An email you say? There’s a mountain of evidence that contradicts this narrative. I remember the daily pictures of gas shell fragments from artillery strikes against Assad’s opposition.
Of course your governments authoritarian media told you syria had chemical weapons, how else could they justify dropping thousands of bombs on syria, and justify western military intervention / more coups in the middle east?
Unfortunately, Wikileaks was suborned by the FSB around 2016. I don’t know what they had on Assange, but he completely stopped posting anything critical of Russia and their authoritarian media. Before that, it would credibly criticize anyone, but afterwards it became very, very suspicious.
Anyways, there’s too much evidence outside of western media of chemical attacks in Syria. The main justification for western strikes in Syria was hunting ISIS. Assad and Putin’s war crimes were a side note to the west. Which is why there was no regime change, in the end.
So you’re just gonna intentionally contradict OPCW whistleblowers who are telling you that the US silenced their reports. Why should I believe you over them?
Syria did not use chemical weapons, the OPCW examiners had their reports silenced.
In a leaked email in Nov, 2019, an OPCW whistleblower stated that the US fabricated the evidence, and used it justify the air-strike. 2
An email you say? There’s a mountain of evidence that contradicts this narrative. I remember the daily pictures of gas shell fragments from artillery strikes against Assad’s opposition.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use_of_chemical_weapons_in_the_Syrian_civil_war
Of course your governments authoritarian media told you syria had chemical weapons, how else could they justify dropping thousands of bombs on syria, and justify western military intervention / more coups in the middle east?
Did you read the wikileaks document?
Unfortunately, Wikileaks was suborned by the FSB around 2016. I don’t know what they had on Assange, but he completely stopped posting anything critical of Russia and their authoritarian media. Before that, it would credibly criticize anyone, but afterwards it became very, very suspicious.
Anyways, there’s too much evidence outside of western media of chemical attacks in Syria. The main justification for western strikes in Syria was hunting ISIS. Assad and Putin’s war crimes were a side note to the west. Which is why there was no regime change, in the end.
So you’re just gonna intentionally contradict OPCW whistleblowers who are telling you that the US silenced their reports. Why should I believe you over them?
Don’t believe me, just widen your news sources. The truth is in the parallax.