latest, media fakery, Syria
Comments 50

Is the sarin also a lie?

by Catte

Imagine the Cuban Missile Crisis – only the Cuban Missiles may not even exist.

The most important aspect of the latest Syrian crisis is the one getting least attention in many quarters. Yes, Trump’s actions were deplorable. But let’s not forget they were also a response to an alleged chemical attack that may never have happened.

It’s not just that we don’t know who was responsible for this attack (which of course we don’t, even slightly). It’s not just that this might be another Ghouta, which would be tragic and farcical enough, it’s that the attack itself has been so sketchily reported and so poorly validated that its reality remains far from certain.

No investigation has yet been conducted. No independent witnesses have been cited. The main source for imagery and information is the White Helmets – who are known and admitted to have faked or distorted previous events. Some of that photo evidence is frankly questionable.

The hilarious fact is we are currently – as Russian PM Medvedev said – on the brink of a conflict with nuclear-armed Russia – and no one knows if the catalysing event even happened. It might well be just another lie. Another bit of badly done fake footage. Like this. And this. And this.

We are subsumed in the unreal now, and may be about to incinerate ourselves in its name.

Imagine the Cuban Missile Crisis – only the Cuban Missiles may not even exist.

That is how grotesque we are.


50 Comments

  1. ti williams says

    Anyone seen any evidence at all in the weeks since the alleged attack that the Syrian Government deliberately gassed its own people? Just asking. It all reminds me the ancient British habit of exaggerating the evil of the enemy in order to whip up the necessary moral outrage to justify an illegal war. In Belgium in 1914 we made up stories about German soldiers raping nuns. In 2003 we made up stories about weapons of mass destruction. In Libya I forget what the phoney casus belli was but the result was the same: chaos. The Syrian gas attack comes from the same play-book.

    Like

    • I asked Admin a similar question and got this reply:

      “google it – we aren’t your research assistants”

      I hope you get a less belligerent response.

      Like

    • If by “global conspiracy” you mean the avowed military, political and financial interests of the Western alliance as personified by membership of NATO and the EU – then yes, France is indeed a part of it. It has, additionally, upheld every pro-war narrative produced by the US in recent times.

      Like

      • aaronmicalowe says

        The problem with the conspiracy view is that we dismiss all evidence that doesn’t support what we believe to be true while automatically accepting any evidence that supports our view.

        To avoid that political quagmire, I’m curious as to what parts of the French onground investigation can be confirmed and what parts are disputed and why (on an evidence by evidence bases rather than dismissing everything because one piece of evidence is in question).

        Like

        • Jen says

          If the French knew how the Syrians used to manufacture sarin gas using hexamine as a stabiliser among other things, what was to stop the French themselves from making sarin gas the way the Syrians did and pass off the result as Syrian-made?

          In other words, can we be sure that the samples the French claimed to have received from the Khan Sheykhoun site really were from there?

          Like

          • aaronmicalowe says

            It is possible, but with that level of scepticism it is never possible to prove anything. I couldn’t even prove the universe exists under that test.

            Indeed, all the evidences and articles written about by Off Graun would also fail to meet that level of scepticism. At some point people have to make a choice. Some will choose one way. Others will choose another.

            I apply a simple test to stop my scepticism dismissing everything. The bigger the conspiracy, the more evidence is needed to support it. So, this conspiracy involving all the Western countries in the world and others like Israel (basically something akin to the so called “New World Order”) would need much more evidence to support its existence than the evidence that is supplied to debunk or contradict it.

            For example, I used to believe that 9/11 was as was portrayed by the media. After a year of gathering information that is more credible and legitimate than the US government can contrive I had to modify my view. But the conspiracy that 9/11 was committed by the Bush administration (or internal US group) was so ridiculously large it took a hell of a lot of evidence to prove it, all the time making sure not to dismiss evidence provided by the US government and NIST etc until those evidences were proven false.

            Simply doubting the French and believing that their “investigation” has been faked isn’t enough. That way leads madness. We have to gather evidence that specifically contradicts that result. Anything less is non-scientific.

            Seriously, where do we stop drawing theories to support the conspiracy? Is all of science created to trick us? Is the universe an illusion? Do we have any choice? It doesn’t help to ask these questions any more than it helps to ask the political affiliation of a tuna sandwich.

            Like

            • If we can draw you back from the generic rant to the specific issue –

              The French claim is currently only a claim. They don’t even make it clear if they are alleging the “signature” hexamine is unique to SAA sarin – which is a rather important elision. Given the fact the SAA was confirmed to have destroyed all its chemical weapon stocks in 2014, and given we have the Ghouta attack as a previous example of rush to judgement and possible false flag, and given the lack of specificity so far in the French report, it seems premature to make assumptions.

              Like

              • aaronmicalowe says

                Do we have any evidence that the SAA destroyed all its chemical weapons? Also, what evidence is there that prevents the SAA from developing new chemical weapons?

                Like

                • well the destruction was confirmed by international observers. Rather than asking for basic info why not do a little research 🙂

                  Like

                  • aaronmicalowe says

                    And which international observers? I’ve been ridiculed in this very thread for not remembering the specific name of of an international observer, so it’s fair to ask you which specific international observers you’re referring to.

