After Idlib chemical attack, four pro-Assad talking points to be wary of

[TomSea]

Excerpted:

After Idlib chemical attack, four pro-Assad talking points to be wary of
Published April 5th, 2017 - 15:19 GMT via SyndiGate.info

...

Or that the attack was a “false flag”:

The discussions mirrored those that followed a previous chemical attack in 2013 that targeted opposition-held areas of Damascus.

While the UN stopped short of saying definitively that the Syrian government was behind that attack, it said that the perpetrators had access to government stocks of Sarin, the expertise and the equipment to use the weapon.

Governments such as the US, France, Germany and the UK all released intelligence assessments that accused Assad’s government of being behind the attack.

The Syrian government denied carrying out the attack, and Russia - its ally and patron - claimed that the attack had been carried out by the opposition in order to provoke an international intervention against the Syrian government.

With history apparently repeating itself, here are four pro-government talking points you should be wary of.

1. “No information from opposition-held areas is trustworthy”

This claim is often repeated, and some caution with information coming from Syria is necessary: reporting from Syria is extremely difficult, not to mention dangerous.

From the beginning of the uprising in 2011, the Syrian government targeted journalists and media activists for arrest, torture and death.

For foreign journalists, reporting from opposition-held areas became impossible when kidnappings became common.

Some Syrians remain committed to getting reliable information out of the country, however, and it is wrong to simply dismiss all of the news from opposition-held areas as propaganda.

In addition, two journalists from Agence France Presse - a well regarded wire service - were on the scene of yesterday’s attacks. Presence on the ground is the gold-standard for reporting.

However, even without it, major news outlets now have years of experience in reporting on Syria and are well-equipped to filter fact from fiction.

2. “al-Qaeda controls Idlib, and they control all of the information from there”

One of the dominant opposition groups in Idlib is Jabhat Fateh al-Sham (JFS), which was formerly known as Jabhat al-Nusra, al-Qaeda’s branch in Syria.

...

Continued: http://www.albawaba.com/loop/after-idlib-chemical-attack-four-pro-assad-talking-points-be-wary-959384

[Victoria33]

I can see a ruler with no soul, using poison gas to kill enemies.  My question is, were ANY enemies of Assad killed?  All we hear about/see are regular citizens killed by gas and then the hospital where live ones are being treated, is bombed.  Again, were any enemies killed or just regular people?  It makes no sense for Assad to kill people just to be killing people who are no threat to him.  It is a wasted effort and he wouldn't want that kind of publicity.

Or, did one of Assad's military men decide to do that on his own?  Give the order and it happened.  What was the communication like between that air field "commander" and higher up the chain of command?  Was there any?