Even for the president of Russia, the news from Syria is increasingly coming to resemble a choose your own adventure story.
Even for the president of Russia, the news from Syria is increasingly coming to resemble a choose your own adventure story, in which readers pick a starting point and entirely different narratives are woven from the same facts.
For Vladimir Putin, every aspect of the war in Syria begins with the premise that President Bashar al-Assad has been from the start of the uprising in 2011 an innocent victim, whose completely legitimate, Alawite-led government has been attacked by Sunni Muslim extremists, armed and funded by the Gulf states, Turkey and the United States.
So, when he was asked about the killing of more than 80 men, women and children by a nerve agent in rebel-held northern Syria last week, during an interview with a state broadcaster posted on the Kremlin’s website on Wednesday, Putin began by absolving Assad’s air force, which is supported by Russian personnel.
“Where is the proof that the Syrian government forces used chemical weapons? There is no proof,” Putin told Mir TV. “The same thing happened back in 2003, when a pretext was concocted to justify sending troops to Iraq.”
Asked to clarify his suggestion, on Tuesday, that the mass poisoning — and the images of its young victims that left Ivanka Trump “heartbroken and outraged” — might have been “a provocation,” staged to give the U.S. a pretext for attacking Assad’s government, Putin said that this was only one possible explanation for what happened last week in the town of Khan Sheikhoun.
“There are several versions, two of which I consider as priorities,” Putin said, according to a Kremlin translation. “The first is that the Syrian bombs hit a secret chemical weapons facility.”
After calling that hypothesis — which his own ministry of defense had presented as a definite fact last week — “quite possible,” Putin pointed to independent reports that “the terrorists have used chemical weapons” in Iraq, and then asked “why can’t they have them in Syria?”
(Putin’s case rests on the assumption that he’s speaking to someone unaware of the fact that the area of northern Syria where the mass poisoning took place last week is controlled by Qaeda-affiliated Islamist rebels, not the rival Islamic State group, which used an entirely different chemical agent in an attack in the Iraqi city of Mosul last month.)
“According to the second version,” Putin continued, “it was a staged provocation, a deliberate incident designed to create a pretext for increasing pressure on the legitimate Syrian authorities.”
While calling again for an international investigation of the incident, the Russian president failed to even mention the third possibility: that the Syrian military, which was implicated in the killing of hundreds of civilians with a nerve agent in 2013 outside Damascus, and bombed rebel-held neighborhoods of Aleppo with Chlorine gas as recently as December, did indeed drop a chemical payload on Khan Sheikhoun.
Given that so much of the open-source evidence of the attack’s aftermath came from activists more committed to overthrowing Assad than to the impartial reporting of facts, it is fair to ask for an investigation by independent experts. It is puzzling, though, that Putin keeps making this request even though the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, which won a Nobel Prize for removing Syria’s declared stockpile of chemical weapons, said last week that it had already opened an investigation.
As the Russian expatriate news site Meduza noted, Putin’s Mir TV interview also included the clearest expression yet that the Russian president might now be experiencing something like buyer’s remorse over the presidency of Donald Trump.
Asked if Russian-American relations are better now than when Barack Obama was in office, Putin replied: “We could say that at the working level, the degree of trust has dropped, especially in the military area. It has not improved and has probably worsened.”
You sure know how to hurt a guy: Putin says things were better under, yes, Obama. (Missing Hillary too?) https://t.co/4dTqCriN7W
— Stephen Sestanovich (@SSestanovich) April 12, 2017
Putin also confirmed that the Trump administration had alerted his government to the president’s plan to launch 59 cruise missiles at a Syrian air base in retaliation for the suspected chemical attack.
“It was completely unexpected,” Putin said, “aside from the fact, of course, that we learned about it a few hours in advance.”
Top Photo: Russian President Vladimir Putin was interviewed this week in Moscow by Radik Batyrshin, chairman of Mir Television.
I know that corporate media thinks that Putin bashing is great infotainment, but it’s not. Look at lots of well known journalists. Where are they (excluding the Intercept)?
