White Helmets coordinating with al-Nusra to stage chemical attack in Idleb

[DConnell Member]

5 minutes ago, techbeck said:

I prefer Neowin.  But sadly, looks like I am going to have to find another actual tech site in order to discuss tech related things.  Especially if more people join to keep the RWN sections active. 

 

Oh well, times change I guess....

And not always for the better. ?

[theyarecomingforyou]

1 hour ago, DConnell said:

But do you really think Russia would be using a site like Neowin to spread propaganda? ? I'd hardly call that an effective use of resources.

Russia is interested in promoting conflict, playing both sides of the debate to stir up hostility and engaging in online defence of its foreign policy. Whether it is a Russian operative or somebody blindly parroting Russian propaganda is really immaterial. What's concerning is that OP has refused to engage in any actual discussion, instead just posting link after link to Russian state media. You can't pretend that's nothing.

[wakjak]

2 hours ago, DConnell said:

But do you really think Russia would be using a site like Neowin to spread propaganda? ? I'd hardly call that an effective use of resources.

Absolutely. we previously had 2 Russian operatives, who have since disappeared... doing nothing but posting Russian Propaganda or spreading literal fake news.

 

Now we have a new one, who does the exact same thing.

 

 

[nagokod]

Security Message for U.S. Citizens: Travel Warning – Syria

Quote

Tactics of  ISIS, Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, and other violent extremist groups include the use of suicide bombers, kidnapping, small and heavy arms, improvised explosive devices, and chemical weapons.

Source: https://sy.usembassy.gov/security-message-u-s-citizens-travel-warning-syria/

[CrashG]

Thats cool, my vacation plans didn't include Syria anyways.

[DConnell Member]

17 hours ago, theyarecomingforyou said:

Russia is interested in promoting conflict, playing both sides of the debate to stir up hostility and engaging in online defence of its foreign policy. Whether it is a Russian operative or somebody blindly parroting Russian propaganda is really immaterial. What's concerning is that OP has refused to engage in any actual discussion, instead just posting link after link to Russian state media. You can't pretend that's nothing.

Sure I can. Or rather, I can simply not care. I have more important things to worry about than what somebody posts in the conspiracy section. Though it's worth noting he has invited debate, and just gotten personal attacks in return. Maybe if you debated what he's posting rather than claiming he's a Russian troll?

 

Let him post what he wants - as long as he remains within the rules, he's as entitled to do so as anyone else here.

 

Doesn't mean anyone has to take what he posts seriously. You're actually lending him more weight by acting like he's some sort of "problem".

[nagokod]

Quote

The White Helmets have shot at least nine videos intended to serve as proof in accusations that the Syrian government conducted a chemical weapon attack using chlorine against civilians in Idlib, the Russian military claims.

Quote

The Russian military details that on September 11, the White Helmets and terrorists from Tahrir al-Sham (commonly known as Al-Qaeda in Syria) held a meeting following the filming process, in which they selected two out of nine videos for future transfer to the United Nations and the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW). The remaining videos are to be used for propaganda on social media networks due to the poor quality, the military claims.

 

At the same time, since September 9, the White Helmets have been staging rehearsals of an alleged chemical attack in Khan Shaykhun, Russian officials say in the same statement, claiming that the rehearsals feature up to 30 civilians, including a dozen children aged 8-12.

Source: https://www.rt.com/news/438282-white-helmets-film-chemical-attacks/

[theyarecomingforyou]

4 hours ago, DConnell said:

Sure I can. Or rather, I can simply not care. I have more important things to worry about than what somebody posts in the conspiracy section. Though it's worth noting he has invited debate, and just gotten personal attacks in return.

There have been no personal attacks in this topic. Stating that OP is pushing Russian propaganda is not a personal attack - it is a statement of fact. Further, it is frankly laughable to claim that OP has invited debate when they have just spammed hourly updates from Russian media, with nobody else commenting until I pointed out the issue.

4 hours ago, DConnell said:

Maybe if you debated what he's posting rather than claiming he's a Russian troll?

Debate what? There hasn't been any credible evidence presented to warrant a discussion. Look at the quote from the original post:

 

"Yesterday, The US, Britain, and France issued a joint statement expressing “concerns” over a military attack on Idleb and threatening to respond to any use of chemical weapons, which implies that these states are planning to stage another chemical incident and exploit it as an excuse to attack Syria, just like what happened on April 14th."

 

The claim is that if the US, Britain and France issue a warning about the use of chemical weapons that they must therefore being planning to stage a chemical weapons attack. That's not evidence - that's a baseless conspiracy theory. There's good reason this topic is in the conspiracy section.

