Staged Chemical Weapons Attack in Syria? Why We need Critical Thinking



Next Story

I have 20 years experience teaching critical thinking. Today I teach critical thinking at one of the most prestigious universities in the UK, and the rest of the time I travel, teaching critical thinking to students in poor and rich countries around the world. I do this because I believe understanding how to identify fact from fiction is not just helpful – it is essential.

Most would probably agree that critical thinking (being able to separate facts from fiction and thus make informed decisions) is important, but unfortunately this skill is largely missing in the general public.

A Need for Critical Thinking

In 2014, Cambridge International Examinations research revealed that teachers across the globe believe critical thinking is the skill their students most lack when they begin their post-16 courses at school, and 56% of teachers said students were still unable to think critically when they entered university (source).

A 2011 study by sociologists from the New York University and University of Virginia concluded that 45% of students graduated “without knowing how to sift fact from opinion, make a clear written argument or objectively review conflicting reports of a situation or event” (source).

More recently, a 2017 study by MindEdge, an online learning company founded by Harvard and MIT educators, found 44% of college students could not correctly answer 6 of 9 questions designed to gauge their ability to detect fake news (source), and a report by The Wall Street Journal the same year found large groups of college seniors have “basic or below-basic levels” meaning “they can generally read documents and communicate to readers but can’t make a cohesive argument or interpret evidence” (source).

It is easy to focus on the students here, but if the majority of students are unable to critically think at 16 years of age, and are still unable to critically think when they enter or leave university, it follows that parents, teachers and other adults that they regularly come into contact with are also failing to effectively demonstrate how to do so.

That is not all. A report by the Foundation for Young Australians in 2015 found the demand for critical thinking skills in new graduates has risen 158% in 3 years (source) while a 2016 Stanford University report found college students actually performed worse than high school students at distinguishing “between a news story, an ad, and an opinion piece” (source).

This is extremely worrying when we consider that the growing nuclear threat and a lack of trust in political institutions are two main reasons scientists have set the doomsday clock at 2 minutes to midnight for 2018 (source).

The need for students and non-students to understand global events is indeed increasing, while the ability for the general public to act on truth, it seems, is actually declining.

The Ability to Act on Truth

Let us take one of the most important events unfolding in the world right now as an example – missile strikes against the Syrian government.

France (source), the UK (source) and the USA (source) claimed they had evidence that a chemical attack did take place on April 7th in Douma and that it was carried out by Bashar al-Assad’s regime. Meanwhile, Russia said this evidence comes only from media reports (source), and presented testimony from two medics who said the video broadcast of survivors being treated for chemical exposure had been faked by intelligence services, with Britain directly involved (source).

Is it possible that media outlets reported on a fake video about a chemical weapons attack that did not even take place so that the US-led coalition could justify attacking the Syrian government?

Critical thinking is the “The objective analysis and evaluation of an issue in order to form a judgement” (source). It is therefore first important to acknowledge any assumptions or conclusions we may already have based on prior conditioning (not facts). For example, a preconceived idea that our governments and media are the good guys and would not lie.

Next is the ability to find fact-based information to investigate the topic or argument to discover what the facts, not assumptions, actually are.

Evidence of Media Manipulation

In 2013 the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) released a documentary called Saving Syria’s Children with staged events and fake video footage of an an incendiary bomb attack that featured British doctor Rola Hallam, who not only lied about incendiary bomb victims around her, but also turned out to be the daughter of Syrian rebel supporter, Dr. Mousa al-Kurdi (source).

A similar event took place in 1990 when nurse Nayirah gave testimony that was used to justify bombing Iraq in the Gulf War. It turned out her testimony was also fabricated, and her father was in fact the Kuwaiti Ambassador to Washington (source).

The U.S. government has certainly been manipulating the media since the 1950s (source), and in 2010 it was made public that the CIA “now has relationships with reporters from every major wire service, newspaper, news weekly, and television network” and has “persuaded reporters to postpone, change, hold, or even scrap stories” (source). Modern journalists confirm this (source) and according to former CIA officer Michael Scheuer, the BBC is now one of the first organisations that the CIA goes to when they want to influence the news media (source).

Evidence of Chemical Weapons Attacks

In 2013, PressTV reported on a leaked document revealing a UK-Qatari plot to fund rebels and fake a chemical weapons attack from the Syrian government (source). Later that year, Carla del Ponte, leading an investigation for the U.N., found no evidence Assad had used chemical weapons but strong evidence coalition-supported Syrian rebels had carried out a Sarin nerve gas attack (source).

According to award-winning journalist Ben Swann, as of Feb 2018 there has been no evidence of Assad using any chemical weapons (source), and Professor Theodore Postol at MIT released a 6-page document providing evidence that the White House Intelligence Report from 2013 and 2017 were both blatant fabrications (source).

Postol also reminds us that false intelligence on weapons of mass destruction “led to a US attack on Iraq that started a process that ultimately led to a political disintegration in the Middle East” and only days ago, CNN reported that the US-led coalition in fact proceeded with military action in Syria without having any certainty about the alleged chemical attack (source).

Facts Not Assumptions

The final stage of critical thinking is to be able to make a conclusion based on the facts and not on any preconceived assumptions. According to University of Minnesota Professor Nan Gesche, this means having an open-minded “beginners mindset” without bias and prejudice (source).

This is the hardest part of critical thinking because of cognitive dissonance, which is the human’s tendency to argue black is white rather than hold a view that goes against their previous conditioning/assumptions.

