Examiner: Rebels admit gas attack result of mishandling chemical weapons

[stlsaxman]

Dale Gavlak (NPR and other publications) interviewed rebels who say attack was accidental...

Not sure how reliable a source the Examiner is but here you have it-

http://www.examiner.com/article/breaking-news-rebels-admit-gas-attack-result-of-mishandling-chemical-weapons?fb_action_ids=590440097664147&fb_action_types=og.likes&fb_source=other_multiline&action_object_map=[229197903896694]&action_type_map=[%22og.likes%22]&action_ref_map=[]

August 30, 2013

In a report that is sure to be considered blockbuster news, the rebels told Dale Gavlak, a reporter who has written for the Associated Press, NPR and BBC, they are responsible for the chemical attack last week.

Gavlak is a Middle Eastern journalist who filed the report about the rebels claiming responsibility on the Mint Press News website, which is affiliated with AP.

In that report allegedly the rebels told him the chemical attack was a result of mishandling chemical weapons.

[FSogol]

1. Examiner: Doesn't have enough credibility to take seriously

[1-Old-Man]

35. But ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, PBS, CNN, and FOX do?

I guess its not possible that anyone but Assad did the gassing.

[Peacetrain]

2. There has been threads on this.. a big one on the front page right now

and the source is looking pretty shady.

just saying

[sibelian]

11. Shady source? PHEW.

That means it would be alright for Obama to carry on with the bombing campaign.

RELIEF.

[Peacetrain]

13. Take it somewhere else..

[sibelian]

37. I'm happy with it right here, thanks.

[Peacetrain]

39. Coffee coming up

(_)O (_)O cup for you and cup for me

[rhett o rick]

3. I am in no hurry to see this locked but it does sound a little fishy.

For one thing, do the rebels have chemical weapons? And if they used them would we go after them?

[KittyWampus]

4. There's a reason you are left scraping the bottom of the barrel for sourcing this-

There's a reason why no reputable news source is carrying it.

It's not because every respectable news outlet on the planet is a co-conspirator in PNAC.

[sharp_stick]

5. The Examiner?

Holy shit but you had to reach deep into the sewer for this one. If NPR or AP isn't reporting it I'd pretty much say it's the steaming pile of shit that they put out on pretty much a daily basis.

[Warpy]

6. I read Assad's inner circle was caught flatfooted

and in a panic right after it.

Still, I think little coming out of that country is reliable.

And people are jerking their knees and screaming for vengeance for all those pore baybees not realizing it's the oldest propaganda trick in the world.

Remember the infants tossed out of incubators and onto the cold floor in Kuwait?

Offhand, I'd say that since Assad is Putin's boy, this is Putin's problem. No one appointed the US as the world's guardian and no one is paying us a dime for the service.

[truebluegreen]

8. Indeed.

In fact everyone of us pays for the privilege.

[pnwmom]

7. This examiner article has already been locked once as a RW site and self-deleted twice.

The story was started by WND 5 days ago and eventually pushed its way out of the right wing blogosphere into the left.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=581438

[rhett o rick]

9. It was locked for inappropriately being in LBN. Just sayin. nm

[pnwmom]

15. The locker said it was a RW site. That means it doesn't belong anywhere here. n/t

[rhett o rick]

16. Not true. Skinner said that sight could be used to lock threads in LBN because it wasnt appropriate

for LBN. He said that the host could decide otherwise.

[pnwmom]

17. Here is exactly what the locker said:

(Notice the use of the word "and&quot :

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=581438

"Locking-Consensus of hosts that the Examiner is a RW site and not appropriate for LBN."

[rhett o rick]

18. The hosts voted to lock. There was no agreement that the Examiner is a RW site.

It has been determined that the source was not acceptable for LBN which has more strict rules than GD. The host of LBN do not affect what happens in GD.

What's the rush to declare sights as RW?

[pnwmom]

19. It was the "consensus of the hosts that the Examiner is a RW site. . . ."

"Consensus" means that all the hosts agreed.

This story was based on a story that has been pushed by WND for five days before it moved out of the rightwing blogosphere. Why should DU post repeated threads about it?

[rhett o rick]

20. You are quoting someone. But the consensus was to lock. Only the one person

claimed that the Examiner is a RW sight. All the hosts agreed to lock. Only one host mentioned it was a RW sight.

