BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Sep 13 - 01:31 PM

Those are not the words of Cameron or any other politician.
None of them have said that or anything like it.
Those are the words of Laurie Penny, who writes for NS on pop culture, politics and feminism.

Read your own shit Jim dear and stop wasting everyone's time.

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Sep 13 - 01:21 PM

Sorry - not exactly the same - here Cameron has added the need for Britain to "feel big and important" - even more disgusting!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Sep 13 - 12:56 PM

"Complete fabrication"
"Are we still going to feel big and important? Will our exports be affected?"
David Cameron - you have the link to the New Statesman article above
Similar statements have been made by Cable - who has admitted in the past that they trade with states that have abominable human rights records - and a further statement by yet another minister is also linked in connection with trying to explain away the sale of sarin producing chemicals - to be reasonably exact "Britain's trade with Syria must not be affected".
Do you get turned on by defending war crimes and human rights atrocities - do you stand in front of a mirror while you do it?
Perv!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Sep 13 - 11:36 AM

DESPITE HOMS AND DESPITE THE CHEMICAL ATTACKS BRITAIN - CAMERON AND AT LEAST TWO OF HIS MINISTERS HAVE STATED PUBLICLY ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS THAT "WHATEVER THE OUTCOME BRITISH TRADE WITH SYRIA MUST NOT BE AFFECTED"

Complete fabrication.
A made up quote that no-one ever said.
A desperate lie from a floundering fart.

Nice colours though Jim.

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Sep 13 - 11:13 AM

"Where did Assad get all the rest of his weapons from?
Russia and China."
Assad has being purchasing the wherewithal to make chemical weapons from britain for six years - they started to purchase it at the time they began to establish their chemical industry - a documented fact.
They now have a massive arsenal of chemical weapons which will tale a decade to dismantle - they say it will tae a decade to decommission it a a horrendous cost and have suggested that the West pays the billion or so it will cost to remove.
Your feeble little arm-wavings about China and Russia only goes to show that the British Government has made Britain as culpable as the rest of them in regard to Chemical use against civilians - as you indicate - they are all a shower of mercenary bastards - you couldn't sqeeze acredit card between their morals THEY HAVE ALL ACTED AS ASSAD'S ARMOURERS
It was pointed out by a defecting Syrian official last year that Assad placed great value on his relationship with Britain - he advised that this should be used as leverage to stp the Homs Killing - NOTHING WHATEVER HAS BEEN DONE IN THIS RESPECT - ON THE CONTRARY, DESPITE HOMS AND DESPITE THE CHEMICAL ATTACKS BRITAIN - CAMERON AND AT LEAST TWO OF HIS MINISTERS HAVE STATED PUBLICLY ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS THAT "WHATEVER THE OUTCOME BRITISH TRADE WITH SYRIA MUST NOT BE AFFECTED"

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: GUEST
Date: 20 Sep 13 - 10:41 AM

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Teribus
Date: 20 Sep 13 - 09:32 AM

By the way unnamed Guest:

"Special Forces from US and UK must have been on the ground from an early stage, who must be closely involved with the action."

Why must US or UK Special Forces have been on the ground in Syria?
Why from an early stage?
Why must they have been closely involved in the action?

Utterly ridiculous - absolutely no requirement whatsoever for them to be there.

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Teribus
Date: 20 Sep 13 - 09:24 AM

GUEST
Date: 20 Sep 13 - 08:16 AM

Incident 1: Tokyo subway attack at the height of the Tokyo rush hour where five separate trains were attacked some extremely well educated and intelligent "nutters" who manufactured their own Sarin managed to kill 13 people

Incident 2: The attacks in Damascus on the 21st August 2013 killed 1429

Incident 3: In Iraq Saddam Hussein killed over 5,000 in one single attack in 1988

The difference? In Tokyo the agent was home made, in Syria and in Iraq the agent was professionally manufactured, weaponised and delivered by a dedicated means purposely designed to cause the maximum amount of death and incapacity.

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: bobad
Date: 20 Sep 13 - 09:00 AM

"Not a high level of expertise to produce Sarin so could have been produced by either side."

From Reuters:

"Mr Sellstrom confirmed that the quality of the sarin was superior both to that used in the Tokyo subway but also to that used by Iraq during the Iraq-Iran war," he told reporters.

