ISIL, ISIS, Daesh discussion thread.

[Rroff]

Is it your contention that a group is founded by people from the British military, funded by the British military but does not service British goverment and military goals? Or do you think that Britain does not have a goal of overthrowing Assad / Syrian government? We can examine either of your potential hypotheses but the latter would be most hilarious.

Eh?

All I was saying was the fact that they have English writing on their uniform means nothing in terms of who is behind the organisation - I'm not in any way furthering case of who is or isn't behind the organisation or what goals or agendas might be.

 

[Minusorange]

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...ttacked-u-s-iran-tensions-flare-idUSKCN1SK0YM

Interesting escalation, why would Iran be attacking SA oil depots with drones ?

 

[StriderX]

‘Iran-backed forces’ is about as euphemistic as ‘enemy combatant’, Iran is doing minimal amounts of nothing.

But suck on John Bolton’s **** all the same, it coo.

 

[EvilSooty]

Got bored headbutting a brick wall of wilful ignorance, western exceptionalism and justification of war crimes so gave up on this thread for a bit

But some interesting news about the alleged Douma attack last April which featured the White Helmet propaganda outfit.

An engineering report has been leaked from the OPCW which confirms it was all staged. The argument from the White Helmets and in the main OPCW report released to the public was that two yellow cylinders full of chlorine crashed through one concrete ceiling and made a hole in another after being dropped by the evil Assad's airforce and the release of the gas caused the deaths.

But in the suppressed report not released to the public, the OPCW engineers ran all kinds of tests and couldn't reproduce that theory and concluded that the cylinders were likely placed manually.

https://www.moonofalabama.org/2019/...chemical-weapon-incident-was-staged.html#more

So there you have the lovely White Helmets we fund implicated in a staged CW attack to drag us into war. If staged it implies the victims were killed for the purposes of the video and pictures.

It's also worrying that organisations like the OPCW which are supposed to be impartial appear to be twisting their reports to suit the propaganda coming out from the US etc.

This makes everything they have reported on recently questionable. They backed our gov's claims over the Skripals for example.

I doubt this evidence will make a bit of difference to those so invested in their black/white view of the world that we are 'good' and anyone our gov targets conveniently is evil incarnate, but here it is anyway.

Bear this in mind when you hear about the next CW attack.

Interest from our press who screeched about Douma last April? None - what a shocker. Same as when they found the people from the WH propaganda videos who said it was a hoax.

Anyone who believes the official narrative at this point will believe anything.

 

[Dis86]

Do you have a link to the opcw site hosting this report? Or just links to conspiracy websites discussing what they've been told it says?

 

[EvilSooty]

Do you have a link to the opcw site hosting this report? Or just links to conspiracy websites discussing what they've been told it says?

You struggle with the concept of leaks. Why would it be on an official OPCW site if the OPCW suppressed the report? Use your brain.

Follow the links in the article to get to the report if you want which has been published by a group of British academics studying the propaganda around Syria. They explain why it's a credible leak amongst other things.

Or if you want to just carry on believing something because it appeared on the BBC and the government told you so it must be true, fine, your choice.

People still going on about 'conspiracy theories' after the lies over Iraq, Libya, Syria, the revelations from Wikileaks etc are hilarious.

 

[Dis86]

You struggle with the concept of leaks. Why would it be on an official OPCW site if the OPCW suppressed the report? Use your brain.

Follow the links in the article to get to the report if you want which has been published by a group of British academics studying the propaganda around Syria. They explain why it's a credible leak amongst other things.

Or if you want to just carry on believing something because it appeared on the BBC and the government told you so it must be true, fine, your choice.

People still going on about 'conspiracy theories' after the lies over Iraq, Libya, Syria, the revelations from Wikileaks etc are hilarious.

You struggle with verifiable sources. I could write a document mimicking something like that and host it on any one of a number of sites. Does that make it genuine?
Seemingly to you it does. You talk about people buying anything from official sources yet you lap up any old baloney.

 

[EvilSooty]

You struggle with verifiable sources. I could write a document mimicking something like that and host it on any one of a number of sites. Does that make it genuine?
Seemingly to you it does. You talk about people buying anything from official sources yet you lap up any old baloney.

Only you couldn't as it's a clearly a technical report compiled by experts signed off by a known senior engineering official within the OPCW, Ian Henderson. Henderson exists - the OPCW have mentioned him in previous reports so this is easily refuted if a forgery, yet the OPCW and Henderson are silent which speaks volumes.