Nevertheless, if we look at the facts, we must conclude “Yes. It is possible” that the media reported on fabricated evidence, and it is also possible that the attack was completely staged by intelligence services and did not take place at all.

Why? Because the facts show that all this has happened multiple times before. Please watch my video below to see why this matters and what we can do.

I also invite you to watch my full lecture on The Art of Critical Thinking, and if you would like me to make more Trews-style videos, then please let me know here.

WUWE is a project to promote critical thinking and inspire positive personal and systemic change by raising awareness of facts not covered in the mainstream; please support me on FacebookYouTube and Twitter, or subscribe for my latest updates here.

Get Your FREE In Depth Numerology Reading

Your life path number can tell you A LOT about you.

With the ancient science of Numerology you can find out accurate and revealing information just from your name and birth date.

Get your free numerology reading and learn more about how you can use numerology in your life to find out more about your path and journey. Get Your free reading.

×

Source Article from http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Collective-evolution/~3/p9HFa0STBTQ/

Syrian Doctor In Douma Has Some Serious Doubts Over The Chemical Gas Attack



Next Story

Remember when 9/11 happened? In that moment, a large portion of the country, and the world for that matter, actually believed that terrorists inside of planes took down the towers. This was the narrative which was constantly spewed out by mainstream media at the time. That was 2001, and the term ‘false flag’ was virtually unknown. Today, it’s a different story. Throughout the years, investigations continued and information kept emerging, we now know that the majority of the American population doesn’t believe the official story put out by the their government. Furthermore, there are now peer-reviewed studies which have been published inside of science and engineering journals, along with thousands of architects and engineers who have spoken out. Throw in the western military alliance and their connection to these supposed terrorist organizations who committed the attack, along with countless academicians, politicians, and military personnel testimony, and something doesn’t really seem to gel.  9/11 was used as a justification to infiltrate Iraq for ulterior motives. It’s the most popular example, an event that sparked a shift in perception, and an opportunity to finally see the corruption. In that sense, the poor souls who lost their lives that day have served a historical, humanitarian purpose.

Never before have we seen so much transparency, and so much opportunity to see the truth.

We are now seeing the same thing with Syria.

Ex marine, Ken O Keefe, really hits the nail on the head in this interview, stating quite emotionally that anybody who can’t really see what’s going on by now must be “the dumbest of the dumb.”

Even Americans from within the Department of Defense have been speaking up about it for years, like former NATO Supreme Allied Commander, General Wesley Clark. Clark said, in an interview with Democracy Now, that the U.S. had plans to invade countries in the Middle East, including Syria, for no justified reason at all.  He offered the sentiments of some within the American military, which is that they have a “good military” and that they can “take down governments.”  He spoke of a memo that described how the U.S. had “plans to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and finishing off, Iran.” (source).

He stated how is superiors told him that,  “I guess if the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem has to look like a nail.”

They (America) had no justification or reason to do what they did.

Not only do many Americans not believe the official explanation regarding 9/11, many aren’t really falling for what seems to be a massive propaganda campaign in Syria, with regards to last year, and this years most recent attack in Douma. When the last ‘attack’ happened, multiple academicians, politicians, and a big chunk of the global citizenry took the false flag perspective. Putin flat out said it was a “false flag” and that “more are being prepared in Syria.”

He’s even voiced his concern about the “magical” and “mythical” threats they impose on other countries in order to justify some sort of infiltration. If you think this is Russian propaganda, keep reading, because I address that later on in the article.

The World Is Waking Up To False Flags

The false flag narrative is really hitting the mainstream hard, which is interesting to say the least, because, as mentioned above, a decade ago this term was virtually unknown. It really goes to show just how much the world has woken up in such a short period of time. The fact that it’s even entered into the conversation is a big plus.

False flag means that the entire event was staged with crisis actors, or it can mean actual events taking place that are simply done by one group, but blamed on another, like 9/11. All for the purpose of invasion, division, and installing a government that would best suit the needs of America and its allies. There is an interesting document from the CIA showing that these plans have been in the works for a while, we will get to that later in the article as well.

Was the chemical gas attack in Syria a false flag like Putin and Assad are claiming? These attacks are always filled with tremendous amounts of controversy. Right now, the Organisation For The Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) is in there trying to investigate, while western media continues to push the idea that an attack did happen, and it was done so by Assad on his own people, which doesn’t really make much sense. There is no evidence to support that conclusion, other than intel from western intelligence agencies who are making the claim.

Where is the evidence? Why are Assad and a large majority of Syrian people saying that this is a false flag? What is going on here, and why is it always so hard to receive any sort of truth from mainstream media? Why have we seen so many examples of this type of activity from the western military alliance before? Why are we convinced that these people are genocidal dictators, yet are loved by so many? If someone like Assad is a dictator, what is George Bush? What is Barack Obama? What is the Deep State?

A document from the CIA provides some insight as to why we are dished out so much misinformation, as it states that the CIA task force “now has relationships with reporters from every major wire service, newspaper, news weekly, and television network in the nation,” and that “this has helped us turn some ‘intelligence failure’ stories into ‘intelligence success” stories,’ and has “contributed to the accuracy of countless others.” Furthermore, it explains how the agency has “persuaded reporters to postpone, change, hold, or even scrap stories that could have adversely affected national security interests or jeopardized sources and methods.”

