Syria

Read Annex II and try to think critically about it. Territory was controlled by terrorists.
1) Fragments of "bomb" were not found. If there was no "blast" but just dropped container - remains of it would be found and demonstrated.
2) No one dead body or poisoned persons were really examinated by OPCW "experts". Few urine samples with product of degradation of Sarine (or other materials) - means nothing. Medical records (may be fake documents) does not describe treatment of Sarin-poisoning, but treatment of lung-agents.
3) Photo and video materials of militants don't demonstrate Chem-Suits or gas-masks. Only respirators. If there really was Sarin (in time of photosession) - all of them were already dead.
4) Etc, etc, etc...

It's not surprising, that Russians vetoed such sort of "investigations"
I’ve read the Annex and I’ve also read the previous reports. Assad’s govt used CW including Sarin many times confirmed by a unanimously appointed (including Russia) mechanism. Because Russia didn’t like their ally being blamed, they vetoed the mechanism apportioning blame four times.

Russia supports Assad’s govts use of CW
 
I’ve read the Annex and I’ve also read the previous reports. Assad’s govt used CW including Sarin many times confirmed by a unanimously appointed (including Russia) mechanism. Because Russia didn’t like their ally being blamed, they vetoed the mechanism apportioning blame four times.
Russia don't like when innocents are blamed, and real criminals are supported by the smoke-cover of a baseless slander.

Russia supports Assad’s govts use of CW
Bla-bla-bla. Any amount of words (especially British or terroristic words) can not change even one real evidence.
"Airbase was visited, chemical storages were not found, because we didn't search for it".
You blame Jane, that she killed John, without demonstration death body, bullet, weapon or anything else, based only on the words of Ali (criminal friend of John) and hole in the wall.
I believe it is not sufficient even for British court.
 
Russia don't like when innocents are blamed, and real criminals are supported by the smoke-cover of a baseless slander.
Assad's govt have been adjudicated as guilty of using CW on multiple occasions by a unanimously appointed mechanism. Russia voted for that mechanism and screams when the results are not to its liking.
Bla-bla-bla. Any amount of words (especially British or terroristic words) can not change even one real evidence.

"Airbase was visited, chemical storages were not found, because we didn't search for it".
I've read the Annex. Did you miss the filler cap and bomb casing evidence? The airbases statements contradict Assad's govt statements on the planes and flightpath plus the other pilot somehow 'died on operations' conveniently.
You blame Jane, that she killed John, without demonstration death body, bullet, weapon or anything else, based only on the words of Ali (criminal friend of John) and hole in the wall.

I believe it is not sufficient even for British court.
If the evidence of the JIM went before a Court, Assad would be found guilty of war crimes. I look forward to that day.
 
I've read the Annex. Did you miss the filler cap and bomb casing evidence? The airbases statements contradict Assad's govt statements on the planes and flightpath plus the other pilot somehow 'died on operations' conveniently.
Man, it's war. Muck-up with documents and the death of soldiers (including pilots) - it's just a reality of war.

If the evidence of the JIM went before a Court, Assad would be found guilty of war crimes. I look forward to that day.
Assad will be "found in war crimes" if he'd lost war, independently from his real actions. May be, he will "die in prison" before court, as Miloshevich did, or "murdered by the crowd" as Gaddafi.
So will May, Trump, Obama, or anybody else.
"Vae victis", you know. Question was how many evidences, and what kind of them, British cops need to blame ordinary British citizen in the murder.
 
Man, it's war. Muck-up with documents and the death of soldiers (including pilots) - it's just a reality of war.
Sure. A bit like the none existent CivCas caused by the RuAF
Assad will be "found in war crimes" if he'd lost war, independently from his real actions. May be, he will "die in prison" before court, as Miloshevich did, or "murdered by the crowd" as Gaddafi.
One can only hope.
So will May, Trump, Obama, or anybody else.
When they commit war crimes, you may have a point. Until then .........
"Vae victis", you know. Question was how many evidences, and what kind of them, British cops need to blame ordinary British citizen in the murder.
Which murder? The one 'highly likely' committed by the Russian govt?
 
Sure. A bit like the none existent CivCas caused by the RuAF

One can only hope.

