Wednesday, May 22, 2019

Holes

"Establishment Narrative Managers Struggle With New Syria Plot Holes" (Johnstone):
"The leaked document doesn’t by itself prove that the Engineering Assessment is correct and the official OPCW findings are incorrect, it just proves that there were other analyses which differed sharply with the official conclusions we’ve been permitted to see, and that we weren’t permitted to see those analyses. In a post-Iraq invasion world, this by itself is entirely unacceptable. And, rather than pushing for answers and accountability, the so-called journalists of the largest media outlets in the west are completely ignoring it."
The determination here is important enough to serve as the possible justification for a war, which, given the players involved, might turn into WWIII, so you'd think the onus would be on the OPCW to ensure that the report was 100% accurate.  A dissenting opinion from a long-time staff member is something that needs, at the very least, mentioning (and probably providing the good reasons why it was rejected), instead of only showing up as a leak from a whistle blower.  It is particularly bad when the missing dissent raises all manner of excellent points which directly refute the official conclusion, a fact which makes the entire operation look like nothing more than part of the apparatus of Empire and its desired wars. Of course, such a nuanced report wouldn't have done the warmongers any good.  A messy casus belli starts to smell like the missing WMDs of Iraq.

Tinmeline:
  1. March 14, 2018 - Skripal poisoning;
  2. April 7, 2018 - Douma attack (which might arguably been a distraction from the Skripal attack as its Official Story started to fall apart, particularly given the fact that a British spy runs the White Helmets);
  3. June 2018 - OPCW granted authority to place blame for chemical attacks, largely as a result of heavy British lobbying;
  4. March 1, 2019 - OPCW report on Douma; and
  5. late May 2019 - yet another allegation of a chemical attack from the Syrian government.
I note that the actual report doesn't explicitly ascribe blame to the Syrian government as everybody takes it as a given that the shells were delivered from the air - thus the vital importance of whether the shells were placed rather than fell from above - and the Syrian government is the only possible culprit.

It is quite a complex series of players:
  1. somebody to stage the scene (White Helmets = MI6), with the help of the terrorists (al-Qaeda) to supply the dead bodies;
  2. the (((media))) and 'professional' dissemblers like Bellingcat to spread the PR; and
  3. a 'disinterested, 'scientific' organization to provide the 'objective' details of the casus belli.
Needless to say, the warmongers at the OPCW have a Nobel Peace Prize.
blog comments powered by Disqus