4 hours ago, DConnell said:

Let him post what he wants - as long as he remains within the rules, he's as entitled to do so as anyone else here.

Where did I suggest that they should be banned from posting? I said no such thing. But I have every right to call out Russian propaganda for what it is.

[DConnell Member]

 

1 hour ago, theyarecomingforyou said:

There have been no personal attacks in this topic. Stating that OP is pushing Russian propaganda is not a personal attack - it is a statement of fact. Further, it is frankly laughable to claim that OP has invited debate when they have just spammed hourly updates from Russian media, with nobody else commenting until I pointed out the issue.

 

On 9/9/2018 at 11:07 AM, nagokod said:

I'm glad you don't take for granted the info I've posted. Nobody should. That's why I started the topic on Conspiracy subforum

This looks rather like an invitation for discussion to me. And if nobody is commenting, then what is the big deal? The only person who sees a problem here is you.  Heck, I'm only posting because I'm annoyed by you antagonizing a new member. I don't care about the topic one way or the other, I'm just here because of THAT.

 

And if you object to him posting without making any commentary, remember that there are others who do the same, or at least don't comment beyond a snide remark. Meanwhile your contribution to the thread isn't anything constructive. You haven't picked apart the articles or invited discussion. You've just complained about his source and basically called him a troll.

 

If you're not going to contribute anything here, just leave the thread be, and let it live or die on its own merit.

[nagokod]

George Galloway told RT the UK will “rely upon pre-cooked open source intelligence from terrorist groups,” amid accusations from the Russian military that the White Helmets have faked footage of a concocted chemical attack.


Responding to Labour’s shadow foreign secretary, Emily Thornberry, who urged the government to verify any chemical attacks in rebel-held parts of Syria before taking military action, Galloway warned that their refusal to do so shows the government’s “ill intentions.”

 

source : https://www.rt.com/uk/438295-syria-galloway-tony-blair/

[theyarecomingforyou]

1 hour ago, DConnell said:

This looks rather like an invitation for discussion to me. And if nobody is commenting, then what is the big deal?

It's spam. Nine posts in a row without any comment, all pushing a Russian propaganda. Then they make one comment and immediately go back to spamming Russian propaganda.

1 hour ago, DConnell said:

Heck, I'm only posting because I'm annoyed by you antagonizing a new member.

Funny how you don't have a problem with a new member spamming Russian propaganda yet you take issue to me calling them out for it.

1 hour ago, DConnell said:

And if you object to him posting without making any commentary, remember that there are others who do the same, or at least don't comment beyond a snide remark.

I haven't come across another topic where someone posts nine comments in a row without any response from other members and if I did I'd be commenting on that as well.

1 hour ago, DConnell said:

Meanwhile your contribution to the thread isn't anything constructive. You haven't picked apart the articles or invited discussion. You've just complained about his source and basically called him a troll.

What's there to discuss? The topic is based on the assumption that if western nations express concern about the use of chemical weapons that it must mean they are about to stage an attack themselves. The rest of the posts are quotes from Russian military sources that don't provide any substantive evidence. It's all trying to muddy the water, which is a classic propaganda technique. But please, do enlighten us as to what there is to discuss here. You've criticised me criticised the OP, so I don't see what you've brought to the conversation here. I've at least pointed out the lack of evidence to support OP's claims.

 

We must not be afraid to call out propaganda for what it is and should not tolerate it around here.

[DConnell Member]

29 minutes ago, theyarecomingforyou said:

I

What's there to discuss? The topic is based on the assumption that if western nations express concern about the use of chemical weapons that it must mean they are about to stage an attack themselves. The rest of the posts are quotes from Russian military sources that don't provide any substantive evidence. It's all trying to muddy the water, which is a classic propaganda technique. But please, do enlighten us as to what there is to discuss here. You've criticised me criticised the OP, so I don't see what you've brought to the conversation here. I've at least pointed out the lack of evidence to support OP's claims.

You tell me what there is to discuss. I really don't care. It's the antagonizing of a new poster that I'm objecting to. You're the one invested in the content of the posts; surely you have more to say on the subject than "Ha ha fake news!"

 

Quote

 

We must not be afraid to call out propaganda for what it is and should not tolerate it around here.

So "propaganda" should not be tolerated in the subforum where it's actually on-topic. Ohhhkay ... ?

 

He's not breaking any rules, and is actually posting his stuff where appropriate.  So basically, what you're saying is it shouldn't be tolerated because you don't like it or agree with it.