Black is White. Up is Down.

Written By: - Date published: 10:24 am, April 17th, 2017 - 133 comments
Categories: International, Media, Propaganda, spin, Syria - Tags: , ,

A little under two weeks ago every major news outlet fell over themselves to report on allegations of a chemical attack in Syria that had killed scores of people.

Yesterday our time, over one hundred people, including scores of children, were killed when buses carrying Syrian refugees were bombed. There have been a few sidebar stories that I’ve seen in western newspapers. But no headlines. No cries of indignation. No demands that ‘something must be done’.

Worse than that, what reporting there has been, has been completely misleading and/or utterly dishonest.

In the Guardian, we were told that the buses were carrying residents from government held areas. This was and is completely untrue. That article has yet to be updated or corrected. Essentially readers are being invited to conclude or suspect against reality, that Syrian government forces targeted a convoy of buses packed with women and children who felt antipathy towards the Syrian government. Hell, even the Daily Mail was more accurate (at least in its headline), even it did use the tragedy to segue back to Khan Shaykhun and more condemnation of Syria’s government.

Today’s sidebar story on the atrocity in The Guardian leads with the same bare faced lie or, if you want to cut them some slack, the same misleading or inaccurate statement. It reads – “Nearly 70 children were among those killed when a suicide car bombing tore through buses carrying evacuees from besieged government-held towns in Syria a monitoring group has said.” (my emphasis)

Here’s my question. If media give a crap about Syrian people, then why isn’t the bombing of the bus convoy waiting to enter into Aleppo getting similar levels of coverage to the supposed sarin attack? And why are very basic facts being twisted or omitted?

(I say “supposed” in relation to the sarin attack advisedly, because that story seems to be tattering and shredding as time passes – a quick post on that will be going up later today or tomorrow)

Meanwhile, here’s the only decent report I found yesterday on the deliberate targeting of that bus convoy.

 

A little bit of searching will produce translated interviews from non-western news sources with women from that convoy that were conducted at an Aleppo hospital. Those women tell how they were kept in the buses for two days and not allowed to exit at all, meaning among other things, that children had to piss their pants. One woman recounted how crisps were thrown on the floor and young children who hadn’t eaten and who had no concept of humiliation, were invited to eat the crisps from the floor of the bus.

Now, I don’t expect any such interviews to be aired on western news media. They have a narrative to sell. And it seems that ordinary people only count insofar as they and their suffering serve to further that narrative.

But perhaps I’m being too harsh. I understand that maybe it was just unfortunate that the western media news cycle had turned and was somewhat obsessed with nuclear matters yesterday – what with them getting all wide eyed and arm wavy over a nuclear test. Y’know, like when they reported disapprovingly of that successful test for an ‘upgraded nuclear weapon’ by the US yesterday? Oh – hang on, that was the other nuclear related test – not the bad one…

And so it goes.

133 comments on “Black is White. Up is Down. ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. ropata 1
    17 April 2017 at 10:53 am

    Jimmy Dore excoriates the US media regularly. Here’s his take on the MOAB in Afghanistan and the MSM jizzing themselves over bombing innocents

    • Bill 1.1
      17 April 2017 at 12:46 pm

      Definitely one of his more passionate and on point broadcasts Ropata. Thanks for the link.

      At 10min 05 sec

      “You’re jumping off point should be the media and the government are fucking lying. That’s your starting point. Not that they’re telling the truth until someone proves them wrong. The starting point is that the government and the media are lying about the war;about bombing; about everything foreign policy related. They’re lying. That should be your jumping off point”

      Yup.

      Thankfully, ever more people are coming to that conclusion. And some (like Jimmy Dore) actually have some penetration.

  2. weka 2
    17 April 2017 at 11:06 am

    Nearly 70 children were among those killed when a suicide car bombing tore through buses carrying evacuees from besieged government-held towns in Syria, a monitoring group has said.

    Saturday’s blast hit a convoy carrying residents from the northern towns of Fuaa and Kafraya as they waited at a transit point in rebel-held Rashidin, west of Aleppo.

    • Bill 2.1
      17 April 2017 at 11:55 am

      Towns besieged byor surrounded by rebels (or whatever other term one prefers for those groupings) would have been a clear and unambiguous statement.

      The language used is (at best) unnecessarily (deliberately?) confusing and misleading and “the northern towns of Fuaa and Kafraya ” means nothing to anyone not familiar with Syrian geography or occupied/unoccupied areas within Syria.

      To talk of a ‘government held town’ suggests that those living there and not favourably disposed to the Syrian government are being given passage to a non-government area – as happened in Aleppo and Homs etc.

      • Poission 2.1.1
        17 April 2017 at 1:13 pm

        For government held towns,read Shiite enclaves. For rebel held towns read Sunni enclaves.

        The security for the former evacuation was under Ahrar al-Sham an Salafist group( funded and supplied by Turkey and Saudi).

        Security for the latter was by Hezbollah (funded by Iran)

        A better analysis is here.

        http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/04/16/524227422/more-than-100-die-in-suicide-attack-on-syrian-evacuees

      • weka 2.1.2
        17 April 2017 at 1:34 pm

        I doubt that it’s deliberate so much as a result of inherent Western bias and the structure of Western journalism. I also think it’s relevant that the first paragraph is referencing its source as a monitoring group. In that sense it’s not the Guardian that is saying it but people who are closer. I can see a range of possibilities including the piece being cobbled together from various sources by someone who was not an investigative journalist (note, no journalist name on it).

        I can’t make sense of what they’re saying about whether the town the people were leaving was rebel held or govt held. I can’t tell from the post either.

        In terms of the lack of MSM coverage, I’d compare it not only to the gas thing but to bombings in the West. Apparently it’s not newsworthy if a bus load of women and kids get blown up in a war zone, although if the war zone was in the West obviously it would be.

        • Bill 2.1.2.1
          17 April 2017 at 7:39 pm

          Just back from a long day. couldn’t quite understand your comment until I checked the links I’d provided. The first one (that goes to yesterdays Open Mike) was actually meant to go to the link contained in that comment from yesterday.

          Emma Graham-Harrison and Damien Gayle wrote the piece that should have been directly linked to.

          I’ve updated the links in the post.

          • weka 2.1.2.1.1
            17 April 2017 at 8:50 pm

            Sorry, that doesn’t make it any clearer. Where the towns govt held or not?

            • Bill 2.1.2.1.1.1
              17 April 2017 at 10:23 pm

              The towns are not held by any opposition. But they are surrounded and isolated by various opposition forces. So yes, we can say they are held by the government.

              But the real problem with the terminology is that until now, it has been headchoppers, their families and fellow travellers that have been getting on buses and heading out of government held cities/areas under ‘safe passage’ guarantees given by the Syrian government. (eg – eastern Aleppo and Homs and other places)

              So when a piece is written that somewhat confusingly refers to a government held town (rather than a town under rebel siege) , the initial assumption is that ‘non-government’ types are leaving. And when we are told, without much in the way of clarity being offered, that those people have been attacked and killed, then the assumption casual readers will make is that anti-government peeps have been targeted and killed. This is strengthened by the fact that media accurately report that the buses were in rebel held areas.

              I do believe it’s a deliberate case of terminology being employed to muddy waters. There is no compelling reason why “from towns under rebel siege” could not have been used.

              If you can be arsed to re-read the pieces and swap out “government held towns” for that phrase, I’m picking the picture would be clearer.

  3. garibaldi 3
    17 April 2017 at 11:12 am

    Congratulations Bill. I admire the effort you are putting in to try to get to the truth. As sure as day follows night we cannot believe all the crap emanating from the West .
    We must also realize it is hard to know just what is going down on either side, though it is very clear that ‘our’ side is utterly hypocritical and mostly wrong in its reporting.

