No, he's just a shill for Assad, and he has destroyed his own reputation over several years by working in that capacity. He admits that his only 'witness' wasn't actually a witness to the chemical attack at all, and he declines to consider why Assad and Russia gave him privileged access even before they let the OPCW inspectors in, because they know he won't say anything they find inconvenient. He's a useful idiot, no more.

looooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooool.

Awards and honours
Fisk has received the British Press Awards' International Journalist of the Year seven times,[38] and twice won its "Reporter of the Year" award.[39] He also received Amnesty International UK Media Awards in 1992 for his report "The Other Side of the Hostage Saga",[40] in 1998 for his reports from Algeria[41] and again in 2000 for his articles on the NATO air campaign against the FRY in 1999.[42]

1984 Lancaster University honorary degree[43]
1991 Jacob's Award for coverage of the Gulf War on RTÉ Radio 1[44]
1999 Orwell Prize for journalism[45]
2001 David Watt Prize for an investigation of the 1915 Armenian Genocide by the Ottoman Empire[46]
2002 Martha Gellhorn Prize for Journalism[47]
2003 Open University honorary doctorate[48]
2004 University of St Andrews honorary degree[49]
2004 Carleton University honorary degree[50]
2005 Adelaide University Edward Said Memorial lecture[51]
2006 Ghent University honorary degree Political and Social Sciences[52]
2006 American University of Beirut honorary degree[53]
2006 Queen's University Belfast honorary degree[54]
2006 Lannan Cultural Freedom Prize worth $350,000[55]
2008 University of Kent honorary degree[56]
2008 Trinity College Dublin honorary doctorate[57]
2009 College Historical Society's Gold Medal for Outstanding Contribution to Public Discourse[58]
2009 Liverpool Hope University honorary degree[59][60]
2011 International Prize at the Amalfi Coast Media Awards, Italy[61]

who do you believe, a celebrated journalist or the rantings of a jihadi death cult paid by the pentagon and foreign office?

If Assad could just go away and let Jaish al Islam have their fun, this Assad animal doesn't even entertain pipeline talks and his society is way too secular, what an evildoer.

lol at referencing the warmongers gazette on the white helmets issue.
The Syrian civil (aka proxy) war was initiated by CIA backed death squads, it is a spill over from Iraq. It has always been a target state in the neo-con agenda. It is an American war.

Back when the Guardian meant something:

The US government, in other words, appears to admit that white phosphorus was used in Falluja as a chemical weapon.

This they were forced into accepting after lying about 'illumination' as you are now doing. It's like Vietnam never happened.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...ov/15/usa.iraq

It's all about the

So many things wrong with that map. You really expect us to believe that the Saudis are letting Qatar build a pipeline through their territory?

Also, the whole pipeline war has been debunked repeatedly - the timeline doesn't match up. Nice that you're adding some graphics though: your misinformation is getting better comrade.

I'd like to see the citations for repeated debunking. If you think agendas are based on rigid time lines and temporary alliances you are doing it wrong.

good analyses re geo political scramble for gas and oil
robert kennedy
https://www.ecowatch.com/syria-anoth...882180532.html

Pepe Escobar - pipelineistan and the new silk roads
asia times http://www.atimes.com/writer/pepe-escobar/
counterpunch https://www.counterpunch.org/author/c3ava/

Read your links - the Kennedy article states on page 4 that Assad was doomed when "in 2000 when Qatar proposed to construct a $10 billion, 1,500km pipeline through Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria and Turkey".

It then goes on to say "In 2009, Assad announced that he would refuse to sign the agreement to allow the pipeline to run through Syria “to protect the interests of our Russian ally."" Now, I've looked and looked and cannot find one news article or government statement earlier than 2016 that actually reports that this happened. All the websites I've visited have a variation on this quote, yet none of them have any supporting documentation or reliable footnote. Indeed, a couple for them simply linked to Kennedy's article as 'proof'. However, the Qatar-Turkey pipeline was proposed after meetings with the leaders of the two countries in August of 2009, at which time there was a proposal for the pipeline to bypass Syria (Qatar->Saudia Arabia->Kuwait->Iraq->Turkey) in addition to the one on your map. Planning of this pipeline however started months later with the working group only starting work in 2010.

Further down that page, Kennedy claims that " In 2009, according to WikiLeaks, soon after Bashar Assad rejected the Qatar pipeline, the CIA began funding opposition groups in Syria." This is untrue - the memos leaked by Wikileaks are from 2009, but they detail concern about the program (which started in 2006) and debate as to if it should be halted since the opposition groups were compromised by Assad's internal security.

Lets go back to your map. You have that US backed pipeline running into the Mediterranean - that's never been the plan. They wanted to run it through Syria and into Turkey to meet up with the Nabucco pipeline - which after a history of overruns and being a complete ****show, was aborted in 2013.