"This does not point to a cottage industry chemical," said Lyall Grant, taking a swipe at earlier comments by Churkin. Churkin said in July that a Moscow analysis found "cottage industry" quality sarin gas was used in an alleged March 19 attack, which he blamed on the rebels."

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: GUEST
Date: 20 Sep 13 - 08:16 AM

Special Forces from US and UK must have been on the ground from an early stage, who must be closely involved with the action. Not a high level of expertise to produce Sarin so could have been produced by either side. But if only small amounts have been used might indicate an agent provocateur.

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Sep 13 - 08:07 AM

Where did Assad get all the rest of his weapons from?
Russia and China.
I am sure that they were happy to supply precursors too and, unlike UK, without checking on their end use.

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Sep 13 - 07:58 AM

There is no evidenvce as to where the chemical weapons came from, though we do know that the chemical sales took place at the time Syria was establishing its Chemical weapons stockpiles - it's covered in one of the earlier links
The bastard should never have been sold such material FOR WHATEVER CLAIMED PURPOSE and anybody having done so has now implicated the countries concerned in human rights abuses and possibly indictable war crimes
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: GUEST,Ed T
Date: 20 Sep 13 - 06:39 AM

I suspect most of the nuke stockpiles was from the cold war, when the USA (and some of its allies) and Russia (with china) feared they would be nuked by the other- a belief that having more of them deterred the other. This does not seem st all to be of a similar situation as with Assad. It still puzzles me as to the purpose of having that large a volume- that Assads people seem to have said it would take a year or more to get rid of such large stockpiles.

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Sep 13 - 06:13 AM

It wasn't for your benefit Keith - others have no trouble reading words with more than three letters
I await with anticipation your defence of the British sales of chemical components essential to the manufacture of chemical weapons recently used on the people of Syria - you appear to be left only with:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zv-dP4sdWls
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Sep 13 - 05:58 AM

You forgot to colour it all in Jim.

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Sep 13 - 05:43 AM

The updte was the fact that sales of the saran chemical have been going on for six years, the last sale was de-licensed - the earlier ones took plave therefore the recent gas attack was almosst certainly carried out using BRITISH SUPPLIED COMPONENTS
The fact that these components can be used in the manufacure of toothpase is totally irrelevant - it was sold to country with a long record of human rights abuses and which now will be possibly indited for war crimes - making Britain a full and knowing accomplice in those crimes.
If you are going to continue defending implication in War Crimes - make a better job of it - you claim to be a aptriot - TRY HARDER You Pratt
Jim Carroll
FROM THIS MORNINGS TIMES

WE WOULD RATHER BE GASSED THAN STARVED, SAYS DOCTOR
Syria
Tom Coghlan, Roger Boyes
Thousands of Syrians trapped in the city of Homs for 500 days without power or food supplies are being starved out by the Assad regime, a trapped doctor said yesterday.
"Doctor M" told The Times that being gassed to death would be a more preferable end than the slow misery being inflicted on the city in what has been compared to the siege of Stalingrad.
"Sick people here do not die due to [lack of] medical treatment but because of hunger and severe malnutrition, unhealed wounds, severe lack of food and absence of basic human necessi¬ties," he said via a Skype connection.
The doctor, who declined to be identi¬fied for his own safety, added: "All nego¬tiations with the regime failed to give any corridor to get the families out. We are trying to bring out the injured. We have 3,000 people and 1,000 are in¬jured, many women and children."
Details of the siege of Homs have emerged as the Alawite regime under President Assad appears to be winning its two-year war against rebel fighters and cementing its hold on power thanks to the Russian-proposed chemi¬cal weapons decommissioning plan. Alawites are an offshoot of the Shia branch of Islam.
The intensity of fighting around the city indicates the strategic importance of the town. Once the Government re¬takes control of Homs, it will control an arc of territory from the Jordanian border up to the Mediterranean coast.

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Sep 13 - 04:29 AM

Final sentence of Jim's old Daily Mail piece.
"Last night a BIS spokesman said: 'The five licences were granted to two UK exporters. We cannot publish their names for reasons of commercial confidentiality. The end users were two Syrian commercial companies.
'The quantities of sodium fluoride involved were commensurate with the stated end use in the production of cosmetics and there was no reason to link them with Syria's chemical weapons programme. This remains the case.'

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Sep 13 - 04:21 AM

If you bothered your arse to read your own, out of date, discredied sources, you would have seen this printed at the head of it.