Carl Bernstein- A paid “talking head/contributor” to CNN. What happened to actual work at the Washington Post.
Bob Woodward- Officially an “assistant managing editor” (whatever the hell that means). But in reality, one of the most right wing names in the country. But, does anybody ever call him on his bias? No. Because he’s the GREAT BOB WOODWARD, damnit!
Simon Ostrovsky- He did lots of great work based in Moscow for Vice News. Now, word is that they’re doing mass layoffs. He chose to take the diplomatic approach to leaving. “Due to ‘inetrnal chnages’, I’m leaving”. Now, he’s at CNN. Why? Frankly, that’s just sad.
Will CNN let Ostrovsky do actual work and NOT infotainment?
Too many assumptions.
“Putin’s case rests on the assumption that he’s speaking to someone unaware of the fact that the area of northern Syria where the mass poisoning took place last week is controlled by Qaeda-affiliated Islamist rebels, not the rival Islamic State group, which used an entirely different chemical agent in an attack in the Iraqi city of Mosul last month.)”
Then you assume they are disappointed by Trump on the assumption that they really believed there would be detente.
1) they’re pros, not delusional naive kids.
2) they know too well US cannot be trusted
Overall article good for buzzfeed. From Intercept I expect better
It has come to this. Al Queda press releases and videos are driving coverage of Syria and American policy on Syria.
But in the first paragraph, how does Mackey know that Putin thinks of Assad as a innocent victim? The Russians offered him up in a deal they put together so after the war began which was rejected by Obama and crew. But this is Putin mind reading. I am utterly amazed how many people can read Putin’s motivations and thoughts, and not know a lick of Russian.
Mr. Mackey
I’m not quite sure why it takes the use of chemical weapons for the Intercept to cover the worst ongoing conflict in the world today. Russia continues to fund, support and bomb on behalf of the “legitimate” Syrian government for two principle reasons:
1. Russia has a Naval facility in Syria. This is the only one in the Middle East that Russia has so keeping Assad in power is critical to Russian imperialism as well as challenging US power.
2. The Medvedev Doctrine published in 2008 outlined the Kremlin plans to challenge the unipolar world of the US (as in Syria) and to outline Russia’s sphere of influence (as in Ukraine):
The Medvedev Doctrine is critical to understanding the geopolitical goals of Russia in Eastern Europe and the Middle East. It also shows the insanity of Tillerson’s Russia must choose the United States or Syria. Russia chose Syria long ago – and will not abandon Assad precisely because of the above two reasons (whether Assad is responsible for the chemical attack or not).
What Russian imperialism? How many foreign bases does Russia have? The US? Has Russia installed missiles and troops on other countries borders? Is there a power group in Russia with an ideology of world domination through regime change in the US and elsewhere?
@Mackey – http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2013-02-28/news/fl-robert-mackey-sentencing-20130228_1_mackey-and-trucchio-paul-trucchio-alligator-god
Not good!
an uninformed and biased article. When Putin said Al Qaida rebels have used chemical weapons, he probably referred to the fact that Al Qaida operatives in Turkey were caught in 2013 with two Kg of Sarin, and to the UN report, which Del Ponte was part of, that suggested that the Al Qaida linked terrorists could have been responsible for chemical attacks.
Mr. Mackey also attributes squarely to Assad the responsibility for Al Goutha attack, which is pretty much still an open question. There are plenty of experts and journalists — including Hersh — who shed doubts on the version of the events concocted by our free Western press.
Carlo, I admire your balls. How did they get so big? You call Mackey’s article “uninformed and biased” but then offer that Putin “probably” was referring to something. LOL. Nice move. So your comment is so much more substantial and factual than his article. I see.
I’m assuming your comments about Mackey’s beliefs about Assad and Al Goutha are from some other source because it doesn’t exist in this article. Such an oversight certainly is not evidence of your bias, of which I presume, you have none.
I am so glad you commented with such factual and unbiased information. I know I and the rest of TI’s readers are much better off for your presence here.
