frank Arthur • 3 years ago
Hi, I am Frank Arthur. I am a professional Academic Writer. Now also I am providing Assignment Help in the UK
frank Arthur • 3 years ago
So Said post
Sanjay Chauhan • 3 years ago
Everything mentioned in this post is engaging and interesting. Really this one is the best post. If you want an amazing mobile app for your business, then contact Escale Solutions which is the leading mobile app development company in Gurgaon.
Johan Rock • 3 years ago
Every Think Is too good in your post. Thanks! If You want to become a professional writer, I suggest you visit a blog for professional writing.
David • 4 years ago
Even today i am still very very shocked by this attack
Shona Rajoria • 5 years ago
Finally, found something good to read. I'll stick with it.
mahmoudsoliman • 6 years ago
this is fantastic post
Chetan Upadhyay • 7 years ago
I had seen lots of post but this is the best one I had ever seen https://www.sevenmentor.com/
Maket Pasta • 7 years ago
rosy mostafa • 9 years ago
hello
ninikhan • 9 years ago
It is the same old scenario the TRUE will ALWAYS be crucified as a liar,
and the FALSE will always be EMBRACED & LOVED as a hero or
deliverer. Why? the lie is always more acceptable and entertaining than
the truth. trk38
Help
Joseph Mitchener • 7 years ago
Men will build a sty
for an ugly truth
but a kissing booth
for a pretty lie.
naim • 9 years ago
Thanks for he information about accident claims . I think usually people are unaware of these things. If you think you were right and that accident was not your fault so you should know these advices then you can do anything. [More Information]
Guest • 9 years ago
Guest • 9 years ago
[URL= http://www.furniture-movers... /]
شركة تخزين اثاث بالرياض
[/URL]
[URL=
http://www.zahraa7.org /]
شركة تنظيف بجدة
[/URL]
[URL= http://www.nile7.com/%D9%86...]
نقل عفش تبوك
[/URL]
[URL= http://www.nile7.com/%D8%B4...]
شركة كشف تسربات المياه تبوك
[/URL]
[URL= http://www.nsmat-jeddah.org /]
شركة تنظيف
[/URL]
[URL=
http://www.hamd-almadinah.org /]
شركة تنظيف منازل بالمدينة المنورة [/URL]
[URL= http://www.salehy.org
/]
شركة الصالحي لكشف التسربات [/URL]
[URL= http://www.pest-control-com... /]
شركة رش مبيدات بالرياض [/URL]
[URL=
http://www.dr-emad.org/]
جراح تصغير المعدة [/URL]
[URL= http://www.shahrany.org /]
عزل خزانات بالرياض [/URL]
[URL= http://www.kema-ryiadh.com/]
شركة تنظيف بالرياض
[/URL]
[URL=
http://www.hamd-jeddah.org /]
شركة نقل اثاث بمكة [/URL]
[URL= http://engmonaalgamal.blogs...] nile7seo[/URL]
[URL= http://monaali.byethost33.c...]nile7[/URL]
[URL= http://engmona.blogspot.com/]nile7[/URL]
naim001 • 9 years ago
Research statistics and survey reports display that the number
of people selecting motorbikes as their primary transport is increasing in a
drastic manner. This situation is bringing more motorbikes on the roads than
usual, and increasing the threat of road accidents. Accident
Claims, a trusted and well renowned claim service
provider is proudly extending a helping hand to the accident victims. Our main
purpose is to offer motorbike accident victims a way out of this complex
situation. Our suggestion, guidance, and expert help, can lead you towards
desired success to obtain compensation. [More Information]
econdemocracy • 10 years ago
Breaking news - veteran middle east correspondent Robert Fisk one of few western reporters who has been there (for decades)
http://www.independent.co.u...
Gas Missiles 'Were NOT Sold to Syria'
Export papers seem to back Assad's denial over sarin attack
– but Russians won't go into detail
"if Western leaders are to be believed,
[Syria] wanted to fire just seven missiles almost a half
century old at a rebel suburb in which only 300 of the
1,400 victims (if the rebels themselves are to be
believed) were fighters."
By Robert Fisk
eptember 22, 2013 "Information
Clearing House - "The
Independent" -
While the Assad regime in Damascus has denied responsibility
for the sarin gas missiles that killed around 1,400 Syrians
in the suburb of Ghouta on 21 August, information is now
circulating in the city that Russia's new "evidence" about
the attack includes the dates of export of the specific
rockets used and – more importantly – the countries to which
they were originally sold. They were apparently manufactured
in the Soviet Union in 1967 and sold by Moscow to three Arab
countries, Yemen, Egypt and Colonel Muammar Gaddafi's Libya.
These details cannot be verified in documents, and Vladimir
Putin has not revealed the reasons why he told Barack Obama
that he knows Assad's army did not fire the sarin missiles;
but if the information is correct – and it is believed to
have come from Moscow – Russia did not sell this particular
batch of chemical munitions to Syria.
Since Gaddafi's fall in 2011, vast quantities of his
abandoned Soviet-made arms have fallen into the hands of
rebel groups and al-Qa'ida-affiliated insurgents. Many
were later found in Mali, some in Algeria and a vast
amount in Sinai. The Syrians have long claimed that a
substantial amount of Soviet-made weaponry has made its
way from Libya into the hands of rebels in the country's
civil war with the help of Qatar – which supported the
Libyan rebels against Gaddafi and now pays for arms
shipments to Syrian insurgents.
There is no doubt that Syria has a substantial chemical
weapons armoury. Nor that Syrian stockpiles contain
large amounts of sarin gas 122mm missiles. But if the
Russians have indeed been able to identify the specific
missile markings on fragments found in Ghouta – and if
these are from munitions never exported to Syria – the
Assad regime will boast its innocence has been proven.
See url above for reset of story including this:
"It would perhaps be going beyond conspiracy theories to
say the government was not involved," one Syrian
journalist said last week, "but we are sure the rebels
have got sarin. They would need foreigners to teach them
how to fire it. Or is there a 'third force' which we
don't know about? If the West needed an excuse to attack
Syria, they got it right on time, in the right place,
and in front of the UN inspectors."
