Putin declares Syria gas attack a false flag; says more are coming

a reply to: theultimatebelgianjoke

I don't understand what are you trying t show me.

Russia vetoed investigation. And commented it with traditional nonsense they use every time.
I have seen this many times before.. e.g. Boeing shoot down over Ukraine.
They didn't wanted investigation, it was done without them later and that was nice reason to say it was biased and false. It's like their template.

a reply to: intrptr

Well the real reason behind US motives is actually very different from helping Assad or the Syrians ...

a reply to: Zmurfix

It don't consider it is non-sense to start an investigation before blaming someone.
And when you investigate, you should consider all elements of the case and not drop those who contradict the thesis the investigation is trying to give credit to.

All the reasons why more and more people doesn't swallow the MSM propaganda anymore are - for the example of the OP - exposed in this thread :

Is Syria Gas Attack A False Flag?

a reply to: AgarthaSeed

i support Russia on this. it makes sense that the Clinton administration or Obama's have done what they can to get trump to carry out their dirty work. I hear peace was supposed to brake out in Syria since this coincidental incident.

hope trump sees through the bullshizzle.

a reply to: theultimatebelgianjoke

Well the real reason behind US motives is actually very different from helping Assad or the Syrians ...

Yah, we occupy enough Middle Eastern countries ow to enlist them as proxies to 'finish our dirty work for us'. Syria is next, then Iran. Love that "unclassified" document.

"The best way to help Israel deal with Iran is to defeat Syria".

'Help Israel' deal with Arabia... (pure propaganda)

We know from General Clark that Syria and Iran are on that list of seven countries. Looking at a map of the geography of the region we see Syria surrounded by Nato occupied countries and Iran off to one side. Syria is next, then Iran.

"Help Israel deal wth arabs", we are dong their dirty work for them for god only knows what reasoning.

Because we have to defend the Holy Land and Gods Chosen?

Make no mistake about it. The twisted propaganda is so embedded in western culture, we would burn the world for them and not bat an eye.

(WTF)

originally posted by: theultimatebelgianjoke
a reply to: Zmurfix

It don't consider it is non-sense to start an investigation before blaming someone.
And when you investigate, you should consider all elements of the case and not drop those who contradict the thesis the investigation is trying to give credit to.

That Resolution wasn't blaming anyone, that's a Russian propaganda and who you mean with "drop those who contradict .." ?

originally posted by: bphi1908
a reply to: face23785

I think you need to read a bit. The articles below just skim the surface, you may want to dig a bit on your own.

There is no need for a "long game" they are there and have been for years. The US military was the muscle big oil needed to kick in the door..oh and Iraq was involved in 9/11 and weapons of mass destruction or some crazy crap like that. You always need an excuse no matter how flimsy.


www.nytimes.com...

www.aljazeera.com...

www.counterpunch.org...

Crazy crap like this this and this?

Iraq did have WMD. You're misinformed. So if you're misinformed about that, you may want to consider what else you're on the wrong track on.

Like I said, if we wanted an excuse to invade someone for oil, 9/11 was it and we would've invaded the Saudis, who have a lot more oil than Iraq. Your silly theory has a gaping hole in it that you're in denial about.

a reply to: Zmurfix

The draft resolution was clearly blaming the Syrians in advance for the attack, what the Russians want is to have this claim investigated first, that's why they vetoed ...

Earlier on Tuesday, Britain, the US and France have circulated in the UN Security Council a revised version of their draft resolution on the investigation into the alleged chemical attack in Syria’s Khan Sheikhoun on April 4.
The resolution is a slightly revised version of previous similar document, which condemns the use of chemical weapons in Syria. The document also demands that Damascus hand over all information on flights on the day of the incident to the Joint Investigative Mechanism of the UN and the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) and provide access to the military bases from which strikes against Khan Sheikhoun could be carried out. The resolution also threatens Syria with sanctions and the use of military force under Chapter VII of the UN Charter.
Last week, Russia described the document as "inadmissible" and prepared its own resolution, which envisages a full-scale investigation on the ground by UN and OPCW experts

Source

If you have a link to the said draft resolution, feel free to share, it is not (yet ?) available of the UN site.

a reply to: face23785

Powell Blames Himself, Others For Specious Iraq WMD Claims to U.N.

