Why Trusting US Government and Mainstream Media Makes You a Dupe
Apr 18, 2017 14:09:01 #
Who trusts the U.S. government and American newsmedia nowadays? Only dupes possibly can. Just look at the recent history, for the evidence on that:
The U.S. Government and ‘news’media lied us into invading Iraq in 2003, and hid their coup that overthrew the democratically elected progressive government in Iran in 1953, and lied to say that the CIA wasn’t behind the overthrow and ’suicide' of Salvador Allende in Chile in 1973 — and now they’re lying us into war yet again, this war against Syria (where we, and our allied jihadists who are fighting to overthrow Assad, have already destroyed the lives of the people). It’s also a war against Syria’s defenders Iran and Russia, which war against Russia would be World War III — goodbye to all our dreams. And for what? All this destruction, for what? Will Trump actually take us that final mile, to Armageddon? He’s got a Congress and ‘news’media that are almost 100% supporting his reversal of his previous foreign policy by his outright bombing of Syria — bombing the government that’s fighting against the jihadists — exactly the opposite of what he had been promising to do when he was a candidate for the Presidency.
After these many decades of bloody shameful government, and ‘news’media American Establishment lies, who but an outright fool would trust them now, regarding Bashar al-Assad, Vladimir Putin, Syria, Iran, and Russia? Or: is it actually okay that only decades afterward is the truth being revealed to Americans, that America’s aristocracy and its agents had, decades earlier, perpetrated atrocities abroad (such as in Iran, Iraq, and Chile), and blamed the helpless victims for everything? Is it okay for the lies to be spread as ‘news’, at the time, and to become publicly known as having been lies, only decades afterward, when the history-books get written, and meanwhile for us to be voting for those thug-politicians all the while, whom the ‘news’media had deceived us into thinking to have been acceptable to lead us? This is ‘democracy’?
What about the assassinations of JFK, RFK, and MLK — and what about 9/11? Who but an idiot today would still trust the official story about those events? Who SHOULD trust them? Should you?
Now, regarding specifically the alleged sarin gas attack that was allegedly perpetrated by Bashar al-Assad, on 4 April 2017, and that the U.S. regime is now also alleging that Russia, meaning Vladimir Putin, approved: Is that just another in the long and sordid history of U.S. government and Establishment lies?
Let’s consider the evidence on this matter:
First, read this. Did you click onto the links wherever you had any questions about the authenticity of the evidence in that article? After having read that, do you still believe the official story regarding this gas-attack, which could get the U.S. military into war in the battlefields of Syria against the Syrian government, and against Russia?
And did you read the extensive evidence that the 21 August 2013 East Ghouta sarin gas attack which Obama had said crossed his ‘red line’, was actually a set-up job by the U.S. and allied governments working in conjunction with its jihadists in Syria to create a pretext for U.S. troops to help the jihadists to overthrow Assad? It all needs to be understood in the context of the underlying reasons behind the U.S. government’s longstanding campaign to overthrow and replace Syria’s government.
In any case, more and more evidence is coming to light which is inconsistent with the hypothesis that the Syrian government was behind the 4 April 2017 Syrian gas-attack, and that is consistent with the jihadists — the forces who are fighting against the government — being behind it.
The time when it’s excusable to be a dupe of the U.S. government and its ‘news’media (which are controlled by the same lying aristocracy that controls the top politicians) is long-since past. Americans now need to know our government’s ugly recent history, and to understand today’s ‘news’ in light of it.
Then read this, and decide whether or not you trust the Trump-regime's allegation that «Russians had foreknowledge of the chemical attack» and that «Russia’s goal was to cover up the Syrian government’s culpability for the chemical attack».
An American news-site about newsmedia headlined on April 11th, «Out of 47 Major Editorials on Trump’s Syria Strikes, Only One Opposed», and reported that, «Of the top 100 US newspapers, 47 ran editorials on President Donald Trump’s Syria airstrikes last week: 39 in favor, seven ambiguous and only one opposed to the military attack».
On April 10th, CBS News headlined «What Americans think about U.S. strike on Syria» and reported, «Fifty-seven percent of Americans approve of the airstrike against Syrian military targets — calling immoral the Syrian regime’s use of chemical weapons that led to the strike — but most are leery of any military involvement beyond airstrikes, a CBS News poll shows. President Trump’s overall approval rating edged up». Do those findings show an intelligent American public, or instead a mass of dupes?