  4. WC1 4
    17 April 2017 at 11:20 am

    Gulf of Tonkin, weapons of mass descruction give the US a lack of credibility. How many children are killed by war and famine on a daily basis? But they are ignored and based on shonky evidence the US responds to one reported incident.

  5. james 5
    17 April 2017 at 11:41 am

    Those women tell how they were kept in the buses for two days and not allowed to exit at all

    Was this after the bombing?

    • adam 6.1
      17 April 2017 at 1:13 pm

      Did you read any of these tinfoilhat? Obviously not – as you are trying to score points again.

      The independent piece does exactly what Bill put up in the post, as does the LA times piece.

      If you going for point scoring, you might want to get your facts right at the very least. Or read what was said before going off half-cocked.

  7. Ross 7
    17 April 2017 at 12:59 pm

    An alleged suicide bomber versus an alleged chemical attack by the State. I’m obviously missing something.

  8. McFlock 8
    17 April 2017 at 3:13 pm

    Oh come on – you respond to the passive voice in MSM by linking to RT, which repeats the “moderate rebels” line until even their Damascus source has to call it bullshit?

    And yes, chemical weapons get more press. That’s because they suck worse than the n-th suicide bombing in the middle east, and also send a more explicit message.

    • adam 8.2
      17 April 2017 at 4:01 pm

      Have you given up on people McFlock? Because it reads like it when you rank deaths, actually it’s quite vulgar.

      I thought the point of the post was quite clear, the media does this vulgarity already – especially if it does not fit the official narrative.

      • McFlock 8.2.1
        17 April 2017 at 9:12 pm

        You might say I’ve given up on one or two.

        News. What’s new. That’s generally what gets reported.

        But if you also want to argue an equivalence between conventional explosives that happen to be targeted at civilians and designing, building, stockpiling and using weapons that are primarily and almost exclusively effective against the most vulnerable civilians, well – good luck with that.

        • adam 8.2.1.1
          17 April 2017 at 11:25 pm

          I’d argue purely and simply we should condemn any act which targets civilians. Rather than make some sort of hierarchy about it.

          • McFlock 8.2.1.1.1
            17 April 2017 at 11:34 pm

            So the degree of premeditation required isn’t a factor?

            • adam 8.2.1.1.1.1
              18 April 2017 at 12:07 am

              You want to make it one?

              • McFlock …
                18 April 2017 at 12:23 am

                it is for most crimes. Why not this one?

                • adam …
                  18 April 2017 at 1:59 am

                  So what does that have to do with reporting it?

                  • McFlock …
                    18 April 2017 at 3:41 pm

                    relative column inches

                    • adam …
                      18 April 2017 at 4:48 pm

                      So you are back to a hierarchy of death as your line.

                      So who gets to chose this more worthy death thing then?

                    • McFlock …
                      18 April 2017 at 4:55 pm

                      It’s not a hierarchy of death, it’s a hierarchy of news. What’s new.

                      As for who chooses, you do. We all do. Otherwise you’d be talking just as much about the most recent suicide bombing in Kabul.

                    • adam …
                      18 April 2017 at 5:16 pm

                      “We all do”

                      Really, Ummm OK. So I own the press now.

                    • McFlock …
                      18 April 2017 at 5:18 pm

                      The media you consume. The comments you make. You choose those. It’s all a big pot. If it’s clickbait, you see more of it.

                    • adam …
                      18 April 2017 at 5:54 pm

                      You really have no idea how propaganda works do you?

                    • Bill …
                      18 April 2017 at 6:00 pm

                      Of course it’s all consumer power Adam!

                      And next up. Save the world. Buy recycled loo paper. Buy low energy light bulbs. Buy low pressure shower heads. Buy, buy buy!!

                      And just keep buying and don’t fucking dare pop out a question or two about any systemic nature of power or the relationships between centres of systemic power… all the power you ever need worry your head about is in your back pocket.

            • Spikeyboy 8.2.1.1.1.2
              18 April 2017 at 9:41 am

              Holding victims in a bus for 2 days prior seems to be a large amount of premeditation…

              • McFlock …
                18 April 2017 at 3:44 pm

                Really? Of what?

                It probably provided opportunity for the bombers, but was that intentional, or just an indication of the difficulties organising exchanges and logistics in a civil war?

                • Bill …
                  18 April 2017 at 3:48 pm

                  You think the car bomber just jumped into a car that happened to be full of explosives, turned the ignition key and Boom!?

                  ffs – get your fucking brain down off the coat hook by the door Mcflock.

                  A headchopper had to drive through headchopper territory and headchopper check points….unless you want to suggest that the Syrian Arab Army is into suicide bombing now.

                  And you sit and exclaim I just have no freaking idea what you’re on about over a post that’s decrying muddled reportage on a huge civilian catastrophe carried out by a headchopper.

                  • McFlock …
                    18 April 2017 at 4:14 pm

                    Oh ffs yourself.

                    You think it was some big fucking conspiracy where the same people holding the buses up for whatever fucking nominal reason or excuse did so explicitly because it took them two days to fill a car with artillery shells and find some mook to blow himself up?

                    Here’s another scenario for you: There’s a holdup in the exchange between the dominant rebel group in the area and the syrian government forces. Quibbling over numbers, or just a logistics issue. Whatever. This bad planning sits everyone up for two days. Local cell of another rebel group that hates both the dominant rebel group (and assad) sees the convoy held up and therefore the cell takes the opportunity to sow more chaos discord and death. Who the fuck knows.

                    And no, I have no freaking idea what you’re on about when you decry “muddled reportage” then hold up a piece of self-contradictory bullshit as the “only decent report” you could find. No fucking idea at all.

                    • Bill …
                      18 April 2017 at 4:25 pm

                      No. I don’t think there was a conspiracy? Where you getting that from?

                      You were wanking about pre-mediation and lack of and other vile measures of what would make a death a ‘worthy’ death.

                      And I simply point out that thought went into loading a truck/van and driving said truck/van to a designated target.

                      Where’s the self-contradiction in the RT report? You haven’t mentioned any such thing thus far. Given that you already spouted outright lies about the content, I’m asking you to outline it please. Oh. And found anything more informative yet that you’d like to share?

                    • McFlock …
                      18 April 2017 at 5:02 pm

                      1: we’re now in the subthread where spikeyboy said that the 2 day delay was premeditation.

                      2: worthy? Where did I say that? Newsworthy, maybe. The premeditation required to pack a car with explosives that might have been used against combatants is one thing. Making chemical weapons, which are most and almost exclusively effective against small, non-combatant people, stockpiling them, loading them, and dropping them – that’s another level of premeditation that begins at the very start of the weapon design phase. Major difference there.

                      3: Yeah I did: here.

                      4: more informative links: anywhere other than RT, because most news services try, on some level, to be accurate. RT’s relationship with the truth is purely coincidental – case in point, its sat photo of a plane shooting down mh17.

                    • Bill …
                      18 April 2017 at 5:54 pm

                      Is there any oxygen available when you’re that deep in the propaganda quagmire McFlock?

                      On your number 3. – There’s no self contradiction there at all. None. The anchor asked a question around responsibility. Now this goes back to the quagmire and maybe the lack of oxygen, because anyone with half an ounce of awareness already knows that “supposed moderate rebels” is a term used by those who know full well there are no moderate rebels (not for a long time now), and that the only supposedly moderates are those headchoppers that western governments give military, financial and logistical support to (e.g. – White Helmets, al-Nusra, Jaysh al-Fattah, Ahrar al-Sham and others under the Jabhat al-Islamiyah umbrella)

                      Fuck. That’s not at all hard to bend your head around, is it?