Finally, Saudi Arabia. They've attempted to block every pipeline Qatar's built. Most recently (I think?) the Dolphin pipeline - to send gas from Qatar to the UAE. The route of the pipeline had to be shifted to avoid Saudi maritime boundaries. In addition, Qatar also shifted to LNG - it's now one of the largest (if not the largest) producers of it and has spent $10+ billion on a shipping fleet. If you take into consideration the territory through which a pipeline would be built (political issues, terrorist threats and infrastructure deficiencies), combine that with the fact that Asia is a growing market for LNG and the fact that Qatar already has a distribution method that's working, the 'pipeline war' theory starts to look less and less likely.

Pipelines and ME politics would be an interesting thread. Obviously oil and gas have a lot to do with it. Oil and gas are 68% of Russia's exports and the source of most of Putin's enormous wealth. Occam's Razor imo is that it's at least his main concern.

Re the Assad refusal I don't see the importance of locating an actual quote from Assad, it's pretty clear how the local allegiances are shaping up, Pepe explains

It all started in 2009, when Qatar proposed to Damascus the construction of a pipeline from its own North Field – contiguous with the South Pars field, which belongs to Iran – traversing Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Syria all the way to Turkey, to supply the EU.
Damascus, instead, chose in 2010 to privilege a competing project, the $10 billion Iran-Iraq-Syria, also know as «Islamic pipeline». The deal was formally announced in July 2011, when the Syrian tragedy was already in motion. In 2012, a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) was signed with Iran.
Until then, Syria was dismissed, geo-strategically, as not having as much oil and gas compared to the GCC petrodollar club. But insiders already knew about its importance as a regional energy corridor. Later on, this was enhanced with the discovery of serious offshore oil and gas potential.

https://www.counterpunch.org/2015/12...lineistan-war/

Clearly not much is going to happen while war rages. This is the reason the Saudis are continuing to pressure the coalition of the NATO willing to continue the war. With regard to bypassing Syria, yes this is a possibility, however the duplicity of Turkey is no doubt on Washington's mind. It can't all be reduced to 'gas and oil' despite my own use of the slogan... Russia-China is growing, multi polar globe is the future, the new silk roads will bring unprecedented Eurasian integration built on Chinese money, oil traded in the Yuan not the dollar. This will not do for the neo-cons, they can't just pull out of Syria and drop the planned Iranian invasion despite Trump's apparent plans - yes Trump is the anti-war president

Re when and where the CIA were funding the opposition (aka jihadis originally trained by the CIA in the 80s as the mujahadeen in Afghanistan to fight the soviet union and continually supported by the Saudi wahhabist govt). Yes wiki leaks but we probably shouldn't be taking that point without some salt. As Kennedy points out the CIA have been interfering there since 1949, who really knows how much of a presence they have had on and off. Just last week we discovered British special forces have been conducting secret (and possibly illegal by UK standards) war there.

Re the map, it is the Russian line that runs to the med.

Re Qatar and the Saudis I think the recent failed blockade was due to Qatar's movements towards Iran, Pepe again

Qatar has already provided a game-changer; Doha has gotten closer to Tehran (common interests in South Pars/North Dome gas-field oblige), as well as Damascus – much to the despair of the House of Saud. So, unlike the recent past, Qatar is not engaged in regime change anymore. But still there are the diverging interests of Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Israel and, of course, Washington, to accommodate.

http://www.atimes.com/article/new-si...will-go-syria/

Pretty mind-bending/mind-blowing but it is imo the only way to develop a consistent understanding of middle east developments, without falling into the trap of reducing everything to crude market forces.

I recommend http://www.atimes.com/search/?q=pepe%20escobar which is a search for pepe escobar on the asia times site, there are around 100 in depth articles, many about middle east geo-politics. If you have any links please share

for sure set teh thread up

From 2014 but basically on the money

https://www.globalresearch.ca/the-se...-syria/5410130

Shortly after signing with Iran and Iraq, on August 16, 2011, Bashar al-Assad’s Syrian Ministry of Oil announced the discovery of a gas well in the Area of Qarah in the Central Region of Syria near Homs. Gazprom, with Assad in power, would be a major investor or operator of the new gas fields in Syria. [7] Iran ultimately plans to extend the pipeline from Damascus to Lebanon’s Mediterranean port where it would be delivered to the huge EU market. Syria would buy Iranian gas along with a current Iraqi agreement to buy Iranian gas from Iran’s part of South Pars field.[8]

Qatar, today the world’s largest exporter of LNG, largely to Asia, wants the same EU market that Iran and Syria eye. For that, they would build pipelines to the Mediterranean. Here is where getting rid of the pro-Iran Assad is essential. In 2009 Qatar approached Bashar al-Assad to propose construction of a gas pipeline from Qatar’s north Field through Syria on to Turkey and to the EU. Assad refused, citing Syria’s long friendly relations with Russia and Gazprom. That refusal combined with the Iran-Iraq-Syria gas pipeline agreement in 2011 ignited the full-scale Saudi and Qatari assault on Assad’s power, financing al Qaeda terrorists, recruits of Jihadist fanatics willing to kill Alawite and Shi’ite “infidels” for $100 a month and a Kalishnikov. The Washington neo-conservative warhawks in and around the Obama White House, along with their allies in the right-wing Netanyahu government, were cheering from the bleachers as Syria went up in flames after spring 2011.