When they commit war crimes, you may have a point. Until then .........

Which murder?
Ok. Just imagine, that some kind of stupid thing came to London coppers, and said, that ordinary teeth-doctor Jane just murdered ordinary londoner John. As the prove - it shows photo of a hole in a wall (made by a bullet or, may be, nail). What should coppers do - search for more seriouse evidences, or immediately capture Jane, blame her in murder, and send her in a court?
 
Ok. Just imagine, that some kind of stupid thing came to London coppers, and said, that ordinary teeth-doctor Jane just murdered ordinary londoner John. As the prove - it shows photo of a hole in a wall (made by a bullet or, may be, nail). What should coppers do - search for more seriouse evidences, or immediately capture Jane, blame her in murder, and send her in a court?
As you're on RoPs, I've helped your quoting. As for your ramblings, it still remains 'highly likely' the Russian govt as mentioned on the principle thread. They may indeed arrest 'Jane', but they will investigate and if 'Jane' is shown to be nothing to do with the investigation, she'll be released.
 
As you're on RoPs, I've helped your quoting. As for your ramblings, it still remains 'highly likely' the Russian govt as mentioned on the principle thread. They may indeed arrest 'Jane', but they will investigate and if 'Jane' is shown to be nothing to do with the investigation, she'll be released.
What if they found nothing? What if they don't want even to search? "To prove guilty" and "to prove innocence" are different things. In the civilisated countries, it is guilty, what should be proven. Baseless blames are just slander/libel/defamation. Pit on the road and traces of Sarin can not be "evidence" of Assad's/May's/Obama's guilty for any seriouse observer.
 
This may help

OPCW Confirms Use of Sarin and Chlorine in Ltamenah, Syria, on 24 and 25 March 2017

"THE HAGUE, Netherlands —13 June 2018—The Fact-Finding Mission (FFM) of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), confirmed in a report released today that sarin was very likely used as a chemical weapon in the south of Ltamenah, Syrian Arab Republic, on 24 March 2017. The FFM also concluded that chlorine was very likely used as a chemical weapon at Ltamenah Hospital and the surrounding area on 25 March 2017. "
 
What are you dribbling on about? A ‘pit in the road’ and Sarin would refer to Assad’s use of CW.
No. If you blame Jane in the murder of John (or Assad in the murder of civilians with CW), you need:
1) demonstrate dead body of John (hundred dead bodies of civilians, and at least two hundreds of poisoned but still live persons);
2) Made post mortem expertise that he really die from bullet in his head (post mortem expertise, that they die because of poison, and medical expertise that live persons really suffer from NA-poisoning);
3) Find weapon of murder with evidences of use (find container with CW, jet that used it, store of CW, etc)
4) Find evidences, that it was Jane, who shoot from gun, and evidences, that it was her shoot, that killed John. May be, it can be words of Ali, if he really can differentiate Jane from other white girls (may be, it can be words of militants, if they can differentiate Syrian jets from Russian, Turkish, American, British, and can differentiate Sarine from Chorine or other CW). Better to find fingerprints on the gun and traces of powder on the Janes hands.
5). Really good to find other witnesses - not Ali and his gang, especially if we know that Ali is Jane's enemy (Evidence from neutral countries will be good).

What has that got to do with May and Obama?
I mean, that anyone can blame anybody with such sort of "evidence". May be it was Obama, who order to drop CW container from some kind of stealth fighter. May be, it was May, who personally delivered car with Sarin-like gas to Syria? Who knows? Hole in the road means less than even hole in the wall. Sarin may be used by anybody, from Jews to Brits, but obviously it was used after photosession of "terrorist's ambulance", not before.
 
