Twitter | Search | |
GeorgeMonbiot
Arguing w/ Syrian gas attack deniers is like arguing w/ climate change deniers. No evidence will change their minds
Do news organisations have a duty to publish stories from anonymous sources when there is reason to believe they are untrue? Apparently…
Medium Medium @Medium
Reply Retweet Like More
Sparkle60 3 Jul 17
Replying to @GeorgeMonbiot
Now we are supposed to accept... because Brian Whittaker says so, it must be so. Would not believe anyone who writes for establishment.
Reply Retweet Like
GeorgeMonbiot 3 Jul 17
Replying to @60Sparkle
Not at all. You might start by reading the OPCW report.
Reply Retweet Like
Sparkle60 3 Jul 17
Replying to @GeorgeMonbiot
Bit like msm, they say it so we must accept it. That's what they do when they want regime change or a war. Say that 'experts' said...
Reply Retweet Like
GeorgeMonbiot 3 Jul 17
Replying to @60Sparkle
Ah, I see. So the OPCW is now part of the conspiracy. I wonder who isn't.
Reply Retweet Like
Sparkle60 3 Jul 17
Replying to @GeorgeMonbiot
Why does the OPCW not start with dealing with those who sell chemical weapons or provide the means to make/sell them?
Reply Retweet Like
GeorgeMonbiot 3 Jul 17
Replying to @60Sparkle
It does. Why don't you do some basic research on subjects you claim to care about?
Reply Retweet Like
Sparkle60 3 Jul 17
Replying to @Gaudd @GeorgeMonbiot
There is absolutely no point in the OPCW or all these other 'pretend we care' organisations, other than masonic like privilege for the few.
Reply Retweet Like
GeorgeMonbiot 3 Jul 17
Replying to @60Sparkle @Gaudd
ah right ...
Reply Retweet Like
Sparkle60 3 Jul 17
Replying to @GeorgeMonbiot
Here's the thing George, writing reports is not good enough. If they can't take action, what is the point? UK on trial for selling CW?
Reply Retweet Like
GeorgeMonbiot 3 Jul 17
Replying to @60Sparkle
So you too would like OPCW powers enhanced? Good. But a moment ago you dismissed them as a masonic conspiracy.
Reply Retweet Like
GeorgeMonbiot 3 Jul 17
Replying to @fraserfifield
We'll see. But having read everything I can, on both sides of the question, I am confident that you have got this wrong.
Reply Retweet Like
Ashik 3 Jul 17
Replying to @GeorgeMonbiot
Let's not be so binary. Skepticism to US claims on war crimes is perfectly rational. To frame people this way isn't productive
Reply Retweet Like
GeorgeMonbiot 3 Jul 17
Replying to @gumbleinthewabe
The OPCW, HRW, Amnesty etc are not "US claims".
Reply Retweet Like
Fraser Fifield 3 Jul 17
Replying to @GeorgeMonbiot
I wish I could appeal to your greater reason and decency on this, I really do. failing to do so however I guess we'll just wait and see.
Reply Retweet Like
GeorgeMonbiot 3 Jul 17
Replying to @fraserfifield
You appear to hate the fact that I'm judging this case by the evidence, rather than by ideological conviction.
Reply Retweet Like
Random 🥝 | #FreeAssange ⏳ 3 Jul 17
One issue is that HRW & Amnesty employees have made statements showing clear bias, while OPCW funding compromises them too.
Reply Retweet Like
GeorgeMonbiot 3 Jul 17
Yup, they're all part of the conspiracy.
Reply Retweet Like
GeorgeMonbiot 3 Jul 17
Replying to @daes0707
take your pick. It changes by the day.
Reply Retweet Like
Morgan Carlston 3 Jul 17
Reply Retweet Like