Russia and Syria block chemical weapons inspectors access to the site in Douma

They also gave two different reasons. They told the UN they blocked them because they don't have the proper security clearances and then they told the OPCW they blocked them citing security reasons.

The Russian army has been in Douma and secured the area since at least Thursday. By all accounts the area is secure.

But since the chemical weapons inspectors cannot be allowed in Douma, don't worry, Assad will usher in 22 of his most loyal supporters to be interviewed by the OPCW.

It's an insult to all of the world who is concerned about the situation.

www.opcw.org...

Reminds me of MH17 all over again.

a reply to: xstealth


Ummm...scuse me dude...the bombs and missiles already fell...as Hillary was want to say...what difference does it make at this point...







YouSir

a reply to: xstealth

Guess they didn't need to bomb anyone to block access then



And yes, I'm concerned by the West throwing accusations without evidence as usual, bombing other countries using lies as a pretext and just generally doing the same stupid crap that lacks foresight and general common sense, but these things are nothing new

Russian propaganda has put out the following story today:

Moscow has ‘irrefutable’ evidence chem attack in Syria’s Douma was staged – Russia’s envoy to OPCW

www.rt.com...


The evidence is so "irrefutable" that no one is allowed to see it.


Russia and Syria's actions are disgusting, both are pumping out propaganda while allowed no real investigations to ever happen.

Ahh, the same 'ol, TIRED same 'ol..

He said,
She said,
They said,
The others said,

Truth is the first casulty, always.

a reply to: xstealth

Tell me again m why the west decided to drop bombs knowing full well this inspection was about to take place?

a reply to: xstealth

Russia and Syria's actions are disgusting, both are pumping out propaganda while allowed no real investigations to ever happen.

That's the funniest thing ever Mr. Neocolonialist

a reply to: xstealth

Were these the inspectors chosen by the US or the ones the Russians selected?

We vetoed and blocked inspectors being sent by the UN that they suggested.

I think both teams of preferred inspectors should go.

If they blocked their own selected international chemical weapons inspectors then that smells fishy to me.

Edit to add:
I wish idiots hadnt bombed the evidence before the inspectors had a chance to prove culpability

That bombing cemented the accusation in my mind that the west were liars in blaming Russia or Syria for this chemical attack.

The US wants proxy war with Russia. Europe wants control over the future pipelines in Syria. Never forget that.

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: xstealth

Tell me again m why the west decided to drop bombs knowing full well this inspection was about to take place?

This is simple. Because the west knows full well the inspection was about to be blocked.

Tell me how your opinion makes a lick of sense. For your unthoughful logic to be plausible then the west would have had to hit the site in Douma with their airstrikes.

a reply to: xstealth

Definitely doesn't add more credibility to Russians' claims that this was staged.

I'm personally changing my opinion now and starting to believe that they actually performed the attack.

If not, it's dumb as hell to do not allow them to inspect the place.

Sure Russia has all the proof they need.

Because they did it.

BwaaaHaHaHa

😎

a reply to: xstealth

It's an insult to all of the world (warmongers) who is concerned about the situation.

Fixed that for you.

Get used to it, Iran will be next.

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: xstealth

It's an insult to all of the world (warmongers) who is concerned about the situation.

Fixed that for you.

So do normal rational people think that wanting a chemical weapons inspection on an attack site is "warmongering" or just Russian propagandists who don't care if gas was used?

originally posted by: xstealth

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: xstealth

It's an insult to all of the world (warmongers) who is concerned about the situation.

Fixed that for you.

So do normal rational people think that wanting a chemical weapons inspection on an attack site is "warmongering" or just Russian propagandists who don't care if gas was used?

Are you for real?

How many times has the West lied about other countries in order to bomb them or start a war?

a reply to: xstealth

Alas, the moral argument.

Hundreds of thousands of Syrians are dead because the world has made it the staging ground of a proxy war.

Less than a hundred people die the week after Trump saying we're leaving and you're immoral if you don't want any part in this $&#@ show that could turn into a world war with one misplaced missile.

Aren't there countries where the government is raping and killing their citizens without a shred of international outrage? But they don't have resources do they?

originally posted by: Zcustosmorum

originally posted by: xstealth

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: xstealth

It's an insult to all of the world (warmongers) who is concerned about the situation.

Fixed that for you.

So do normal rational people think that wanting a chemical weapons inspection on an attack site is "warmongering" or just Russian propagandists who don't care if gas was used?

Are you for real?

How many times has the West lied about other countries in order to bomb them or start a war?

I'm for real, Russia and Syria are not allowing inspectors to work for the 8th time following a chemical weapons attack in Syria.

Your second question is completely irrelevant. If you block an investigation and block collection of the evidence then claim "there is no evidence" then it's propaganda.

a reply to: xstealth

How is “not having proper security clearances” and “ citing security reasons” two different things?

Seems like the same reason iterated by two different people to me.

That point aside, it doesn’t matter who inspects the site, people will trust whoever they trust right now and since both sides have already made there public statements everyone’s already made up their minds.

If one trusts the West theyll believe whatever narrative they lay out, if one doesn’t trust the West they will believe the Russian narrative, inspections will do very little in that regard.

originally posted by: xstealth

originally posted by: Zcustosmorum

originally posted by: xstealth

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: xstealth

It's an insult to all of the world (warmongers) who is concerned about the situation.

Fixed that for you.

So do normal rational people think that wanting a chemical weapons inspection on an attack site is "warmongering" or just Russian propagandists who don't care if gas was used?

Are you for real?

How many times has the West lied about other countries in order to bomb them or start a war?

I'm for real, Russia and Syria are not allowing inspectors to work for the 8th time following a chemical weapons attack in Syria.

Your second question is completely irrelevant. If you block an investigation and block collection of the evidence then claim "there is no evidence" then it's propaganda.

Alleged chemical attack

And nor does a country, which threatens others with nuclear weapons, uses white phosphorus and depleted uranium tipped weapons, have the right to criticize, the US and friends are not the police force of the world, they are liars looking for another way to satisfy their bloodthirst and greed.