This is why mainstream media and their broadcasts about geopolitical events is very questionable. Although it is a document outlining their desire to become more open and transparent, the deception outlined by various whistleblowers (example) requires us to read between the lines and recognize that the relationships shared between intelligence agencies and our sources of information are not always warranted and pose inherent conflicts of interest.

How can we really trust anything mainstream media says when it comes to geopolitics with the (brief) information provided above?

The Doctor In Syria

An interesting report by Robert Fisk (pictured above), a multi-award winning Middle East correspondent of The Independent, and a journalist who has risked his life to visit the Syria clinic at the centre of a global crisis. Fisk joined The Independent in 1989 and has written best-selling books on the Middle East, including Pity the Nation and The Great War for Civilisation. Fisk gained his BA in English and Classics at Lancaster University and holds a PhD in politics from Trinity College, Dublin.

He met with Dr. Assim Rahaibani, and shared his experience with the doctor,

“The 58-year old senior Syrian doctor then adds something profoundly uncomfortable: the patients, he says, were overcome not by gas but by oxygen starvation in the rubbish-filled tunnels and basements in which they lived, on a night of wind and heavy shelling that stirred up a dust storm.”

It’s important to get the real narrative of the people on the ground in Syria, but it’s also important to mention that he is sharing his experience not as an eye witness himself.

“He refers twice to the jihadi gunmen of Jaish el-Islam (the Army of Islam) in Douma as “terrorists” – the regime’s word for their enemies, and a term used by many people across Syria. Am I hearing this right? Which version of events are we to believe?”

He goes on to explain,

“Readers should be aware that this is not the only story in Douma. There are the many people I talked to amid the ruins of the town who said they had “never believed in” gas stories – which were usually put about, they claimed, by the armed Islamist groups. These particular jihadis survived under a blizzard of shellfire by living in other’s people’s homes and in vast, wide tunnels with underground roads carved through the living rock by prisoners with pick-axes on three levels beneath the town. I walked through three of them yesterday, vast corridors of living rock which still contained Russian – yes, Russian – rockets and burned-out cars.”

They would be Russian, and not American, and that’s because these “Islamist groups” don’t actually represent Islam at all.

“The global war on terrorism is a US undertaking, which is fake, it’s based on fake premises. It tells us that somehow America and the Western world are going after a fictitious enemy, the Islamic state, when in fact the Islamic state is fully supported and financed by the Western military alliance.”
– Dr. Michel Chossudovsky, University of Ottawa’s Emeritus Professor of Economics, spoken at the International Conference on the New World Order, organized and sponsored by the Perdana Global Peace Foundation.

Again, there are many questioning this attack, from former British and American commanders to academia, and more. It’s actually quite overwhelming.

Eva Bartlett, a Canadian journalist and human rights activist, divulged that “their video footage actually contains children that have been ‘recycled’ in different reports; so you can find a girl named Aya who turns up in a report in say, August, and she turns up in the next month in two different locations.Bartlett was a speaker at a United Nations panel on the current events in Syria. She delivers an incredibly insightful speech on what’s actually going on in Syria and how the White Helmets aren’t the heroes everyone thinks they are, but rather a strategic terrorist group that’s funded by the U.S.You can read more about the White Helmets in an article we published about them, here.

 Last December, Democratic Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard, introduced the Stop Arming Terrorists Act, the terms of which her website outlines succinctly: “The legislation would prohibit the U.S. government from using American taxpayer dollars to provide funding, weapons, training, and intelligence support to groups like the Levant Front, Fursan al Ha, and other allies of Jabhat Fateh al-Sham, al-Qaeda and ISIS, or to countries who are providing direct or indirect support to those same groups.”

And Gabbard herself was quoted as saying that the “CIA has also been funneling weapons and money through Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Qatar and others who provide direct and indirect support to groups like ISIS and al-Qaeda. This support has allowed al-Qaeda and their fellow terrorist organizations to establish strongholds throughout Syria, including in Aleppo.”

So again, this is nothing new, and it’s far from fake news or propaganda. We know this because western media continues to ridicule this assertion.

The Deep State has a long history of labelling foreigners as dictators, sponsoring terrorist activities in those countries and influencing a regime change to suit their own best interests. A document titled “Syria: Scenarios of Dramatic Political Change,” written in July of 1986 by the Foreign Subversion and Instability Center, part of the CIA’s Mission Center for Global Issues, states that its mission to analyze “a number of possible scenarios that could lead to the ouster of President Assad or other dramatic change in Syria.” Though the document is 25 years old, it shows that the U.S. plans to influence and infiltrate Syria to create change that would suit their own interests which dates back well over 30 years.

Another important point to make, for anybody who is calling the “false flag” narrative Russian propaganda, is to remember that this narrative has been expressed within geopolitics well before Russia brought it up. And it’s not just Russia, I recently published an article that provides a few examples:

MIT Professor Emeritus Claims Latest Chemical Attack In Syria Was Not Assad’s Doing

What’s also interesting to note about this whole chemical weapons debacle is that after the first one last year, CNN, like this time, accused Bashar Al Assad of killing his own people, but they also acknowledged that the “rebels” “are not in possession of chemical weapons, but that these “moderate terrorists” affiliated with AL Nusra are trained in the use of chemical weapons by specialists on contract to the Pentagon.”

Who Trained Who?

Anything that might help the U.S. government overthrow Syria, always seems to move forward. The terrorist organizations in Syria have been, again, in “cahoots” with terrorist organizations for a long time. `

In an earlier report dated December 9, 2012, CNN confirms that:

“The training [in chemical weapons], which is taking place in Jordan and Turkey, involves how to monitor and secure stockpiles and handle weapons sites and materials, according to the sources. Some of the contractors are on the ground in Syria working with the rebels to monitor some of the sites, according to one of the officials.