On April 12th, Morning Consult bannered «Americans Trust Trump the Most to End Syrian Conflict». 57% trusted him to end it.
Here’s the actual background of the war in Syria — it’s the war that Trump is continuing and escalating, but which was previously Obama’s (and the Clintons’ and the Bushes’, and going all the way back to Truman’s) war, for pipelines to be built through Syria, to transport the Sauds’ (Saudi Arabia’s) oil, and the Thanis’ (Qatar’s) gas, into the world’s largest oil-and-gas market, the EU. The Sauds and the Thanis are the main funders of Al Qaeda, ISIS and other jihadist groups, and are also the main funders of the ‘moderate rebel forces’ (the Al-Qaeda-led forces) in Syria, and pay for the U.S.-made weapons that those jihadists (most of whom are foreigners imported into Syria, and all of whom are fundamentalist Sunnis, as are the Sauds and the Thanis) are using, to overthrow Assad’s government.
Then, consider this, the most authoritative analysis of all, of the White House’s ‘evidence’ regarding the April 4th Syrian gas-attack:
After detailed decimation of President Trump’s ‘intelligence’ ‘justifying’ his invasion of Syria, the MIT specialist on such intelligence-analysis, Dr. Theodore Postol, concludes:
I have worked with the intelligence community in the past, and I have grave concerns about the politicization of intelligence that seems to be occurring with more frequency in recent times – but I know that the intelligence community has highly capable analysts in it. And if those analysts were properly consulted about the claims in the White House document they would have not approved the document going forward.
I am available to expand on these comments substantially. I have only had a few hours to quickly review the alleged White House intelligence report. But a quick perusal shows without a lot of analysis that this report cannot be correct, and it also appears that this report was not properly vetted by the intelligence community.
This is a very serious matter.
President Obama was initially misinformed about supposed intelligence evidence that Syria was the perpetrator of the August 21, 2013 nerve agent attack in Damascus. This is a matter of public record.
President Obama stated that his initially false understanding was that the intelligence clearly showed that Syria was the source of the nerve agent attack. This false information was corrected when the then Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, interrupted the President while he was in an intelligence briefing. According to President Obama, Mr. Clapper told the President that the intelligence that Syria was the perpetrator of the attack was «not a slamdunk».
The question that needs to be answered by our nation is how was the president initially misled about such a profoundly important intelligence finding?
The U.S. ‘news’media hid from the public Dr. Postol’s disproof of the Obama regime’s still-continuing assertions that the 21 August 2013 sarin attack was from Syria’s government instead of from the ‘moderate rebels’ (jihadists) whom the U.S. supported. Will they hide from the U.S. public his disproof of the U.S. regime’s latest such scam backing the actual perpetrators of a war-crime — will they do now as they did then?
On 13 April 2017, I posted a news-report on the just-released detailed new investigation by Dr. Postol, of the April 4th Syrian gas-attack (linking, as I always do, to the original document), and submitted it to all of America’s large national-news media (and to most of the medium-sized and smaller ones, as well). I headlined it, «The Money-Quote from the Postol Report on the Recent Gas Attack in Syria». We shall see how many — if any — of the large ones do publish that news-report. (Just google the headline.) Nobody can say that America’s large ‘news’ organizations are simply ignorant of the reality on this vitally important matter.
Can anyone but a dupe be supporting Donald Trump, now? He may be a knowing and willing participant in these war-crimes, but among the American public, only dupes can still be supporting them in this decades-long effort by the U.S. aristocracy to overthrow the only person whom a majority of Syrians want to be their nation’s leader. The effort hasn’t succeeded, even after all of these decades trying, but is Trump really determined to be the person who would carry it to ‘victory’? How much would he want such a ‘victory’? Should the Americans who voted for him, view him, now, as a traitor, for having so quickly gone exactly against what he had promised when he campaigned for the Presidency? Certainly, he is a liar. But are his dupes remaining dupes? Time will provide the answer to that.
And, maybe, this time, Trump will offer a deal that can and will be rejected by everyone. Maybe his reach, finally, is exceeding his grasp.