                      On your number 4. So you’ve got nothing at all to link to or share.

                      On number 2. This might come across as a bit oblique for your oxygen starved brain. But if you can entertain the notion that a government that is winning a war would launch a pointless chemical weapons attack against civilians for no gain whatsoever, than you must also entertain the notion that a group of headchoppers desperate for respite and increased support who have always echoed the lines of western hawks would also perpetrate a chemical attack – and for a multitude of potential and obvious gains.

                      But you can’t/won’t do that, will you?

                    • McFlock …
                      18 April 2017 at 6:06 pm

                      3 The anchor asked the question well after the blame in the report had been pointed at the supposed moderates. The answer was no it probably wasn’t them. That’s a contradiction.

                      4 except the reports you hate because they don’t fit your own monologue. Gotta love your headchopper leitmotif though. Really lets you turn off your brain. Shit, otherwise you’d have to accept that the war isn’t just “assad vs headchoppers”, it’s “Assad vs kurds vs other kurds vs ISIS vs Yazidis vs half a dozen other groups with different agendas and levels of brutality and local connections”.

                      2: “Winning”. lol. “no gain whatsoever” except the effect on the rest of the civilians. Did consider it, considered it probably bullshit. Mostly because without a decent delivery system, its as likely to be as shit against your own crowd as it is the others.

                    • Bill …
                      18 April 2017 at 6:23 pm

                      Oh, you and I both know damned fine well that various headchoppers are backed by various foreign governments…who go to some lengths to convince ‘us’ that their headchoppers aren’t like the other headchoppers and in fact, aren’t headchoppers.

                      But I’d bet that between us, we couldn’t name three non-government factions (so not umbrella labels that groups might swear allegiance to), who claim to fighting in the name of Islam – so not Kurds or Rojavans or Yazidis and others – and who are involved in Syria who aren’t headchoppers.

                      The only delivery system required for two pipe bombs – one packed with a chemical and the other with explosives to rupture the one packed with chemicals – is a pair of legs and two arms to place the fucking things.

                      And that according to (relinking) Theodore A. Postol Professor Emeritus of Science, Technology, and National Security Policy Massachusetts Institute of Technology – so, y’know, no slouch or armchair wallah – is how that piece of metal in the crater was delivered because it could not have been delivered from the air. (It’s all to do with how it has ruptured)

                    • McFlock …
                      18 April 2017 at 7:18 pm

                      Oh, but blaming rebels for something must therefore tar those two and the non-Islamic groups you made with the headchopping brush. Such muddled reporting is misleading 🙄

                      Whereas Hezbollah obviously immediately suspend their headchopping tendencies when they fight for Assad.

                      As for your link, it wouldn’t be the first scribd dump that was bullshit. I have no idea whether it is or not. But I’m pretty damned sure it was trawled up by someone looking to suit their personal narrative. Not that it actually contradicts my statement “Mostly because without a decent delivery system, its as likely to be as shit against your own crowd as it is the others“

                    • Spikeyboy …
                      19 April 2017 at 5:35 pm

                      Have you ever heard of Occams razor? One assumption. Head choppers are people haters. This is borne out by any cursory look at their video or propaganda. Easily believable that they would consider waylaying a busful of civillians, hold them for two days and organize a bombing to send a message to other locals. Your story above requires many more hypotheses and assumptions and is far more a ‘conspiracy’ story

                    • McFlock …
                      19 April 2017 at 8:53 pm

                      Spikeyboy, the thing about Occam’s razor is that it involves not adding information that we do not know exists, rather than deliberately omitting information: in this case the factional nature of Assad’s opposition.

                      If the same group that delayed the convoy wanted to attack the convoy, why wait two days? Your razor needs to add information as well as remove it

                    • Spikeyboy []
                      20 April 2017 at 8:33 am

                      Still less convoluted than your scenario. More to the point of this thread is the following article in the Independent
                      http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/syria-suicide-attack-refugee-buses-trump-only-cares-sunni-children-a7687066.html

                    • McFlock …
                      20 April 2017 at 11:36 am

                      You’ve got a funny idea of “less convoluted”. Where’s the benefit in the delay?

                      As to your article, I quite like Fisk. But he misses a brutal fact – chemical weapons are news. Suicide bombers aren’t, even if they kill more people.

                    • Spikeyboy []
                      21 April 2017 at 6:11 am

                      To do this terrible deed you need 2 parts – the victims and the bomber. Neither one is super easy especially if you want to select the victims. The suicide bomber has to be psychologically prepared. Even people as heavily indictrinated as these people are, are still people subject to doubts and insecurities. When the victims are random (though the physical buildings or place may be fixed) you dont get to see the delays caused by psychology. People arent robots even though it may suit the establushment to say that these people are. You cant set a suicide bomber loose until you are absolutely sure that they will go through with the deed. A two day delay due to psychological commitment ‘problems’ is quite a likely thing to happen

                    • Spikeyboy []
                      21 April 2017 at 7:14 am

                      On the subject of sarin gas attacks this is looking to everyone now as more WMD type lies.
                      http://m.truthdig.com/report/item/nerve_agent_attack_did_not_occur_in_syria_expert_finds_20170419

                    • McFlock …
                      21 April 2017 at 12:19 pm

                      Oh great. Now you’re adding cold feet for the bomber in order to make your scenario match the facts.

                      And your definition of “everyone” also leaves much to be desired.

                    • Spikeyboy []
                      22 April 2017 at 2:41 pm

                      You have obviously never been anywhere outside your comfort zone McF. Very certain about everything on how the world works. Your right I guess and pretty easy ftom safe nz too…

                    • Spikeyboy []
                      22 April 2017 at 5:25 pm

                      Sorry I meant everyone who is prepared to take all official stories with a grain of salt and memories of all the previous lies to drag us into more war and wait until people actually trained in the type of necessary analysis get to pick over the war hawks version.

                    • Spikeyboy []
                      22 April 2017 at 5:41 pm

                      A suicide bomber is a pretty stuffed up person but not nearly as reprehensible as the people who take their grief and anger and mold and shape it to suit their nasty plans. Not just once but over and over with greater and greater efficiency using broken and defeated people to further their bloodlust. Sorry you dont get it McF but lack of empathy will do that to a person and is quite a strong trait in white folk. Just witness the rape and pillage unleashed on the world by white folk. And yes sometimes those broken people manage to claw through the fog in their brain and hesitate in the face of what they are about to do. You wouldnt know about that McF because youve never been wrong always certain and owing nothing to anyone your own man so to speak. Well good on you and good luck

                    • McFlock …
                      22 April 2017 at 7:12 pm

                      …or you’re just an illogical nutbar who can’t form a coherent argument and therefore has to make up some apparently race-based scenario about gullibility.

                      I’ve been wrong lots of times, and I’ve been around. The thing is, the folks who demonstrated how I was wrong didn’t have to build me up into some sort of always-thinks-I’m-right, never-tested, empathy-deficient fool to do so. They just had to be able to state their case logically and reasonably.

                      And actually, I’m a pretty cynical guy. To the degree that I don’t take someone’s word for it just because their adamant claim matches my personal narrative.