“In a twisted logic, the Pentagon’s mandate was to ensure that the rebels aligned with Al Qaeda would not acquire or use WMD, by actually training them in the use of chemical weapons (sounds contradictory.”
– Dr. Michel Chossudovsky (source)

So, we have U.S. government connections to the same terrorist groups they claim to be going after, as well as connections to funding groups in Syria that exist to over-throw the Assad regime.

Edward Snowden has also been tweeting about these connections.

The point is, the narrative from western media drastically opposes the views of many within the United States. Pink Floyd’s, Roger Waters, was the latest to show this and actually stopped his live concert to explain the “false flag chemical attack in Syria.” This came shortly before another individual was going on stage to praise the White Helmets, which Roger, rightfully so, did not let happen. You can read more about that here.

“The global war on terrorism is a US undertaking, which is fake, it’s based on fake premises. It tells us that somehow America and the Western world are going after a fictitious enemy, the Islamic state, when in fact the Islamic state is fully supported and financed by the Western military alliance and America’s allies in the Persian Gulf.”
– Dr. Michel Chossudovsky

Anybody who thinks this type of stance is Russian propaganda, you must know that these types of events have been taking place long before these supposed gas attacks.

For example, the CIA had secret efforts to topple Syria’s democratically elected Ba’athist government. The CIA plotted with Britain’s MI6 to form a “Free Syria Committee” and armed the Muslim Brotherhood to assassinate three Syrian government officials, who had helped expose “the American plot.” (Matthew Jones in The ‘Preferred Plan’: The Anglo-American Working Group Report on Covert Action in Syria, 1957). The CIA’s mischief pushed Syria further away from the U.S. and into prolonged alliances with Russia and Egypt.

After a second coup attempt, which is what we are seeing now with the Assad regime, anti-American riots hit the Mid-East from Lebanon to Algeria. Among the reverberations was the July 14, 1958 coup, led by the new wave of anti-American Army officers who overthrew Iraq’s pro-American monarch, Nuri al-Said. The coup leaders published secret government documents, exposing Nuri al-Said as a highly paid CIA puppet. In response to American treachery, the new Iraqi government invited Soviet diplomats and economic advisers to Iraq and turned its back on the West.

“In July 1956, less than two months after the CIA’s failed Syrian Coup, my uncle, Senator John F. Kennedy, infuriated the Eisenhower White House, the leaders of both political parties and our European allies with a milestone speech endorsing the right of self-governance in the Arab world and an end to America’s imperialist meddling in Arab countries. Throughout my lifetime, and particularly during my frequent travels to the Mid-East, countless Arabs have fondly recalled that speech to me as the clearest statement of the idealism they expected from the U.S.”
– Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

So, the point is, it’s not simply a Russian narrative, our geopolitical world has been build off of false flag attacks, and it’s been happening for a long time.


Get Your FREE In Depth Numerology Reading

Your life path number can tell you A LOT about you.

With the ancient science of Numerology you can find out accurate and revealing information just from your name and birth date.

Get your free numerology reading and learn more about how you can use numerology in your life to find out more about your path and journey. Get Your free reading.

×

Source Article from http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Collective-evolution/~3/Jmlvgd1dqsQ/

This Is The Problem: Out of Top 100 News Outlets, Not a Single One Questioned Syrian Attack

A disturbing trend has been ongoing within the mainstream media when it comes to reporting on United States foreign policy, and while some may argue that the media is typically critical of President Trump, 26 major editorials were published in response to his recent decision to launch airstrikes against Syria, and not a single one criticized the attack.

In fact, that sentiment was shared by the top 100 newspapers in the United States, according to an analysis conducted by Fair.org. Out of those papers, none of the editorials issued in response to an escalation of the war in Syria that could have sparked World War 3, condemned it. While 74 papers issued no response, the editorial teams from 20 papers showed overwhelming support, and six papers neither supported or condemned the attack.

“None of the top 100 newspapers questioned the US’s legal or moral right to bomb Syria, and all accepted US government claims to be neutral arbiters of ‘international law.’ Many editorials hand wrung about a ‘lack of strategy’ or absence of congressional approval, but none so much that they opposed the bombing. Strategy and legal sanction are add-on features—nice but, by all accounts, not essential. The total lack of editorial board dissent is consistent with major papers’ tradition of uniform acceptance of US military action.”

The analysis noted that as the “most influential paper in the country,” the New York Times, “has not opposed a single US war—from the Persian Gulf to Bosnia, to Kosovo to Iraq to Libya to the forever war on ISIS—in the past 30 years.” That trend has stayed in place in 2018, as the Times’ response to the attack showed its newfound support for the Trump Administration.

The New York Times’ Editorial Board claimed it was reassuring that his military response to a suspected chemical attack that killed dozens of people in the rebel-held Damascus suburb of Douma on April 7 was coordinated with Britain and France,” and applauded Trump’s decision to go after Syria because “preventing chemical weapons was in the ‘vital national security interest of the United States.’”

After months of pushing the claim that the only reason Trump won the 2016 election was that of “Russian election interference,” the Washington Post changed its tune on Trump and acknowledged his increased hostility towards Russia. Leading with the headline, “Trump was right to strike Syria. But the mission is far from accomplished,” the Post’s Editorial Board argued that the strike was a good start, but the U.S. must now be prepared for a response from Russia and Iran.