But you have demonstrated in this thread you believe any old ******** no matter how unlikely so I'll not bother anymore. Somebody with a brain might find it of use.

If it's not in the BBC, Guardian, Independent or whatever dross you read it clearly didn't happen...

Back to sleep.

 

[Dis86]

Because signatures of a guy who has signed off reports before can't be copied? I love CT loons. They're brilliant.

CT loon: everything you read is lies!
Normal person: but how do you know your sources are genuine?
CT loon: cos cos...cos...yours are lies! Open your eyes! Sheeple. Mainstream media!

 

[RoboCod]

Because signatures of a guy who has signed off reports before can't be copied? I love CT loons. They're brilliant.

CT loon: everything you read is lies!
Normal person: but how do you know your sources are genuine?
CT loon: cos cos...cos...yours are lies! Open your eyes! Sheeple. Mainstream media!

His problem is, as he states, he thinks he knows better than everyone else. He thinks everyone sees the world in black and white and that we think we are the 'good' guys, so we're therefore stupid. As soon as you declare yourself 'woke AF' it's clear to every other sensible person that you're a cretin. This is why engaging in conversation with the woke bot is futile. It's not interested in your view, because it's automatically wrong.

 

[h4rm0ny]

USA and UK militaries having a very public spat right now about the threat from Iran. With a British general rejecting US claims the threat from Iran has suddenly increased. Pentagon getting all huffy about it. Things like this usually take place behind closed doors so it's concerning that the general felt the need to go public with this. Ministry of Defence standing by him, as well.

Seems pretty obvious the USA is looking for pretexts for military action.

It's also worrying that organisations like the OPCW which are supposed to be impartial appear to be twisting their reports to suit the propaganda coming out from the US etc.

Well the OPCW tried to argue against US claims of Iraq's WMD threat before that war, and John Bolton personally dropped in on the then head of the OPCW to threaten his kids if he didn't follow the US party line. And then managed to get that person removed when they stuck to their position despite this. Think the OPCW are under as much pressure from the USA as anyone.

An engineering report has been leaked from the OPCW which confirms it was all staged. The argument from the White Helmets and in the main OPCW report released to the public was that two yellow cylinders full of chlorine crashed through one concrete ceiling and made a hole in another after being dropped by the evil Assad's airforce and the release of the gas caused the deaths.

Chlorine now. I remember original claims that it was Sarin gas. That was significant because that is actually harder to manufacture and could implicate a state actor. Chlorine is easily obtainable and manufacturing Chlorine gas quite easily within the capabilities of backyard terrorists.

 

[EvilSooty]

OPCW confirms that the leaked engineering report is genuine.

https://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2019/05/strange-news-from-the-opcw-in-the-hague-.html

Douma was staged and the White Helmets are completely discredited as a reliable source of anything.

@h4rm0ny

Yeah, I read about Bolton threatening the head of the OPCW before the second Iraq War. That was the end of their independence.

Yeah, the WHs and US & French intelligence services said sarin at the time and that they had biological samples proving it (which they never produced so more lies). The OPCW however said they found no evidence of sarin use so they moved onto chlorine instead which can be produced by anyone.

In a functioning democracy this story would be headline news for days with the OPCW and May getting grilled as remember we bombed Syria over this pack of lies. It could have easily escalated to war with Russia over this.

Remember the propaganda from last April? Hundreds of articles screaming that something must be done.

But now? Silence from the vast majority of the corporate press and state BBC even though it's been sent on to all of them. Peter Hitchens of the Mail is the only one I've seen outside of alternative media to touch it.

Douma's propaganda value has been exhausted so they aren't interested.

Just wait for the next staged CW attack and they all act like nothing has happened.

 

[Rroff]

USA and UK militaries having a very public spat right now about the threat from Iran. With a British general rejecting US claims the threat from Iran has suddenly increased. Pentagon getting all huffy about it. Things like this usually take place behind closed doors so it's concerning that the general felt the need to go public with this. Ministry of Defence standing by him, as well.

Lot of this kind of stuff seems to happen over Twitter these days.

 

[IronWarrior]

I really liked this part in the report.



Everyone said it was staged, it looked clearly staged laying on top a unbroken bed.

 

[Rroff]

Everyone said it was staged, it looked clearly staged laying on top a unbroken bed.