"PUBLISHED: 22:10, 7 September 2013 | UPDATED: 15:35, 8 September 2013"

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Sep 13 - 04:14 AM

"Since September 7th, Vince Cable rubbished all those claims and the story is dead."
If you'd bothered your arse reading the link (nothing changes) you might have noticed that it carries today's date and contains the information that Britain has been selling the wherewithal to manufacture chemical weapons for six years to dictator who is known to have been killing and torturing his people for over a decade - that sort of information is never out of date - it is the arming of a war criminal with chemical weapons.
I have differences with many on this thread but you are the only bunch of twats who fit the description I have given
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Sep 13 - 03:04 AM

Jim, your Daily Mail piece is long out of date.
Since September 7th, Vince Cable rubbished all those claims and the story is dead.
Except in your fevered brain obviously.

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 20 Sep 13 - 03:04 AM

Jim Carroll: "From the Times over the last couple of days.

"NO DOUBTS, BUT ASSAD CAN CARRY ON KILLING
Anthony Loyd
Commentary......."

Let's look at this again, OK?

Last line: "Commentary"

Yes, an impassioned account, based on a common assumption, with no facts to back it up...same as the other one. Look, I'm not trying to play down the tragedy, nor minimize cause of the deaths, nor am I less than sympathetic, to the families...it's ALL fucked..OK?

We just don't know, who, for sure, did it. ..and 'funding' can provide delivery systems, to anyone with the inclination to do it, for whatever agenda....be it foreign or domestic...get over it!

THEN when they are TRULY found out, THEN give them hell deluxe!

Have you ever noticed that when 'terrorist groups' do something like that, they ALWAYS take the 'credit', and 'claim responsibility' and they announce that it was them??

That was conspicuously missing this time.....
I'm open for ALL possibilities!!!
I hope THINKING things through is not something you see as an unsanitary act!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Sep 13 - 03:01 AM

What a sorry bunch
Insanitary, who has been insisting on the possibility of Assad's innocence in the use of chemical weapons.
Face Ache, who has been arguing that it is nuffin' to do with us

Why single out those two?
What about Little Hawk and your old mates Don T, Stringsinger, Greg, .......

It is just you and me who think something should be done to discourage further use of gas.
Obviously, being sane, I don't actually demand that our forces should march in there.

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Sep 13 - 02:21 AM

What a sorry bunch
Insanitary, who has been insisting on the possibility of Assad's innocence in the use of chemical weapons.
Face Ache, who has been arguing that it is nuffin' to do with us because "Syria or any of the 'Arab Spring' protestors have no interest in” the good ol' British take on democracy.
And Keith, who has insited as far back as forever that everything Britain does is OK with him and to criticize trade with terrorist and despotic states is "aniti-British" – it doesn't matter anyway as, "everybody is doing it", so why pick on poor old Britain?"
Good to be back among those who know what's and who all have their hearts set at righting the world's wrongs!
Jim Carroll

From the Times over the last couple of days.

"NO DOUBTS, BUT ASSAD CAN CARRY ON KILLING
Anthony Loyd
Commentary
The Syrian war's mid-term future and the survival of the Assad regime has been decided as much by the timing of yesterday's UN report into the chemical attack in Damascus as by its contents.
Though stopping short of decisively laying blame for the attack on the regime, in its every detail the report suggests beyond reasonable doubt that sarin nerve agent was used and that the regime was responsible.
Yet had the finding been released in time to influence Britain's parliamentary debate on intervention— itself a fulcrum event that shaped President Obama's hesitation in launching strikes — punitive military action might have already occurred.
The report's timing has instead dealt a new hand to every player at the diploiiiatic table, though at the expense of Syrian civilians.
President Assad's survival has been guaranteed, for the while at least, and an continue to wage war using the same conventional weapons that have killed the vast majority of the 100,000 dead so far.
Russia, Iran and China can feel relief that their ally—whose continued tenure of power is now a default necessity by which to implement the Geneva deal—has bounced back in strength.
In the meantime, Israel, America and Europe, deeply worried as much by the possibility that Syrian chemical weapons might fall into the hands of Islamic radicals as that they may be used again by the regime, may now address those concerns.
The strength of wording in the Security Council resolution being drafted to back the Geneva plan will decide the strategies of each of these players. What it will not influence, though, is the emerging strategic threat posed by thousands of al-Qaeda-Iinked militants in the country, possibly the greatest conglomeration of radical militants since Afghanistan in the Taleban era.
Nor is it likely to affect the fate of Syria's population, who will continue to face the ravages of war, the rockets, missiles and bullets that allow them to be killed each
day in the conventional way."