Final straw — Mackey’s taking the bullshit about Ivanka’s “broken heart” seriously
Glenn Greenwald, Jeremy Scahill and Laura Poitras should be ashamed at what is happening to this site. Not that there’s much evidence they care, or are even much involved any longer. A podcast here, a few columns there, and Laura’s gone bye-bye.
With increasing amounts of dreck swamping the worthwhile material
“Glenn Greenwald, Jeremy Scahill and Laura Poitras should be ashamed at what is happening to this site. ”
Ashamed because another writer expressed his own opinion?
As usual, no intellectual value in your comments.
swisscheese
Mona was outraged that Mackey seemed to actually support HRC for President. She wanted Mackey fired.
Everything so far in the first few months of the Trump Presidency bears out Mackey’s choice to “oppose” Trump. The idea that Trump was a non-interventionist which many on the far left supported turned out to be another Trump Lie. Greenwald on numerous occasions pointed out some of Trump’s positive positions on Israel and non-interventionism. Now NATO is suddenly (in the world of Trump) relevant again – another Trump reversal.
In reality, Mackey may not have supported Hillary so much as oppose Trump – the same stand as was taken by the brilliant Noam Chomsky. Mona detested HRC primarily because she was a liberal hawk and a strong supporter of Israel.
good old craig back with his BS!
https://theintercept.com/2017/04/13/assad-suggests-chemical-attack-play-staged-al-qaeda-united-states/?comments=1#comments
i guess you and mackay are “alone”…
“…….i guess you and mackay are “alone”……..”
Sure Jack, among Russian-bots and far left wing whack-jobs. I grant you that a chemical attack by Assad at this point in the conflict seems a little far fetched, but certainly not out of character for the murderer Assad.
curious… 77 trolls commenting… all of them…
i dont guess… you and mackay are alone…
http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/13/politics/trump-russia-british-intelligence/index.html
British intelligence passed Trump associates’ communications with Russians on to US counterparts By Jim Sciutto, Pamela Brown and Eric Bradner, CNN
The European intelligence agencies detected multiple communications over several months between the Trump associates and Russian individuals — and passed on that intelligence to the US. The US and Britain are part of the so-called “Five Eyes” agreement (along with Canada, Australia and New Zealand), which calls for open sharing among member nations of a broad range of intelligence.
The communications are likely to be scrutinized as part of the Senate Intelligence Committee’s investigation into Russia’s efforts to meddle in the 2016 presidential election.
Robert Mackey Doesn’t Know Which 9/11 Conspiracy Theory to Believe
I believe in reading articles written by the left, right, center, warmonger and peacemaker.
Robert Mackey articles I have been there enough to know not to bother. Now I just skip over them.
Yet you take the time to comment. Strange.
Vladimir Putin Doesn’t Know Which Syria Conspiracy Theory to Believe
Neither do I.
mackey is a disgrace. how bad must it really be that this hack of a shit is getting paid to tweet while inebriated …
What junk! I had come to hope for more from the Intercept. Fake news does not become true because years pass. Blaming Assad for Gouta was fake then and it’s still fake now.
Correct. Maybe this guy should review some of Jimmy Dore’s recent You Tube shows.
The FBI FISA Order against Carter Page ALSO INCLUDES Paul Manafort and Roger Stone TARGETING All Communications. The Very Such Political and Economic Elites (and not so elites) That Populate the NSAs Hammer Supercomputer Project Dragnet Database. The Same NSA Hammer Supercomputer Project Dragnet Database that we already have copies of in “evidence pending” Stored in those 47 Hard Drives and 600,000,000 Pages. Those 47 Hard Drives and 600,000,000 pages that CIA Contractor Dennis Montgomery Signed Sealed an Delivered (and received immunity for submitting) to the FBI and US Attorneys Office in the District of Columbia Office Two Years Ago.
The FBI FISA Order identifies as the FBI the lead agency to be AIDED BY the NSA CIA and may be shared broadly within the Adminstration. Susan Rice. John Brennan. Admiral Rogers. Jim Clapper. Senior Administration Officials.