Flash • 10 years ago
On 29 August 2013, an MPN article bylined to MPN contributors Dale Gavlak and Yahya Ababneh reported that Syrian rebels and local residents in Ghouta, Syria alleged in interviews that the Al-Nusra Front was responsible for the chemical weapons incidents in Ghouta; those interviewed claimed that weapons had been delivered to untrained fighters and "some of the fighters handled the weapons improperly and set off the explosions."[4] Gavlak later told Brown Moses Blog that she had not been involved in writing the article, saying that "Despite my repeated requests, made directly and through legal counsel, they have not been willing to issue a retraction stating that I was not the author. Yahya Ababneh is the sole reporter and author of the Mint Press News piece."[5] Gavlak and at least one other MPN contributor ended their relationships with MPN.[6] The MPN report had been "widely circulated"[7] and cited among others by Military.com, the Voice of Russia, Press TV, Spanish newspaper ABC, ConsortiumNews.com andInfoWars.[8][9][10][11][12] Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting initially characterized the article as "honest about the limits of its knowledge", but after Gavlak's comments dissociating herself from the story wrote that "with the allegations of unprofessional behavior on the part of Mint Press News, there's little reason to take the Mint Press story seriously."[13] Bridget Johnson on PJ Media had previously described MPN as having "anti-U.S. and anti-Saudi links, as well as ties to the Occupy movement."[14] Louis Proyect looked at some of the political attitudes of 'key adviser' Odeh Muhawesh on his blog.[15] Later in September, journalist Brian Whitaker raised questions about the Ababneh byline, writing that "If Yahya Ababneh and Yan Barakat are indeed the same person, the question arises as to why Mint Press called him Ababneh rather than Barakat (which is the name he appears to have used for his other writing)", and noting that a comment on the Daily Mail website in the name of Yan Barakat had been left on 28 August, which had given the essence of the MPN story with the additional detail that he had first been alerted to the story by a Russian.
econdemocracy • 10 years ago
Military.com (whose president is a retired US Navy Admiral with Joints Chiefs background and whose advisory board has former Joint Chiefs of Staff) did not merely cite the report.
It went further by contacting Ababneh and asking him for a little more detail on some things, including the context of the inteviews, in which the testimonials were given to him. Wish they had asked (and printed his responses) much more than they did, but at least it's a small step forward, someone bothering to look into it.
Gavlak has told the New York times she has been "suspended" from AP and specifically for her work on this story, which is an outrage that she was blacklisted, for a story that is not even been shown to be false let alone the higher standard (deliberate falsification) one normally associates with such a dismissal.
She (along with Mintpress too, both) deserves the support of journalists and the public to demand AP reinstate her immediately. That said Gavlak also admitted candidly to the NY Times that she did work with Ababneh to write the story, and merely that she 'pitched' the story to them as MintPress has said, but that it was actually she (not Ababneh) who personally submitted on both of their behalf, directly to MintPress, via Google Docs. This is a clear case of politically motivated attacks on journalists. No one can say with a straight face or even imagine for a second that the same would have happened had the interviews been with local Ghouta residents and instead, with Syrain Army instead of rebels and if the testimonials pointed at Syrian Army CW use, instead of the politically embarrassing testimonials that actually were given in the interviews, namely that rebels used CW.
MitnPress should likewise be defended from smear campaigns. It's not MintPress "versus" Gavlak. On a very narrow level, sure, if your livelihood was threatened you too might resort to legally trying to force your name off it. To her credit Gavlak did not say one negative word about the credibility oft he story, or of Ababneh or his interviewing abilities or the testimonies of the Ghouta locals, and she even praised Ababneh as someone she still today, even after this friction with MintPress, she considers and openly told NY Times she considers him a reputable journalist. She actively praises him and though she would be showered with media attention if she sold out, if she said the story is not true, she didnt' say one word about that.
The above dismisses any notion that "there's little reason to take the Mint Press story seriously" - so does the following:
Anyone who cares about the dead kids like politicians like to say they care, must call for a full followup investigation. Give Ababneh interviews, support, and if need be, protection. Consider giving asylum in neutral country to the Ghouta rebels and family and civilians who testified...then they can be free and safe for other followup questions to be given to them. Then we can confirm (or not) the allegations. No one, neither I nor anyone I have read, claims we are "100% certain" these allegations are true, but clearly voices would be shouting to the heavens for a followup investigation to confirm/not confirm, if it were testimonies pointing at the Syrian Army.
The dead and relatives of the victims do not deserve ANY less justice or deserve any less of a follow-up investigation by indep sources to try to confirm these MintPress findings, the victims are not one bit less deserving of this, just because the testimonies happen to point at rebel use of CW.
Aaron • 10 years ago
You seem to be the only one with eyeballs here, who's actually read what happened. So many idiots here.
Nofearorfavor • 10 years ago
Being late in reading this story, rumors were already supporting it as factual the day after it happened. Yet today (24.09.2013), Obama speaking at the UN Summit, again repeated his call for military action in Syria! How is it possible to credit the US president as a man presented with the Nobel Peace Prize, when he is showing himself to be nothing but a common warmonger fraternizing with organ eater terrorists?
Halvor (Raknes) • 10 years ago
"Saudi Arabia Threatens to “End Career” of AP Reporter Over Chemical Weapons Story" - http://www.infowars.com/sau...
CORNUT • 10 years ago
keep it firm, resist to pressure from the Saudi gangs
John Papadopoulos • 10 years ago
Makes sense that Saudi "supported" the US on possible strikes in Syria now, doesn't it.
Souria Archives-Syria Archives • 10 years ago
It is hilarious that You Still have this Fake Discredited "Rebel used Chem Weapons" Bullshit Story on your pro Dictator Assad website - Dale Gavlak has already gone public saying she never even went to Syria and that she was punked and used by Mint Press to lend her AP crediblity to the story. In addition, The fake "co-Author" Yahya Ababneh doesn't even exist and is most likely a fake name for a Russian Agent who was born in St Petersburg, according to today's Christian Science Monitor.
Ezra Pound • 10 years ago
Is there anybody besides Jews and US Government employees/contractors/leeches who believes it was Assad? No. The only people who believe the Jewish lies that Assad illogically gassed his own people are Jews and government employees.
taza • 10 years ago
Dale Gavlak had nothing to do with this article..
More lies from this crummy site.
econdemocracy • 10 years ago
How do you know she has "nothing" to do with this article? Because some blogger posts what he says is an email from Gavlak? That she for some
reason has to go through him instead of speaking for herself on her own authenticated account? The truth is, until DG and Ababneh and the site
speak up directly, we don't know the full story. But IF you want to quote bloggers who make all sorts of claims, then it should be also ok, to quote other individuals who claim to have had direct contacts with Gavlak. Several of them have posted what Gavlak emailed to them at the end of August, and guess what? In those emails, Gavlak stated that she helped Ababneh write the article. One asserted that Gavlak has known Ababneh for a solid three years. MintPress has said right on this page that Ababneh did the interviews. This is not uncommon, in a joint article, and it's certainly plausible that it was mostly helping him with English that was the entirety of her role, but if she chose to do it, and based on knowing him for long enough to have some respect for Ababneh's work, and if she also then within the first week replied to emails saying, yeah, she helped Ababneh write it, and those emails others shared said *nothing* about trying to distance herself, then it's pretty obvious: she did
help write it, but now is under a huge amount of pressure since the article went vinal and (understandably, I sympathize) wishes that pressure by the world's most powerful country and Billionaire Saudis, were not on her. Certainly very mainstream sources have spoken about Saudi backing for rebels; the charges about one particular Saudi in this article, we do not know for sure whether they are true, but it's what real journalism is about: reporting what many people on the ground have said. To me what's more important right now than who might have given them the chemicals is simply that many locals to Ghouta: rebels and family of rebels and also civilians, ALL gave the testimony that rebels caused the chemical attack. If anyone actually gives a DAMN about those dead kids instead of using them as a political football for US "Regime change" games, if you actually CARE about those kids, you don't look for any cheap excuse to ignore the many personal testimonies given in interviews to Ababneh, you DEMAND that these be further investigated.