The answer could come soon. But, clearly, the people who own America’s ‘news’media are almost 100% supportive of his 100% reversal on Syria, on Russia, and on World War III. And, the American public, if not as uniformly supportive of the American government’s war-crime — unprovoked invasion without even having provided any evidence to back up their asserted and by-now impossible-to-believe cause to invade, as America as the policeman, judge, jury, and executioner, for the entire world — are over 50% duped, even today, even after all those many decades of having been duped into invading countries that had never invaded us.
Regarding Syria, there is no way, now, that either side can back out and still keep its honor. For Russia, and for Syria, and for Iran, its honor is to never yield up its sovereignty. For the United States, its honor is: what is it? What it is, is to coerce the entire world to its aristocracy’s will, no matter what. That, today, is what remains, of America’s honor: international dictatorship, reigning through imposing fear worldwide.
Could this be the way to World War Three? Which side will back down? What if neither side will?
How does anybody make a deal with somebody like Hitler? WW III would be even worse than that — far worse. Is Trump like that? Is the aristocracy that he’s trying to please, so horrific as that? The evidence thus far is clearly yes. And, without a doubt, most Americans are their dupes (just like in 1933 Germany).
The American aristocracy, who are accustomed to winning, might feel that this is just another game, which they must, as always before, win. It’s actually no game at all; and, if they don’t cave soon, it’ll be lose-lose all around, even for the billionaires in their luxurious nuclear-proof bunkers, such as here, and here, and here, and here, and here, and here, and here, and here, and here, and here. It’ll be all for naught, even for them — even for the super-dupers.
http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2017/04/17/why-trusting-us-government-and-mainstream-media-makes-you-dupe.html
The U.S. Government and ‘news’media lied us into invading Iraq in 2003, and hid their coup that overthrew the democratically elected progressive government in Iran in 1953, and lied to say that the CIA wasn’t behind the overthrow and ’suicide' of Salvador Allende in Chile in 1973 — and now they’re lying us into war yet again, this war against Syria (where we, and our allied jihadists who are fighting to overthrow Assad, have already destroyed the lives of the people). It’s also a war against Syria’s defenders Iran and Russia, which war against Russia would be World War III — goodbye to all our dreams. And for what? All this destruction, for what? Will Trump actually take us that final mile, to Armageddon? He’s got a Congress and ‘news’media that are almost 100% supporting his reversal of his previous foreign policy by his outright bombing of Syria — bombing the government that’s fighting against the jihadists — exactly the opposite of what he had been promising to do when he was a candidate for the Presidency.
After these many decades of bloody shameful government, and ‘news’media American Establishment lies, who but an outright fool would trust them now, regarding Bashar al-Assad, Vladimir Putin, Syria, Iran, and Russia? Or: is it actually okay that only decades afterward is the truth being revealed to Americans, that America’s aristocracy and its agents had, decades earlier, perpetrated atrocities abroad (such as in Iran, Iraq, and Chile), and blamed the helpless victims for everything? Is it okay for the lies to be spread as ‘news’, at the time, and to become publicly known as having been lies, only decades afterward, when the history-books get written, and meanwhile for us to be voting for those thug-politicians all the while, whom the ‘news’media had deceived us into thinking to have been acceptable to lead us? This is ‘democracy’?
What about the assassinations of JFK, RFK, and MLK — and what about 9/11? Who but an idiot today would still trust the official story about those events? Who SHOULD trust them? Should you?
Now, regarding specifically the alleged sarin gas attack that was allegedly perpetrated by Bashar al-Assad, on 4 April 2017, and that the U.S. regime is now also alleging that Russia, meaning Vladimir Putin, approved: Is that just another in the long and sordid history of U.S. government and Establishment lies?
Let’s consider the evidence on this matter:
First, read this. Did you click onto the links wherever you had any questions about the authenticity of the evidence in that article? After having read that, do you still believe the official story regarding this gas-attack, which could get the U.S. military into war in the battlefields of Syria against the Syrian government, and against Russia?
And did you read the extensive evidence that the 21 August 2013 East Ghouta sarin gas attack which Obama had said crossed his ‘red line’, was actually a set-up job by the U.S. and allied governments working in conjunction with its jihadists in Syria to create a pretext for U.S. troops to help the jihadists to overthrow Assad? It all needs to be understood in the context of the underlying reasons behind the U.S. government’s longstanding campaign to overthrow and replace Syria’s government.
In any case, more and more evidence is coming to light which is inconsistent with the hypothesis that the Syrian government was behind the 4 April 2017 Syrian gas-attack, and that is consistent with the jihadists — the forces who are fighting against the government — being behind it.