                    Like

                • MS I posted a reply a few minutes after your comment but it got deleted and I haven’t been able to post again until recently (i.e. the website blocked me).

                  So, I’ll try again to say what I wanted to say on the 27 April.

                  You say “Chemicals Declared by Syria”.

                  That doesn’t answer my question although you boast it does. Also, how do we know that this declaration is true?

                  Like

                    • Whatever you say Admin, and however you wish to spin it, we have established that the comments weren’t posted and that no other website was effected. That eliminated any potential problem with my computer, my ISP or the internet in general. So, that boils it down to either off-guardian.org or perhaps some 3rd party server. Those are the only possibilities now and that is what I am referring to as “the website” since that is the only interface I can interact with. How it happened in the background and whether it was on purpose or accidental is not my concern.

                      Like

  2. Nifty Nick says

    Video showing quite clearly the “victims” of the Westminster attack being wheeled into the Marriot Hotel next to Westminster Bridge. Not St Thomas’s hospital across the road – the Marriot HOTEL.

    Can anyone think of a single good reason why this would happen if these people were actual victims?

    Like

    • John says

      All we saw was just one person being wheeled on a trolley into the hotel.
      The rest of the video was largely incidental activities.
      On the basis of this “evidence”, I would not come to any conclusion as to the veracity of the attack.
      What we do know is that 4 people died and scores were injured.
      That is hardly a false flag operation for the people and families affected.
      A police officer died and his funeral was observed by thousands around the country.
      I don’t think you can fake an event like that.
      It is right to be questioning about official versions of events but – this time, at least – it seems it is the correct one.

      Like

      • aaronmicalowe says

        I am curious though as to what happened to the guy they wheeled into that Hotel. Did he ever come out? Who is he?

        Like

  3. archie1954 says

    It would seem to be just common sense that you don’t bomb another nation, without clarifying the facts of the situation first. This rush to bomb, without knowing for sure that the party being bombed did the hideous deed, is outrageous and just plain foolish. The consequences for the whole World could be extremely severe.

    Like

  4. Frank says

    It was Winston Churchill who remarked on Neville Chamberlain’s appeasement of Hitler in Munich 1938 that
    ” … “You were given the choice between war and dishonour. You chose dishonour and you will have war.” The American neo-cons want war, more likely they want to give the impression that they want war, but they think they will force Putin and Russia to surrender. So the relentless drive to encirclement and war continues and will never stop. Sooner or later, therefore, Putin will face his Cuban moment. If for example the US sets up ICBMs in Ukraine. This seems unavoidable. He will have to either call the neo-con bluff or take a trip to Washington to sign the terms of Russia’s surrender.

    But it should be borne in mind that everyone – including power-crazed neocons – is aware of the destructive power of modern nuclear weapons and that such a nuclear exchange would just about finish life in the northern hemisphere – for starters. The notion that america can be protected by ballistic missile defence is in the same bracket as belief that the earth is flat or that man-made climate change is not happening.

    The prospect of imminent nuclear war will i believe will concentrate minds wonderfully, just as it did in the first Cuban crisis.

    Like

    • John says

      Frank: what you have not factored into your analysis is religious fanaticism.
      Have you noted that Trump’s statements have started to include religious references?
      There is a strong christian-zionist-alt-right-lobby in the USA which would welcome the destruction of the world.
      These are so-called rapturists, who believe the destruction of the world is necessary for the Messiah to return.
      They were in Bush’s administration too – as you may have guessed.
      They all believe that all Jews should migrate to Israel to ensure the return of their “Lord”, the conversion of all the Jews to christianity, and the beginning of a 1,000 year (sound familar?) reign (or reich?) led by Jesus.
      If all this sounds completely crazy, well – it is. But these people do actually believe this nonsense.
      That is why they are so much of a threat to world peace, let alone global planetary survival.
      Amerika is the worst-ever superpower in the entire history of the world with idiots like these running things.
      Still, this immediate contretemps will not – I believe – result in anything much for now.
      It will all have been forgotten in two weeks time……

      Like

  5. michaelk says

    There are powerful forces within the deep state in Washington that don’t want to accept defeat in Syria, and their regional allies don’t either. So they want to reverse the outcome of the war, one way or another. The only way to really do that is to get American forces engaged directly as their terrorist ‘rebel’ army has failed and lost. This is of course incredibly dangerous as the Russians see their vital security interests threatened if the Assad regime is toppled and the conflagration sweeps onwards towards the Caucasus and Russian Central Asia, led by a western backed victorious Muslim army… on a roll.

    Defeating Russia in Syria might even revive the moribund ‘opposition’ in Russia itself and undermine Putin’s prestige and popularity, threatening his rule. So there’s a lot at stake here. Can the Russian’s accept defeat in Syria by the Americans? The Russians know where the US backed terrorist army is heading next, after all.

    What makes things incredibly dangerous is that the war party in Washington seems to believe they can limit the conflict to Syria without it turning into a direct nuclear confrontation with Moscow and WW3. When push comes to shove the Russians will back down like they did over Cuba.