That Puts Essentially Everyone in Obamas Administration, The Transitional Administration and even a few in Trumps Administration on White House
Witness Lists. Boy if those (R)s are smart they can call Susan Rice to Testify
First to soften up their other already planned witnesses like Clapper, Brennan, Yates, Lynch, Rogers et al.
Anyone here think our beloved (R)s can Resist Calling Susan Rice BACK to Testify?
What makes you think the Republicans want to get Susan Rice to talk? What is going on isn’t Democrats vs Republicans, it is Donald Trump vs the-establishment. With Nunes shunted aside Susan Rice might never be called to testify.
Wishful thinking by lesser men an the women that love them “John.”
Democrats arent lavishing praise on Conaway, either. They pointed to comments he made in January dismissively comparing the interference of Russia hackers to the participation by Mexican entertainers at Hillary Clinton campaign events.
So Ken thinks Johns (and his ilks) hysterical Russophobic BS is a Joke.
Onve you grasp that then take time to appreciate Paul Ryans appointment of Trey Gowdy as Ken Conaways Co-Chair. Trey Gowdy is a Federal Prosecutor who has already called for Clapper, Brennan, Comey, Rogers, Yates Farkas et al to testify. Trey Gowdy lead the Benghazi Investigation and Repeatedly Skewered Susan “I Didnt Tell Nobody Nothing” Rice in an all to public Past Life.
The Republicans could call Rex Tillerson.
Or maybe they could call Sergey Lavrov to confirm a lack of Russian meddling in the US election.
Hopefully the Democrats on the committee won’t hold up a bundle of papers and proclaim, “We have a list!
I’m pretty sure the (R) majorities on the Intelligence Oversight, Government Reform and Judiciary committees will prefer crucifying democrats.
Not that there’s anything wrong with that…
This article is vague and full of implicit assumptions that are bs.
Accusing Putin of not taking into account the possibility that Assad did it is fair enough, but at least he wants an investigation. U.S. politicians, with the exception of Tulsi Gabbard, have lined up behind the idea that Assad definitely did it, and no need for an investigation before we bomb them. Why mention one but not the other?
The tweet about Obama and Hillary is inane. Anyone who mildly cared about foreign policy knew that Obama was against proxy war in Syria and Hillary was for it. So no, I do not “miss Hillary.”
And finally, as many other commenters are pointing out, it’s not even clear that Damascus attack was Assad.
From a strictly scientific point of view, version 2 is not necessarily contradicting version 1, Rachel : terrorists might have stockpiled the chemical weapons in some improvised storage facility then somehow managed to spread the word that a) said weapons were about to be used in some crowded neighborhood of Damascus (in which case the Syrian army indeed bears responsibility for the tragedy), or b) said facility was a cache of regular weapons.
As for the Ghouta massacre of 2013, not everyone seems to agree on the Syrian government’s “implication” :
http://21stcenturywire.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Analysis-of-the-
UN-Report-on-Syria-CW.pdf
https://twitter.com/s_ghoshroy?lang=en
There’s a third version, however, provided today by Assad himself during his interview with an AFP correspondent, namely no chemical weapons were used in Khan Sheikhoun at all. This one is clearly contradicting both of Putin’s versions.
That’s : http://21stcenturywire.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Analysis-of-the-UN-Report-on-Syria-CW.pdf
Putin has never pretended that Assad is completely blameless, he has just pointed out that Assad would win free and fair elections in Syria if only the USA would be willing to allow Syria to have free and fair elections.
I was travelling on a bus in South Africa and turned and asked the white woman next to me, “Do you think that Nelson Mandela was a terrorist”? She looked at me with eyes as wide as saucers and said “Of course I do – he killed my aunt in a terrorist attack.”
In the fairytale world Mackey lives in there are white hats and black hats. In the real world most of the hats are some shade of grey.
A renowned and leading expert in this field, M.I.T. Professor Theodore Postol, professor of science, technology, and national security policy, offers this explanation….
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2017/04/66730.html
Oh wait.
He’s not a “truther” a “birther” a “911er” or a “targeted individual” is he?