                    • Spikeyboy []
                      22 April 2017 at 10:23 pm

                      More evidence against the msm and Washington version of events for the chemical attack on Syria
                      http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_58ea226fe4b058f0a02fca4d?ncid=engmodushpmg00000004
                      Which I found in this well researched piece
                      http://www.medialens.org/index.php/alerts/alert-archive/2017/844-trump-s-tomahawks-the-instant-certainty-of-the-mainstream-press.html
                      Open your eyes and ears or be led by Trump et al by the nose

                    • Spikeyboy []
                      23 April 2017 at 9:23 am

                      You invoke logic as though its some kind of magic bullet. Logic is just a branch of philosophy. I prefer my philosophy embedded in story as with Dostoevsky or Camus. You may think that intellect and emotion/sensation should be seperated. I don’t.
                      Any system is built from axioms. These are basic assumptions that are not provable from within the system. Euclidian geometry has ‘parallel lines never meet’ as an axiom. Non Euclidian geometry doesnt have this axiom and the world doesnt fall down. It becomes deeper and richer. But someone operating in Euclidian geometry will think a person operating in non Euclidian geometry is an illogical nutbar. So be it.
                      You scoff at the idea of a suicide bomber getting cold feet with such venom that I can only conclude that you consider all suicide bombers to be biological robots. By this I mean that once programmed wether by some other or by self the program is irreversible and only a force external to the bomber can stop the attainment of their goal.
                      You may believe that all people are biological robots or just some or that people can be made into biological robots or some variation in between. This is one of the axioms in your world view. You cant prove it to be true. You just believe it to be so.
                      I dont believe that any people are biological robots nor that they can be made to be biological robots. This is one of my axioms. In my system, for any action by a person there is always a freedom space where the action can be altered. This means that a suicide bomber can fail to complete their task due to external and internal forces.
                      In both systems, if enough bombers are sent out some will fail. The difference is that in my system some will fail through internal forces. In this system that is a certainty. The only thing open to debate is the frequency.

                    • Psycho Milt …
                      22 April 2017 at 10:56 pm

                      More evidence against the msm and Washington version of events for the chemical attack on Syria

                      You seem to have a very broad definition of “evidence.” Most of those two articles are about why it was wrong for Trump to damage a Syrian air force base (presumably written for those who don’t find “illegal” sufficient). The only “evidence” presented against the MSM’s reporting of the sarin attack is claims that the people of Khan Sheikun are very bad people, and might well have been able to manufacture crude chemical weapons.

                      For the case against Assad, we have eye witness accounts of the gas attack arising from an air strike, data showing an air strike was carried out, the reports of Medicins sans Frontieres staff who treated victims of the attack and, not least, the journalist who visited Khan Sheikhoun a couple of days later and found no evidence of a rebel chemical factory. For the case against Assad’s opponents, we have your and Bill’s steadfast refusal to believe anything reported in mainstream media and various and various dubious claims about how Assad’s opponents might have done it to make him look bad.

                    • Spikeyboy []
                      23 April 2017 at 11:28 am

                      Perhaps you should read with a less jaundiced eye. The Huff Post article did not say that the people of Khan Sheikhoun are very bad people. It said that the people that have taken over Khan Sheikhoun are very bad people in much the same way as you would say the Assad government are very bad people. The people that have taken over Khan Sheikhoun are affiliated to the organisation that collapsed the twin towers among other horrendous events. Yet you say we can believe nothing of what the Russians and Syrians have to say and must instead believe every piece of documentary evidence supplied by people affiliated to the twin towers act of terrorism? Above you imply that photographic and video can not have science applied to them. What are they then? The word of god perhaps. If this is the evidence supplied it must stand up to scrutiny. You pretend concern about the plight of Palestinians. Do you think that this type of evidence would be helpful to their cause. Of course not!! Their evidence must and does stand up to the most and detailed analysis. Photos not compatible with science! What bollocks

                    • McFlock …
                      24 April 2017 at 10:42 am

                      Spikeyboy, take a deep breath and stop rambling.

                      Try addressing the points that were raised.

                      Yet you say we can believe nothing of what the Russians and Syrians have to say and must instead believe every piece of documentary evidence supplied by people affiliated to the twin towers act of terrorism

                      No, I don’t think anybody said that: just that the Russians are highly unreliable and the story of the “very bad people affiliated to AQ” is consistent with the story of MSF and other folks, but the Russian and Syrian stories… not so much.

                      Above you imply that photographic and video can not have science applied to them.

                      Don’t be an idiot, nobody said that. But if you must know, I think that the science that was “applied to them” involved a massive amount of margin for error and guesstimation that was not reflected in the supplied documentation.

                      Not unreasonable amounts of error and estimation in any one instance, but error multiplies. If the shadow length is off or the lat is off or the shadow angle is off – all by small amounts from the low-def clips – then if the wind was slightly off and the dispersion calculations were off or maybe the sarin was an older batch or less effective for some other reason, then the entire “oooo he couldn’t have standed there without protection and lived” argument falls down.

                      As for the rest of your comment, take a fucking breath and try to focus.

                    • Spikeyboy []
                      24 April 2017 at 4:19 pm

                      If MSF treated patients 100km from the attack site how exactly do they corroborate eyewitness accounts? No one is denying a chemical attack took place. Inly the official story of how.
                      From the New York Times

                      A 14-year-old resident of the attacked town, Mariam Abu Khalil, said she had left home for her examination on the Quran — scheduled for early morning because fewer bombings were expected then — when the attack took place. On the way, she saw an aircraft drop a bomb on a one-story building a few dozen yards away. In a telephone interview Tuesday night, she described an explosion like a yellow mushroom cloud that stung her eyes. “It was like a winter fog,” she said.

                      Consistent with a non sarin nuerotoxin plus chlorine from a bombed wharehouse as described by Russia/Syria.

                      So MSF corroborating not so much and the other folk you mention wouldnt be the white helmets and Al Queda affiliates by chance?

                    • McFlock …
                      24 April 2017 at 4:57 pm

                      Them, plus a journalist I’m unfamiliar with so taken with caution, and of course the results of lab tests and autopsies done by various investigators.

                      In a telephone interview Tuesday night, she described an explosion like a yellow mushroom cloud that stung her eyes. “It was like a winter fog,” she said.

                      Consistent with a non sarin nuerotoxin plus chlorine from a bombed wharehouse as described by Russia/Syria.

                      You’re a wee bit messy with which bits are NYT and which bits are you shilling your blinkered support, but actually no it’s not “consistent”.

                      Firstly, if the Syrian aircraft dropped a bomb that landed on a building “a few dozen yards away”, that’s pretty bloody close for even a teeny bomb.

                      Secondly, if it was a weapons depot, there might also have been secondary explosions cause by weapons stored there which anyone just yards from the scene would have noticed, no? Even if the sarin was being stored pre-mixed and ready for use.

                      Thirdly: MSF:

                      Eight people who were examined by MSF staff displayed symptoms consistent with exposure to an agent such as sarin gas or similar compounds,

                      the exact opposite of what you just wrote, from the horse’s mouth.

                      Fourthly: Turkish autopsies say sarin.

                      Fifthly: OPCW also says sarin, again the exact opposite of your “non sarin nuerotoxin” claim.

                      So, who am I going to believe is most likely to be accurate: the dictator who claims it wasn’t him, the other dictator’s compulsively-lying media channel, or everyone else?

                    • Spikeyboy []
                      24 April 2017 at 9:58 pm

                      Non of what you say is evidence of who done what only what was done

                      The journalist you are unfamiliar with is from the guardian and he was miraculously able to get his story from officials of ahra al sham a terrorist group affiliated to isis/al queda..

                      Actually yes consistant and at least not schilling for 9/11 terrorists

                      And yes msf treated many people that had been exposed to a neuro toxin at a hospital 100km from the attack site because isis groups wont allow them to work in their territory – only the white helmets

                      If sarin then isis/al queda affiliated groups have access to sarin as demonstrated by Seymour Hirsch.

                      Very loose meaning of everyone. Terrorist propaganda mostly. Video and photos supplied by white helmets and isis affiliated groups to get a result in a war that was going badly for them. They did 9/11 and you still think they are not capable of this. Youre a weird person

                    • Bill …
                      24 April 2017 at 5:40 pm

                      Obviously no building was hit by any chemical bomb. We know this because the White House has released a report where they are adamant and confident that a crater in the road (photos of which we have all seen) is not only the point of impact, but also has not been tampered with.