No, we don't know for 100% certain that they are true but if we care about the dead and suffering that as well SAY we do, then it's about time we stop looking for excuses to cover the rear end of a white house (and ally Republicans) who seem interested in victims *only* when they (think) they can pin is on the Syrian government and then show utter contempt and disdain for actually finding out the truth, when the lines of evidence seem to point at rebels. This is beyond shameful.
I notice that the alleged email from Gavak does not say many things. Does she say she has less belief that the testimonies are true? No. Does she say the basic allegations she doesn't believe in? No. Does she say she has less faith now in Ababneh? No. If the Ghouta people said that Syrian army did it, Gavlak would be treated like royalty and given lots of mainstream interviews. I say this not to criticize her, but the media. Instead since the "wrong answer" was given by locals, the mainstream wants to shoot the messengers, not just the Ghouta locals who spoke up but Ababneh who interviewed them and Gavlak who did the right thing by helping a Jordanian freelancer she had apparently known for some years and who is even a Masters candidate in journalism, helped him write it up but now clouds are hanging over her career and immense pressure one can be sure of - you don't piss off a Billionaire Saudi prince let alone the world's most powerful empire in human history, without immense pressure on you, and for that (and for not selling out and telling them the lie/line they want to hear - she has not said the story is not true) she deserves our sympathy)
Once more: the real issue is not whether Gavlak's role as having helped with English to co-write the English version, real issue is the slaughter
of civilians and whether rebels were responsible - anyone who wants to bury this story does not give a half a sh*t about the victims. Anyone who
cares about the victims, doesn't ask "who does the evidence point at?" before deciding whether one should investigate. For the same reason the mainstream has buried the even more explosive story the two pro-rebel journalists Piccinin and Quirico, overhearing while held hostage, rebel commander saying in English in adjacent room that they, rebels, had just done a chemical attack in Ghouta area(!) as “provocation” to get US to attack.Not "planning to" not "speculation" but "we did it". Anyone who actually CARES about the victims will demand that what Pierre Piccinin and Domenico Quirico be vigorously and openly further investigated, in a transparent manner, by groups independent of any partisan, including independent of any western pressure. Who is calling for that?
How many Americans have even been told about the rebel commander (they had previously known him, he was in charge of their detention as
hostages) and the rebel commander's confession they overhead?
Similarly, demand a full investigation of the testimonials these Ghouta area Syrians gave to Ababneh, Give them and their families asylum in a
safe country if need be, so they can feel free to reveal their names and tell more and answer questions, so one can verify and confirm, or question, the testimonies they gave. I don't want to hear any excuses about "oh it would be too much trouble to do that" - excuses by those who don't give a hoot about the victims - anyone who cares, will want to find out, investigate, and see whether it's true - the many, many separate accounts by Ghouta area Syrians including rebels and their families - that rebels were behind it.
There may have been multiple rebels chem attacks since the overhead rebel confession Piccinin/Quirico heard were FSA while the rebel groups Ababneh reported about seem to be different. That might explain the 'coincidence' of the attacks happening right after the arrival, a Syrian government invitation, of UN inspectors, exactly 1 year and 1 day after the August 20, 2012 "red line" speech by Obama, almost on cue, "please attack Syria" just when the Syrian Army not only knew they would be in huge trouble if they used chem, but even were making significant military gains so had nothing to gain, and everything to lose, while rebels had everything to gain. Even if just one of the many testimonies is later verified to be true, that's all it takes: one case where it's verified to be true that rebels used chemical weapons (instead of several cases, which is very possible) means that our tax dollars and our allies are supporting those who have used chemical weapons - and that needs to
stop. Hopefully by then there is a peaceful negotiated diplomatic settlement and a peaceful transition of power in Syria but don't count on it - there are those planning massive bloody vicious covert war - and while that goes on we can't have our tax dollars go to those who have used - or to whom many lines of evidence point repeatedly as having used - chemical weapons.
To demand anything less than a full vigorous investigation into these many testimonies that rebels used chem weapons, is moral cowardice. Speak
up and spread the word and demand these be looked into, interview Ababneh (as military.com did, taking his reports seriously, see their "White House mum on.." story, it's a website headed by a Retired U.S. Navy Admiral with Joint Chiefs of Staff background) other media should inverview him, and further investigate those testimonies as well as the Piccinin/Quirico overhead admission by a rebel commander. They will not do this however without public pressure - without public pressure, they will underplay (or ignore) lines of evidence pointing at rebels, away from the White House narrative, and focus laser-like without questioning much of the underlying assumption and claims of the powerful, who don't want to have these rebel-chemweapon links investigated, they want them buried at the bottom of the ocean, they want them brushed under the rug...
econdemocracy • 10 years ago
How do you know she has "nothing" to do with this article? Because some blogger posts what he says is an email from Gavlak? That she for some reason has to go through him instead of speaking for herself on her own authenticated account? The truth is, until DG and Ababneh and the site speak up directly, we don't know the full story. But IF you want to quote bloggers who make all sorts of claims, then it should be also ok, to quote other individuals who claim to have had direct contacts with Gavlak. Several of them have posted what Gavlak emailed to them at the end of August, and guess what? In those emails, Gavlak stated that she helped Ababneh write the article. One asserted that Gavlak has known Ababneh for a solid three years. MintPress has said right on this page that Ababneh did the interviews. This is not uncommon, in a joint article, and it's certainly plausible that it was mostly helping him with English that was the entirety of her role, but if she chose to do it, and based on knowing him for long enough to have some respect for Ababneh's work, and if she also then within the first week replied to emails saying, yeah, she helped Ababneh write it, and those emails others shared said *nothing* about trying to distance herself, then it's pretty obvious: she did help write it, but now is under a huge amount of pressure since the article went vinal and (understandably, I sympathize) wishes that pressure by the world's most powerful country and Billionaire Saudis, were not on her. Certainly very mainstream sources have spoken about Saudi backing for rebels; the charges about one particular Saudi in this article, we do not know for sure whether they are true, but it's what real journalism is about: reporting what many people on the ground have said. To me what's more important right now than who might have given them the chemicals is simply that many locals to Ghouta: rebels and family of rebels and also civilians, ALL gave the testimony that rebels caused the chemical attack. If anyone actually gives a DAMN about those dead kids instead of using them as a political football for US "Regime change" games, if you actually CARE about those kids, you don't look for any cheap excuse to ignore the many personal testimonies given in interviews to Ababneh, you DEMAND that these be further investigated.
No, we don't know for 100% certain that they are true but if we care about the dead and suffering that as well SAY we do, then it's about time we stop looking for excuses to cover the rear end of a white house (and ally Republicans) who seem interested in victims *only* when they (think) they can pin is on the Syrian government and then show utter contempt and disdain for actually finding out the truth, when the lines of evidence seem to point at rebels. This is beyond shameful.