Not only is this “article” predictable, it almost lends credence to the alternate narratives just due to the source.
Come on TI!
Robert,
Please stop writing about Syria.
Branko
Jesus M8, you should work for the Guardian.
And I’m sure he will, just a soon as Luke Harding’s personal assistant is promoted and a position opens up.
I can understand The Intercept wanting to accommodate diverse viewpoints and opinions, but this seems to be so far into innuendo that it’s straying pretty close to fake news.
this article is fake news…
relies on fake facts and hide important ones for its narrative to stick!
it didn’t stick!!!!
Why is this trash even published by TI? No one reads this periodical for a rehashed version of whatever propaganda narrative (Putin has ‘buyer’s remorse,’ seriously?) the corporate media are pushing at the moment. Hosting NYT/Guardian hacks like this is seriously damaging to TI’s journalistic credibility.
Agreed. Mackey’s other article appearing beside it follows the same specious tactic: a smug condescension without purchase. Assad and Putin’s views are somehow flawed. Mackey’s right to sniffle but not tell anyone why he’s being snide. It’s apparent (the true version of things). Is narcissism contagious? No, this is this just junk journalism.
Here’s the thing: If you don’t have very strong evidence of who used the chemical weapons, you don’t accuse countries of doing that. Accusations of extreme violations of international law without strong evidence to back them up just serve to undermine the credibility of the accusers. Both chemical attacks mentioned in this article lack strong evidence of who the perpetrators were. So accusations against Syria and Assad at this point are nothing but propaganda for geopolitical reasons, because none of the accusing countries’ leaders gives a damn about the victims, only about their interests in the region.
Bu… bu… bu… they have “facts” that they can’t show us due to “national security concerns”! hahah
Correct…. and the consequences of such speculation has huge and dire consequences. One better treads extremely lightly through this obvious minefield of disinformation.
Terrorists have been caught with SARIN GAS in iraq, syria, and even turkey. Remember when the usa was training ‘rebels’ to use chemical weapons? Why no mention of this? Seems very relevant…unless you want people to blame assad and support war?
I heard a report that al nusra kidnapped 200+ people the week before the gas attack…many later showed up suffering from sarin, the rest were probably taken as slaves. Notice there were only kids and men? No women? Taken as slave brides possibly.
Remember the false flag ghouta attack that everyone swore was assad? Turned to be ‘moderates’. Why no cries of ‘obama the butcher’?
This is all cold war lies and israel’s yinon plan in action. Cause chaos in the middle east, balkanize (Redraw borders, creating smaller, weaker countries), israel expands.
The thing about sarin gas is, folks couldn’t have administered aide to those affected as they too would have been affected. But nobody on that video wore anything to keep from that happening?
And wasn’t it VERY convenient that those “White Helmets” were on scene in this tiny town with cameras rolling?
This entire thing STINKS.
Oh dear.
Want to read some real journalism? See link below- amazed how the information contained has been shoved down the memory hole.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/jul/12/syrian-opposition-doing-the-talking
Terrific reference, Thanks
tiger tiger
According to your link:
This is a typical half truth by your source critical of sources on the Syrian conflict. The US began funding opposition to Assad in response to the assassination of Rafik Hariri in 2006. Hezbollah operatives have been implicated in the bombing of Hariri’s motorcade, but it’s unlikely that Assad had no knowledge of the murder. Hariri had been very critical of Assad troops stationed on Lebanese soil. Assad pulled his military out of Lebanon under international pressure. The US rightly funded opposition to Assad. Assad crushed a pro democracy movement associated with the Arab Spring to initiate the conflict.
Context matters, but in politics, the only context that matters is the context that supports your political agenda.
From the article:
“While calling again for an international investigation of the incident, the Russian president failed to even mention the third possibility: that the Syrian military, which was implicated in the killing of hundreds of civilians with a nerve agent in 2013 outside Damascus,…”
This allegation about the 2013 Ghouta gas attack has been debunked by Seymour Hersh and others. Why does Mackey repeat this disproven talking point? If he can’t be bothered to check such an important fact, why should we believe anything else he writes?