    Hope lies in Russia. The Russians are trying to avoid war with the West for as long as possible, but it’s really, really, hard work. It may even no longer be possible as hysteria has gripped the West’s leaders who no longer even appear rational. We’re living in extremely dangerous times, yet looking at our media one wouldn’t know it.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Kaiama says

      When histrians look at pre www history, they are reading what was written by the people who won. The www is a great leveller in the information war. It is no longer possible to control one version of the news.

      Like

    • Meister says

      Washington doesn’t have to accept the defeat in Syria. All it takes is to triumphantly proclaim that the goals have been achieved, declare victory, and ride off into the sunset. Since this guarantees the status quo, the arms sales will not suffer, the think tanks will churn out their analyses, and everyone will go on as before.

      Like

  6. Reblogged this on wgrovedotnet and commented:

    It really doesn’t take that much imagination. For instance, imagine the slaughter of half a million Iraqi children based on a WMD crisis and the WMD’s were not there?
    Are we all, really this stupid, that we cannot discern the lie from the fake and remember the lies of the past being repeated again and again?
    So much for Saving Syria’s Children, eh?
    Many thanks to Catte for this article.

    Like

  7. mog says

    If I said that I killed a man last night, you might want to phone the police. A group might want to start debating the incident: Was it self defence ? Was it manslaughter or pre-meditated murder? etc. All that opinion might circulate without first considering that I might have ‘killed a man’ in my dreams.

    This is why I spent so much time trying to get people I know to research 911 and related fabrications of history. It was obvious that the time would one day come when the unquestioning acceptance of a deception was going to have the very gravest consequences. It seems that time is now, and we are in an existential battle for reality itself.

    Our culture (especially the liberal media) seems unable to follow the simple sequence that starts with establishing the facts through considering evidence.
    It is as if the dogmatic adherence to Enlightenment principles has led, paradoxically, to their complete inversion.

    Like

    • very good summation . . . one that I have been believing myself. One that tells me we, as a nation, are iin really deep shit!

      Like

  8. Kaiama says

    I have seen no reliabl evidence. This reporter who claims to have seen the dead everywhere >24hours after the alleged incident. At the very least, why isn’t there a comprehensive report with facts, video andphotos? These people have a vested interest in stitching up Assad. The so called bomb photo seemed more like a groun-ground rocket or mortar and I question why there was anything left of it at all in the impact crater. The photos of graves seemed not to be anywhere near the cemetery in the town which is shown on google maps. The fact that we have stones spaced 1person apart yet have stones at both ens of the line. The burial site seems more like wasteground than a cemetery. I’m not saying somthing didn’t happen but there is an awful lot of imprecision and vagueness. Too many inconsistencies and too many crazy stupid assumptions. Defending Assad against the US is going to end up as ww3. The US broke international law after failing to wait for a proper investigation. QED.

    Like

  9. aaronmicalowe says

    There are international observers on the ground that have confirmed that it was a nerve agent.

    Like

      • Sav says

        The observers are likely the highly regarded International Observatory of Observing Chemical Stuff (23 1/2 hour service).

        Like

        • aaronmicalowe says

          The chance of me finding out what this organisation is called now is pretty much nil. I didn’t invent this story though. All I know is it was some international organisation of surgeons. Why surgeons? I have no idea. Maybe they need this info in order to treat people on the ground. God knows.

          By the time I come across the exact name of the organisation I bet the truth of what happened in Syria will be known anyway. As always it seems the truth comes out long after it would make any difference and is then used as an excuse to commit the next atrocity, and so the cycle continues on and on.

          Like

    • Davey says

      Aaron. There are no honest brokers within rebel controlled areas, the closest thing in the area is Medics Without Borders, who have presented no definite opinion on the attack. The Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) expressed serious concern about the reports and said a fact-finding mission was “in the process of gathering and analysing information from allavailable sources”.The OPCW will not be able to confirm anything until samples are tested at an accredited laboratory. Perhaps we should at least wait for the lab tests before drawing any conclusions ?

      Like

      • Sav says

        By which time ‘rebels’ will provide shell casings which they’ve smeared with the breakdown chemicals of sarin.

        This is my take: The ‘rebels’ are using chlorine bombs. Naturally the media blame it on the government. Easy to make with just basic household products and the chloramine gas produced provides the choking affect. They’ve used these from early on to fake sarin attacks.

        The UK government have even been warning about terrorists using chlorine bombs back home.

        Like

      • aaronmicalowe says

        If there are no honest brokers within the region, and you have to be on the ground to get direct results, then that means that all theories about the Sarin attack (including Off Graun’s) are currently unprovable. This is not unusual in war situations where information is also used as a weapon.

        Like

    • Jen says

      Aaron, do you have a direct line to ISIS or Jabhat al Nusra? Is that how you were able to confirm the presence of “international observers”?

      Like

      • aaronmicalowe says

        No, I think I viewed it on CNN. Yes, I know that for you that must prove it’s fake but then either this organisation exists or it doesn’t. Just because I can’t remember the name of it doesn’t mean its existence if forever stricken from the book of reality. I am not God, after all.

        Like

.....................

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s