“Mr. Trump was right to order the strike, and also to focus it on chemical and biological facilities. It is vital that the international prohibition against the use of those horrific agents be upheld; the participation of Britain and France in the operation was important in that respect. At the same time, the president and Mr. Mattis clearly sought to minimize the risk of a direct military confrontation with Russia or Iran. That is prudent, but if Russia takes retaliatory action, including in cyberspace, the United States must be ready to respond.”

An editorial from USA Today claimed that the attack authorized by Trump was an appropriate way to punish Syrian President Bashar Assad and his military for gassing his own helpless people two days earlier. The nerve agents employed are among the most barbarous and indiscriminate weapons ever devised.”

The Wall Street Journal argued that “Syria’s illegal use of chemical weapons against its own people demanded or at least justified the Western attacks.” The Los Angeles Times went as far as to claim that an alleged chemical attack from the Syrian government is far worse than what the U.S. has done to civilians in Syria:

“Whatever one thinks of the wisdom of Trump’s decision, he is right to see the use of chemical weapons as especially abhorrent. Of course, conventional weapons also cause death and injury, and a child killed by a barrel bomb is just as dead as a child poisoned by sarin or chlorine gas. But for a century, chemical weapons have been viewed by civilized nations as beyond the pale. The descriptions in recent days of Syrian victims gasping, trembling and foaming at the mouth only reinforces that view. If the deployment of such weapons in Syria goes unpunished, other governments and movements might be emboldened to violate that prohibition.”

As Fair.org noted, this is not an uncommon trend, even with the Trump Administration. When the U.S. responded to reports of an alleged chemical attack by the Syrian government with airstrikes in April 2017, only one of the 47 newspapers opposed the airstrikes in their editorials responding to it.

However, the most glaring problem with the mainstream media editorials is not that they supported the airstrikes or opposed them. The most egregious problem with their responses was that the same entities that are supposed to act as the “Fourth Estate” holding the U.S. government accountable, blindly supported reports of a chemical attack that has yet to be verified.

Following the airstrikes targeting the Syrian government, U.S. intelligence officials admitted that they were conducted despite the fact that the United States had no proof that Syria had carried out a sarin gas attack on its own people. In fact, the attack occurred the day before an investigation was set to take place.

A number of the editorials also claimed that the airstrikes from the U.S. were justified because they targeted facilities housing chemical weapons that could have been used on Syrian civilians. However, witnesses on the ground in Douma claimed that the airstrikes actually destroyed a cancer research facility.

The latest example of blatant propaganda from the mainstream media serves as a reminder that the same outlets who helped start the Iraq War by falsely claiming that Saddam Hussein had “Weapons of Mass Destruction” are now pushing the United States towards an escalated war in Syria with unverified claims of a “chemical attack” when the only groups responsible for routinely carrying out chemical attacks on Syrian civilians are the U.S. military and the rebel groups they support.

DASH cryptocurrency and The Free Thought Project have formed a partnership that will continue to spread the ideas of peace and freedom while simultaneously teaching people how to operate outside of the establishment systems of control like using cryptocurrency instead of dollars. Winning this battle is as simple as choosing to abstain from the violent corrupt old system and participating in the new and peaceful system that hands the power back to the people. DASH is this system.

DASH digital cash takes the control the banking elite has over money and gives it back to the people. It is the ultimate weapon in the battle against the money changers and information controllers.

If you’d like to start your own DASH wallet and be a part of this change and battle for peace and freedom, you can start right here. DASH is already accepted by vendors all across the world so you can begin using it immediately.

Source Article from https://thefreethoughtproject.com/this-is-the-problem-out-of-26-mainstream-news-reports-on-trumps-syria-strikes-zero-questioned-it/

Breaking: US, UK and France Attack Syria, Commit War Crime

SANA distributed photo of the US, UK and France cooperated attack on Syria.
SANA distributed photo of the US, UK and France cooperated attack on Syria.

On the morning of the Muslim’s commemorating Israa and Miraaj, the ascending of prophet Muhammad PBUH to heavens and to Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem, the pariah states of the USA, UK and France illegally, unlawfully, without consent, without any mandate and without any respect to the international law nor peace and stability in the world.

The evil empire of regimes led by a lunatic at the White House, a poodle at 10 Downing Street and a boy inheriting de Gaulle legacy by destroying it. All of them trying to solve their internal pressing issues on the account of the oldest civilization in the world that never posed any threat against any of their interests anywhere in the world, until now.

The attacks targeted what is said to be a Syrian research center, a military base, and a chemical storage facility, as claimed by propagandists and the mouthpieces of the criminals themselves. Over a 100 missiles were launched on 3 targets within Syria, the ones that passed Syrian Rusian-made air defense systems reached their targets and caused damage.

We are awaiting an official Syrian state statement to specify the casualties and damage.

Qatar, Cyprus, Jordan, UAE, and Israel have also contributed to the attack. US and UK bases in Qatar and Cyprus were used and Israel paved the way by testing the Russian air defense missiles which failed to stop all the incoming air to surface missiles in last week’s Israeli attack against T4 military airbase near Homs.

While the whole international community is awaiting the results of a chemical inspection team arriving in Syria to uncover what really happened in the alleged chemical attack in Douma earlier this month, and while the United Nations is still debating, this doesn’t matter to the bloodthirsty pariahs.

Muslim money was also used to finance the pariah states attacking Syria, especially from Al Saud and Qatar.

