Wikileaks: Syria chemical "attack", bogus OPCW report -- Re: 60 Missles, 60 Seconds, $100M

On Fri, Apr 07, 2017 at 10:15:34AM -0700, Razer wrote:

On 04/07/2017 09:21 AM, grarpamp wrote:

...

On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 11:37 AM, Razer wrote:

...

It gets 'better' ... The New York Times reporter writing the hit piece blaming the Syrian govt for the chemical weapons attack that never happened also 'co-wrote the Iraq aluminum tube story in 2002':

https://twitter.com/RaniaKhalek/status/850359176505298949 On never happening...

https://www.reddit.com/r/news/comments/63xaqh/us_launches_missiles_at_syrian...

"Allow me to break it down a bit, and prove to you that this is a massive false flag for multiple reasons First, our narrative "Gas Attack" happens 45 minutes after the Susan Rice story makes FOX news First outlets to run the story: WSJ, NYT, MSNBC, and CNN. Plaster pictures of dead kids all over their outlets. Completely ignoring and derailing the biggest scandal in modern US political history. "

ps: Stockholm authorities busy inciting nationwide fear right now too...

US Trump/Repubs killing net neutrality so problematic live feeds from indie street journos can get region killed because oh muh tier-1 bandwidths are aching.

The US even ignored it's own 'Rebels" eyewitness account. They claimed it was an SU-22 that hit the building containing the CWD. That aircraft isn't normally capable of carrying CWDs and I SERIOUSLY DOUBT the Russians would give the SAF the proper mounts to do so, even if available. I'm also VERY SKEPTICAL that the CW agent was Sarin. There's loads of pics of USAID's "White Helmets" handing the victims without even gloves on yet no reports of sick or dead 'helmets', and initial reports coming out of Idlib passed on by regional twitter accounts at the time claimed it was probably Chlorine.

Nevertheless, this was NOT a "Chemical Attack", it was a "Chemical Release" from a building under control of the so-called 'rebels' who were apparently manufacturing CWDs in the vicinity of civilian populations and the US is using it as a post-facto excuse, by distorting the facts, for their weeks-old boots-on-Syrian-soil-illegally invasion of the country.

All the creeps are cheering:

https://twitter.com/AuntieImperial/status/850381753554313216 https://twitter.com/AuntieImperial/status/850185408394780674 https://twitter.com/AuntieImperial/status/850386646725926912 https://twitter.com/AuntieImperial/status/850381915890753536

https://twitter.com/SaudiEmbassyUSA/status/850229963995336705

Raytheon's stocks rose 2.1% pre-trading day even though many of the missiles failed.

https://twitter.com/ReutersBiz/status/850317898711257089 https://twitter.com/IraqiSecurity/status/850386466207387649

And from today's "surprise fscking surprise" dept - looks like the news of Wikileaks' death is premature - to whomever blew the whistle on this one, thank you: WikiLeaks Releases New Documents Questioning Syria Chemical Attack Narrative https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/wikileaks-releases-new-documents-ques... A whistleblower with the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), responsible for conducting an independent investigation into the alleged chemical attack in the Syrian town of Douma on April 7, 2018, has presented WikiLeaks with a body of evidence suggesting the chemical weapons watchdog agency manipulated and suppressed evidence. A prior official OPCW report of the investigation issued last March found "reasonable grounds" for believing a toxic chemical was used against civilians, likely chlorine. Long prior to any independent investigators reaching the site, however, Washington had launched major tomahawk airstrikes against Damascus in retribution for "Assad gassing his own people". WikiLeks release: A statement from the panel tasked with investigating evidence from a OPCW whistleblower regarding the Douma alleged chemical attack in Syria, April 7, 2018. casts doubts on the accuracy of the OPCW final report. https://t.co/0y1MRStibG — WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) October 23, 2019 WikiLeaks published documents based on evidence presented by the internal OPCW whistleblower to an expert review panel on Wednesday. “The panel was presented with evidence that casts doubt on the integrity of the OPCW,” WikiLeaks editor Kristinn Hrafnsson wrote. ...