I notice that the alleged email from Gavak does not say many things. Does she say she has less belief that the testimonies are true? No. Does she say the basic allegations she doesn't believe in? No. Does she say she has less faith now in Ababneh? No. If the Ghouta people said that Syrian army did it, Gavlak would be treated like royalty and given lots of mainstream interviews. I say this not to criticize her, but the media. Instead since the "wrong answer" was given by locals, the mainstream wants to shoot the messengers, not just the Ghouta locals who spoke up but Ababneh who interviewed them and Gavlak who did the right thing by helping a Jordanian freelancer she had apparently known for some years and who is even a Masters candidate in journalism, helped him write it up but now clouds are hanging over her career and immense pressure one can be sure of - you don't piss off a Billionaire Saudi prince let alone the world's most powerful empire in human history, without immense pressure on you, and for that (and for not selling out and telling them the lie/line they want to hear - she has not said the story is not true) she deserves our sympathy)
One more: the real issue is not whether Gavlak's role as having helped with English to co-write the English version, real issue is the slaughter of civilians and whether rebels were responsible - anyone who wants to bury this story does not give a half a sh*t about the victims. Anyone who cares about the victims, doesn't ask "who does the evidence point at?" before deciding whether one should investigate. For the same reason the mainstream has buried the even more explosive story the two pro-rebel journalists Piccinin and Quirico, overhearing while held hostage, rebel commander saying in English in adjacent room that they, rebels, had just done a chemical attack in Ghouta area(!) as “provocation” to get US to attack.Not "planning to" not "speculation" but "we did it". Anyone who actually CARES about the victims will demand that what Pierre Piccinin and Domenico Quirico be vigorously and openly further investigated, in a transparent manner, by groups independent of any partisan, including independent of any western pressure. Who is calling for that?
How many Americans have even been told about the rebel commander (they had previously known him, he was in charge of their detention as hostages) and the rebel commander's confession they overhead?
Similarly, demand a full investigation of the testimonials these Ghouta area Syrians gave to Ababneh, Give them and their families asylum in a safe country if need be, so they can feel free to reveal their names and tell more and answer questions, so one can verify and confirm, or question, the testimonies they gave. I don't want to hear any excuses about "oh it would be too much trouble to do that" - excuses by those who don't give a hoot about the victims - anyone who cares, will want to find out, investigate, and see whether it's true - the many, many separate accounts by Ghouta area Syrians including rebels and their families - that rebels were behind it.
There may have been multiple rebels chem attacks since the overhead rebel confession Piccinin/Quirico heard were FSA while the rebel groups Ababneh reported about seem to be different. That might explain the 'coincidence' of the attacks happening right after the arrival, a Syrian government invitation, of UN inspectors, exactly 1 year and 1 day after the August 20, 2012 "red line" speech by Obama, almost on cue, "please attack Syria" just when the Syrian Army not only knew they would be in huge trouble if they used chem, but even were making significant military gains so had nothing to gain, and everything to lose, while rebels had everything to gain. Even if just one of the many testimonies is later verified to be true, that's all it takes: one case where it's verified to be true that rebels used chemical weapons (instead of several cases, which is very possible) means that our tax dollars and our allies are supporting those who have used chemical weapons - and that needs to stop. Hopefully by then there is a peaceful negotiated diplomatic settlement and a peaceful transition of power in Syria but don't count on it - there are those planning massive bloody vicious covert war - and while that goes on we can't have our tax dollars go to those who have used - or to whom many lines of evidence point repeatedly as having used - chemical weapons.
To demand anything less than a full vigorous investigation into these many testimonies that rebels used chem weapons, is moral cowardice. Speak up and spread the word and demand these be looked into, interview Ababneh (as military.com did, taking his reports seriously, see their "White House mum on.." story, it's a website headed by a Retired U.S. Navy Admiral with Joint Chiefs of Staff background) other media should inverview him, and further investigate those testimonies as well as the Piccinin/Quirico overhead admission by a rebel commander. They will not do this however without public pressure - without public pressure, they will underplay (or ignore) lines of evidence pointing at rebels, away from the White House narrative, and focus laser-like without questioning much of the underlying assumption and claims of the powerful, who don't want to have these rebel-chemweapon links investigated, they want them buried at the bottom of the ocean, they want them brushed under the rug...
StopSpreadingRegimePropaganda • 10 years ago
Ummm, this must be embarrassing for you...http://antiwar.com/blog/2013/09/20...
econdemocracy • 10 years ago
Embarrassing, are you kidding? The central issue is: a large number of Syrians local to Ghouta including civilians, including rebels, including family of rebels, testified that rebels carried out the attack. As for Gavlak, it's pretty interesting that she does not post something publicly herself to press or even on a twitter or other account that is credibly known to be hers -instead we have to trust this blogger that the email he shows us is true, and represents the Whole truth. Ok, let's for the sake of argument suppose it is true.
If it's true, iit makes one ask, not only why she waited so long, but but also why she isn't louder now. If she had any real misgivings about the reliability of the
interviews and of Ababneh there are VERY FEW things that would make her
life easier, than to go public (rather than quietly to one blogger by
email) and to publicly say she does not believe this is very reliable
etc - she would be a media DARLING if she sold out that way...The fact
she has not said one single negative word about the reliability of the
interviews or of Ababneh her colleague whom she has apparently known for
some three years, speaks volumes, given how much she could gain and
certainly reduce negative pressure upon herself if she "renounced" the
story, rather than (if it's true) merely asking for her name to be
removed, I sympathize, she's under as much pressure as you would expect
someone to be under who threatens not only the "Assad narrative" of the
most powerful "regime" on earth, the U.S., but is much more explosive
still: that US-backed rebels could have done it.
Why did she wait this long? Obviously if she didn't think she had anything to do with the story she would have spoken out right away. Several people said they emailed her and she replied in late August, without ANY hint of trying to distance herself from the story. Quite the opposite, she said she helped Ababneh write it. You can find stories of her reporting on the middle east from Jordan and elsewhere all over (search Dale Gavlak Salon) Well either she is well travelled in that area, or she is always in D.C. but works only by remote with local freelancers in Jordan etc. Well if that was ok for all her previous stories without her being there in person, then this is different how exactly? So she knew and trusted Ababneh long enough to write with him, while Ababneh was the only one who did the legwork to get the eyewitness interviews (as MintPress was open about on their website since a while back) she was co-author as she helped him write the piece. Simple enough. Then the story goes viral. And needless to say upsets the White House narrative. It's not hard to understand what happens to a reporter who has a story go viral (though still far too few have seen it, it needs to be every American) your life is not going to be fun. Look at Gary Webb if you don't know what happened to him when he shows CIA's connection to drug-running by the contras in the 1980s. Not fun, thrown under a bus (figuratively, but badly enough). Gavlak needs to feed herself. It doesn't even have to be sinister like a blacklist, it can be much more innocent/sympathetic like "I'd love to hire you but we're getting so much heat and hate from...." and that's not fun for your career, either. Sure, these are hypotheticals, but anyone who claims that the White House and Saudi Billionaires do not make angry phonecalls when a story is this damaging to them, is simply lying - at minimum, to themselves.
How damaging? This is not only going to the "Assad did it! So we have to regime change, I mean bomb!" narrative, it is far more potentially damaging, because it actually points at US-backed rebels, or at least, the narrative have pretended there is a single entity "the" rebels, and at other times, pretended one can isolate the "good" rebels from the "Bad" (at UN commission chairman Paulo Pinheiro said, "there are not good rebels" he did not mean "not one single person" but there is anti-democratic sentiments in the "good" ones and, worse, you can't easily draw the line and separate which are brutal murderers (or even Al Qaeda) and which are not). That the US was backing groups that used chemical weapons is a very explosive and dangerous idea to them.