GASSING OF SYRIAN CIVILIAN
Syria
Will Pavia New York
Gruesome new evidence of a chemical weapons attack in Syria proved that the 1,400 civilians it killed were victims of a war crime, the UN Secretary- General Ban Ki Moon said yesterday.
UN inspectors reported "clear and convincing" evidence of a large-scale rocket attack releasing sarin gas on suburbs in Damascus last month, the incident that almost triggered punitive military strikes from the US.
The keenly awaited report stopped short of blaming President Assad in per¬son for the gassing. However, France, Britain and the US said it left no doubt that his regime was responsible. Russia, which has so far blamed the Syrian rebels for the outrage, gave no immedi¬ate response.
The report — and Mr Ban's impassioned plea for the UN Security Council to impose "consequences" on the Assad regime if it fails to disarm its chemical arsenal — could change the dynamics of a crucial 72 hours of diplomacy in New York.

And Britain's stance at the time of the rejection of the proposal to intervene
"Are we still going to feel big and important? Will our exports be affected?"
http://www.newstatesman.com/uk-politics/2013/08/there-are-too-many-bodies-buried-britains-moral-high-ground

Britain's long-term trade in chemical components to Syria
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2415081/Britain-sent-poison-chemicals-Assad-Proof-UK-delivered-Sarin-agent-Syrian-regime

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Teribus
Date: 20 Sep 13 - 01:55 AM

"the amount of chemical weapons Assad accumulated. What did he plan to do with 'em all?" - Ed T

I know this runs counter to what most believe on this forum but most of the larger "Arab" countries in the region got their weaponry from the Soviet Union - Jordan and Saudi Arabia being the exceptions.

With Soviet weaponry came Soviet tactics and military thinking and the Soviets opted to retain Chemical and Biological weapons after the Second World War.

Chemical and Biological agents have a shelf life - they go off, so you have to constantly renew your stock of agents and amounts just build up if you do not have the facilities to safely dispose of them. The USA have such facilities and that is why the USA has become the repository for thousands of tons of this stuff as it awaits destruction.

Another facet of the region that differs from the west is that the armed forces in these countries main purpose is not to protect the country from foreign aggression but to protect the Government in power, they are used as a tool of repression.

Bashar Al-Assad's plans for those weapons were exactly the same as those of his father and the same as Saddam Hussein, a means of terrorizing your own population, a means of deterring your enemies and/or threatening your neighbours.

The threat of using chemical weapons against say NATO forces does not work as all their equipment and all their soldiers are protected against such weapons and they are all well practiced in operating in a chemical environment. No-one in their right mind would threaten NATO with a chemical attack because NATO's automatic response to such an attack is to use tactical nuclear weapons. UK unilaterally abandoned chemical weapons in 1956, the USA did the same about 9/10 years later.

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 19 Sep 13 - 11:14 PM

Sorta like all those nuclear weapons museums, huh?

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: GUEST,Ed T
Date: 19 Sep 13 - 03:30 PM

What pizzles me is the accounts of the amount of chemical wepons Assad accumulated. What did he plan to do with 'em all? He hardly wanted to set up a chemical weapons museam. He surely knew thei use goes against international law. Beats me!

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: GUEST,Ed (
Date: 19 Sep 13 - 03:22 PM