                      So the MSF report would be wrong.

                      Oh. And then there’s the expert opinion from MiT that the debris of the supposed missile indicates that it is impossible for that projectile to have been delivered from the air.

                      So no warehouse and no air-strike. But (to quote) a “sarin like substance”. Now that narrows it down to just about anything that someone might consider “sarin like” – including any chemical agent that might be packed into a container.

                      Samples of sarin are kind of “ten a penny’ in the ME and the UN has rightly, previously discounted all samples where the provenance of any sample cannot be guaranteed.

                      Various witnesses have reported the smell. Sarin has no odour. People messing around at an impact site with next to no protection only a few hours after impact not experiencing adverse reactions, suggests (if the White House claims about the impact site are to be believed) that no sarin was present.

                      Multiple measurements and calculations from shadow angles diminish errors.

                      Wind speed and directions are taken from the same source as those used by the UN in previous investigations.

                      Funny how no-one interviewed any survivors from the houses that would have been in the path of the plume. Funny how so many young, fit men were filmed at that White Helmet facility…all those houses with only young men and children in them and all taken to a White Helmet facility to be strewn around…

                      But meanwhile, here’s some direct reporting from people affected by terror events that “no-one” wants to hear about.

                    • McFlock …
                      24 April 2017 at 6:08 pm

                      Hey, msf didn’t say the airstrike hit a building. Spikeyboys post did. Easy enough to be “dozens of yards away” and confuse something hitting a building across the way with something that hit the road behind the building.

                      As for postol’s analysis, he didn’t say it was impossible to be the result of an airstrike. That’s over-egging it. He did argue that the supposed impact site was tampered with, and much of that relies on specific timing and, more importantly sequencing, of the pictures he chooses to show. Basically, he’s doing what you’re arguing the media shouldn’t: he’s basing all his supposition upon a few pictures, rather than looking to other sources. Sure, that’s all he has available – for example he wouldn’t know if any of the responders at the scene were contaminated as he supposes, or how potent the sarin batch was, or whether they’d really thought about hazards or chain of evidence before rushing to dig shit up, or whatever.

                      I have a bit of time for him, but I think he’s running too far on the thin amount of material he has access to. And he obviously has a bee in his bonnet about once burned, twice shy with WMD claims – fair enough, too. But it doesn’t add to his credibility.

                    • Bill …
                      24 April 2017 at 6:15 pm

                      “It’s important to be clear about what I’m saying,” he (Postol) told AlterNet. “I’m saying that a so-called White House intelligence report issued on April 11 is totally inconsistent with the claims it’s making. I’m not so much saying that I know what happened, because actually I don’t. What I do know is that this report was, to be blunt, fabricated without the intelligence methodologies that it claims to have used. Because I have data that I have been poring over… for example, there’s video data of this crater that they allege was the source of an air attack, an air munitions. It was not an air munition. You could see that very easily.”

                      https://zcomm.org/znetarticle/attack-on-syria-justified-with-fake-intelligence/

                    • McFlock …
                      24 April 2017 at 6:25 pm

                      A comment that doesn’t match the report that is linked to in that article.

                      In the report he makes a reasonable guess as to the dispersion device (assuming the collapsed pipe is the actual dispersion device), and follows that with the comment

                      If this is in fact the mechanism used to disperse the sarin, this indicates that the sarin tube was placed on the ground by individuals on the ground and not dropped from an airplane.

                      So if his guess is wrong, then his conclusion based on that guess is unreliable. To then make the categorical claim you quoted, which is inconsistent with his own report, is quite literally making a claim that he failed to back up.

                    • Bill …
                      24 April 2017 at 7:42 pm

                      His appraisal is of the White House Report and for the sake of that appraisal he ‘allows’ that the White House Report is accurate.

                      The WHR insists that is the site and it has not been tampered with. If that is the case, then the piece of metal is the delivery mechanism and due to the way it is ruptured, it could not have come from the air. It was placed there and ruptured by an external force exploding it inwards.

                      And if the WHR is wrong, then what was the justification for launching umpteen cruise missiles?

                      Which path you want to journey down on that one ?

                      He states that the device could not have come from the air due to how it has ruptured. He then offers up a scenario for how it could have come to be ruptured in the way it is. It’s only the second part he’s “guessing” at – not the first.

                    • McFlock …
                      24 April 2017 at 8:03 pm

                      He posits one possible configuration, and from that assumes that it could not have been air-delivered.

                      Of course, what if the dispersal device was that configuration with a simple impact fuse? Bomb breaks up in the msec before the fuse goes bang, and what he’s actually looking at is the result of how it was arranged at the moment of detonation.

                      And then he might be completely wrong, and the tube was simple debris on the road before the bomb struck and not even related to the device at all.

                      And, of course, he’s basing his 122mm proportion on… what? What reference item in the photo can give a measurement that precise?

                    • Bill …
                      24 April 2017 at 9:51 pm

                      No.

                      He states that due to how the cannister has been crushed in from the outside, that it could not have been delivered by air. He’s an expert on this shit with a reputation to uphold. So I would really very much doubt if he’d throw that on the line ‘just because’.

                      And I haven’t seen one other person from that field contradict his assertion or call it into question, which, given that it’s getting a fair amount of oxygen on ye olde web…

                      Meantime, if this is just a ‘debating sport’ you want to win, then please do it elsewhere or on a different topic. I’ve no interest in that kind of shit with a topic like this where, at least for me, the object is to try to move towards the truth of a matter as opposed to accruing jousting points.

                      The White House Report is a report that does not stand up. At least some of the reasons it does not stand up have been explained and stated.

                      And it’s fucking serious on a few levels.

                      Now, if all you want to do is wave your arms in an exercise of nay saying and petty debate point scoring where you have absolutely nothing of substance to back your position, then like I say, please do it on a different topic.

                    • McFlock …
                      24 April 2017 at 9:57 pm

                      The altmedia side of the interwebz.

                      Yeah, I might call it a day if you’re resting on an academic’s desire to protect his reputation. Can’t help thinking what you’d say if his assessment didn’t agree with your preconceptions.

                    • Bill …
                      24 April 2017 at 10:23 pm

                      Znet and truth dig (to name two sites that have carried this) are both reputable. And then there’s the posting of his raw report on scrbled (or whatever) that you jumped up and suggested was fake straight off the bat.

                      I’m saying he wouldn’t trash his reputation. It’s not under attack and therefor needing to be protected.

                      Yes, i couldn’t see any rationale for the Syrian government to launch a chemical attack. I read all of the ‘reasonings’ in case I was missing something but not one that I read stacked up or made much sense.

                      And yes, I took into account past allegations of terrorists using chemicals in Syria and past allegations made against the government. I read quite a lot on that front – UN reports etc.

                      I also considered the fact that all of the information that was coming through the msm was sourced from terrorist quarters (White Helmets and a UK doctor previously charged with kidnapping journalists)

                      And I did wonder at the head of the White Helmets, who does not speak english, having a thorough opinion piece in The Guardian on the day after the supposed attack; on a Guardian journalist writing a few days after the attack as ‘the first western journalist on the scene’ when western journalists, for good reasons such as kidnapping and beheadings, simply do not normally go to non-government areas.

                      Then there was Postols take down of the White House Report, Swedish Doctors for Human Rights reports on the White Helmets either killing babies on video or using dead babies as props in videos in relation to another supposed chemical attack – and my utter puzzlement as to why people could consider that the Syrian government might do this “just because”, yet couldn’t bring themselves to wonder if known (and often foreign) headchoppers and kidnappers running on sectarianism might do it…and for obvious benefit.

