Sarin gas confirmed as weapon in Syria attack

First topic message reminder :

More than 90 people were killed in the town in Syria's northern Idlib province, the most deadly attack in more than three years.




[size=11]Image:Dozens of children were hurt in the gas attack[/size]


The global chemical weapons watchdog has concluded that sarin gas was used in an attack in Syria in April which killed more than 90 people.

The Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons report into the Khan Sheikhoun attack has not been publicly released but two diplomats familiar with it confirmed the key finding. UK Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson said he was "pleased though, I must say, not surprised" that the report had confirmed the use of sarin. OPCW director general Ahmet Uzumcu had said two weeks after the attack that samples from victims and survivors had shown they were exposed to sarin or a sarin-like substance.
Mr Johnson added: "The exact responsibility for dropping the sarin will now go to a joint investigative mechanism to be confirmed but I've got absolutely no doubt that the finger points at the Assad regime."

The report, while establishing chemical weapons were used, did not name the perpetrator.


http://news.sky.com/story/sarin-gas-confirmed-as-weapon-in-khan-sheikhoun-10932066

Raggamuffin wrote:

Thorin wrote:


Never laughed so much at such stupidity

Even funnier the belief that dictators who murdered people would have much to lose from continuing to murder people when propped up by Russia.

You cannot make it up and why you are not intelligent enough or worth even debating this with.

So please continue to prattle on as you do.

Again both you and Tommy ignore countless evidence

So its pointless even entertaining two imbeciles

So enjoy

So you can't answer the question. It's no good claiming things afterwards is it?

You're the one stupidly spamming the thread and getting abusive, so it's you who's too stupid to debate properly.

There, there, shhhh.

Thorin wrote:More than 90 people were killed in the town in Syria's northern Idlib province, the most deadly attack in more than three years.

09:13, UK,Friday 30 June 2017

[size=11]Image:Dozens of children were hurt in the gas attack[/size]


The global chemical weapons watchdog has concluded that sarin gas was used in an attack in Syria in April which killed more than 90 people.

The Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons report into the Khan Sheikhoun attack has not been publicly released but two diplomats familiar with it confirmed the key finding. UK Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson said he was "pleased though, I must say, not surprised" that the report had confirmed the use of sarin. OPCW director general Ahmet Uzumcu had said two weeks after the attack that samples from victims and survivors had shown they were exposed to sarin or a sarin-like substance.
Mr Johnson added: "The exact responsibility for dropping the sarin will now go to a joint investigative mechanism to be confirmed but I've got absolutely no doubt that the finger points at the Assad regime."

The report, while establishing chemical weapons were used, did not name the perpetrator.


http://news.sky.com/story/sarin-gas-confirmed-as-weapon-in-khan-sheikhoun-10932066

To get the thread back on topic

Thorin wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

So you can't answer the question. It's no good claiming things afterwards is it?

You're the one stupidly spamming the thread and getting abusive, so it's you who's too stupid to debate properly.

There, there, shhhh.

Go and have a lie down Didge - you're getting all worked up again.

What do we know about the regime's use of chemical weapons in Syria?

Assad regime has deployed chemical weapons including chlorine and sarin on number of occasions since outbreak of war in 2011.

How has the Assad regime used chemical weapons?
It has deployed them in a variety of ways over the past five years: in grenades and makeshift bombs dropped from helicopters; rockets fired from jets; and artillery rounds and custom made rockets fired from the ground.

Chlorine has frequently been used, but as it has an industrial purpose in Syria it is not banned. Chlorine gas is a crude weapon that can be fatal in high concentrations. In lower doses, it can damage lungs or cause severe breathing difficulties and other symptoms, including vomiting and nausea.

The lethal nerve agent sarin has been deployed less often, but generates more outrage internationally because it can cause widespread loss of life.

Its most recent use was in an attack on the northern town of Khan Sheikhun on 4 April. Earlier attacks took place in villages near Aleppo, Homs, Idlib andthe outskirts of Damascus. A large scale attack involving more than one tonne of sarin killed more than 1,300 people in the suburbs of of the Syrian capital in August 2013. The overwhelming majority of those killed were in opposition communities.