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 19 Sep 13 - 12:03 PM

Ake, I think Don T may have had an 'epiphany' about 'proof vs hype', since the Zimmerman trial..(I know, because I've gone around and around with him, about that, too), and I've seen his position change about the chemicals used on civilians, just on this thread. I think that is commendable!! He may be re-thinking some things about that, perhaps on some of the other topics as well.
As this topic unfolds, and either more proof comes out, or is hidden, may have an effect on others, who may just hold a 'partisan line', solely on the fact, that it was just a commonly held 'partisan line'.
As ANYONE who has followed my posts knows, I've been blasting partisan politics, when it comes to changing facts, and playing on people's emotions, steering them away from either the truth, or proof, of their positions...and what people are seeing because of the way this topic was dealt with, by the politicians and press, might just be a MAJOR breakthrough!! As I've said before, the 'peace' and/or protest movement of the 60's era, have been co-opted by the Democratic party, and they've been PRETENDING to champion 'liberal causes' for several decades, when in fact, the two parties have been playing off each other, while managing to push through policies and agendas, that have been favoring a system, that neither party, and the citizens would be in favor of, if it weren't for the smoke and mirrors, that's been purposely created, to keep people in the dark, and blaming 'the other party'!!!!.....Then they 'conscript' normally really decent people to adopt the most outlandish notions, get them emotionally involved, create divisions and then operate in the shadows and 'grey areas', deceiving BOTH sides!!!...disappointing BOTH sides, of the 'common folk', with it!!!...and those same 'decent folks', evolved into the 'parrots', making excuses on behalf of the very people who were willfully deceiving them!!..BOTH sides..BOTH parties....BOTH becoming neither true 'Conservatives', NOR 'Liberals'!!...yet thinking that they were/are!!!......(hence my oft repeated usage of the term, 'so-called', as in 'so-called liberals').
I think Don's change of position, if you will, is 'pointing the way', not just for this subject, but for a list of others, as well...(which I'd LOVE to point out here, but it would lead to a major thread drift, I'm sure.

His quote, "For me, proof should precede action, not follow it", should be a motto to live by, for all those enveloped into 'partisanship politics'....then we'd see their numbers plummeting!!!

As it is now, (and as aforementioned by moi), is that the Democrats are starting to feel betrayed, or alarmed about Obama in his second term, just the same way Republicans were starting to feel about Bush, in his second term!!....and as songwriters, and performers, that had their roots in the 60's, protesting the policies of BOTH sides, when nobody was listening, it's time to remember who and what you are!!!!..and that your greatest tool, is the one you tune up, after you get your head clear!!!

Regards and Cheers!!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Teribus
Date: 19 Sep 13 - 09:12 AM

"I note with some degree of despair that said war lovers have ignored the fact that establishing a bearing for a missile does not prove the point of origin.

As I said, there were two separate missiles and each could have been fired from any point along those bearings which lies within their maximum and minimum range from the target.

So, if they were fired separately, the conclusion that they must have come from that area is not justified by the evidence.

More is needed than just the bearing." - >b>Don T

I would agree wholeheartedly if that indeed was the case - i.e. if all they had to go on was a line of bearing. But that was not the case was it Don?

(A)They (UN Inspectors) knew:

1: Type of Rocket
2: Range
3: Angle of impact
4: Trajectory of missile
5: Line of bearing

Now couple that to

(B) What the US knows from their intelligence satellite images

1: Who was firing on the 21st August
2: Where those firing positions were
3: The times of the various bombardments
4: The communications traffic within units of the Syrian Army before, during, and after the attack

Now combine both - we all know the weapon used was Sarin and we know that at least one of the missiles fired was Russian in origin. Eye witnesses on the ground can confirm timings and if any coincide with barrages from Assad loyalist positions then you have your proof, beyond what Keith refers to as "reasonable doubt" - which back in the days of capital punishment meant that you would have been hanged

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Sep 13 - 07:45 AM

and perhaps what I write has served a useful purpose to Keith?

Yes, often.
You were certainly right about how the Arab Spring would end up.
I was wrong about it.

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: akenaton
Date: 19 Sep 13 - 07:05 AM

Don...That is disgraceful conduct.
If Keith or I applied these conditions to our participation here we would spend our lives in the shower!

Why don't you calm down and discuss the issue....if something comes up which you don't think is relevant, just ignore it, or express your feelings without making personal comments.

Keith and I disagree on this issue, but I find it valuable to listen to the points he makes...sometimes he has shown me where I have got things wrong, and perhaps what I write has served a useful purpose to Keith?

Surely that's what this section of our OL community is all about?

Just calm down, nothing we say will change anything, there is no need to make enemies......Quoting Ian is always a bad idea. :0)

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 19 Sep 13 - 06:26 AM

For the absolute final time Keith A**hole of Hertford, I am replying to your stupid and irrelevant attempt to divert from the matter under discussion.

Neither I nor anybody else suggested your filthy lie that Zimmerman should be "strung up".

I believed, and I still do believe, that his trial was a racially motivated farce, and that evidence was witheld which would have convicted him.

No more to say on that subject, and no more to say to you in the future so don't bother trying.

