The group includes activists and people who call themselves "independent journalists", and several have Twitter followings reaching into the tens or hundreds of thousands.
Umm no the fact there was no evidence before US ran in and blew **** upWould I lie to you honey ?
Could Sarah Abdallah be feeding us BS on the gas attacks in Syria ? And if so who is she ?
BBC Trending
Syria war: The online activists pushing conspiracy theories
BBC Trending Going in-depth on social media
- 19 April 2018
Image copyright Twitter/@sahouraxo
- Share this with Facebook
- Share this with Twitter
- Share this with Messenger
- Share this with Email
- Share
Image caption Sarah Abdallah is one of the most influential Twitter users commenting on conversations about the conflict in Syria, although little is known about the person behind the account
As the investigation continues into another alleged chemical attack in Syria, one group of influential online activists is busy spreading their version of events.
Inspectors from the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) are attempting to access the previously rebel-held town of Douma, where medical organisations and rescue workers say President Bashar al-Assad's forces dropped bombs filled with toxic chemicals in an attack on 7 April, killing more than 40 people.
The Syrian government and its key ally, Russia, say the incident was staged. But the US, UK and France - who support the opposition to Mr Assad - say they are confident that chlorine and possibly a nerve agent were used.
Despite the uncertainty about what happened in Douma, a cluster of influential social media activists is certain that it knows what occurred on 7 April.
They've seized on a theory being floated by Russian officials and state-owned media outlets that the attacks were "staged" or were a "false flag" operation, carried out by jihadist groups or spies in order to put the blame on the Assad government and provide a justification for Western intervention.
The group includes activists and people who call themselves "independent journalists", and several have Twitter followings reaching into the tens or hundreds of thousands.
http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-43745629
Who sued after Iraqi?When are people going to get the idea that Twitter/Facebook is crap ?
The mainstream media aren't angels but at least they can be sued or fined if they print bullshite.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...olice-deny-pms-partner-is-under-investigation
And where does this poisonous dribble come from ? Totally insane xhit.
http://mediawhores.co.nz/2018/02/07...ilt-his-media-career-by-spreading-his-cheeks/
The Guardian and Mediawhores apparently
Well your at least half right Tisme. And after reading some the posionous rubbish you serve up I can see where your taste firmly lies.
Come across any transgender, jewish, paedophile shapeshifters recently ??
Have you cleaned up your mirror yet Tizze ? It must have have made an awful mess when it saw the lying, inspid little xurd leering at it this morning.
Tell you what xuckface. Do you want to keep turning this thread into a slime pit or are we quits ..
Is it something I said?
Yeah.... I chose to highlight a particularly nasty website that seems to produce an endless array of the most bizzare and nasty tales ever invented. It is one of the sources of the current slag campaign against Clarke Gayford.
Your response .......is to equate The Guardian as equal partners in such behaviour. Super, super trolling Tisme.
The crack I made about "transgender, jewish, paedophile shapeshifters" was a way of crudely simplifying at least part of the content of Media whores.
Hey Tisme.Whats the point in that when allegedly sane people can equate the revolting rubbish from MediaWhores with the material from The Guardian and not miss a beat.
.
To which standards are you referring? How often do the published letters, from opinionated tabloid patrons, attract lawsuits?Only cowards use social media for denigration, it's much less likely that they will be sued.
Social media really has to have the same standards applied that mainstream media has to operate under.
Only cowards use social media for denigration, it's much less likely that they will be sued.
Social media really has to have the same standards applied that mainstream media has to operate under.
To which standards are you referring? How often do the published letters, from opinionated tabloid patrons, attract lawsuits?
Were you aware that this forum has had to endure a number of civil lawsuits in recent years?
Hey Tisme.
Don't rubbish Basilios only go to source.
Hello and welcome to Aussie Stock Forums!
To gain full access you must register. Registration is free and takes only a few seconds to complete.
Already a member? Log in here.