Links everyone should read:
https://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n08/seymour-m-hersh/the-red-line-and-the-rat-line
https://www.lrb.co.uk/v35/n24/seymour-m-hersh/whose-sarin
When the spooks are clearly in charge (On the Record Bribing, Blackmailing and/or interfering in the lives of Everyone In The World All The Time) it’s easier to know which conspiracy theories to avoid right off the bat. Theirs.
Get a another job Bob. RT wouldn’t Give you a job in the mail room.
That’s a weak counter-point, isn’t it?
In any case, the issue shouldn’t be whether what Putin claimed is debatable. The point should be that an unconfirmed claim was used as justification to kill people and further destabilize Syria, which is not a civilized thing to do.
“That’s a weak counter-point, isn’t it?”
How is it weak?
“In any case, the issue shouldn’t be whether what Putin claimed is debatable.”
Putin is the most powerful backer of a government that has been accused by the UN of using chemical weapons, which is not “a civilized thing to do”. So, why Putin’s claim should not be the point?
Yeah, this jumped out at me too: “…the area of northern Syria where the mass poisoning took place last week is controlled by Qaeda-affiliated Islamist rebels, not the rival Islamic State group, which used an entirely different chemical agent in an attack in the Iraqi city of Mosul last month.”
Why the f**k couldn’t Al Qaeda have gotten its hands on some of the same stuff? And since when are the two of them rivals?
Why does the Intercept’s Syria coverage always suck so hard? You guys are so great on domestic issues and general national security content but when it comes to this very major world event, I might as well be reading Washington Post.
I totally concur with you, for the past 6 months I’ve been researching what is happening in Syria, several witnesses contradicts the mainstream narrative of the 2011 protest. Several documents published by WikiLeaks in regards to Syra, John Kerry statement that some Arab countries would pay the USA to attack Syria plus an audio from John Kerry meeting with “moderate rebels” asking for the USA to intervene is Syria.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3dgQsx0NZbQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e4phB-_pXDM
Some of the WikiLeaks document about Syria
https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/18328
https://wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/06DAMASCUS5399_a.html
“Why does the Intercept’s Syria coverage always suck so hard?”
Because they have Mackey and another U.S. lackey writing the stories.
Good to see that commenters here are way more intelligent and well informed than the writer of this dribble.
The Intercept should be ashamed to publish such shoddy journalism. The claim that Assad perpetrated the 2013 gas attack has been proven false again and again. Consider, Pulitzer prize winning journalist Seymour Hersh’s expose: https://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n08/seymour-m-hersh/the-red-line-and-the-rat-line
Politically, the intercept is afraid of straying too far away from its roots in the liberal-left milieu of the “left” of the Democratic Party. While publishing some excellent pieces of journalism on the endless anti-Russian campaign, it does not get to the bottom of the US’s endless war drive in the Middle East.
For that, you have to turn to the World Socialist Website — which has published excellent articles every day on this topic, drawing attention to the manufactured 2013 claims without giving any support to the Assad regime. http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2017/04/12/pers-a12.html
MIT Prof. Theodore Postol memo discredits WH/NSC “evidence “of “Syrian Gov’t aerial munitions ,”responsibly for “chemical weapon attack”; WH/NSC “evidence” points towards probably “IED” on the ground detonation, and staged attack.
https://www.rt.com/usa/384520-postol-report-sarin-syria/
Does anyone have a clue as to what sort of point Mr. Mackey is attempting to make?
Good one. I realize that people hate Putin but unlike Trump, he is basically saying that he doesn’t know and not to assume Assad’s guilt until the site is actually investigated. Even if people do not trust Putin, he is acting more like an adult here.