Ever time I communicate with you, I feel like I need to take a shower afterward.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 19 Sep 13 - 06:19 AM

""Regardless, what should be the standard of proof? I suspect we all differ, and it can vary depending on who your favourite team is:)""

In a matter where the end result is likely to be the deployment of bombs which will certainly kill numbers of innocents, much as some of our warmongers would like to deny it, I would suggest that we need to know for certain who it is that we should be bombing.

I note with some degree of despair that said war lovers have ignored the fact that establishing a bearing for a missile does not prove the point of origin.

As I said, there were two separate missiles and each could have been fired from any point along those bearings which lies within their maximum and minimum range from the target.

So, if they were fired separately, the conclusion that they must have come from that area is not justified by the evidence.

More is needed than just the bearing.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Sep 13 - 02:54 AM

Don T, you wanted to see George Zimmerman strung up on much flimsier evidence than this.
Why the double standard?
Discount for multiple massacre?

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Teribus
Date: 19 Sep 13 - 01:29 AM

And the "evidence" that Assad says he has that it was the rebels/terrorists who fired the Sarin filled rockets was handed over to the Russians - Why? Why not just give this "evidence" to the UN weapons Inspectors while they were in Damascus?

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: bobad
Date: 18 Sep 13 - 06:30 PM

Well I guess that settles it, Russia says it was the rebels, not Assad, who used chemical weapons based on evidence provided by the Assad regime.

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 Sep 13 - 03:45 PM

On the map, the trajectories intersect within the base area of the Republican Guard.

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: GUEST
Date: 18 Sep 13 - 02:15 PM

""And, I hear the voice of youth cry, what is proof (truth)""

Sorry, an odd take on ann old Johnny cash song:

Regardless, what should be the standard of proof? I suspect we all differ, and it can vary depending on who your favourite team is:)

From the free online legal dictionary:

Clear and Convincing Proof

A standard applied by a jury or by a judge in a nonjury trial to measure the probability of the truthfulness of particular facts alleged during a civil lawsuit.

Clear and convincing proof means that the evidence presented by a party during the trial is more highly probable to be true than not and the jury or judge has a firm belief or conviction in it. A greater degree of believability must be met than the common standard of proof in civil actions, preponderance of the evidence, which requires that the facts more likely than not prove the issue for which they are asserted.

The standard of clear and convincing proof—also known as "clear and convincing evidence"; "clear, convincing, and satisfactory"; "clear, cognizant, and convincing"; and "clear, unequivocal, satisfactory, and convincing"—is applied only in particular cases, primarily those involving an equitable remedy, such as reformation of a deed or contract for mistake.


Reasonable Doubt

Reasonable doubt is a standard of proof used in criminal trials. When a criminal defendant is prosecuted, the prosecutor must prove the defendant's guilt Beyond a Reasonable Doubt. If the jury—or the judge in a bench trial—has a reasonable doubt as to the defendant's guilt, the jury or judge should pronounce the defendant not guilty. Conversely, if the jurors or judge have no doubt as to the defendant's guilt, or if their only doubts are unreasonable doubts, then the prosecutor has proven the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt and the defendant should be pronounced guilty.

Reasonable doubt is the highest standard of proof used in court. In civil litigation the standard of proof is either proof by a preponderance of the evidence or proof by clear and convincing evidence. These are lower burdens of proof. A preponderance of the evidence simply means that one side has more evidence in its favor than the other, even by the smallest degree. Clear and convincing evidence is evidence that establishes a high probability that the fact sought to be proved is true. The main reason that the high proof standard of reasonable doubt is used in criminal trials is that criminal trials can result in the deprivation of a defendant's liberty or in the defendant's death, outcomes far more severe than occur in civil trials where money damages are the common remedy.

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: GUEST,Ed T
Date: 18 Sep 13 - 01:12 PM

Again, evidence is not proof.

Evidence is put forward and subjected to scrutiny to see if it is valid (or, reasonably considered as such). It is then used with other evidence to prove a case - with some pre-defined level of confidence.
A statements alone is not evidence, no matter where they come from, Russia, USA, France, Syria, Rebels, or elsewhere. When they make statements, one should ask, where is your evidence to back that statement up? Producing evidence long after a statement is made frequently fuels suspicion, as it did with the USA and likely does with others - yes, even Russia.

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: akenaton
Date: 18 Sep 13 - 12:03 PM

The Russians say they have evidence which proves the "rebels" were behind the chemical attacks.
Mr Lavrov says that the evidence will be handed the the UN Security Council in due course.