If we give a damn about the dead civilians and dead children, we'd have front page interviews with Ababneh, instead of ignoring this story so it gets published by MintPress and one other better known website (military.com, headed by a retired U.S. Navy Admiral, see "White House mum..." story there, their advisory board also has Jonit Chiefs of Staff persons...a serious website..they actually took the trouble to interview Ababneh, at least, ask him a few more questions to clarify the context of the confessions, and they take the allegations very seriously at the story shows) but if we give a damn and don't just pretend to, about the victims, the mainstream press would interview Ababneh too.
Also, we could among other things, give asylum to those Ghouta rebels, and rebel families Ababneh interviewed who confessed, so they can openly tell
world without fear, what they told Ababneh, give their testimonies in more detail, answer follow up questions, THAT'S what we'd do if we give a rat's a** about the victims, we'd try to find out more..instea if we want to Spread REbel Propaganda then our only goal is to bury this story and focus on the fact that Gavlak (after a ton of pressure) might not want her name on the story she helped Ababneh write, I wonder why? Does she say it's not true? No. Does she say she trusts Ababneh less? No. Does she say the interviews are less likely to be true? No. She allegedly says she wants her name off. That speaks volumes. So sloppy and quick to cover tail that AntiWar didn't even take the 10 seconds it takes to find out Dale is female, they called her a "he". Her gender is not central but it illustrates how sloppy and quick knee-jerk the reaction was. Let alone considering the broader picture, as outlined about.
If we care about the victims instead of scoring points, if we give the slightest damn about the dead children, we'd not play games or distractions about whether Gavlak, despite having helped Ababneh write up his interviews, now would like her name off the official roster, but we'd focus on the
Testimonies of Ghouta area rebels - saying they did it
Testimonies of Ghouta area residents - saying rebels did it
Testimony of family of dead rebel paid to carry stuff that wasn't explained to him what was in it..- again pointing at rebels.
And investigate and follow-up and find out to verify and confirm, or not confirm, these many different pepole, many different testimonies, pointing at the rebels. If we dont' want to do that, we shouldn't pretend to care about the dead kids, we should just say "it was all just propaganda to bomb, we don't care about any of the dead children, that was just cheap pretense"
We'd also put on Page One something even more explosive, an interview with 2 pro-rebel journalists Pierre Piccinin and Domenico Quirico, overhearing while held hostage by rebles, rebel commander (whom they had known was an FSA rebel commander from before- he was in charge of their being helds) and hearing this rebel commander saying in English in adjacent room to where they were held, with door half open, hearing him say that they, rebels, had just done a chemical attack in Ghouta area as “provocation” to get US to attack. Not speculation or "we might" but "we did it". How many Americans have been even allowed to hear about Pierre Piccinin and Domenico Quirico? Ignored mostly and sometimes reported very very misleadingly as if Quirico "differs" with Piccinin. Nonsense, Quirico himself told La Stamp the exact facts just listed in this paragraph, he only differs on the interpretation (we can't be 100% sure, obviously), and whether we can be 100% sure to exonerate the Syrian Army (obviously, it's not impossible that both rebels and army used gas, even though German intel revealed in leak recently, that they monitored top communication and Assad "always" rejected using chem any time it ws brought up in all those months) but that "we're not 100% sure" and bending over backwards to keep saying that many times, that's the only way Quirico "differed" -- not on the facts - two pro-rebel journalists hear immediately in adjacent room with half open door, Skype conversation in English, rebel commander saying "we did" a chemical attack in Ghouta area. Explosive.
Can you imagine if they had been pro-Syrian govt journalists, held by Army, and heard the opposite confession? It would be front page, or bombs away, before you could blink. Please everyone, spread the word, have the Abaneh interviews investigated fully, fairly, openly, transparently, by neutral parties...Please spread the word about the overhead confession of rebel commander by Piccinin and Quirico, demand investigation there too, call congress, write editor, tell friends, colleagues..
Don Doherty • 10 years ago
Dale Gavlak denied writing this story and says the paper refuses to remove the name despite being contacted by legal counsel. Here is the statement:
"Mint Press News incorrectly used my byline for an article it published on August 29, 2013 alleging chemical weapons usage by Syrian rebels. Despite my repeated requests, made directly and through legal counsel, they have not been willing to issue a retraction stating that I was not the author. Yahya Ababneh is the sole reporter and author of the Mint Press News piece. To date, Mint Press News has refused to act professionally or honestly in regards to disclosing the actual authorship and sources for this story.
I did not travel to Syria, have any discussions with Syrian rebels, or do any other reporting on which the article is based. The article is not based on my personal observations and should not be given credence based on my journalistic reputation. Also, it is false and misleading to attribute comments made in the story as if they were my own statements."
See BrownMoses blog.
econdemocracy • 10 years ago
Interesting, but MintPress has openly said already on the webpage
that the interviews themselves were all by Ababneh. Three questions:
1.Should one not expect such a statement by Gavlak to be on her own
official website or account(Google plus, FB, twitter, linkedin or
similar) and not appear only on someone else's blog who relates having
received an email from her?
2. The statement, if indeed it has been made by Gavlak, does not make true how her name was selected. Surely not completely at random? Surely they didn't roll dice and pick arandom US reporter's name to put next to Ababneh's?
Surely she had some connection with Ababneh or Ababneh's interviews, or this story,and if so, what, in full unabridged detail, was it?
3. Although Iwill not repeat it here, MintPress gave a direct email contact for DaleGavlak a long time ago, on that story's page. Would MintPress choose to
make it so easy to contact one of the two reporters they list, right
from the page of the story, if one of them has absolutely positively
nothing what so ever to do with the article?
Also, whether this is a 4th question or a followup on the 1st, the mind boggles why it should take a month - surely if after a few days or a week if MintPress
were so utterly and completely inaccurate, Gavlak could have posted on
her own twitter/G+/etc. Something doesn't smell right, and I'm not
talking about MintPress here, there is already a character assassination
campaign against others who spoke out, like Mother Agnes, a brave and
courageous woman who has criticized both sides, including the Syrian
government. But her pointing at suspicious things about rebel claims and
videos, now have her attacked viciously. Human Rights Watch
emergencies director Peter Bouckaert has called this woman, Mother
Agnes, an "Assad propagandist" That is outrageous. She has called the
Syrian government "totalitarian." To call someone who has used that word
about the government a "propagandist" is not only irresponsible, it is
Orwellian. What they object to is that she has also called the rebels
out as being, in far more cases than the admits, also totalitarian and
even worse in brutality than the government:
"Now, this totalitarianism is not good, and it's obsolete but if the armed
insurrection is implementing another totalitarianism, which is maybe
worse, because there is blood, they can behead you, they can cut -
last week, in our village, they cut the fingers of a so-called
'collaborator', then they behead him, and they cut him in pieces,and
they left him, in the street, where even children would see.."(2:03 at
YsK-12Q6rBU on YT)
Meanwhile
you can be sure that immense pressure is being put on two pro-rebel
reporters who were taken hostage and after their release, they had a
bombshell: both former hostages, Pierre Piccinin and Domenico Quirico
heard through a half open door to the adjacent room, the very Free
Syrian Army commander they already knew who was in charge of their being
held, they heard him in a conversation in English in which he stated
clearly that they, the rebels, had just launched a chemical attack in
Ghouta "as a provocation" to get the US to attack Syria. Not "we might
do it" not "speculation" about others, but "we did it" Already media
have grossly misrepresented the case, when they (barefly) report on it
as if there is "sharp disagreement" between the two but the La Stampa
interview with Quirico, the one who supposedly "sharply differs" with
Piccinin, shows that Quirico agrees 100% of all the above facts -
English Skype conversation in adjacent room, FSA commander admits they
the rebels had (past tense) launched a chemical attack, and in the
Ghouta area, and to "provoke" a US attack. No disagreement at all, none.