The rudeness of the pariah states attacking Syria in disregarding the international law and the United Nation’s whole charter just adds more crimes to their horrific track record.

This crime against humanity should not go unaccounted for, if the citizens of the countries involved do not overthrow the politicians they elected to launch this attack, each citizen of those countries is a partner in crimes against humanity and holds the same blood share their ‘elected’ politicians do hold. No excuse for ignorance or incapability is justified.

Trying to cover up their crimes based on fake alleged chemical attack they only staged, as proven, and to further lie and conceal the real facts on the ground with the help of their massive propagandists gives us very high doubts about the real events that led to the great wars, especially World War II and whatever we were told by the ‘victors in the war’ and should be re-examined in details with doubt of fakery and cover-ups.

Syria does not have any real ally when it comes to the real battle, only in words and referring to international law ignored by the criminals. We said this before and we repeat it now. Unless Russia and Iran make a serious move without useless diplomacy, they are not reliable and Syria should deal with them in similar manners without sacrificing itself to save them as it did during 8 years of war between Iran and Iraq and saving the Russian economy by not approving the Qatari gas pipeline.

Not a single missile targeted terrorist organizations in reality while western mainstream media propgandists were constantly claiming the US and its allies were fighting ISIS, on the ground they were only targeting whoever fights ISIS and its affiliates all over the country.

Source Article from http://www.syrianews.cc/breaking-us-uk-and-france-attack-syria-commits-war-crime/

Lavrov– ‘US attack on Syria has changed the rules, and now Russia’s moral obligation to not sell air defense to Syria is over

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 5,910 other followers

Source Article from https://theuglytruth.wordpress.com/2018/04/20/lavrov-us-attack-on-syria-has-changed-the-rules-and-now-russias-moral-obligation-to-not-sell-air-defense-to-syria-is-over/

G7 foreign ministers’ statement on the Salisbury attack

JPEG - 59.4 kb

We, the G7 foreign ministers, of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States of America and the High Representative of the European Union, are united in condemning, in the strongest possible terms, the attack that took place against Sergei and Yulia Skripal, using a nerve agent in Salisbury, United Kingdom, on March 4, 2018. A British police officer and numerous civilians were exposed in the attack and required hospital treatment, and the lives of many more innocent British civilians have been threatened. We express our deepest sympathies to them all and our admiration and support for the UK emergency services for their courageous response.

The United Kingdom has thoroughly briefed G7 partners. We share, and agree with, the UK’s assessment that it is highly likely that the Russian Federation was responsible for the attack and that there is no plausible alternative explanation. We condemn Russia’s continued failure to address legitimate requests from the UK government, which further underlines its responsibility. We call on Russia to urgently address all questions related to the incident in Salisbury. The Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) has now independently confirmed the findings of the United Kingdom relating to the identity of the toxic chemical that was used in Salisbury. Russia should provide full and complete disclosure of its previously undeclared Novichok program to the OPCW in line with its international obligations.

This use of a military-grade nerve agent, of a type developed by Russia, constitutes the first offensive use of a nerve agent in Europe since the Second World War and is a grave challenge not only to the security of the United Kingdom but to our shared security. It is an assault on UK sovereignty. Any use of chemical weapons by a state party, under any circumstances, is a clear breach of international law and a violation of the Chemical Weapons Convention. It is a threat to us all. Their use is abhorrent, completely unacceptable and must be systematically and rigorously condemned. We, participating states of the International Partnership Against Impunity for the Use of Chemical Weapons, stand together against impunity for those who develop or use these weapons, anywhere, any time, under any circumstances.

The G7 is committed to protecting and promoting the rules-based international system. We stand in unqualified solidarity with the United Kingdom. Our concerns are also heightened against the background of a pattern of earlier irresponsible and destabilizing Russian behaviour, including interference in countries’ democratic systems. We call on Russia to live up to its Chemical Weapons Convention obligations, as well as its responsibilities as a permanent member of the UN Security Council, to uphold international peace and security. In order to bring Russia back into the rules-based international system, we will continue to engage with Russia, as appropriate, on addressing regional crises and global challenges.

The G7 will continue to bolster its capabilities to address hybrid threats, including in the areas of cybersecurity, strategic communication and counter-intelligence. We welcome national action taken to constrain Russian hostile-intelligence activity and to enhance our collective security. The G7 will remain closely focused on this issue and its implications.

Source Article from http://www.voltairenet.org/article200815.html

RT visits hospital seen in Douma ‘chemical attack’ video, talks to boy from footage (VIDEO)

Hassan Diab, 11, appears to be the trembling boy seen in the video of the aftermath of the alleged chemical attack in the Eastern Ghouta city. The footage was circulated by mainstream media after being posted by the so-called Douma Revolution group on Facebook. 

The organization was one of those, along with the controversial White Helmets, which claimed that the Syrian government was behind the alleged chemical attack in the city on April 7. An RT Arabic crew visited the hospital seen in the alleged chemical attack video. In a bid to shed light on the story, the crew also caught up with the youngster, who was portrayed as a ‘victim’ in the footage.

He says he was with his mother when they were urged to rush to the hospital. “We were outside, and they told all of us to go into the hospital. I was immediately taken upstairs, and they started pouring water on me,” the boy recalled.

“The doctors started filming us here [in the hospital], they were pouring water and taking videos,” he added. Hassan’s father later hurried to the hospital. “I was very surprised, and asked what had happened, why my son’s eyes were red. I found out that it was water, but it was cold, he could have got sick, he was undressed,” the man recalled.