                  • One Anonymous Bloke …
                    18 April 2017 at 4:15 pm

                    “Muddled reportage…”

                    “Perhaps I’m being too harsh…”

                    No shit. Reporters are not paragons of intelligence and understanding with unlimited budgets and no time constraints.

                    RT, being (among other things) a propaganda arm of the Kremlin, has a clear editorial bias, so it’s little surprise that they present a relatively consistent narrative.

                    Compare the years of painstaking enquiry it took to establish the facts of Operation Burnham with day-to-day war reportage.

                    Looks like SNAFU from here.

                    • Bill …
                      18 April 2017 at 4:27 pm

                      It’s pretty easy to opt for simple and clear terminology. And there’s a reason why clear and simple terminology wouldn’t be used and a reason why fuck all coverage would be given to this event.

                      See the link to the Fisk piece I provided below for a less media-centric analysis that sigposts the exact same set of conclusions.

                      edit – just realised I’m going to have to spell this one out. It’s all an integral part of the propaganda that would have us see things through the simple binary lens that always had Assad and Syria as “bad” and western backed headchoppers as “good”…so the media dutifully minimises any coverage of anything that might run counter to that simple picture, at the same time as it would and will maximise coverage of anything that feeds that simple picture.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      18 April 2017 at 5:08 pm

                      Binary narratives are stupid and wrong.

                      Thing is, in ignoring the constraints I mentioned above, the whole “MSM as dutiful agents of the state” narrative looks quite binary from here.

                      As Lao Tsu said, in times of war, horses bear soldiers through the fields. In times of peace, horses bear horseshit through the fields.

                      Edit: to spell it out, the media are the horses.

                    • Bill …
                      18 April 2017 at 5:27 pm

                      We agree that binary narratives are usually stupid and wrong. What’s msm feeding us when it comes to Syria?

                      But this next bit – are you seriously suggesting that in pointing to a relationship between msm and the state, and the general nature of that relationship, that that’s an act of pushing a binary narrative (and therefore “stupid and wrong”)?

                      If that’s what you’re saying, is that any less absurd than accusing someone who might point to the relationship between a police force and a state of “being stupid and wrong” on the grounds they’re pushing a binary narrative?

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      18 April 2017 at 6:17 pm

                      What’s msm feeding us when it comes to Syria?

                      That’s my point: the media isn’t “feeding” us anything we choose not to eat. The general sense is confusing, consisting of multiple and sometimes contradictory accounts, just like any set of witness statements ever, hence my reference to SNAFU.

                      By contrast, I suspect RT‘s narrative of being overly consistent.

    • Bill 8.3
      17 April 2017 at 8:13 pm

      Did you actually view the rt link McFlock?

      The anchor used the term ‘moderate rebels’ on precisely zero occasions

      He did use the term “supposed moderate rebels” once (the reasonable implication being that anyone who deliberately targets bus loads of civilians is anything but moderate).

      We then have Lizzie Phelan who does not once refer to either ‘moderate rebels’ or ‘supposed moderate rebels’.

      There is some short footage from December when buses were set ablaze by what the anchor refers to as ‘extremists’.

      When he comes to the Damascus interview he asks if it’s plausible to slate the attack back to moderate rebels as some reports are doing. The reply is that the reports are unreliable for stated reasons (eg – fake twitter accounts) and that blame can’t be laid until more is known or someone claims responsibility.

      Next question points out that many FSA rebels are reportedly dead. FSA , as you know, are touted as moderates by western sources. I guess the anchor is pointing out it’s highly unlikely that FSA would kill FSA. (Interesting and somewhat revealing analysis of them by Alaa Ibrahim though, eh?)

      Then I guess you missed the bit where the anchor accuses the Russian Embassy in the UK of ‘jumping the gun’? When was the last time you heard a western news anchor do any such thing in relation to a western government making accusations?

      I’d be willing to bet you can’t find a more informative and balanced report from yesterday than the one provided in the post. If you can, I’d genuinely love to see it.

      • McFlock 8.3.1
        17 April 2017 at 9:05 pm

        Yeah I watched it.

        “informative” and “balanced” seem to be highly subjective terms.

        Basically, for someone who seems to be outraged by the passive voice, relying on “supposed” as if it fundamentally changes the nature of that bullshit points to some pretty large motes in your eye as well as mine.

        • Bill 8.3.1.1
          17 April 2017 at 9:48 pm

          Maybe you need to explain what you mean by ‘passive voice’ and relate it back to a post about deliberately chosen (and predictable) msm priorities…and the concomitant mis-reporting and muddling that accompanies stories that must be covered in some fashion or another, but that would upset the dominant narrative if they were to receive much more than a passing mention?

          Informative and balanced are relative rather than subjective btw.

          • McFlock 8.3.1.1.1
            17 April 2017 at 10:00 pm

            The towns were besieged. Passive.
            As opposed to XXX besieged the towns. Active.

            • Bill 8.3.1.1.1.1
              17 April 2017 at 10:38 pm

              The towns were besieged – not very informative.
              XXX besieged the towns – informative.

              By your reckoning, the sentence “The towns were besieged by xxx” would be passive and something I’d be (in your words) “outraged” by. Which I wouldn’t be.

              It’s the deliberate(?) and unnecessary use of phrases that are both confusing and convoluted that’s the issue. People have to work to get an accurate picture of what’s going on. And given that most people give a newspaper article a ‘once over’ and walk away with impressions….

              • McFlock …
                17 April 2017 at 10:45 pm

                what, you mean like having to get almost halfway through a report to find that the “supposed” (by whom?) perpetrators are unlikely to be the ones responsible?

                  • McFlock …
                    17 April 2017 at 11:04 pm

                    but most people would have changed channel well before that correction, even if they placed any trust in that network in the first place.

                    • Bill …
                      17 April 2017 at 11:47 pm

                      I already said that wasn’t what I meant….not by this post and not by any comment I’ve made in this thread beneath the post.

                      I’m going away now having reflected on the fact you’ve lied in your comments, been pulled up on them, hop, skipped and jumped to wherever to throw up whatever other piece of nonsense by way of avoiding engagement on any points raised.

                      I’ve checked. You haven’t responded directly to one fucking thing that’s been written in response to assertions you’ve made. Not one.

                      I’d call it trolling, but I sense there’s something a bit more desperate going on.

                      G’dnight.

                    • McFlock …
                      17 April 2017 at 11:59 pm

                      Well, I guess I just have no freaking idea what you’re on about then.

  9. Tamati Tautuhi 9
    17 April 2017 at 3:41 pm

    MSM can not be trusted it is all orchestrated lies to suit the narrative coming out of the USA and the brotherhood NWO.

    • Bill 9.1
      17 April 2017 at 8:32 pm

      It’s not orchestrated so much as the result of simple blind adherence to a political paradigm. That’s why msm can be free – because they will always walk in step and stay well within ‘acceptable’ bounds.

      There is no NWO and no ‘globalists’ (unless you have a thing for extreme right wing nuttery)

  10. David Mac 10
    17 April 2017 at 4:18 pm

    The circular arguments of conspiracy theorists frustrate me, I steer clear. I know little about explosives but can’t help but think that there is something odd about the reports around this bus attack. It appears about 5 buses all carry similar damage, their sides blown away, some with holes in the roofs. The camera panned to a shallow crater beside the row of damaged buses, I assume it was where the car bomb went bang.

    Wouldn’t the damage radiate out? The bus closest to the crater a real mess and then moving away from the epicenter, the damage diminishing. But the damaged buses all appear to be carrying similar damage.

    Searching for the truth in war…Ha. At least with a haystack you know the needle is in there somewhere.