I am not claiming the story is legitimate, I am just arguing that the OP that was locked was because it didnt meet the strict requirements of LBN.

[pnwmom]

21. I'm quoting the host who locked the thread after saying that it was the consensus

of the hosts that it was a RW site. S/he didn't say that only one host thought that. That's your idea.

[rhett o rick]

22. "That's your idea", yes because I read the discussion. The host that locked the thread

said it but it was not reflected in the discussion.

[pnwmom]

25. The Examiner IS a RW site. See #23, below. n/t

[rhett o rick]

32. Thank you. That's something I can accept. Better than heresay. nm

[maddezmom]

23. It is a RW site...a bit about the owner of the Examiner.com

Political and Christian activism[edit source | editbeta]
Often identified as "Christian billionaire Phil Anschutz",[46] he is a Republican donor who supported George W. Bush's administration. He has been an active patron of a number of religious and conservative causes:
Helped fund Colorado's 1992 Amendment 2, a ballot initiative designed to overturn local and state laws that prohibit discrimination against individuals on the basis of sexual orientation but was invalidated by Romer v. Evans after it passed.[32]
Contributed $70,000 in 2003 to the Discovery Institute, to specifically support the work of telecom guru George Gilder but not matters related to intelligent design. That fact was validated by Discovery President Bruce Chapman in a letter-to-the-editor to the Rocky Mounatain News, "Anschutz never gave that program a nickel,"[47]
The Discovery Institute is a think tank based in Seattle, Washington that also promotes intelligent design and criticizes evolution.[48]
Supported the Parents Television Council, a group that protests against television indecency.[48]
Financed and distributed films with Christian themes, such as Amazing Grace and The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, for mass audiences through his two film production companies and ownership of much of the Regal, Edwards and United Artists theater chains.
Financed The Foundation for a Better Life.
In 2009 Anschutz purchased the conservative American opinion magazine The Weekly Standard from Rupert Murdoch's News Corporation.[39]
Philip Anschutz and fellow board members of the American Petroleum Institute in Washington are credited by Bush's energy secretary for the Oval Office decision in 2001 to stand with the 95-0 vote in the U.S. Senate four years earlier against bringing ratification of the Kyoto Protocol to the floor for consideration. The primary reason cited was the crippling economic effects of the treaty.[citation needed]
Financed the 2010 pro-charter school film, Waiting for Superman.[49]
Financed the 2012 pro-parent trigger film, Won't Back Down.[50]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_Anschutz

[pnwmom]

24. Thanks for the info, maddezmom! n/t

[stlsaxman]

27. Thank you, maddezmom. I wasn't sure if it's a RW site or not.

what caught my eye with some "legitimacy" was Dale Gavlak's name being sited. Gavlak does reports for NPR and other sources (now, to me NPR IS a RW site).

I posted the OP in the slim hope that it might have contained factual info that we were going to war for an accident. My bad. Go ahead and lock the thread. I don't care any more.

[maddezmom]

36. I am just speaking to the site not the journalist

[rhett o rick]

34. Thanks for posting. nm

[SidDithers]

38. It's too bad that GD doesn't have the standards of LBN...

no matter how loony a site is, GD Hosts won't lock it.

Sid

[sibelian]

10. "In a report that is sure to be considered blockbuster news"

Tee and also hee.

No. It's not going to be blockbuster news.

[rhett o rick]

12. Why the rush to judgement?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023576316

[cthulu2016]

14. Looks like they mishandled them a lot

[Motown_Johnny]

26. then explain the rockets

[stlsaxman]

28. good point.

[Motown_Johnny]

29. no it isn't

it is an extremely basic point

nowhere near a good one

[stlsaxman]

30. "extremely basic point" or not- that very question occurred to me when I first read the article...

and it was a "good point" that the article didn't address.

in other words- I WAS AGREEING WITH YOU!!!!!

[Motown_Johnny]

31. I know you were agreeing with me

but something that basic is not a "good point" (in my opinion)


I was pointing out how terrible the article is.

[stlsaxman]

33. thank you for clarifying, and pardon my oversensitivity.

in hindsite i wish i'd never posted it.