This reminds me of the Inquisition. ‘You are a heretic unless you give me evidence that you are a saint’. Why does Putin have to prove Assad is innocent rather than us proving he is guilty? Idlib is crawling with Al Qaeda, they should at least be on the list of suspects for either possessing or using poor man’s WMD.
yep!
and the pseudo journalist even tries to portray alquaeda as if they couldnt stage an attack with sarin gas!
and we know that there was no sarin… just look at the victims helpers!
if anyone wants an analysis from the guy who should have this guy’s job:
http://www.moonofalabama.org/2017/04/white-house-intelligence-assessment-is-no-such-thing-but-shows-support-for-al-qaeda.html
Indeed. Thank you.
wow…thought i was watching PBS or CNN for a minute. then i realized this is dumber.
“open source evidence”? the hell? you mean a few convenient photos from white helmet types who just happened to be there and handled “sarin” “victims” without gloves or hazmat suits? even though you can see on the CDC site that those are the minimum to avoid fatal exposure? or is the CDC a “KGB front” like everything your ilk doesn’t agree with?
i guess the evidence must be damning, though…just look at how much time the US spent investigating it before launching a few million dollar corporate welfare bombs. good to see you so in line with trump, i have to say. peas in a pod.
or maybe the fact that members of the very “IC” you people slavishly worship have said not only did it trace back to turkey but people inside the military and “IC” knew there was a stockpile there of many non-sarin chemicals including chlorine? oops! you don’t like that so it’s a “conspiracy theory”. and we should all take the word of a “journalist” like yourrself who braves the hard landscapes of twitter all day.
speaking of turkey and reasons you’re a failure: even the UN has acknowledged that the 2013 attack wasn’t the syrian government’s joint. but i guess you wrote that one in permanent marker next to “russia invaded ukraine”. or maybe you think you’re a better “journalist” than seymour hersh? i would respond to that if i wasn’t worried about wearing out my “H” and “A” keys.
https://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n08/seymour-m-hersh/the-red-line-and-the-rat-line
https://www.lrb.co.uk/v35/n24/seymour-m-hersh/whose-sarin
if you can’t avoid profound confirmation bias and look past “#PUTINISTEHSUKC” hastags then please get a real job and stop posting ignorant smears with asshole headlines.
^– I found the random paragraph compiler Russia bot, and I claim my $3s.
“thought i was watching PBS or CNN for a minute”
sad… but we are getting used to by intercept…
When you have a probable conspiracy, ask for an independent investigation and see who supports it and who doesn’t. Putin may be right or wrong, but at least he is willing to have an investigation.
I heard it was supposed to be 60 missiles, but one fell overboard. Any verification on that?
Well, the only casualties of the fraud US strike were civilians from a missile that missed, and trump’s credibility.
Oh, and while you’re reading this and thinking Putin is calling for/ok with an investigation, the NATO resolution condemning the attack has just been vetoed – by Russia!
It’s kind of NATO to give a veto to Russia. Or maybe you lack necessary erudition on this subject.
So Seymore Hersh and the guys from are MIT are wrong https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.documentcloud.org/documents/1006045/possible-implications-of-bad-intelligence.pdf
McCain and company are right? http://21stcenturywire.com/2017/04/02/the-real-syria-civil-defence-saving-real-syrians-not-oscar-winning-white-helmets-saving-al-qaeda/
This article tries to use the 2013 false flag for proving the most recent one.
https://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n08/seymour-m-hersh/the-red-line-and-the-rat-line
This article frantically avoids the question “Who benefits?”
This article (intentionally?) misrepresents the Terms of Reference of the investigation proposed by US/UK putting the undue burden of proof of innocence on Syrian government.
Open source ‘evidence’ coming from Al Nusra or affiliated groups because no independent journalist risk beheading or be held at ransom in that area is the most lame excuse coming from this article.
This article fails to mention that the OPCW is on record that the 10 sites under control of the Syrian government were cleared but no such assurance could be given for the 2 sites in Al Nusra/ISIS or affiliated groups.
Clearly McKey isn’t interested in reality.
correct!
article dismissed as propaganda…
It doesn’t matter. His fanboys, incl. Drumpf, believe all of them. And that’s exactly what Putin’s game is. Fear, uncertainty, doubt.
read all the comments section…
wake up and smell the coffee!