Today the US-backed wars in Ukraine and in Syria are but two fronts in the same strategic war to cripple Russia and China and to rupture any Eurasian counter-pole to a US-controlled New World Order. In each, control of energy pipelines, this time primarily of natural gas pipelines—from Russia to the EU via Ukraine and from Iran and Syria to the EU via Syria—is the strategic goal. The true aim of the US and Israel backed ISIS is to give the pretext for bombing Assad’s vital grain silos and oil refineries to cripple the economy in preparation for a “Ghaddafi-”style elimination of Russia and China and Iran-ally Bashar al-Assad.

In a narrow sense, as Washington neo-conservatives see it, who controls Syria could control the Middle East. And from Syria, gateway to Asia, he will hold the key to Russia House, as well as that of China via the Silk Road.

https://www.hrw.org/news/2018/04/04/...ttacks-persist

Human Rights Watch seems to think that the Assad regime has used gas frequently.

See after researching the pipeline war theory, I can almost agree with you that oil/gas plays a major part in the conflict. But then you go and post something from Globalresearch.

Having never heard of it before, I looked at some of their other articles. It's laced with outlandish conspiracy theories, the basis of which are other conspiracy articles posted on other conspiracy websites. It's the internet, so no big surprise, but I don't see a decent conversation sprouting from such divergent viewpoints. Believe Fisk if you want that the chemical attacks never happened, obviously Syria and Russia are just innocents.

It is up to you to distinguish what is conspiracy theory from what is fact or reasonable assumption. You will find nonsense everywhere particularly in the mainstream media, don't dismiss entire networks on the basis of one bad article/journalist. A good article will make clear when facts become speculation. Engdahl is generally a stretch for sure, note 'New World Order' for instance. But the content is accurate and backed up elsewhere.

The 'fake news' phenomenon seems to have sapped the confidence of intelligent people to think for themselves, there is a panic search for 'credibility' and fear of using their own critical faculties.

'seem to think' is the key term here. Note: I am not a supporter of Assad/Putin etc before you start, just interested in truth.

The HRW article is turd. Firstly the photo of the man with mask has the caption 'civil defense member'. The only forces aside from regime forces/NATO/Russian in Syria are Jihadists, alarm bells? 'Rescue workers' are the white helmets who are a front organisation for Jihadist death squads.

Note 'suspected', but next it is described as fact 'when the Syrian government used chlorine in the besieged enclave of Eastern Ghouta.'

'based on data from seven sources' but what are these sources?

Note the graph, 'alleged' perpetrators, in other words ignore completely because it is made up. You can find evidence from the UN that chemical weapons have been used more than 50 times by 'rebel' groups.

The Khan Sheikhoun attack - the investigators did not even attend the scene which is why the Russians vetoed a further mandate. Again let me repeat, I have no issue saying the Syrian Baathists are bad enough to use chemical weapons, but let's be factual and not take at face value these hatchet jobs from Human rights watch. Who funds HRW?

tomj,

You seem to be wrong about the White Helmets and are 100% wrong about the forces in Syria being limited to NATO/Regime/Russia/Jihadi.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-43745629

bbc did an article on tom & friends

there's even something on the white helmets!

Impugns Human Rights Watch.


Cites Globalresearch.ca

So does the UN. Assad has been shown to have used chemical weapons on dozens of occasions. But last year, as a result of the Sarin attack by Assad at Khan Shaykhun, Russia used its veto to terminate the OPCW-UN Joint Investigative Mechanism, so that the OPCW could no longer assign blame for chemical attacks.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khan_S...hemical_attack

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OPCW-U...tive_Mechanism

You wouldn't be engaging in an anti-Semitic conspiracy theory involving George Soros, would you, by any chance? Of course you would.

no it's a straight question, I don't know what this organisation is but it seems very suspect.

"Israel backed ISIS" of course was not enough.

Its disturbing how deeply entrenched in alt-right ideology some people have become. Tomj doesn't strike me as your run of the mill 4chan troll popping in for some quick lolz, he's actually trying, just too far gone.

Research James Le Mesurier. Why would a private security contractor, also known as a mercenary, be setting up and securing funding from european governments for 'save the babies'?
I guess you are being pedantic re the second point. The 'moderate rebels' argument has always been false.