  11. WILD KATIPO 11
    17 April 2017 at 4:41 pm

    So what did the Rev Ian Paisley have to say ?

    Fook what he had to say !!!

    Arrrrrh !!! – wrong war , wrong time , – same old thing !!!

    Saints preserve us all !!!

  12. David Mac 12
    17 April 2017 at 4:44 pm

    In retrospect, a bus that caught fire inside could be much more damaged than one that didn’t closer to the explosion.

  13. Psycho Milt 13
    17 April 2017 at 4:49 pm

    Here’s my question. If media give a crap about Syrian people, then why isn’t the bombing of the bus convoy waiting to enter into Aleppo getting similar levels of coverage to the supposed sarin attack?

    Two reasons, neither of which are difficult to figure out for yourself:
    1. Suicide car bomb attacks are just about everyday occurrences in places where Muslims are in conflict, so the news value is relatively lower than for a sarin gas attack, which has a really high news value.

    2. The perpetrators of the attack and their motives are obscure. If it was clear that a government was responsible for this attack, you’d see blanket coverage and a parade of leaders and diplomats expressing outrage, regardless of the lesser news value of a car bomb attack. No government involved = just another obscure but murderous dispute among Muslims.

    And why are very basic facts being twisted or omitted?

    If they are, it’s because journalists get things wrong, especially when they’re relying on other people for their info. If you’ve ever seen media reporting on something you know a lot about, you’ll be familiar with it. There’s nothing about the Syria conflict that changes that.

    • Bill 13.1
      17 April 2017 at 8:23 pm

      When journalists get things wrong, they correct their honest mistakes. When journalists act as stenographers, that’s really not so much the case (for obvious reasons).

      But all I really have to say in response is that perhaps you and McFlock should catch up for a beer over this and revel in your shared misanthropy.

      • Psycho Milt 13.1.1
        17 April 2017 at 8:45 pm

        Like I said, if you’ve seen reporting on something you have some expertise in, you’ll see plenty that’s not quite right but isn’t worth correcting. In the article you link to, the journos write that the attack took place in a rebel-held area, ie this is a failure of the rebel forces, not the regime. It also says:

        Residents of rebel-held towns waiting in buses in government territory said they were terrified they could face reprisal attacks.

        Which makes it pretty clear the government is not being accused of carrying out this attack.

        From my cursory reading of Guardian reports on this attack, it looks like most likely Da’esh have taken the opportunity to attack people from one of the branches of Islam Da’esh doesn’t like (there are plenty of them), and rebel fighters were also killed. Nowhere have I noticed attempts to mislead me into thinking the regime was involved.

    • reason 13.2
      17 April 2017 at 9:31 pm

      Thanks for the racist explanation Psycho ……… how very british .

      Western governments murderous actions towards Muslims , ie Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya …………. and Syria has been based on lies and misinformation …… to back up the Muslim racist view that they are rag head suicide bombers.

      The common denominator in the civilian bloodbaths in the above mentioned countries is western interference and western arms ……….

      If the media reported that instead of being cheerleaders for war criminals ….. there would be a lot less misery in the middle east.

      Our reporting is mainly western war propaganda …… which is the reason why most people are confused about …. or do not care …. about the genocides we partake in.

      Its the Muslims fault you see ………………………

      • Psycho Milt 13.2.1
        18 April 2017 at 7:08 am

        PhilU……. is that you……

        It’s not racist…….. to refer to suicide car bombings as a feature of Muslim conflicts……….

        Any racist assumptions about Muslims being raghead suicide bombers who are collectively to blame for something are entirely your own …………….

        • reason 13.2.1.1
          18 April 2017 at 9:37 am

          Huge truck and car bombs are being made and used in Syria and Iraq ….

          “The United States via its Central Intelligence Agency is still delivering thousands of tons of additional weapons to al-Qaeda and others in Syria.” ….

          “The British military information service Janes found the transport solicitation for the shipment on the U.S. government website FedBizOps.gov. Janes writes:

          The FBO has released two solicitations in recent months looking for shipping companies to transport explosive material from Eastern Europe to the Jordanian port of Aqaba on behalf of the US Navy’s Military Sealift Command.

          Released on 3 November 2015, the first solicitation sought a contractor to ship 81 containers of cargo that included explosive material from Constanta in Bulgaria to Aqaba. ” ….

          “U.S. and Turkey supported “rebels” took part in the recent attack on Tal al-Eis against Syrian government forces which was launched with three suicide bombs by al-Qaeda in Syria. ” http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-04-09/us-government-reveals-3000-ton-delivery-weapons-and-ammo-al-qaeda-linked-syrian-rebe

          And lets not forget the ‘ratline’ for weapons liberated from Libya ….. to kill and destroy in Syria. https://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n08/seymour-m-hersh/the-red-line-and-the-rat-line

          • Psycho Milt 13.2.1.1.1
            18 April 2017 at 9:48 am

            I expect everyone who troubled themselves to read the OP is aware that conflicts in the Middle East involve few locally-manufactured weapons. If the OP was on that subject, your comments might have a little more relevance than the “none” they’re achieving at the moment.

            • reason 13.2.1.1.1.1
              18 April 2017 at 12:49 pm

              Seeing as the thread is about media disinformation in regards to war and conflict ……. presenting information that is censored and generally withheld… helps highlight the scope of it.

              The second link I posted is especially relevant to your rabid ( pro war ) posts..

              Apart from the ‘ratline’ of weapons from Libya fueling the war and arming Al-quada …. ….. it deals with their access to nerve gas

              Its by Seymor Hersh…… who revealed the My Lai slaughter and rape spree by u.s forces in Vietnam …. and the following cover up.

              I’d take his credibility over yours …..

              There was hundreds of operations like My Lai …..

              War is ugly and cruel so it relies on propaganda which dehumanizes the enemy …. so its alright to kill them.

              The results are consistent … https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CvNDkzi_HEE

              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4T8IfQNl-_8

              “Muslims do not hate us for our freedoms …. they hate us for our policy’s”

              Like arming , training and funding ……… and encouraging to the tune of $Billions$ …. radical extremism.

              A production line ………….. of suicide bomber s

              A lot of dead three year olds and other innocents ……

              Relevant …. but not to you

              • stunned mullet …
                18 April 2017 at 3:35 pm

                Hi Phil

                I have missed your musings over the last many months, hope you are well.

                • reason …
                  18 April 2017 at 7:38 pm

                  Hi cock …. Your off topic… wrong… and a dick pic.

                  Back on topic I’ll quote some Robert Fisk ……. He’s not dishonest and has regard for the victims of these unnecessary wars …

                  “There’s no doubting the flagrant, deliberate, vile cruelty of Saturday’s attack. The suicide bomber approached the refugee buses with a cartload of children’s cookies and potato chips – approaching, I might add, a population of fleeing Shia civilians who had been starving under siege by the anti-Assad rebels (some of whom, of course, were armed by us). Yet they didn’t count. Their “beautiful little babies” – I quote Trump on the earlier gas victims – didn’t stir us to anger.” ……

                  “For what we want right now is to blame the “evil”, “animal”, “brutal”, etc, Bashar al-Assad who was first “suspected” to have carried out the 4 April gas attack (I quote The Wall Street Journal, no less) and then accused by the entire West of total and deliberate responsibility of the gas massacre…”

                  “Even the leftist but hardly pro-Syrian Israeli writer Uri Avneri – briefly, in his life, a detective – has asked why Assad should commit such a crime when his army and its allies were winning the war in Syria, when such an attack would gravely embarrass the Russian government and military, and when it would change the softening western attitude towards him back towards open support for regime change.”

                  “We cried over and lamented and even went to war for those “beautiful little babies” whom we believed to be Sunni victims of the Assad government. But when Shia babies of equal humanity were blasted to pieces this weekend, Trump could not care less. And the mothering spirit of Ivanka and Federica simply dried up.