The time when it’s excusable to be a dupe of the U.S. government and its ‘news’media (which are controlled by the same lying aristocracy that controls the top politicians) is long-since past. Americans now need to know our government’s ugly recent history, and to understand today’s ‘news’ in light of it.
Then read this, and decide whether or not you trust the Trump-regime's allegation that «Russians had foreknowledge of the chemical attack» and that «Russia’s goal was to cover up the Syrian government’s culpability for the chemical attack».
An American news-site about newsmedia headlined on April 11th, «Out of 47 Major Editorials on Trump’s Syria Strikes, Only One Opposed», and reported that, «Of the top 100 US newspapers, 47 ran editorials on President Donald Trump’s Syria airstrikes last week: 39 in favor, seven ambiguous and only one opposed to the military attack».
On April 10th, CBS News headlined «What Americans think about U.S. strike on Syria» and reported, «Fifty-seven percent of Americans approve of the airstrike against Syrian military targets — calling immoral the Syrian regime’s use of chemical weapons that led to the strike — but most are leery of any military involvement beyond airstrikes, a CBS News poll shows. President Trump’s overall approval rating edged up». Do those findings show an intelligent American public, or instead a mass of dupes?
On April 12th, Morning Consult bannered «Americans Trust Trump the Most to End Syrian Conflict». 57% trusted him to end it.
Here’s the actual background of the war in Syria — it’s the war that Trump is continuing and escalating, but which was previously Obama’s (and the Clintons’ and the Bushes’, and going all the way back to Truman’s) war, for pipelines to be built through Syria, to transport the Sauds’ (Saudi Arabia’s) oil, and the Thanis’ (Qatar’s) gas, into the world’s largest oil-and-gas market, the EU. The Sauds and the Thanis are the main funders of Al Qaeda, ISIS and other jihadist groups, and are also the main funders of the ‘moderate rebel forces’ (the Al-Qaeda-led forces) in Syria, and pay for the U.S.-made weapons that those jihadists (most of whom are foreigners imported into Syria, and all of whom are fundamentalist Sunnis, as are the Sauds and the Thanis) are using, to overthrow Assad’s government.
Then, consider this, the most authoritative analysis of all, of the White House’s ‘evidence’ regarding the April 4th Syrian gas-attack:
After detailed decimation of President Trump’s ‘intelligence’ ‘justifying’ his invasion of Syria, the MIT specialist on such intelligence-analysis, Dr. Theodore Postol, concludes:
I have worked with the intelligence community in the past, and I have grave concerns about the politicization of intelligence that seems to be occurring with more frequency in recent times – but I know that the intelligence community has highly capable analysts in it. And if those analysts were properly consulted about the claims in the White House document they would have not approved the document going forward.
I am available to expand on these comments substantially. I have only had a few hours to quickly review the alleged White House intelligence report. But a quick perusal shows without a lot of analysis that this report cannot be correct, and it also appears that this report was not properly vetted by the intelligence community.
This is a very serious matter.
President Obama was initially misinformed about supposed intelligence evidence that Syria was the perpetrator of the August 21, 2013 nerve agent attack in Damascus. This is a matter of public record.
President Obama stated that his initially false understanding was that the intelligence clearly showed that Syria was the source of the nerve agent attack. This false information was corrected when the then Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, interrupted the President while he was in an intelligence briefing. According to President Obama, Mr. Clapper told the President that the intelligence that Syria was the perpetrator of the attack was «not a slamdunk».
The question that needs to be answered by our nation is how was the president initially misled about such a profoundly important intelligence finding?
The U.S. ‘news’media hid from the public Dr. Postol’s disproof of the Obama regime’s still-continuing assertions that the 21 August 2013 sarin attack was from Syria’s government instead of from the ‘moderate rebels’ (jihadists) whom the U.S. supported. Will they hide from the U.S. public his disproof of the U.S. regime’s latest such scam backing the actual perpetrators of a war-crime — will they do now as they did then?
On 13 April 2017, I posted a news-report on the just-released detailed new investigation by Dr. Postol, of the April 4th Syrian gas-attack (linking, as I always do, to the original document), and submitted it to all of America’s large national-news media (and to most of the medium-sized and smaller ones, as well). I headlined it, «The Money-Quote from the Postol Report on the Recent Gas Attack in Syria». We shall see how many — if any — of the large ones do publish that news-report. (Just google the headline.) Nobody can say that America’s large ‘news’ organizations are simply ignorant of the reality on this vitally important matter.