Quirico's disagreement is can be be 100% sure to exonerate the Assad
government, obviously, nothing is 100% certain, and also obviously, one
can't rule out 100% that there might have been rebel chemical attacks
(possibly several since the confession heard by Piccinin/Quirico may be
different) and also a rogue government agent. Germany's top intel
agency already leaked that Assad "always" rejected use of chem weapons,
in all the many months of their then-secret monitoring of his top
communications, no wonder, since Syrian Army was making gains and in any
case it would have been suicidally stupid for him to use them. Even
Iraq's Saddam Hussein who was happy to use chem weapons in 1980s when he
knew the US was on his side and happy to help him even giving
coordinates of Iranian troops to help him, but even Saddam did not use
chem weapons in 1991 when his troops were slaughtered while retreating
and at other times by US, why? Because he knew what would rain upon him
if he did. In contrast, Assad's forces were not losing but making many
significant gains, and by magic coincidence immediately after the
arrival at Syrian government invitation of UN inspectors to look into
previous attack, and exactly 1 year and 1 day after the "red line" speed
by Obama, magically chem weapon attacks right near the UN inspectors
are launched. Gosh, this is a tough one to see who had everything to
gain (rebels) and who had nothing military or otherwise to gain and
everything to lose. But wait, they will character assassinate Piccinin
and Quirico if they have to in western media, or rebel-backing Qatar's
mouthpiece Al Jazeera or rebel-backing Saudi mouthpiece Al Arabia, or
just immense behind the scenes pressure to shut them up too. It's up to
all but especially up to US citizens to demand these things -
particularly the Piccinin/Quirico overheard confession but also the
Ababneh interviews - are fully, and vigorously investigated by
independent expert analysis groups not subject to western pressure.
On Gavlak's reputed email to that blogger..the three above questions are
decreasing order or importance - item 1 is to get it directly online
from Gavlak'ss official account not through an intermediary. I have no
evidence that Brown Moses is not being truthful, but assertions this
strong can easily be made (and should be made) by the reporter herself.
Vito Essex • 10 years ago
Gavlak just wrote says its not here nd she have nothing to do with it, She knew about article but only now saying its not her, no strange now then US and UN gonna push for action only blame should be on Assad
alla • 10 years ago
I do not believe it.
econdemocracy • 10 years ago
You don't have to "believe it" - you should support investigating it. If these were local residents that had, instead, said something like "Assad did it" then the western world's leaders would be all OVER this..probably bombing already, but at least demanding a full investigative follow-up.
You should be aware that a completely different line of evidence also points at rebels: two journlists, both pro-rebel, ewre taken hostage by rebels and both heard a rebel commander in a Skype conversation say that rebels did just launch a chemical attack on the Ghouta area, "as a provocadtion" to get US to attack. Their names are Pierre Piccinin and Domenico Quirico. The media rarely report this. When they do, they pretend there is "disagreement" by Quirico, but look at what Quirico in fact said to La Stampa the Italian newspaper:
“During our kidnapping [by FSA rebels], we were kept completely in the
dark about what was going on in Syria, including the gas attacks in
Damascus”, Quirico said. “But one day, we heard a Skype conversation in English between
three people whose names I do not know. We heard the conversation from
the room in which we were being held captive, through a half-closed
door. One of them hadpreviously presented himself to us as a general of the Syrian Liberation Army. The other two we had never seen and knew nothing about”.”During the Skype conversation, they said that the gas attack on the two neighborhoods in Damascus [Ghouta] had been carried out by rebels as a provocation, to push the West towards a military intervention. They also said they believed the death toll had been exaggerated,” Quirico said in his statement.
The only disagreement Quirico had was when Piccinin said the Syrian Government did not do it...of course you cannot be 100% sure of anything, ever, and you can't be 100% sure that maybe, well, maybe there was a rebel AND a government attack, etc, etc.And a huge amount of pressure to not be (falsely) accused of being "pro-Assad" etc so he adds 10 disclaimers that he can't be 100% sure, isn't 100% sure, they only heard it, etc, etc...but as you can see he agrees 100% with Piccinin: they heard exactly the same: the Free Syrian Army commander they knew from earlier, speaking by phone in English, saynig the rebels already did launch a chemical attack, and they both agree he said it was as a provocation to get the US to attack.
What a horrible thing - a war crime, a chemical attack, and killing civilians, and on top of that, not even in a battle, but just as a "provocation" to get the U.S. to attack, so an even more ugly war crime..
And this is a very separate piece of information that also points at the rebels...very damningly. What would you think if you had two pro-Assad journalists taken hostage and after release they both agree that the government said something like that on the phone? That would be considered hugely strong evidence..
But that's not what happened, ou have the both of these things, this investigation by MintPress and the Piccinin and Quirico overheard conversation, BOTH pointing at rebels.
Even for these combined - you don't have to "believe" but we should demand the end of the government and media ignoring this damning set of report and have a full open independent investigation.
We should demand it now, before more of our tax dollars go to funding rebels who have not only been known to include a BIG Al Qaeda presence, but who also have all of the above, not 100%, but very very strong evidence pointing at chemical weapon attack.. Call your reps and demand an investigation..call the media, or write, and demand coverage, and interviews and investigation follow-up.
econdemocracy • 10 years ago
BREAKING STORY - PLEASE THUMBS UP --THIS COMBINED WITH THE MINT PRESS INVESTIGATION IS STRONGER THAN THE SUM OF EACH BY ITSELF -- TWO FORMER HOSTAGES WHO WERE JUST RELEASED BY REBELS SAY THAT WHILE THEY WERE CAPTIVE THEY HEARD FREE SYRIAN ARMY (FSA) GENERAL HAVE A CONVERSATION ON SKYPE THAT THEY HAD CARRIED OUT (PAST TENSE) A CHEMICAL WEAPONS ATTACK, IN THE SUBURB OF DAMASCUS (GHOUTTA). Both journalists were former supporters of the rebels. U.S. media is not covering this, and when they do they falsely say the Italian former hostage, Domenico Quirico, is "sharply" disagreeing with the Belgian former hostage, reporter Pierre Peccinin, in fact BOTH hostages agree 100% that: 1) they were held by rebels, 2) they overhead a skype conversation though a half open door 3) one of the speaker is one they knew by the voice very well, who previously identified himself as a FSA General 4) Both former hostages agree that the FSA general said that they had carried out a chemical attack (not "were planning to" but did) and 5) In Ghoutta and 6) It was to get Washington to intervene to overthrow the Syrian government...they were willing to kill Syrian civilians just to get the US to intervene. 7) Both hostages formerly supported the rebels, so if anything their strong bias was in the other direction..even NY times says "had published articles in the past which were sympathetic to the rebels"( paraphrase).
