Current Affairs
-
The only thing I think is clear to the layman, is that no one can be sure if Assad was responsible for the chemical attack, or not.
Another thing, for some one as ill informed as my self, is why, if this all means so much to the west, has everyone decided upon what appears to be a token, public military gesture so late on in a conflict that has been going on for years?"I didn't get it. BUUUUUUUUUUUT, you fucking do your thing." - Roujin
Ninty Code: SW-7904-0771-0996 -
legaldinho wrote:
I've already responded to that one.
https://www.welt.de/politik/ausland/article165905578/Trump-s-Red-Line.html
Was completely undermined by the official OPWC report?
https://www.opcw.org/fileadmin/OPCW/Fact_Finding_Mission/s-1510-2017_e_.pdf
I'll read the other two tomorrow, I don't have the energy tonight. -
GooberTheHat wrote:legaldinho wrote:
I've already responded to that one.
https://www.welt.de/politik/ausland/article165905578/Trump-s-Red-Line.html
Was completely undermined by the official OPWC report?
https://www.opcw.org/fileadmin/OPCW/Fact_Finding_Mission/s-1510-2017_e_.pdf
I'll read the other two tomorrow, I don't have the energy tonight.
How was that article undermined by the OPCW investigation exactly? Did you read either documents?
There is no confirmed count of the number of civilians killed by the poisonous gases that were released by the secondary explosions, although opposition activists reported that there were more than 80 dead, and outlets such as CNN have put the figure as high as 92. A team from Médecins Sans Frontières, treating victims from Khan Sheikhoun at a clinic 60 miles to the north, reported that “eight patients showed symptoms – including constricted pupils, muscle spasms and involuntary defecation – which are consistent with exposure to a neurotoxic agent such as sarin gas or similar compounds.” MSF also visited other hospitals that had received victims and found that patients there “smelled of bleach, suggesting that they had been exposed to chlorine.” In other words, evidence suggested that there was more than one chemical responsible for the symptoms observed, which would not have been the case if the Syrian Air Force – as opposition activists insisted – had dropped a sarin bomb, which has no percussive or ignition power to trigger secondary explosions. The range of symptoms is, however, consistent with the release of a mixture of chemicals, including chlorine and the organophosphates used in many fertilizers, which can cause neurotoxic effects similar to those of sarin.
The article focuses on the facts given him by his sources. The skepticism about the nature of the attack is carefully explained. It reads like meticulous, good old fashioned journalism. To suggest the author is a denialist is ridiculous.
The OPCW document clearly explains it's brief and how it came to its view. It clearly documents a range of chemicals tested positive, just like the article says. As for the source of the attacks, The OPCW investigation is only as good as the evidence it receives. It doesn't "undermine" the article at all, if you read the OPCW report. Bodies tested positive for sarin or a sarin like substance. Birds etc tested postive
For a number of toxins, including sarin but also hexamine, dimp,impa etc. Bodies were only tested for sarin.
Environmental samples and other samples from the site
5.99 Environmental samples, two dead birds, and hair from a dead goat were received by
the FFM team on 12 and 13 April 2017. Anatomical parts and internal organs from
the birds were removed and taken by the team upon their receipt.
5.100 At the time of handover, the team was informed that all samples provided on
12 and 13 April 2017 were taken by the chemical sample unit of the SCD. A member
of the chemical sample unit who took the samples was present at the handover and
provided information on every sample. This information was supported by
interviewing the same person a few days later and with photographs handed over at an
interview. This information was corroborated by testimony from other witnesses.
Anyone wanna guess who the "SCD" is? Take a wild guess. Go on.
-
For a start, Hersh asserts that it wasn't sarin, but a cocktail of chemicals that were present in the building struck, that when disrupted by the explosion, combined to form a toxic cloud that had the same effect and caused similar side effects to sarin.
The range of symptoms is, however, consistent with the release of a mixture of chemicals, including chlorine and the organophosphates used in many fertilizers, which can cause neurotoxic effects similar to those of sarin.
The OPCW report clearly states that the presence of sarin was found in autopsy results.
From these four people of the seven mentioned in the previous paragraph, whose biomedical specimens had tested positive for sarin or a sarin-like substance, the team identified one person as having the same name as a casualty from whom the team had previously taken blood that had also tested positive. The DNA of these two samples matched, thus when the analyses of the blood samples from the other three positive samples are viewed in the context of the matching DNA, medical records, and witness testimony, the team attached credibility to the results obtained from the other three people. As such, the FFM confirms with a high level of confidence that these three additional people were exposed to sarin or a sarin-like substance. -
Cheers to goobs and Gonzo for going at it about actual current affairs!
Lots of links to read.