Russian broadcaster VGTRK was the first to find the boy and his father and break the story. Now, Moscow is planning to show the video about Hassan at the next meeting of the UN Security Council, Russia’s UN envoy Vassily Nebenzia said on Thursday.

Despite the doubts, unconfirmed social media posts and claims by the White Helmets were enough for the American-British-French coalition to strike Syria on April 14 over the alleged attack. The US-led force was so sure of its ‘sources’ that it went on with the strikes even though the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) had not even started working on the ground to establish the truth.

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

Source Article from https://www.rt.com/news/424694-douma-boy-video-attack/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=RSS

Propaganda in action: Out of top 100 news outlets in US, not a single one questioned Syrian attack

mainstream media war

    

A disturbing trend has been ongoing within the mainstream media when it comes to reporting on United States foreign policy, and while some may argue that the media is typically critical of President Trump, 26 major editorials were published in response to his recent decision to launch airstrikes against Syria, and not a single one criticized the attack.

In fact, that sentiment was shared by the top 100 newspapers in the United States, according to an analysis conducted by Fair.org. Out of those papers, none of the editorials issued in response to an escalation of the war in Syria that could have sparked World War 3, condemned it. While 74 papers issued no response, the editorial teams from 20 papers showed overwhelming support, and six papers neither supported or condemned the attack.

“None of the top 100 newspapers questioned the US’s legal or moral right to bomb Syria, and all accepted US government claims to be neutral arbiters of ‘international law.’ Many editorials hand wrung about a ‘lack of strategy’ or absence of congressional approval, but none so much that they opposed the bombing. Strategy and legal sanction are add-on features-nice but, by all accounts, not essential. The total lack of editorial board dissent is consistent with major papers’ tradition of uniform acceptance of US military action.”

The analysis noted that as the “most influential paper in the country,” the New York Times, “has not opposed a single US war-from the Persian Gulf to Bosnia, to Kosovo to Iraq to Libya to the forever war on ISIS-in the past 30 years.” That trend has stayed in place in 2018, as the Times’ response to the attack showed its newfound support for the Trump Administration.

The New York Times’ Editorial Board claimed it was “reassuring that his military response to a suspected chemical attack that killed dozens of people in the rebel-held Damascus suburb of Douma on April 7 was coordinated with Britain and France,” and applauded Trump’s decision to go after Syria because “preventing chemical weapons was in the ‘vital national security interest of the United States.'”

After months of pushing the claim that the only reason Trump won the 2016 election was that of “Russian election interference,” the Washington Post changed its tune on Trump and acknowledged his increased hostility towards Russia. Leading with the headline, “Trump was right to strike Syria. But the mission is far from accomplished,” the Post’s Editorial Board argued that the strike was a good start, but the U.S. must now be prepared for a response from Russia and Iran.

“Mr. Trump was right to order the strike, and also to focus it on chemical and biological facilities. It is vital that the international prohibition against the use of those horrific agents be upheld; the participation of Britain and France in the operation was important in that respect. At the same time, the president and Mr. Mattis clearly sought to minimize the risk of a direct military confrontation with Russia or Iran. That is prudent, but if Russia takes retaliatory action, including in cyberspace, the United States must be ready to respond.”

An editorial from USA Today claimed that the attack authorized by Trump was “an appropriate way to punish Syrian President Bashar Assad and his military for gassing his own helpless people two days earlier. The nerve agents employed are among the most barbarous and indiscriminate weapons ever devised.”

The Wall Street Journal argued that “Syria’s illegal use of chemical weapons against its own people demanded or at least justified the Western attacks.” The Los Angeles Times went as far as to claim that an alleged chemical attack from the Syrian government is far worse than what the U.S. has done to civilians in Syria:

“Whatever one thinks of the wisdom of Trump’s decision, he is right to see the use of chemical weapons as especially abhorrent. Of course, conventional weapons also cause death and injury, and a child killed by a barrel bomb is just as dead as a child poisoned by sarin or chlorine gas. But for a century, chemical weapons have been viewed by civilized nations as beyond the pale. The descriptions in recent days of Syrian victims gasping, trembling and foaming at the mouth only reinforces that view. If the deployment of such weapons in Syria goes unpunished, other governments and movements might be emboldened to violate that prohibition.”

As Fair.org noted, this is not an uncommon trend, even with the Trump Administration. When the U.S. responded to reports of an alleged chemical attack by the Syrian government with airstrikes in April 2017, only one of the 47 newspapers opposed the airstrikes in their editorials responding to it.

However, the most glaring problem with the mainstream media editorials is not that they supported the airstrikes or opposed them. The most egregious problem with their responses was that the same entities that are supposed to act as the “Fourth Estate” holding the U.S. government accountable, blindly supported reports of a chemical attack that has yet to be verified.

Following the airstrikes targeting the Syrian government, U.S. intelligence officials admitted that they were conducted despite the fact that the United States had no proof that Syria had carried out a sarin gas attack on its own people. In fact, the attack occurred the day before an investigation was set to take place.

A number of the editorials also claimed that the airstrikes from the U.S. were justified because they targeted facilities housing chemical weapons that could have been used on Syrian civilians. However, witnesses on the ground in Douma claimed that the airstrikes actually destroyed a cancer research facility.

The latest example of blatant propaganda from the mainstream media serves as a reminder that the same outlets who helped start the Iraq War by falsely claiming that Saddam Hussein had “Weapons of Mass Destruction” are now pushing the United States towards an escalated war in Syria with unverified claims of a “chemical attack” when the only groups responsible for routinely carrying out chemical attacks on Syrian civilians are the U.S. military and the rebel groups they support.