No. If you blame Jane in the murder of John (or Assad in the murder of civilians with CW), you need:
1) demonstrate dead body of John (hundred dead bodies of civilians, and at least two hundreds of poisoned but still live persons);
2) Made post mortem expertise that he really die from bullet in his head (post mortem expertise, that they die because of poison, and medical expertise that live persons really suffer from NA-poisoning);
3) Find weapon of murder with evidences of use (find container with CW, jet that used it, store of CW, etc)
4) Find evidences, that it was Jane, who shoot from gun, and evidences, that it was her shoot, that killed John. May be, it can be words of Ali, if he really can differentiate Jane from other white girls (may be, it can be words of militants, if they can differentiate Syrian jets from Russian, Turkish, American, British, and can differentiate Sarine from Chorine or other CW). Better to find fingerprints on the gun and traces of powder on the Janes hands.
5). Really good to find other witnesses - not Ali and his gang, especially if we know that Ali is Jane's enemy (Evidence from neutral countries will be good).
You mean an investigative mechanism set up by the U.N. unanimously with the power to apportion blame using SMEs. Much like the report I posted earlier that blamed Assad’s govt: https://www.securitycouncilreport.org/atf/cf/{65BFCF9B-6D27-4E9C-8CD3-CF6E4FF96FF9}/s_2017_904.pdf

The fact that Russia didn’t like the results of the investigation mechanism’s findings led to them vetoing it.
I mean, that anyone can blame anybody with such sort of "evidence". May be it was Obama, who order to drop CW container from some kind of stealth fighter. May be, it was May, who personally delivered car with Sarin-like gas to Syria? Who knows? Hole in the road means less than even hole in the wall. Sarin may be used by anybody, from Jews to Brits, but obviously it was used after photosession of "terrorist's ambulance", not before.
Which part of a unanimously UNSC Resolution appointed Joint Investigative Mechanism are you having problems understanding? Why bother agreeing to set it up and then having a hissy fit and vetoing it four times because you don’t like their findings?
 
The fact that Russia didn’t like the results of the investigation mechanism’s findings led to them vetoing it.
Russia don't like lack of real evidence. Russia don't like baseless blames. Russia don't like that some countries - paralize investigation.

Which part of a unanimously UNSC Resolution appointed Joint Investigative Mechanism are you having problems understanding? Why bother agreeing to set it up and then having a hissy fit and vetoing it four times because you don’t like their findings?
There are only two things, that I don't understand - why there are so many stars on the sky, and why I still discussing with someone, who playing fool, obviously don't believing in his own stupid statements. (For true Brits, it was reference on the saying of the famous Russian professor: "Zwei Dinge erfüllen das Gemüt mit immer neuer und zunehmender Bewunderung und Ehrfurcht, je öfter und anhaltender sich das Nachdenken damit beschäftigt: Der bestirnte Himmel über mir, und das moralische Gesetz in mir.")
In fact, I wrote it not for you, but for other readers.
Let me say most simple. Investigation team was send there to gather maximal amount of facts. True facts. Real facts. Something, that can be used in a court of any civilizated state.
That mean at least:
- constatation of death and confirmation of identités of dead and poisoned person;
- post-mortem examination of bodies;
- gathering samples of tissues of dead and still living animals in the poisoning zone and outside it.
- gathering samples of plants.
- searching for containers what was used to deliver poison;
- examination of crater, searching for traces of paint, plastic and metal that would be remained after strike;
- searching for evidence of CW-stores in the militants camps, terrorist's objects, objects of government forces (Syrian, Russian, Turkish, American, Israil, etc)
- examine abilities of terrorist to act in the situation of CW-usage.
- medical examination of living but poisoned persons in the clinics of neutral countries (Switzerland or something);
- many other things, that laymen can't even imagine.

And what we see? Bodies were not examined, poisoned person were not examined (one analise of urine is not examination), bases were not searched for CW-stores, terrorists were not interrogated (only interviewed) and so on. Even hole in the road was not examinated in reality, only it's photos. The Disgrace, nothing more.
With such amount of facts it will not be an "investigation", only stupid clownarie.
That's why Russians don't want to allow such kind of show.
 
I have no privilégiés to reply in the Skripal's thread, so let's continue our discussion here.

From the Syria thread:
Grey Fox said:
What if they found nothing?
As I said, released
So, you understand, that a hole in a wall and words of Ali is not sufficient evidence to imprison lawful teeth-doctor in London, don't you?
Grey Fox said:
What if they don't want even to search?
U.K. not Russia
It is UK who don't want to search real evidence of guilty, and prefer to blame the harmless teeth-doctor (I mean Assad).
 