The only "disagreement" is Pierre on TV said "Assad did not do it" while Italian Quirico said we can't be 100% sure Assad did not, and it would be "insane" to claim it, and then the Belgian and Italian media went on (the La Stampa article in English went on for 4 out of the 6 paragraphs of the stoyr, two-thirds of it, with nothing but "we can't be 100% sure that the people were who they said they were" and on and on and on....I ask you, if it was Assad's forces who captured them and they had heard such a phone confession, and they were both former Assad-admiring journslists and they both heard it about chemicadl attack on Ghoutta, and then they are released, and Lo and Behold, they find out Ghoutta really did have a chemical attack, how strong would that be? Very very very strong incriminating evidence...
Belgian Piccinin: "It pains me to say it because I've been a fierce supporter of
the Free Syrian Army... since but based on what both men have learned, Peccinin told RTL that it would be “insane and suicidal for the West to support these
people.” Italian t Domenico Quirico says they were treated like animal. Quirico, the one the mainstream media tell us "sharply" takes a different view, in fact said this in the English article in La Stampa:
"During our kidnapping [by FSA rebels], we were kept completely in the dark about
what was going on in Syria, including the gas attacks in Damascus”,
Quirico said. “But one day, we heard a Skype conversation in English
between three people whose names I do not know. We heard the
conversation from the room in which we were being held captive, through a
half-closed door. One of them had previously presented himself to us as
a general of the Syrian Liberation Army. The other two we had never
seen and knew nothing about”.
“During the Skype conversation, they said that the gas attack on the
two neighbourhoods in Damascus had been carried out by rebels as a
provocation, to push the West towards a military intervention. They also
said they believed the death toll had been exaggerated,” Quirico said
End quote. The RT story you find find by searching for its title, "Chemical attack was Syria rebel provocation, former hostages say" (a second story on ibtimes dot co dot uk -is called "Syria: Assad not Responsible for Ghouta Gas Attack, Says Freed Hostage Pierre Piccinin") No we can't be 100.00% sure Assad's forces did not also...other than 1) it would be suicidally stupid to do it, he knew how US would react.. 2) Assad's forces have been gaining ground and didn't need chem weapons 3) would Assad be stupid enough to use it exactly the day after arrival of UN delegation, and on the day after the one year anniversary of the Red Line speech? How convenient...4) every single time Assad was asked, he said No, says German intelligence which heard....so no I'm not 100.0% Assad's forces (rogue element) didn't do it....let the UN investigate all parties...Including the conceivable idea that Assad's forces did, but also investigate the far stronger evidence that rebels used chemical weapons
But let's not let the power that be bury this - we must have on-going pressure on our representatives in Washington to investigate this - not to "bomb the rebels" not to "bomb the Saudi/Qatari/Turkish backers" but to investigate and then hold them accountable (which still doesn't mean bomb, it means criminal prosecution etc...but if they start talking about bombing Syria, ask them Are You Going to Also Bomb your US-Backed Dictatorships "allies" of Saudi Arabia and Qatar? No? Good, then stop the talk of bombing!) But this is a war crime. Made worse by the fact it wasn't even civilians killed by a military skirmish in which they were "collateral damage" to rebels being willing to use chemical weapons, no, worse, it is rebels using it just as a game of pin it on Assad to get US to attack and overthrow the Syrian government and put these rebels in power, this story is about a FSA chem attack, so it's not just the Al Qaeda (Al Nusra) ones...
I'd love to have a peaceful change of power with elections, which is much more possible than most realize (read the Hidden History of the Syrian Civil War on PopularResistance) than you might thing, this guy's first acts in office is to start opening up the brutal state his father inherited to him, released prisoners, legalized private radio, legalized an opposition newspaper...then by 2007 Seymour Hirsh reported in the New Yorker how covertly we and Saudis etc have been funding brutal violent folks to build up for a violent overthrow...seriously, instead of encouraging the modest but very real positive steps...so a peaceful hand-over of power from Assad to nonextremist elements, those who are for pluralism and human rights for everyone (not just their sect) would be great, but that's a long, long way away, andt that's not gonna happen with "slaughter all Christians and also kill Muslims who are of a different sect than mine" rebels, the Al Qaeda/Al Nusra, and it's not going to happen with these "they treated us as dogs when we were hostages" FSA folks, the "Free" Syrian Army.....covert funding of violent and yes terrorist extremists is what betrayed the original, brave and admirable Syrian protesters...that's what covert actions do...Sorry for long post...Please, PRESSURE TO DEMAND FULL U.S. AND FULL U.N./ICC INVESTIGATION OF BOTH THE MINTPRESS INVESTIGATIVE REPORT AND OF THESE TWO REPORTERS FIRST-HAND REVELATION ABOUT FSA GENERAL SAYING FSA REBELS COMMITTED THE CHEMICAL ATTACK...CALL CONGRESS..ASK THEM TO INVESTIGATE!
najah • 10 years ago
Arabian Gulf leaders are fools, and can not do anything without permission from USA!!!
ccaffrey • 10 years ago
Au contraire. There are a few Arabian Gulf leaders that are very skilled at getting US leaders to do what is beneficial for them, and not just in that area of the world.
econdemocracy • 10 years ago
Thank you for this report and sharing your findings, courageous reporting! Also please share this far and wide: This goes back to April 2011 if not earlier! The Saudis apparently have funded to create attacks or "turmoil" since (at least) as early as April 2011 (just one month after peaceful protests started in Syria) at the latest - possibly earlier, see http://beforeitsnews.com/wa... which links to respected (but very strongly independent) veteran reporter Robert Fisk's articles form April 2011one in the UK's Independent newspaper and another copy at informationclearinghouse.info/ under the different title, but same article by Fisk, "Shadow of Syrian Conflict Stretching into Lebanon" The peaceful Syria opposition (who I did and still support, not Assad) was betrayed by those powers who decided to create a "Libya" play in Syria by funding viiolence - helping discredit the (worthy) moderate opposition and bringing Al Qaeda brutality and terrorism to Syria and threatening the whole middle east - they have an alliance with Al Qaeda groups in Iraq to create a "Caliphate" that spans Iraq to Syria and beyond..sick, dangerous game the West and it's allies play, please see the above BeforeItsNews article we posted under "Uncover the Lies: The Hidden History of the Syrian Civil War" and the Fisk and related info detailed there. Americans and Middle Eastern folk and any Christian, Jewish, Muslim, non-religious, left or right, many of us oppose the U.S. empire which is only hurting Americans too (as well as horribly hurting others) we must unite to save not just the world but to save America itself from the American Imperial project!