Can anyone but a dupe be supporting Donald Trump, now? He may be a knowing and willing participant in these war-crimes, but among the American public, only dupes can still be supporting them in this decades-long effort by the U.S. aristocracy to overthrow the only person whom a majority of Syrians want to be their nation’s leader. The effort hasn’t succeeded, even after all of these decades trying, but is Trump really determined to be the person who would carry it to ‘victory’? How much would he want such a ‘victory’? Should the Americans who voted for him, view him, now, as a traitor, for having so quickly gone exactly against what he had promised when he campaigned for the Presidency? Certainly, he is a liar. But are his dupes remaining dupes? Time will provide the answer to that.
And, maybe, this time, Trump will offer a deal that can and will be rejected by everyone. Maybe his reach, finally, is exceeding his grasp.
The answer could come soon. But, clearly, the people who own America’s ‘news’media are almost 100% supportive of his 100% reversal on Syria, on Russia, and on World War III. And, the American public, if not as uniformly supportive of the American government’s war-crime — unprovoked invasion without even having provided any evidence to back up their asserted and by-now impossible-to-believe cause to invade, as America as the policeman, judge, jury, and executioner, for the entire world — are over 50% duped, even today, even after all those many decades of having been duped into invading countries that had never invaded us.
Regarding Syria, there is no way, now, that either side can back out and still keep its honor. For Russia, and for Syria, and for Iran, its honor is to never yield up its sovereignty. For the United States, its honor is: what is it? What it is, is to coerce the entire world to its aristocracy’s will, no matter what. That, today, is what remains, of America’s honor: international dictatorship, reigning through imposing fear worldwide.
Could this be the way to World War Three? Which side will back down? What if neither side will?
How does anybody make a deal with somebody like Hitler? WW III would be even worse than that — far worse. Is Trump like that? Is the aristocracy that he’s trying to please, so horrific as that? The evidence thus far is clearly yes. And, without a doubt, most Americans are their dupes (just like in 1933 Germany).
The American aristocracy, who are accustomed to winning, might feel that this is just another game, which they must, as always before, win. It’s actually no game at all; and, if they don’t cave soon, it’ll be lose-lose all around, even for the billionaires in their luxurious nuclear-proof bunkers, such as here, and here, and here, and here, and here, and here, and here, and here, and here, and here. It’ll be all for naught, even for them — even for the super-dupers.
http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2017/04/17/why-trusting-us-government-and-mainstream-media-makes-you-dupe.html
Apr 18, 2017 16:08:55 #
ACP45 wrote:
Who trusts the U.S. government and American newsme... (show quote)
This article was written by Eric Zuesse, a writer for Russia Insider News. The MIT intelligence and weapons expert does his research working in collaboration with Maram Susli (known online as 'Syrian Girl' and 'PartisanGirl') and uses U-Tube videos as his information source. Nuff said!
Apr 19, 2017 06:53:59 #
pafret wrote:
This article was written by Eric Zuesse, a writer for Russia Insider News. The MIT intelligence and weapons expert does his research working in collaboration with Maram Susli (known online as 'Syrian Girl' and 'PartisanGirl') and uses U-Tube videos as his information source. Nuff said!
You use the classic AD-HOMINEM argument (attack the arguer instead of the argument). Instead of addressing the specifics of what they say, you try to discredit the source. Classic failed logic. Continue getting your news from CNN, the Wapo, and the NYT - no fake propaganda news there, right?
Apr 19, 2017 07:26:15 #
ACP45 wrote:
You use the classic AD-HOMINEM argument (attack the arguer instead of the argument). Instead of addressing the specifics of what they say, you try to discredit the source. Classic failed logic. Continue getting your news from CNN, the Wapo, and the NYT - no fake propaganda news there, right?
Your point in the article is can we believe news media when so very much of it is straight out lies, to duping the public..
I agree with that statement and can only say with reading so many different accusations of it was the Turks supplying, it was the rebels , it was the CIA who support BOs regime of removing Assad, to it was Russia and Assad etc I can not tell you who did it... Nor do I believe anyway else can either..