It all reminds me why I stick to academic squabbles, then you're largely arguing over what was written. Not what was written about a specific place that you have no access to.
I did lol at "how is that not game over" FWIW.
I might need to dust off Gary Webb died for our sins again re the opus dei stuff. I can't speak to (looool) the later motivations, but a whole bunch of the motivation around early 80s south American shizzle was certainly anti left Christianity. (Gary Webb of dark alliance fame fyi.)
Also, big shout to Dante for Grenfell update.
I'm still great and you still love it. -
And as quoted it the reuters article, those sarin samples were later matched to government provided samples, proving that the government used sarin in Khan Sheikhoun, which undermines Hersh's article.
Laboratories working for the OPCW compared samples taken by a U.N. mission in the Damascus suburb of Ghouta after the Aug. 21, 2013 attack to chemicals handed over by Damascus for destruction in 2014.
The tests found “markers” in samples taken at Ghouta and at the sites of two other nerve agent attacks, in Khan Sheikhoun in April 2017 and Khan al-Assal in March 2013, two people involved in the process say. -
GooberTheHat wrote:For a start, Hursh asserts that it wasn't sarin,
Show me where he said that, or GTFO of this thread.
As to the rest, I never stated that sarin wasn't found by the OPCW. I noted how its findings weren't inconsistent with the article, much less "debunked" it. -
GooberTheHat wrote:And as quoted it the reuters article, those sarin samples were later matched to government provided samples, proving that the government used sarin in Khan Sheikhoun, which undermines Hersh's article.
Laboratories working for the OPCW compared samples taken by a U.N. mission in the Damascus suburb of Ghouta after the Aug. 21, 2013 attack to chemicals handed over by Damascus for destruction in 2014.
The tests found “markers” in samples taken at Ghouta and at the sites of two other nerve agent attacks, in Khan Sheikhoun in April 2017 and Khan al-Assal in March 2013, two people involved in the process say.
Source?
-
In other words, evidence suggested that there was more than one chemical responsible for the symptoms observed, which would not have been the case if the Syrian Air Force – as opposition activists insisted – had dropped a sarin bomb, which has no percussive or ignition power to trigger secondary explosions. The range of symptoms is, however, consistent with the release of a mixture of chemicals, including chlorine and the organophosphates used in many fertilizers, which can cause neurotoxic effects similar to those of sarin.
Is that not him saying that the Syrian airforce didn't use Sarin? -
legaldinho wrote:GooberTheHat wrote:And as quoted it the reuters article, those sarin samples were later matched to government provided samples, proving that the government used sarin in Khan Sheikhoun, which undermines Hersh's article.
Laboratories working for the OPCW compared samples taken by a U.N. mission in the Damascus suburb of Ghouta after the Aug. 21, 2013 attack to chemicals handed over by Damascus for destruction in 2014.
The tests found “markers” in samples taken at Ghouta and at the sites of two other nerve agent attacks, in Khan Sheikhoun in April 2017 and Khan al-Assal in March 2013, two people involved in the process say.
Source?
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-syria-opcw-timeline/timeline-of-investigations-into-syrias-chemical-weapons-idUSKBN1HG1M7 -
Are you even reading your own articles, let alone mine?
-
GooberTheHat wrote:In other words, evidence suggested that there was more than one chemical responsible for the symptoms observed, which would not have been the case if the Syrian Air Force – as opposition activists insisted – had dropped a sarin bomb, which has no percussive or ignition power to trigger secondary explosions. The range of symptoms is, however, consistent with the release of a mixture of chemicals, including chlorine and the organophosphates used in many fertilizers, which can cause neurotoxic effects similar to those of sarin.
Is that not him saying that the Syrian airforce didn't use Sarin?
You can read and write, what do you think?
-
If you can't see what's wrong, repeatedly, with your posts, I'm afraid I can't help you.GooberTheHat wrote:Are you even reading your own articles, let alone mine?
-
OK, maybe assert was too strong, but he clearly suggests it.
-
I mean, the fact that he is just relaying information from his sources doesn't relinquish his responsibility for the inaccuracies in his article, as later proved by the OPWC report.
-
But we can argue all day about who's sources are worse (yours BTW) but it won't get us anywhere.
-
He suggests there are strong reasons to doubt a sarin bomb was used, and there are.The OPCW report did find a mixture of chemicals, which there were. It found a sarin or sarin-like substance also. And all samples -all samples - were handed over by the white helmets or by the authorities run by Al Qaeda.
I'm not saying Assad never used chemical weapons. I would not put it beyond him to have used them in the early days when the struggle was in the balance. His father certainly did, and his men are still in charge. Bashar is a pup compared to those guys.