Altered_States • 10 years ago
My sympathies go with you. I know that the U.S is the most violent country in the world - yet preaches Peace and Democracy.
They give new meaning to the word, Hypocrisy!
The U.S. is winding down its' 12 years of fighting two countries. Neither war has furthered the cause of peace, but instead, have created more enemies - many more.
The lies the Neocons create is shameful. But, you can't shame anyone if they have no shame. To these shameless Neocon, any war is a good war. They seem to be their happiest when they are at war, and angry if they are NOT fighting a war. Does that sound crazy to you? Good! Welcome to my world.
TiredofPlusquellic • 10 years ago
The only person who benefits from a 'rebel' confession is Assad and his regime. Why would the rebels want to protect Assad from airstrikes? Makes no sense.
econdemocracy • 10 years ago
If you want to talk about "the only one who benefits" then let's apply that logic to the chemical attacks themselves. We know #1 Assad had everything to lose, he knew it would massively increase chance US attacks. Even if he had been losing (in fact the opposite is true) he knew it would be suicidally dangerous to use gas #2 He was winning week after week, so it would be doubly stupid #3 He would be triple-stupid enough to launch a chem attack *exactly* during the short visit of UN inspectors that had just arrived the previous day, to look into previous chem attack, at his government's own invitation? Now it's getting even more unbelievable, but it doesn't stop there!
#4 German intelligence ships, it was revealed only after the attack, monitored Assad's communications for months and months it turns out. In all cases he always rejected the use of chemicals, any time his commanders brought it up (they don't say what his commanders brought up? Sarin? Or White Phosphorus that the US and Israeli have used? Or just tear gas, that's also a chemical weapon) It doesn't stop there,
#5 Who would gain from a gas attack? The rebels, who were losing militarily and knew it was their best chance to get the US to attack It doesn't stop there! Because:
#6 This MintPress report, where as noted by ccaffrey, they interviewed multiple local residents and not just one but multiple rebels and also interviewed family members of other rebels..but it doesn't stop here!
#7 Former hostages Pierre Piccinin and Domenico Quirico were held by rebels, released, they are serious journalist (DQ) and freelancer (PC, who also had reported form Mali) and they were both strongly pro-rebel and kidnapped nevertheless and held hostage...and through half open door they heard rebel commander in skype conversation say they, the rebels, carried out a chemical attack, to get the US to attack Syria, to pin it on the Syrian government...Did I mention these are two journalists who were strongly pro-rebel? Remember they did not hear "we plant to launch it" they heard "we did launch a chem attack" Are you kidding me? There may have been several rebel chemical attacks rather than one...
What would you say on *just* item #7 happened backwards? Imagine pro-Syrian government journalists kidnapped and held hostage by the Syrian government forces (or pro-government militias) and imagine they overheard, oh my god, the side we are supporting, they just said over the phone that *they* carried out a gas attack! ...how would western media and politicians react to just item #7 if it happened backwards? Overwhelmingly strong evidence they'd say, from formerly pro-government journalists, etc! (we have DQ's former articles so there is no question he was sympathetic to the rebels, see NY Times story online)
We didn't even mention UN report on a previous chem attack, which pointed at the rebels...so we know they have chem weapons...even Japanese "cult" fantatics got their hands on sarin, 20 years ago for an attack in Japan, so anyone can get their hands on it...We didn't even mention (strongly pro-rebel) Turkey...busted an operation by Syrian Rebel faction Al Nusra...to make and smuggle chem weapons..indictment followed up on those arrests, just a day or two ago.
And that's just item #7...add the German intelligence, as the MintPress report, add that Assad was winning militarily add the strange timing and on and on and on...I would bet my car that at least one chemical attack was by rebels, and possibly several different rebel factions/brigades independently of one another might have (that is what Piccinin/Quirico heard and what MintPress was told by local rebels and their families and local residents...might have been separate attacks that rebels carried out) OR as one commenter said "rebels" in quotes in one case, people paid money to carry materials...
By the way military.com just ran a story on this MintPress story, they are not just a blog their board of directors includes two former members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and their President Terry "T" McCreary is a retired U.S. Navy Admiral..sserved as the Chief of Naval Information (CHINFO) on the Joint Chiefs of Staff..their report a few days ago they even interviewed Ababneh..and they take the report quite seriously. They are not saying they are 100% sure it's true, but their story (and interview with one of the investigators Ababneh) takes it very seriously see "White House Mum on Rebel Chem Weapons Use"
ccaffrey • 10 years ago
Well in the first place there is not just "a" rebel confession since there are multiple rebel groups, some of the more brutal ones being also funded from the outside. From what I'm trying to piece together from this confession, these rebels had been paid to courier weapons, didn't know what they were, and accidentally set them off, killing a number of their own people! They may have confessed to that BECAUSE it was an accident, out of remorse, and also because they did not want the rest of their families and neighbors wiped out by bomb-ready forces who would assume they'd acted deliberately. Make sense?
omar Aboudi • 10 years ago
General Clark's Book on Modern Wars[edit source]
In Clark's book, Winning Modern Wars, published in 2003, he describes his conversation with a military officer in the Pentagon shortly after 9/11 regarding a plan to attack seven Middle Eastern countries in five years: "As I went back through the Pentagon in November 2001, one of the senior military staff officers had time for a chat. Yes, we were still on track for going against Iraq, he said. But there was more. This was being discussed as part of a five-year campaign plan, he said, and there were a total of seven countries, beginning with Iraq, then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Iran, Somalia and Sudan."
ccaffrey • 10 years ago
Yes! And there is video of him talking about that conversation as well!
omar Aboudi • 10 years ago
Ari Rusila • 10 years ago
In my opinion Obama should think twice bedore air-strike against al-Assad regime
as the right address might be Qatar-funded mercenaries led by Al Qaeda. Also
the latest info is that US does not know where WMDs of regime are so there is two follow-ups:
a) the opposition can have some of them,
b) the unclear location can be hit by air-strike causing damage.
While all options are open what happened in relation of chemical weapons from my perspective it is crucial to wait untill we know more, for example after investigations made by U.N team. Meanwhile the great powers should make pressure to local stakeholders to start ceasefire/peace talks without preconditions. More about Syria e.g: "War To Dissolution With Help Of Media" -
http://arirusila.wordpress....
ccaffrey • 10 years ago
In another article it was mentioned that satellite intelligence had been tracking the movement of what they believed to be chemical weapons to various locales, all heavily guarded by army guards both en route and at the remote locations. My understanding is that most of the vehicles being tracked were larger trucks, capable of transporting the chemicals and the means to deploy them. Actually, after reading some of the other reports, including rebels saying they had gotten the weapons from outside parties, I think that a variation of b) may well be the case. I'm sure that Assad's army was aware they were under surveillance. However, one way to stem an air attack would be if they could put out enough "decoys" as well as actual weapons that the U.S. would no longer be sure of what was going where, and therefore could be deterred from launching airstrikes lest they accidentally hit one of the supplies themselves.
Hi,
My name is Sanjay Chauhan, a professional in Techslate that offers the best Data Science course in Noida which is specially designed for working professionals who want to gain Data Science experience by working on Live projects.