I do think it's a red herring and I do not dismiss Trump was mislead or that we aren't involved.. It sickens me!!!
We may never know or it may be 20 years before we really know.. All I hear is who may have done it and nothing clear on why.. Assad does not have clean hands but why gas his own?? Was it a hit that went wrong fighting the rebels?? Did Kerry know for sure the gas was all removed?? I doubt it !! Did BO even care?? I doubt it!! What it is, is sloppy politics at its worst and at the hands of innocent victims'!!! That's what I do know..
When speaking of news to dupe pafret points out possible motive by the source who wrote the article.. Also a fair vetting when we're looking to see if real or not... We would be remiss if we didn't as it is so difficult to tell anymore..
Apr 19, 2017 08:50:45 #
lindajoy wrote:
Your point in the article is can we believe news m... (show quote)
Very good response Lindajoy. You make a good point that I would like to expand upon. It is important to know the source of the article, and to question the motivation of the author. But isn't that the case for all communication? I don't want to sound paranoid, but I question everything I read. Does it pass the smell test? Does it sound logical and reasonable? We all have our views of the world around us that have been shaped upon a lifetime of experience and learning. What I find objectionable is the attitude that "I don't have to read this article, or view this video because it was written by XYZ or appeared in XYZ. To prejudge an article, story, video without even reading or watching it seems to me to be intellectual arrogance.
I have not problem with an honest disagreement with a viewpoint that can be expressed in a straightforward manner. But let us discuss the issue, not who wrote the article, or where the article appeared.
Apr 19, 2017 09:04:50 #
ACP45 wrote:
Very good response Lindajoy. You make a good point... (show quote)
I agree with what you say here.. To not vet as you do in asking your questions of the site or source given all the negative advertising, false stories etc it is a necessity anymore and isnt that terrible!!
Impartial Journalism has become a thing of the past!!
Thank You as well..
Apr 19, 2017 09:09:18 #
ACP45 wrote:
You use the classic AD-HOMINEM argument (attack the arguer instead of the argument). Instead of addressing the specifics of what they say, you try to discredit the source. Classic failed logic. Continue getting your news from CNN, the Wapo, and the NYT - no fake propaganda news there, right?
What was said can neither be proved nor disproved; the author cited no independent sources which can be checked and instead relied on expert's credentials and "superior knowledge" to assert an opinion. That expert has feet of clay. The article cites as truth, opinions, which can not be verified. A few real, historically verified, occurrences were mixed with speculative popular conspiracies, to give the flavor of fact to all.
In such cases the veracity of the arguer must be considered and while investigating that, it became apparent the the author is a shill, a propagandist for Russia. His expert, who has impressive credentials until you look closely at where he gets his information is a useful tool. There is no Ad Hominem attack, their opinions are not facts and they have an axe to grind.
The assertions made, may or may not be truth; they are denied by the government and that may or may not be truth. Given government agencies' propensity for lying, under the cover of national security, anything might be true. However that does not prove the authors case. I could with equal validity cite the Weirdo with the goofy hairdo on television who says Ancient Aliens and Lizard People control everything and the actions described were their doing.
Apr 19, 2017 13:52:54 #
pafret wrote:
What was said can neither be proved nor disproved;... (show quote)
I cannot disagree with what you have said. It is tough to make an honest appraisal of the facts when there is so much that is unknown, and unverified. I would simply point out that the Trump administration came to a very rapid conclusion on this matter, despite an almost identical 2013 claim of a CW attack by the Syrian government that was proven false by a UN mission report and journalist Seymour Hersh.
I have posted about the CIA's previous intervention in Syria, Wesley's Clark's remarks about taking out 7 Arab countries in 5 years, the competing pipelines issue, the large supply of gas in Syrian land coveted by our Arab allies Saudi Arabia and Quatar, their desire to see a Syrian regime change and partitioning, our corporate interests (Exxon/Halliburton, etc) seeking contracts, all of which lead me to question the main stream narrative. Add to that the UN Peace Conference report, the recent poll that most Syrians support the al-Assad regime, numerous intelligence reports (leaks) stating that many of our own analysts don't believe the present government narrative, and simple logic that this would be counter-productive for al-Assad to do what is claimed. For all these reasons, I have no difficulty accepting Dr. Postel's observations, nor do I have difficulty believing Syrian girl's (now Partisan girl) comments because they are consistent with the pattern of information that I have laid out.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.