What do we know about the regime’s chemical weapons stocks?
It surrendered most of its stockpile of sarin over a six-month period after the Damascus attack. The process was brokered by Russia, as a means of avoiding reprisal airstrikes on the Assad regime, which had been threatened by the US. The weapons were transported out of Syria by teams organised by the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), which had identified about 1,300 tonnes of sarin and chemicals used to produce it. While much of the stockpile was withdrawn, intelligence agencies believe that up to five tonnes was not declared.

How have past attacks been confirmed?

Biological samples taken from victims was used to confirm the use of sarin in the Damascus and Khan Sheikhun attacks. The tests were performed by OPCW laboratories and government facilities in the UK, the US and France. In the the aftermath of past attacks, intelligence agencies have trawled through intercepted communications, which were not analysed in real time, and found indications that Syrian military units had made preparations ahead of time.

In the Khan Sheikhun attack, preparations included the movement of forces closely linked to the use of chemical weapons to the airbase from where the jet that allegedly dropped the sarin took off.

Those forces included the Syrian Scientific Studies and Research Centre, the Republican Guard and the 4th Division, run by Bashar al-Assad’s brother, Maher. Intelligence agencies also noticed the unusual deployment of air conditioning and air purification units to the same base days earlier. These are used in the preparation and storage of sarin, often when it is mixed and weaponised from binary substances, and typically just before use.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jun/27/assad-regime-chemical-weapons-syria

‘LAUGHABLE, FANCIFUL’


Experts slammed the Russian series of events, saying it was unlikely rebels were to blame. Mr Rycroft said the UK had not seen any evidence to suggest any opposition group has “the sort of chemical weapons that would be consistent with the symptoms that we saw yesterday”.

“We have every indication that this was a sustained attack using aircraft over a number of hours,” Mr Rycroft said.

“We see all the signs of an attack using a nerve agent capable of killing over a hundred people and harming hundreds more.”

Charles Lister, a senior fellow at the US-based Middle East Institute, told CNN the Russian version of events were “laughable.”

He said the world couldn’t be expected to believe that opposition forces with access to chemical weapons hadn’t used them, other than on its own people. He also pointed out that all nerve agents in Syria are binary which means the toxic agent in its active state is not contained within the weapon.

“First of all, nobody in their right mind would ever store both components of a binary nerve agent in the same building,” he told CNN.

“And secondly, even if they were stored together and then targeted, blowing them up would not result in any active nerve agent — it’s chemically impossible.”

British chemical expert Colonel Hamish de Bretton-Gordon also dismissed the claim that rebels struck a nearby chemical weapons warehouse, inadvertently unleashing nerve agents. He told the Daily Beastthe Russian claims were “pretty fanciful” because “immolating sarin eliminates sarin.” Human Rights Watch, which strongly condemned the attacks, said there was strong evidence to suggest Syrian government forces have not stopped carrying out chemical attacks.

New York Times journalist Jeffrey Marcus also points out there are several holes in Russia’s account, especially as there is “no independent evidence that a chemical weapons facility existed in that area”.

He also writes how international weapons experts say if a chemical weapons facility was hit, as the Russians claimed, a likely explosion would have caused the chemical to burn up. It documented several cases of Syrian government helicopters dropping canisters filled with chlorine in dozens of cases.




http://www.news.com.au/world/middle-east/chemical-war-in-syria-russia-blaming-rebels-highly-implausible/news-story/d751f6972509fad5a9f3d7f98e3f4a92


So bang goes Tommy's theory.

There is no evidence that govt forces dropped sarin...

However...

In September 2015 a US official stated that ISIS was manufacturing and using mustard agent in Syria and Iraq, and had an active chemical weapons research team.[93][94] In February 2016, the CIA Director John O. Brennan said on 60 Minutes that there were "a number of instances where ISIL has used chemical munitions on the battlefield".

Wikipedia

And...

http://www.google.co.uk/url?q=http://www.dw.com/en/is-assad-to-blame-for-the-chemical-weapons-attack-in-syria/a-38330217&sa=U&ved=0ahUKEwiuxLyfoujUAhULJMAKHTLeA80QFggzMAU&usg=AFQjCNH4V57h5aCN00_bvnUTuTirVsE7jw

Thorin wrote:‘LAUGHABLE, FANCIFUL’


Experts slammed the Russian series of events, saying it was unlikely rebels were to blame. Mr Rycroft said the UK had not seen any evidence to suggest any opposition group has “the sort of chemical weapons that would be consistent with the symptoms that we saw yesterday”.