There are a lot of discrepancies (with the various elements of the scenes versus the supposed CW attack scenario) but things dropped from heights can have very unexpected outcomes (watch some of the videos on the How Ridiculous channel on YouTube for instance) - even doing the exact same experiment multiple times can have a surprising and not always intuitive range of potential outcomes. Contrary to some of the points in that report these kind of cylinders don't have to be going that fast (~40 MPH) to punch through (unreinforced) concrete though reinforced can add some extra dimensions while still possible to stop afterwards by a less rigid object. (EDIT: That doesn't contradict the point they make that full penetration was seen under any tested velocity but rather the overall ring fencing they used to establish a range of parameters for the scenario).

I would have liked to see some baseline set for the standard and likely integrity of the concrete and other structural work involved as well as in that part of the world it could differ hugely from a generic model based on normal standards of construction.

Those kind of factors could be why the report has been suppressed, until more detailed study can be done, as well potential political agendas.

 

[EvilSooty]

There are a lot of discrepancies (with the various elements of the scenes versus the supposed CW attack scenario) but things dropped from heights can have very unexpected outcomes (watch some of the videos on the How Ridiculous channel on YouTube for instance) - even doing the exact same experiment multiple times can have a surprising and not always intuitive range of potential outcomes. Contrary to some of the points in that report these kind of cylinders don't have to be going that fast (~40 MPH) to punch through (unreinforced) concrete though reinforced can add some extra dimensions while still possible to stop afterwards by a less rigid object.

I would have liked to see some baseline set for the standard and likely integrity of the concrete and other structural work involved as well as in that part of the world it could differ hugely from a generic model based on normal standards of construction..

There could be a video of the head of the White Helmets saying it was staged and people still wouldn't believe it.

At this point isn't it safe to say that it was more likely than not staged?

 

[Rroff]

5. These attacks make zero military sense for Assad

Something I strongly disagree with that it has significant weight as to whether it was or wasn't an act by or on behalf of the Syrian regime - which doesn't change the truth or otherwise of anything else. Like the surprise at the use of English in the depth of the Middle East it is the perspective of naivety not insight. That Assad and supporting forces had turned the tide does make it less likely they would use weapons banned or of a controversial nature at an international level but it is far far from a guarantee, as some are insistent is the case, that they didn't.

After years of intense war within the country and pressure from outside Assad's resources are spent, allies are unreliable (not necessarily due to the nature of his allies themselves but that they themselves are under pressure/sanctions, etc. and often operating a long way from home and under threat in many cases of interdiction from Israel) and there was and still is a long way to go for Assad and his goals and the ever present threat of potential renewed efforts by foreign actors to resupply or support a resurgence, etc. means that huge amount of resources are needed to maintain control of areas retaken and resources need to be there to combat that potential eventuality which even now will mean there is a lot of pressure to keep loses to a minimum and temptation to take shortcuts where possible.

In light of all of this do you think on balance it's more likely to have been staged or not?

Personally I have no idea if it has been staged or not - there is plenty to suggest either outcome is possible. On balance there is a lot of holes in the official story of a chemical attack.

 

[EvilSooty]

Something I strongly disagree with that it has significant weight as to whether it was or wasn't an act by or on behalf of the Syrian regime - which doesn't change the truth or otherwise of anything else. Like the surprise at the use of English in the depth of the Middle East it is the perspective of naivety not insight. That Assad and supporting forces had turned the tide does make it less likely they would use weapons banned or of a controversial nature at an international level but it is far far from a guarantee, as some are insistent is the case, that they didn't.

After years of intense war within the country and pressure from outside Assad's resources are spent, allies are unreliable (not necessarily due to the nature of his allies themselves but that they themselves are under pressure/sanctions, etc. and often operating a long way from home and under threat in many cases of interdiction from Israel) and there was and still is a long way to go for Assad and his goals and the ever present threat of potential renewed efforts by foreign actors to resupply or support a resurgence, etc. means that huge amount of resources are needed to maintain control of areas retaken and resources need to be there to combat that potential eventuality which even now will mean there is a lot of pressure to keep loses to a minimum and temptation to take shortcuts where possible.

Personally I have no idea if it has been staged or not - there is plenty to suggest either outcome is possible.

Nothing at all will convince you as you appear to be invested in the clearly nonsensical official line for some reason. There isn't plenty of evidence to indicate it was carried out by the Syrian government (you haven't produced any) - the whole story has fallen apart if you haven't noticed.

