
https://consortiumnews.com/2016/09/0...mical-attacks/
Exclusive: A widely touted U.N. report accusing the Syrian government of two chlorine-gas attacks relied on shaky evidence and brushed aside witness testimony that claimed some incidents were staged, reports Robert Parry.
United Nations investigators encountered evidence that alleged chemical weapons attacks by the Syrian military were staged by jihadist rebels and their supporters, but still decided to blame the government for two incidents in which chlorine was allegedly dispersed via improvised explosives dropped by helicopters.
In both cases, the Syrian government denied that it had any aircraft in the areas at the times of the purported attacks, but the U.N. team rejected that explanation with the curious argument that Syria failed to provide flight records to corroborate the absence of any flights. Yet, if there had been no flights, there would be no flight records.
Rewind back to 2013..
Before we Bomb Syria, Shouldn't we Seek Proof of Guilt?
http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co....of-guilt-.html
The pathetic bleating flock of the British political media are helping to beat the drums for war. Yet again.
Late last week, the BBC began blasting the airwaves with stories about a chemical weapons attack in the suburbs of Damascus. Initially, its reporters and presenters were reasonably careful to point out that the videos on which this claim was based were unverified - and in fact impossible to verify. As has since become quite clear, the site of the alleged atrocity is very difficult to reach. This fact would be well-known to those who released the films. Indeed, they are in a position to make the site hard to reach. This is by no means the first such allegation that has been made. No reliable proof has ever been produced of any of them.
But bit by bit, this caution lessened. The more the claims were repeated, and the more the films were shown, the more commentators and reporters would say that it was ‘almost certain’ or ‘increasingly likely’ that the Syrian government’s armed forces were responsible for a huge chemical warfare attack on civilians, in the suburbs of the capital city.
In a slow news week, the unpopular papers and then the popular papers, joined in with their own coverage. Even some normally-sceptical writers and commentators were regrettably swept up in proclaiming the likelihood of the truth of the story. It is becoming increasingly risky to voice doubt. What if it’s true? How will the doubters look then? Well, when it's proved to be true, I’ll accept it is true. But until then, I won’t. I won't be frightened into abandoning the rules of evidence, and nor should you be.
That happens all the time, why would the BBC have to make a fake Panorama story about chemical attacks around the same time if they had real stories to report on? it does not add up, if I remember right from all the info the Panorama team just happened to be passing this place in the arse end of nowhere when they made their film, yeah ok.What was it that George Bush said? “Fool me once shame on you. Fool me… can’t get fooled again.”
UN Team Heard Claims of ‘Staged’ Chemical Attacks
https://consortiumnews.com/2016/09/0...mical-attacks/
Exclusive: A widely touted U.N. report accusing the Syrian government of two chlorine-gas attacks relied on shaky evidence and brushed aside witness testimony that claimed some incidents were staged, reports Robert Parry.
United Nations investigators encountered evidence that alleged chemical weapons attacks by the Syrian military were staged by jihadist rebels and their supporters, but still decided to blame the government for two incidents in which chlorine was allegedly dispersed via improvised explosives dropped by helicopters.
In both cases, the Syrian government denied that it had any aircraft in the areas at the times of the purported attacks, but the U.N. team rejected that explanation with the curious argument that Syria failed to provide flight records to corroborate the absence of any flights. Yet, if there had been no flights, there would be no flight records.
Rewind back to 2013..
Before we Bomb Syria, Shouldn't we Seek Proof of Guilt?
http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co....of-guilt-.html
The pathetic bleating flock of the British political media are helping to beat the drums for war. Yet again.
Late last week, the BBC began blasting the airwaves with stories about a chemical weapons attack in the suburbs of Damascus. Initially, its reporters and presenters were reasonably careful to point out that the videos on which this claim was based were unverified - and in fact impossible to verify. As has since become quite clear, the site of the alleged atrocity is very difficult to reach. This fact would be well-known to those who released the films. Indeed, they are in a position to make the site hard to reach. This is by no means the first such allegation that has been made. No reliable proof has ever been produced of any of them.
But bit by bit, this caution lessened. The more the claims were repeated, and the more the films were shown, the more commentators and reporters would say that it was ‘almost certain’ or ‘increasingly likely’ that the Syrian government’s armed forces were responsible for a huge chemical warfare attack on civilians, in the suburbs of the capital city.
In a slow news week, the unpopular papers and then the popular papers, joined in with their own coverage. Even some normally-sceptical writers and commentators were regrettably swept up in proclaiming the likelihood of the truth of the story. It is becoming increasingly risky to voice doubt. What if it’s true? How will the doubters look then? Well, when it's proved to be true, I’ll accept it is true. But until then, I won’t. I won't be frightened into abandoning the rules of evidence, and nor should you be.
And the "doctor" was the daughter of one of the opposition leaders, still it was on Panorama and that's enough to get TruBlue salivating, it's all the proof he needsThat happens all the time, why would the BBC have to make a fake Panorama story about chemical attacks around the same time if they had real stories to report on? it does not add up, if I remember right from all the info the Panorama team just happened to be passing this place in the arse end of nowhere when they made their film, yeah ok.
I forgot about her, relatives can come in handy can't they, remember Nayirah and her false testimony? it got shown just about everywhere.And the "doctor" was the daughter of one of the opposition leaders, still it was on Panorama and that's enough to get TruBlue salivating, it's all the proof he needs
Nayirah al-Ṣabaḥ in tears during her testimony. It was later revealed that she was the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador to the United States and that her testimony could not be verified.
Out of interest how do you and Gluey know she's related?I forgot about her, relatives can come in handy can't they, remember Nayirah and her false testimony? it got shown just about everywhere.
Nayirah al-Ṣabaḥ in tears during her testimony. It was later revealed that she was the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador to the United States and that her testimony could not be verified.
It really is childlike.
Panorama could well lie for dramatic affect.
But BBC panorama carrying out some grand propaganda war?
Laughable. In every way.
I dont think the BBC particularly has to lie.
The British have said they've no interest in the conflict now.
Why would the BBC need to have a propaganda campaign to the dumb British ignorants who havent a clue.
They don't have to fuel the conflict, assad has done a good job of that by murdering innocent people.
And the sunnis wont stop until he is dead. That is a fact. And he knows it. That is why he drops chlorine on sunni towns.
Watch the video. It ties in perfectly with this statement - “World events do not occur by accident. They are made to happen, whether it is to do with national issues or commerce; and most of them are staged and managed by those who hold the purse strings.”
Who said the above? Some mongo? Depends on one's point of view. It was made by Denis Healey. He wasn't the bumbling boyo he tried hard to portray, but an arch-globalist and a co-founder of the Bilderberg Group.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