Former U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell in a new book said he blames himself for not trusting his instinct and making what proved to be false assertions to the United Nations about Iraq's possession of weapons of mass destruction, Bloomberg reported earlier this month (see GSN, Feb. 17, 2011).

Powell's high-profile February 2003 prewar presentation to the U.N. Security Council included now-discredited claims that Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein had movable biological weapons facilities and was involved in a "sinister nexus" with al-Qaeda.

No evidence of active WMD production facilities or usable stockpiles have been found in Iraq following the U.S.-led March 2003 invasion.

"A failure will always be attached to me and my U.N. presentation," Powell writes in "It Worked For Me," a book that provides leadership advice. "I am mad mostly at myself for not having smelled the problem. My instincts failed me."

a reply to: theultimatebelgianjoke

" Award-winning Iran-Contra journalist Robert Parry says the chemical weapons attack in Syria was launched from a joint Saudi-Israeli special operations base in Jordan, according to his intelligence sources.
U.S. intelligence analysts determined that a drone was responsible for the attack and “eventually came to believe that the flight was launched in Jordan from a Saudi-Israeli special operations base for supporting Syrian rebels,” according to the source.
“The suspected reason for the poison gas was to create an incident that would reverse the Trump administration’s announcement in late March that it was no longer seeking the removal of President Bashar al-Assad,” writes Parry."


www.prisonplanet.com...




If Anyone wanted to Destroy Assad's Regime in Syria , this sounds like a Possible way to do it .

a reply to: theultimatebelgianjoke

Yes, resolution demanded access to Syrian bases and military personnel, for me it's essential demand, for you it's blaming.

Threatening with force is obviously not a good way, but since in your first reply to me you posted article about how Syria is ready to provide access I don't see a problem here.


I didn't found resolution text (I don't think they publish vetoed resolutions), but most info about it is in these articles, but overall it's same thing you posted.
www.whatsinblue.org...
www.whatsinblue.org...

a reply to: AgarthaSeed

"Elements of the U.S. government have worked overtime in attempts to paint Putin as one of the world's most evil, corrupt, untrustworthy leaders in the world."

And yet Trump was still elected POTUS.

Suppose it takes one to know one all the same.

a reply to: Zmurfix

As I mentionned earlier, the Syrians are willing to coopperate with an investigation.

originally posted by: theultimatebelgianjoke

Syria ready to provide OPCW investigators access to Shayrat airbase — UN envoy

They just don't want to take the blame for someone elses false flag.

Even US leading academic institutions raised some suspicions on the validity of the 'Assad did the chemical attacks' claims :

A Quick Turnaround Assessment of the White House Intelligence Report Issued on April 11, 2017About the Nerve Agent Attack in Khan Shaykhun, Syria.

And about the previous (2013) one :

Possible Implications of Faulty US Technical Intelligence in the Damascus Nerve Agent Attack of August 21, 2013

a reply to: theultimatebelgianjoke

And that's why UN prepared resolution to Investigate who is behind it. Russia vetoed it because they don't want allow investigators access to Syria bases etc.

If the articles are correct they are preparing their own resolution without Syrian participation. That is "dropping out someone" imo.

So Russia and Syria still do not want an investigation into the gas used in Syria last week.

The Russia representative in the UN also voted on a resolution to Syria future gas attacks, with China no vote and usually China takes Russia side.

Now US and Russia talks are what is call cold, to add more realization of what is going on with Russia, well it seems that Russia is not as mighty as people think and a lot of economic problems in the Putin administration had handicap Russia superpower status

It seems that as is today, US even under the military hindering Obama administration still stand as the superpower that has always been if not stronger.