“We have every indication that this was a sustained attack using aircraft over a number of hours,” Mr Rycroft said.

“We see all the signs of an attack using a nerve agent capable of killing over a hundred people and harming hundreds more.”

Charles Lister, a senior fellow at the US-based Middle East Institute, told CNN the Russian version of events were “laughable.”

He said the world couldn’t be expected to believe that opposition forces with access to chemical weapons hadn’t used them, other than on its own people. He also pointed out that all nerve agents in Syria are binary which means the toxic agent in its active state is not contained within the weapon.

“First of all, nobody in their right mind would ever store both components of a binary nerve agent in the same building,” he told CNN.

“And secondly, even if they were stored together and then targeted, blowing them up would not result in any active nerve agent — it’s chemically impossible.”

British chemical expert Colonel Hamish de Bretton-Gordon also dismissed the claim that rebels struck a nearby chemical weapons warehouse, inadvertently unleashing nerve agents. He told the Daily Beastthe Russian claims were “pretty fanciful” because “immolating sarin eliminates sarin.” Human Rights Watch, which strongly condemned the attacks, said there was strong evidence to suggest Syrian government forces have not stopped carrying out chemical attacks.

New York Times journalist Jeffrey Marcus also points out there are several holes in Russia’s account, especially as there is “no independent evidence that a chemical weapons facility existed in that area”.

He also writes how international weapons experts say if a chemical weapons facility was hit, as the Russians claimed, a likely explosion would have caused the chemical to burn up. It documented several cases of Syrian government helicopters dropping canisters filled with chlorine in dozens of cases.




http://www.news.com.au/world/middle-east/chemical-war-in-syria-russia-blaming-rebels-highly-implausible/news-story/d751f6972509fad5a9f3d7f98e3f4a92


So bang goes Tommy's theory.

I see Tommy is now desperate to avoid this damning evidence to his theory

Nobody is denying that ISIS have used chemical munitions, but this area is not held by ISIS.

http://p.dw.com/p/2apRJ

What is even worse is Tommy never even bothers to check his sources.

It so embarressing.

Tommy stated

Tommy Monk wrote:
In September 2015 a US official stated that ISIS was manufacturing and using mustard agent in Syria and Iraq, and had an active chemical weapons research team.[93][94] In February 2016, the CIA Director John O. Brennan said on 60 Minutes that there were "a number of instances where ISIL has used chemical munitions on the battlefield".

He did say ISIS has chemical ammunition's and was even able to manufacture "small" amounts of Chlorine and Mustard Gas.

Oh dear, some people really need to read as to what they buy into.

Thorin wrote:

Thorin wrote:‘LAUGHABLE, FANCIFUL’


Experts slammed the Russian series of events, saying it was unlikely rebels were to blame. Mr Rycroft said the UK had not seen any evidence to suggest any opposition group has “the sort of chemical weapons that would be consistent with the symptoms that we saw yesterday”.

“We have every indication that this was a sustained attack using aircraft over a number of hours,” Mr Rycroft said.

“We see all the signs of an attack using a nerve agent capable of killing over a hundred people and harming hundreds more.”

Charles Lister, a senior fellow at the US-based Middle East Institute, told CNN the Russian version of events were “laughable.”

He said the world couldn’t be expected to believe that opposition forces with access to chemical weapons hadn’t used them, other than on its own people. He also pointed out that all nerve agents in Syria are binary which means the toxic agent in its active state is not contained within the weapon.

“First of all, nobody in their right mind would ever store both components of a binary nerve agent in the same building,” he told CNN.

“And secondly, even if they were stored together and then targeted, blowing them up would not result in any active nerve agent — it’s chemically impossible.”

British chemical expert Colonel Hamish de Bretton-Gordon also dismissed the claim that rebels struck a nearby chemical weapons warehouse, inadvertently unleashing nerve agents. He told the Daily Beastthe Russian claims were “pretty fanciful” because “immolating sarin eliminates sarin.” Human Rights Watch, which strongly condemned the attacks, said there was strong evidence to suggest Syrian government forces have not stopped carrying out chemical attacks.