Russia don't like lack of real evidence. Russia don't like baseless blames. Russia don't like that some countries - paralize investigation.
Russia voted for the mechanism and didn't like the response, hence the four vetoes.
There are only two things, that I don't understand - why there are so many stars on the sky, and why I still discussing with someone, who playing fool, obviously don't believing in his own stupid statements. (For true Brits, it was reference on the saying of the famous Russian professor: "Zwei Dinge erfüllen das Gemüt mit immer neuer und zunehmender Bewunderung und Ehrfurcht, je öfter und anhaltender sich das Nachdenken damit beschäftigt: Der bestirnte Himmel über mir, und das moralische Gesetz in mir.")
In fact, I wrote it not for you, but for other readers.
Let me say most simple. Investigation team was send there to gather maximal amount of facts. True facts. Real facts. Something, that can be used in a court of any civilizated state.
That mean at least:
- constatation of death and confirmation of identités of dead and poisoned person;
- post-mortem examination of bodies;
- gathering samples of tissues of dead and still living animals in the poisoning zone and outside it.
- gathering samples of plants.
- searching for containers what was used to deliver poison;
- examination of crater, searching for traces of paint, plastic and metal that would be remained after strike;
- searching for evidence of CW-stores in the militants camps, terrorist's objects, objects of government forces (Syrian, Russian, Turkish, American, Israil, etc)
- examine abilities of terrorist to act in the situation of CW-usage.
- medical examination of living but poisoned persons in the clinics of neutral countries (Switzerland or something);
- many other things, that laymen can't even imagine.
I'm happy for it to go to Court. You just need to persuade Assad to attend. Can you do that?
And what we see? Bodies were not examined, poisoned person were not examined (one analise of urine is not examination), bases were not searched for CW-stores, terrorists were not interrogated (only interviewed) and so on. Even hole in the road was not examinated in reality, only it's photos. The Disgrace, nothing more.
With such amount of facts it will not be an "investigation", only stupid clownarie.
That's why Russians don't want to allow such kind of show.
They voted for it. they squealed when it found against Assad. They threw their toys out of the pram.
I have no privilégiés to reply in the Skripal's thread, so let's continue our discussion here.
 
Russians voted for a real investigation. If OPCW don't want or isn't able to do real investigation (with searching for real evidence) - Russia don't need such clowns.
Russia voted for UNSC Resolution 2235. They came back with their TORs and Russia agreed them:
Security Council Unanimously Adopts Resolution 2235 (2015), Establishing Mechanism to Identify Perpetrators Using Chemical Weapons in Syria | Meetings Coverage and Press Releases
“5. Requests the UN Secretary-General, in coordination with the OPCW Director General, to submit to the Security Council, for its authorization, within 20 days of the adoption of this resolution, recommendations, including elements of Terms of Reference, regarding the establishment and operation of an OPCW-United Nations Joint Investigative Mechanism to identify to the greatest extent feasible individuals, entities, groups, or governments who were perpetrators, organizers, sponsors or otherwise involved in the use of chemicals as weapons, including chlorine or any other toxic chemical, in the Syrian Arab Republic where the OPCW FFM determines or has determined that a specific incident in the Syrian Arab Republic involved or likely involved the use of chemicals as weapons, including chlorine or any other toxic chemical, and expresses its intent to respond to the recommendations, including elements of Terms of Reference, within five days of receipt;
Russia then got upset by the findings of the Joint Investigative Mechanism and vetoed their renewal, extension and reinstatement four times.
 
Russians and other members of UNSC send IT to establish facts. Fact were not established. So, it was useless to continue this circus.
Russia voted for UNSC Resolution 2235. They came back with their TORs and Russia agreed them:
Security Council Unanimously Adopts Resolution 2235 (2015), Establishing Mechanism to Identify Perpetrators Using Chemical Weapons in Syria | Meetings Coverage and Press Releases

Russia then got upset by the findings of the Joint Investigative Mechanism and vetoed their renewal, extension and reinstatement four times.
 
@scalieback , you are going to enter the stupid and useless circle "Russia guilty. Putin guilty." Cancel it.
Tell me your own opinion. Do you really think, that JIT gathered all possible and aviable facts about poisoning in Khan Shaykhun?
 

Latest Threads

Top