Well Russia stands no chance against an UN unified against them and Syria, even NK.

originally posted by: Zmurfix
a reply to: theultimatebelgianjoke

And that's why UN prepared resolution to Investigate who is behind it. Russia vetoed it because they don't want allow investigators access to Syria bases etc.

If the articles are correct they are preparing their own resolution without Syrian participation. That is "dropping out someone" imo.

Find a copy of the draft and we'll discuss it, once we know for sure what was in it.
Since the MSM is mosy busy going after 'Janitor Gossips' than journalism, I'll read the document and make my own mind rather than believe whatever they can say about it.

Russia won't support UN Security Council resolution condemning Syrian government — Lavrov

"We cannot and will not support attempts to pass without proof a UN Security Council resolution condemning the government ‘on the quiet’, without any inspections," the foreign minister said.

"Yesterday, we discussed in detail (with US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson) a need to step up Russian-American efforts towards mobilizing the international community for fight against terrorism, and reminded that US actions like strikes against Syria on April 7, are at variance with this task. We insist on a most thorough, independent investigation into that incident," Lavrov said.
Lavrov earlier marked that attempts to blame the Syrian government for the alleged use of chemical weapons in Khan Shaykhun on April 4, were absolutely unfounded. Moscow insists that the incident should be investigated by the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) on the ground. Earlier, the Syrian government appealed for an OPCW investigation. Russia supported it. At a meeting with US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson on Wednesday, Sergey Lavrov also drew his attention to the appeal from Damascus.

a reply to: AgarthaSeed

Of course a former head honcho of the KGB would know a little about false flags. Hell he probably implemented a few in his time.

I'll give him credit where its due, he can play the game but did he deplore the multiple chemical warfare attacks that preceded the latest one? He certainly did nothing to stop them and methinks he didn't want to stop them.

Putin is no idiot but he is Machiavellian to the core.

a reply to: Zmurfix

Well well well ... investigations continues for the draft resolution.
I found its UN administrative reference nr : S/2017/315, it is listed on the UN site but, the link is broken ...

Security Council Meetings in 2017

Even the guys from reddit are asking the question :

Russia vetoes UN Resolution S/2017/315 - but where is it?



Found it :

S/2017/315 - PDF Link

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: bphi1908
a reply to: face23785

I think you need to read a bit. The articles below just skim the surface, you may want to dig a bit on your own.

There is no need for a "long game" they are there and have been for years. The US military was the muscle big oil needed to kick in the door..oh and Iraq was involved in 9/11 and weapons of mass destruction or some crazy crap like that. You always need an excuse no matter how flimsy.


www.nytimes.com...

www.aljazeera.com...

www.counterpunch.org...

Crazy crap like this this and this?

Iraq did have WMD. You're misinformed. So if you're misinformed about that, you may want to consider what else you're on the wrong track on.

Like I said, if we wanted an excuse to invade someone for oil, 9/11 was it and we would've invaded the Saudis, who have a lot more oil than Iraq. Your silly theory has a gaping hole in it that you're in denial about.

You are correct Iraq DID have weapons of mass destruction...according to the article you provided:

The United States had gone to war declaring it must destroy an active weapons of mass destruction program. Instead, American troops gradually found and ultimately suffered from the remnants of long-abandoned programs

Not exactly a robust program now is it?

We are getting off the main point of the thread, so if you want to believe oil companies haven't had access to the oil fields in Iraq and haven't profited from Iraqi oil your welcome to it. I offered a bit of information to help inform your opinion, take it or leave it doesn't bother me either way.

a reply to: theultimatebelgianjoke

Ok, I read it, it's just what we discussed but more wordy.
Still can't see any blaming and so I can't take this as a reason for veto.

Let's wait what will russians came with, we can compare it later and I'm sure we will clearly see the main reason behind this veto.