As Don says, nobody yet knows the truth, everyone is looking for validation.

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 Sep 13 - 11:54 AM

Beyond reasonable doubt.

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Greg F.
Date: 18 Sep 13 - 11:41 AM

Perhaps some facts instead of gueses and suppositions?

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: bobad
Date: 18 Sep 13 - 11:25 AM

What would be acceptable as "proof"?

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 18 Sep 13 - 11:21 AM

"""The term chemical weapon is applied to any toxic chemical or its precursor that can cause death, injury, temporary incapacitation or sensory irritation through its chemical action. Munitions or other delivery devices designed to deliver chemical weapons, whether filled or unfilled, are also considered weapons themselves.""

Seems pretty plain that this would preclude the sale of precursors to suspect regimes.

So selling to Iraq or Syria would seem to be illegal under the agreement, for any signatory.

If the US or UK have sold to those countries any precursor, they are in breach.

QED

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 18 Sep 13 - 11:12 AM

That link contains the word "likely", but I don't see any "definitely".

In fact the article states ""This isn't conclusive, given the limited data available to the UN team, but it is highly suggestive and another piece of the puzzle.""

In other words, they don't KNOW!!

Given that the two targets are 16km apart and that at lest one is at the extreme range of the missile, the missiles could have been fired from the area claimed, or from another area (or areas on), or close to the suggested lines anywhere within the maximum and minimum range of each missile.

Not so certain now?

One or two will profess absolute certainty, because they cannot ever admit to not knowing.

For the rest, let's wait for that all important proof.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 18 Sep 13 - 09:23 AM

Don T: "For me, proof should precede action, not follow it."

Atta baby!!!
That way it's harder for those parties to exploit your emotions, just to further their agendas..which just might be questionable in the first place!
As I've said before, on here, just let the TRUTH come out, and let the chips fall where they may!! Everything else should fall into place, AFTER the truth, is known....not 'adjust' the truth to fit what plans were made or policies set..just to accommodate the 'actions' or 'policies'!!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: GUEST,Ed t
Date: 18 Sep 13 - 07:17 AM

Last guest was cookie-free me:)

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: GUEST
Date: 18 Sep 13 - 07:10 AM

I suspect folks on both sides (and in the middle) are busy trying to determine it from the UN information released, and other surveillance information.One such attempt, using the UN information, is on the Human Rights Watch website - which does not tell us for sure who did it, but is worth considering.

Mapping the flight path

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Teribus
Date: 18 Sep 13 - 04:54 AM

"maybe there were WMDs in Iraq, and Bush was right(?)...in which case they got them from us!!" - GfS

Well according to Mayomick, there were definitely WMD in the form of chemical weapons in Iraq - and adopting his wider reading of the CWC there still are WMD in the form of chemical weapons in Iraq - UNMOVIC, the Iraq Survey Group and the OPCW disagree completely with Mayomick's assessment. There again according to Mayomick's assessment of the CWC both you and I and mayomick probably have WMD in the form of chemical weapons under our respective kitchen sinks, or in our garden sheds, oh and let's not forget our toothpaste.

Iraq most certainly did not get any WMD from "us" (I take it the "us" you are referring to is the USA) What they collected by fair means and foul from various countries and suppliers around the world were "dual use" components and precursors bought with a clearly stated peaceful, innocent and perfectly legal purpose that they then redirected and used to make those weapons themselves.

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 Sep 13 - 02:48 AM

Yes, and the missiles had Russian Cyrillic ciphers on them.
The balance of probabilities has shifted to beyond reasonable doubt.

UK Foreign Secretary William Hague said: "From the wealth of technical detail in the report - including on the scale of the attack, the consistency of sample test results from separate laboratories, witness statements, and information on the munitions used and their trajectories - it is abundantly clear that the Syrian regime is the only party that could have been responsible."

US ambassador to the UN Samantha Power used similar language when saying: "The technical details of the UN report make clear that only the regime could have carried out this large-scale chemical weapons attack."

She also pointed out that the 122mm rockets cited in the report were of the type previously associated with government forces and that the quality of the sarin was higher than that used by Saddam Hussein in Iraq.

French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius said: "When you look at the findings carefully, the quantities of toxic gas used, the complexity of the mixes, the nature, and the trajectory of the carriers, it leaves absolutely no doubt as to the origin of the attack."