Source Article from https://www.sott.net/article/383378-Propaganda-in-action-Out-of-top-100-news-outlets-in-US-not-a-single-one-questioned-Syrian-attack

Rand Paul: Syrian Chemical Attack A False Flag

Home » Falsehood, Manipulation, North America, Politics, Videos » Rand Paul: Syrian Chemical Attack A False Flag



 


The chemical attack allegedly perpetrated by the Syrian government is most likely a false flag, according to Senator Rand Paul (R-KY).

When asked by CNN’s Wolf Blitzer if stalling Russian sanctions was the right move for Trump, Paul directed the topic to whether or not the chemical attack in Syria was even genuine.

“I think before you talk about sanctions, we oughta talk about what evidence is there that Russia was complicit in this attack,” Paul said on Monday.

“In fact, for that matter, I still look at the attack and say Assad either must be the dumbest dictator on the planet or maybe he didn’t do it. I have yet to see evidence that he did do it. The intelligence agencies claim they have that evidence. But think about it: does it make any sense?”

“He’s been winning the war for the last couple of years,” he continued. “The only thing that would galvanize the world to attack Assad directly is a chemical attack. It killed relatively few people compared to what can be killed with traditional bombs, traditional machine guns, traditional tanks. And so you wonder, what logic would there be for Assad to be using chemical weapons?

“So before we get to the Russians, we have to first determine that Syria was implicated, and then we outta determine what the connection is between Russia and Syria on this attack.”

Source











RELATED ARTICLES


Did you like this information? Then please consider making a donation or subscribing to our Newsletter.













Leave a Reply











Source Article from http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/TheEuropeanUnionTimes/~3/fA5kpDUsuks/

Syrian boy exposes US chemical attack masquerade: "lured with cookies than sprayed with water"



 


A boy who was portrayed as a ‘victim’ in a rebel-linked activists’ video of the alleged chemical attack in Douma has told Russian broadcaster VGTRK that he was lured into the hospital with cookies and then sprayed with water.

Panic, fear, screaming adults and frightened children featured in the purported footage of the aftermath following the alleged chemical attack in the Eastern Ghouta city. The video has been circulated by mainstream media since April 7 after being posted by the so-called Douma Revolution group.

The group is one of the organizations, along with the notorious rebel-linked White Helmets, that has claimed government troops were the culprits behind the reported chemical attack.

One of the main ‘characters’ in the footage is a soaked boy, who is seen being sprayed with water by people who claim to be ‘rescue workers.’ It’s not clear whether they are doctors from the hospital, human rights activists, or White Helmets members. The latter usually make such videos and send them to news agencies, including Reuters.

Russian broadcaster VGTRK said it found the boy in the video, who appeared to be 11-year-old Hassan Diab. His story differed from the one presented by the activists and later propagated by the mainstream media. He was in the basement with his mother, who said they ran out of food, when they heard some noise outside.

“Somebody was shouting that we had to go to the hospital, so we went there. When I came in, some people grabbed me and started pouring water over my head,” he told Evgeny Poddubny, a war correspondent from Russian broadcaster VGTRK. Hassan confirmed that he was the boy in the video, and was very scared when the whole situation unfolded. He is now fine and shows no symptoms of having experienced a chemical attack two weeks ago.

Привет. Это Хасан Диаб. Ему 11 лет и он снимался в ролике Белых касок за еду (финики, рис, печенье) 7 апреля в Думе. Хасан жив и здоров и передает привет всем, кто так сильно переживает за пострадавших в Думе от отравления, и одобряет удары по Сирии. ************************************************************In return for playing a victim in #WhiteHelmets propaganda video 11 year old #HassanDiab got some badly needed food a few dates, rice, and a cookie He is alive and well and sends his greetings to everyone#whitehelmets #douma #syria #chemicalattack

A post shared by Евгений Поддубный (@evgeny.poddubny) on Apr 18, 2018 at 8:16am PDT

He was eventually found by his father, who said he didn’t hear about any chemical attack that day. “I went to the hospital, walked upstairs, and found my wife and children. I asked them what had happened, and they said people outside were shouting about some smell, and told them to go to the hospital. At the hospital, they gave dates and cookies to the kids,” he said.

One of the medical workers, who was reportedly on shift at the time, said he was surprised by the sudden influx. “Some people came here and washed people. They said: ‘Chemical attack. Chemical attack.’ We didn’t see any chemical attack symptoms,” he added. He did, however, say that there were many people with respiratory problems as a result of dust from recent bombings in the city.

Social media posts and the White Helmets’ report were enough for the US, UK and France to launch a series of strikes on Syria on April 14. The announcement of the strikes came hours before the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) team was scheduled to arrive in Douma to determine whether chemical weapons had been used there.

“The boy agreed to play this role for food. Then the video was circulated across the globe and became the ‘evidence’ which served as an excuse for the US, the UK and French airstrikes [against Syria],” Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova wrote on Facebook.

Moscow is planning to show the video about Hassan at the next meeting of the UN Security Council, Russia’s UN envoy Vassily Nebenzia told Rossiya 1 on Thursday.

Source











RELATED ARTICLES


Did you like this information? Then please consider making a donation or subscribing to our Newsletter.

Source Article from http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/TheEuropeanUnionTimes/~3/zzkXdxCox14/