                  And we claim that Middle East violence has nothing to do with us.”

                  https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/syria-suicide-attack-refugee-buses-trump-only-cares-sunni-children-a7687066.html

                  “3000 tons” …. “81 containers of cargo that included explosive material” ….. and thats just a small small portion of the Freedom and democracy sent to ‘help’ Syria …………

                  Nazi type of help ……… Black is white

                  • stunned mullet …
                    18 April 2017 at 7:48 pm

                    Apologies…..my mistake your usage of ellipsis is very ‘phil like’.

                    ….and it’s you’re… eh

                    …. a pity….eh

                    …I was curious how Phil’s menagerie was after the loss of his dear old friend last year…

                    • reason …
                      18 April 2017 at 9:51 pm

                      You should apologies for talking troll shit on a thread about misinformation …. specifically regarding the

                      ” suicide bombing of a convoy of civilian refugees outside Aleppo killed 126 Syrians, more than 80 of them children ”

                      are you sick … eh
                      have no shame … eh
                      racist ….. eh

                      Have some peace propaganda ….. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8veOzd39VWI

  14. Antoine 14
    17 April 2017 at 11:20 pm

    Speaking as an outsider, you lot are collectively weird about Syria

    • ropata 14.1
      17 April 2017 at 11:36 pm

      Reporting war crimes and MSM failures is “weird” to you? Would it matter more if a bomb went off in your neighbourhood?

      • Antoine 14.1.1
        18 April 2017 at 12:23 am

        It’s the way you (collectively) discuss it that is weird

          • Antoine 14.1.1.1.1
            18 April 2017 at 3:24 am

            It doesn’t feel like it’s really about Syria any more; rather, about a few posters’ egos… (those that haven’t been banned yet…)

            A.

            • marty mars 14.1.1.1.1.1
              18 April 2017 at 5:43 pm

              Of course it is about ego – 99% of the posters are really just pushing the propaganda that fits their personal narrative. It is always like this cos this is the human condition and life as we know it.

  15. reason 15
    17 April 2017 at 11:43 pm

    What is weird Antoine is your indifference to fellow innocent humans having their lives and families destroyed ….. with huge amounts of suffering, refuges …. and other terrible things.

    Like the possibility of nuclear war.

    Now, back on topic ………

    The problem with the lies and propaganda we receive through the media ……….. is that our history becomes based on lies …………

    This was driven home to me when reading Moana Jacksons excellent writing regarding, ……. “the Crown’s recent undertaking to “commemorate” the 19th century wars when it wrested so much land from Māori and assumed a sovereignty that was never agreed.” http://e-tangata.co.nz/news/moana-jackson-facing-the-truth-about-the-wars

    These wars of confiscation …. as I’d describe them ….. and the following dispossession …. have a familiar propaganda to them.

    Compare and contrast ….. “The renaming began with the “Māori Wars”, as if Māori were the belligerents and the colonisers were the aggrieved. Māori were described as “rebels” or mocked on memorials to those who upheld “law and order” against the forces of “fanaticism and barbarism”. The fanatics and barbarians were the “non-friendly” Māori who opposed the Crown, of course, and the “law and order” was the authority the Crown wished to impose by destroying the law and order implicit in tino rangatiratanga.’

    modern renaming examples…. operation “enduring freedom” …”humanitarian bombing ….. and destabilisation programs followed by massively supported proxy wars described as civil wars…..

    These following quotes could just as well apply to modern Muslims and our wars against some of them….

    “It did not suit the colonisers’ interests to question the unjustness of the wars, or the grievances they caused to iwi and hapū in terms of human suffering and the confiscation of millions of acres of land.” ………..

    “Instead, truth and history were collapsed into a self-proclaimed innocence in which the takeover of the Māori world eventually became a takeover of historical memory.” ……..

    “the stories of the war were consciously redefined in a way which flew in the face of Māori political and social realities.” …..

    Instead of learning from history ….if its propaganda based….. we just repeat its wrongs.

  16. Incognito 16
    18 April 2017 at 12:01 am

    Hi Bill, I know you’ve already clocked off for the night.

    I hope you’re not going to take this the wrong way but I often struggle with following and understanding your writings; it is bloody hard work sometimes and I can never be sure that I have the right end of the stick. My impression is that I am not alone in this and that would be a real shame because you never write (about) trivial stuff but sometimes it tends to get ‘lost in translation’ if you know what I mean. HTH.

    • Bill 16.1
      18 April 2017 at 3:27 pm

      Through a different and narrower angle, Robert Fisk has eloquently covered what I was trying to signpost through my focus on deliberately muddled and noticeably muted media coverage of this massacre.

      Here’s the link to his piece in The Independent.

  17. The Weatherman 17
    18 April 2017 at 1:33 am

    “We’ll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false.” — William Casey, CIA Director, 1981

  18. adam 18
    18 April 2017 at 12:29 pm

    Bill, I have one of those thoughts on waking.

    The real kicker about this story, if Assad and co are gassing people, why would hundreds of women and children want to move to the areas controlled by him, if he was going to kill them?

    • Bill 18.1
      18 April 2017 at 3:36 pm

      What about asking, in all of that footage on a gas attack and its aftermath – where are the women? Do Syrian mothers just take off and leave their children to it? I’m being fucking serious here. Of all the people being stripped down, washed down, carted off….I didn’t see any women. And yet, shouldn’t they have accounted for about half of the affected adults? Actually, probably over half given the number of children and going on the assumption that young children tend to hang close to their mothers.

      And yes. All these people in Syria seeking refuge in government areas , be that Western Aleppo in the case where the headchoppers were ruling the roost in eastern districts…what are they thinking!

      Don’t they know they will be (according to western media) sluaghtered wholesale? Still waiting for that footage from eastern Aleppo to be aired – the footage of the slaughter carried out by the Syrian Arab Army that we were assured was on the cards. I guess it just must be too gruesome to broadcast /sarc

  19. tinfoilhat 19
    18 April 2017 at 4:32 pm

    I believe most of the reports suggested that a large number of women were amongst the dead.

    I’m not sure what you’re trying to suggest ?

    • Bill 19.1
      18 April 2017 at 5:16 pm

      I’m ‘suggesting’ nothing.

      I’m stating what I’ve seen (or more accurately, failed to see) when viewing White Helmet videos from Khan Sheikhoun.

      Maybe you have an explanation as to why (ostensibly) half of the adult victims – women –
      are just no-where to be seen?

      • tinfoilhat 19.1.1
        18 April 2017 at 6:52 pm

        Hi Bill

        i’m assuming that with all the reports agreeing that there were a number of women killed in the attack that it is an accurate report and if it was inaccurate I would think that one or more of the media outlets or online reporters would have said so, I’m certainly not going to search through videos and pictures of the dead and dying to prove or disprove your assertion.

      • marty mars 19.1.2
        18 April 2017 at 7:06 pm

        I think you are crossing a line – there could be lots of reasons other than your fucked up version, for instance religious. Your bias has distorted your thinking imo.

        • adam 19.1.2.1
          18 April 2017 at 8:20 pm

          But and here it really does get sick marty mars, the western media have shown us photos of dead women and children in the bus bombing.

        • Bill 19.1.2.2
          18 April 2017 at 9:29 pm

          What ‘version’!? What fucking line?

          I’m stating honestly what I’ve seen (or noticeably not seen) from what has been presented in the form of White Helmet videos that went fucking viral.

          Children being washed down. Men being washed down. Children being filmed in various states and situations. Men being filmed in various states and situations.

          No women that I noticed. And certainly not anything like half of those adults being filmed/videoed.