Suppressed OPCW report? Victims showing up fine calling it a hoax? The WHs being a British creation? Who cares? Assad just likes gassing people for a laugh. Unreliable allies? Eh, Russia has backed them every step of the way. Who needs the Russian military when you have the power of chlorine that only ever kills civilians, never jihadis, in incredibly unlikely ways? It's a real game changer that chlorine.

 

[EvilSooty]

Some breaking news: a tapped phone conversation between the head of the Syrian Arab Army and President Assad in April 2018 has just emerged which confirms that Rroff has been right to be sceptical all this time.

SYRIAN GENERAL: I bring great news, President. We are on the cusp of victory in Ghouta retaking 90% of the territory from the Army of Islam using purely conventional weapons backed by Russian airpower. We are currently negotiating a surrender agreement with the rebels as we did with all previous rebel pockets during the campaign to allow them to lay down their arms and be bussed to Idlib.

PRESIDENT ASSAD: Gas them.

SYRIAN GENERAL: But, President. We have won with conventional weapons and they are about to surrender. What benefit could that bring?

PRESIDENT ASSAD: **** knows. Gas them.

SYRIAN GENERAL: But our enemies the US, UK and France have said they will attack us if we do ,as they did in 2017, and nearly did in 2013 threatening to overthrow your regime leaving you dangling from a lamppost. Why are we crossing their red line that they have announced in advance?

PRESIDENT ASSAD: Didn't you hear me? I don't care about logic. Gas them and make sure it is as militarily ineffective as possible. I recommend two small cannisters full of chlorine dropped onto an apartment block and don't you dare try and target the rebels themselves. I only want dead civilians.

 

[Rroff]

Nothing at all will convince you as you appear to be invested in the clearly nonsensical official line for some reason.

Suppressed OPCW report? Victims showing up fine calling it a hoax? The WHs being a British creation? Who cares? Assad just likes gassing people for a laugh.

You are just as bad as the people you rail against. Lapping up things that are clearly by any metric nonsense because they support the picture you want to see, even if ultimately that picture itself is the right one, and when called out on it try to write me off as "invested in the clearly nonsensical official line" despite my posts clearly showing anything but that.

EDIT: And as if to prove my point:

Some breaking news: a tapped phone conversation between the head of the Syrian Arab Army and President Assad in April 2018 has just emerged which confirms that Rroff has been right to be sceptical all this time.

SYRIAN GENERAL: I bring great news, President. We are on the cusp of victory in Ghouta retaking 90% of the territory from the Army of Islam using purely conventional weapons backed by Russian airpower. We are currently negotiating a surrender agreement with the rebels as we did with all previous rebel pockets during the campaign to allow them to lay down their arms and be bussed to Idlib.

PRESIDENT ASSAD: Gas them.

SYRIAN GENERAL: But, President. We have won with conventional weapons and they are about to surrender. What benefit could that bring?

PRESIDENT ASSAD: **** knows. Gas them.

SYRIAN GENERAL: But our enemies the US, UK and France have said they will attack us if we do as they did in 2017 and nearly did in 2013 threatening to overthrow your regime leaving you dangling from a lamppost. Why are we crossing their red line that they have announced in advance?

PRESIDENT ASSAD: Didn't you hear me? I don't care about logic. Gas them and make sure it is as military ineffective as possible. I recommend two small cannisters full of chlorine.

It is hard to take you in any way seriously after that tripe.

EDIT: I will actually break down some of that though:

SYRIAN GENERAL: I bring great news, President. We are on the cusp of victory in Ghouta retaking 90% of the territory from the Army of Islam using purely conventional weapons backed by Russian airpower. We are currently negotiating a surrender agreement with the rebels as we did with all previous rebel pockets during the campaign to allow them to lay down their arms and be bussed to Idlib.

SYRIAN GENERAL: But, President. We have won with conventional weapons and they are about to surrender. What benefit could that bring?

While this was true for most of Ghouta province the rebels in Douma had not agreed to a negotiated surrender by the end of the 31st March ultimatum as was announced to be so on Syrian TV and over the next few days an agreement was come to for the evacuation of non-combatants and wounded but by the 3rd or 4th of April the rebels turned down any further talks on surrendering leading to renewed air and artillery strikes from government forces on the 6th to soften them up for an offensive on the 7th - on the 7th despite making a lot of ground government forces were still facing stiff resistance and once again repulsed with heavy losses including several more tanks, something they could poorly afford to lose, when they'd already lost more than a dozen in assaults on the area. Not quite the picture you are presenting.