New York Times journalist Jeffrey Marcus also points out there are several holes in Russia’s account, especially as there is “no independent evidence that a chemical weapons facility existed in that area”.

He also writes how international weapons experts say if a chemical weapons facility was hit, as the Russians claimed, a likely explosion would have caused the chemical to burn up. It documented several cases of Syrian government helicopters dropping canisters filled with chlorine in dozens of cases.




http://www.news.com.au/world/middle-east/chemical-war-in-syria-russia-blaming-rebels-highly-implausible/news-story/d751f6972509fad5a9f3d7f98e3f4a92


So bang goes Tommy's theory.

I see Tommy is now desperate to avoid this damning evidence to his theory

Nobody is denying that ISIS have used chemical munitions, but this area is not held by ISIS.

That doesn't mean that ISIS is not in the area.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Thorin wrote:

I see Tommy is now desperate to avoid this damning evidence to his theory

Nobody is denying that ISIS have used chemical munitions, but this area is not held by ISIS.

That doesn't mean that ISIS is not in the area.

Really?

So now where nobody is even excusing ISIS of this or how they have not even taken responsibility for. You claim they were just in the area with mass amounts of sarin, they do not even have such quantities of to pull off such an attack? 

Seriously, where did they get the aircraft to pull this attack off?

Read this...

http://p.dw.com/p/2apRJ

Tommy Monk wrote:Read this...

http://p.dw.com/p/2apRJ

I have read it and it makes no evidence for any of your claims Tommy?

Why do you keep side stepping my damning evidence to your claims?

Its like any conspiracy, the more I easily rebuke, the more desperate you get by throwing up anything in to misdirect from the fact your theories do not hold water with this attack.

You also know its a poor article you posted, when the claims made, do not add up with the Ghouta attack

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghouta_chemical_attack

Thorin wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

That doesn't mean that ISIS is not in the area.

Really?

So now where nobody is even excusing ISIS of this or how they have not even taken responsibility for. You claim they were just in the area with mass amounts of sarin, they do not even have such quantities of to pull off such an attack? 

Seriously, where did they get the aircraft to pull this attack off?

I didn't claim that at all. The fact they're not in control of the area doesn't mean they're not active in the area.

Look, I have no objections to actual conspiracies or views made about events, but I get very bored, when claims made are not backed up with any credible evidence. As I enjoy researching claims made. Once in a while a good one is made. This is not one of them by Tommy.

My work is done on this thread and all the evidence I present easily dismisses the theories of Tommy and points all roads to Assad committing this attack. Its only a matter of time to prove this conclusively

All the best everyone and have a good evening

Raggamuffin wrote:

Thorin wrote:


Really?

So now where nobody is even excusing ISIS of this or how they have not even taken responsibility for. You claim they were just in the area with mass amounts of sarin, they do not even have such quantities of to pull off such an attack? 

Seriously, where did they get the aircraft to pull this attack off?

I didn't claim that at all. The fact they're not in control of the area doesn't mean they're not active in the area.

What relevance would that have then, if they were incapable of pulling of this chemical attack Rags?

It would have zero relevance. As they could not have pulled off the attack and neither do they control the area either. Which was what Tommy even then went off this afternoon, based off him not researching properly. He went off the CIA stating ISIS can make small amounts of Chlorine and Mustard Gas. Neither of which were used in this attack.

As more important they never even had the quantities available to carry out such an attack or even show how they could implement such an attack

While it is impossible to assess the exact amount of chemical agent used immediately, the extent and distribution of the casualties are consistent with the use of hundreds of kilos. Sarin is too complicated and expensive for rebels to have manufactured themselves, and while they might potentially have obtained some supplies of stolen nerve agents or other gas, it is very unlikely to be more than a few kilos.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/05/syria-chemical-weapons-attack-what-we-know-khan-sheikhun

Its why originally Tommy tried to laugh off my sources, as he knew, he had no case to argue against their evidence on this. He never presented anything refuting the Guardian articles.


Now I am bored Rags, sorry, but neither you and Tommy have a case 

Enjoy your evening, as this debate is now done, as far as i am concerned

Enjoy

So still no evidence from didge...