But I have serious doubts about 2017 and even graver doubts about this latest one.
Hersch isn't a crazy. He is a reputable old fashioned hack who has contacts and is trusted. Sources give him info and he reports. He is not smart, he is not scheming, and he is not political. He is a skeptical journalist of the old school. He'll even report on Opus Dei. I can tell you if I was a hack, and I had a story that had that part of it in it, I'd leave that out. For my own sake. But the man doesn't. He just reports the facts. For you to buy the smear jobs against him so easily has been profoundly sad to witness, if anything because I think based on your posts your heart is in the right place. Which is the only reason I haven't called you a retard yet but fyi I'm getting this close. -
I've already called you one, I just didn't post it, so it's OK.
-
GooberTheHat wrote:But we can argue all day about who's sources are worse (yours BTW) but it won't get us anywhere.
I'm using the same fucking sources you are! I'm just paying attention to the details.which after all I am kind of trained to do. Do you know what it's like to work in an organisation like the OPCW? You have to read the report carefully. If you show me the reports cited in the Reuters article I will gladly admit that Assad used sarin in 2013/2014, ok? It won't get us anywhere because the only thing I've been preoccupied about is the last attack. (And to a lesser extent, the 2017 one)
-
GooberTheHat wrote:I've already called you one, I just didn't post it, so it's OK.
If we are both still around in a few years, I've bookmarked this thread here. I'll definitely rub it in.
-
But even if the white helmets did provide the samples that tested positive for sarin, how the fuck would they manage to manufacture sarin that had the same "markers" as sarin handed over by the Assad regime to inspectors?
-
legaldinho wrote:GooberTheHat wrote:But we can argue all day about who's sources are worse (yours BTW) but it won't get us anywhere.
I'm using the same fucking sources you are! I'm just paying attention to the details.which after all I am kind of trained to do. Do you know what it's like to work in an organisation like the OPCW? You have to read the report carefully. If you show me the reports cited in the Reuters article I will gladly admit that Assad used sarin in 2013/2014, ok? It won't get us anywhere because the only thing I've been preoccupied about is the last attack. (And to a lesser extent, the 2017 one)
OK, I'll bow to your superior wisdom oh trained one. -
GooberTheHat wrote:But even if the white helmets did provide the samples that tested positive for sarin, how the fuck would they manage to manufacture sarin that had the same "markers" as sarin handed over by the Assad regime to inspectors?
I'll entertain you for a sec:
1) they got the chems from... The Syrian army! Many of whose officers defected earlier in the conflict.
2) these "markers" can be replicated by a sophisticated outfit, in house or for major dollars. Countries with the capacity include: Israel, the UK, the US. Countries with the Dosh to pay include: Qatar, Saudi Arabia. I doubt these camelfucks can make anything, but who knows. I bet they pay
3) these "markers" are bullshit newspaper speak for something much more mundane, which is why I asked for the sources. You will notice the article says "two persons close to the process say"
But luckily, goobs, since you are not a retard you have already realised this is all irrelevant because there is no way the OPCW says anything about these markers. You already know it mate. Give up.
-
The mystery thickens.
Scenario A or Scenario B as to who's the perpetrator?
Whatever the case it's a shitstorm and it doesn't look good for Syria.
The big question is: what happens next?Steam: Ruffnekk
Windows Live: mr of unlocking
Fightcade2: mrofunlocking -
I like Scenario A.
I like Scenario B.
Who's right? There's only one way to decide.... -
I'm going to bed, see you in the morning.
-
legaldinho wrote:GooberTheHat wrote:And as quoted it the reuters article, those sarin samples were later matched to government provided samples, proving that the government used sarin in Khan Sheikhoun, which undermines Hersh's article.
Laboratories working for the OPCW compared samples taken by a U.N. mission in the Damascus suburb of Ghouta after the Aug. 21, 2013 attack to chemicals handed over by Damascus for destruction in 2014.
The tests found “markers” in samples taken at Ghouta and at the sites of two other nerve agent attacks, in Khan Sheikhoun in April 2017 and Khan al-Assal in March 2013, two people involved in the process say.
Source?
Emphasized for ease of reading. Who are these two people? Why couldn't the Reuters author say "the OPCW say in their report". Why would that be omitted from the report? Is it possible that might be because it's fucking made up shite? I honestly don't know, but these are the questions I'd ask.
-
GooberTheHat wrote:I'm going to bed, see you in the morning.
Sweet dreams xoxox -
The confusing thing is they're both likely and we can't tell what's true or false.
For now.Steam: Ruffnekk
Windows Live: mr of unlocking
Fightcade2: mrofunlocking
Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- All Discussions2,718
- Games1,881
- Off topic837