[jeffreyH]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.independent.co.uk/voices/douma-syria-opcw-chemical-weapons-chlorine-gas-video-conspiracy-theory-russia-a8927116.html%3famp

[Kryptid]

Jimmy Dore has been listed as a conspiracy theorist on wikipedia for reporting this information, seems to be a successful campaign afterall you just called him one.

The very link you posted states, "The evidence we were never meant to see about the Douma ‘gas’ attack". That certainly sounds like they are proposing that there is a cover-up. The web address of the page itself has "conspiracy theory" in it. So this very much sounds like a conspiracy theory. If Jimmy Dore promotes it, then that makes him a conspiracy theorist. As such, Wikipedia is not in the wrong for calling him one. If you're going to convince us that Wikipedia isn't trustworthy, you're going to have to do way better than that. Wikipedia isn't unreliable simply because Jimmy Dore doesn't like being called a conspiracy theorist. Plenty of fat people don't like being called fat either. Being offended by a label doesn't make it wrong.

Also, why are you posting links again? Weren't you told not to? It's like nothing has changed at all. You are pretty much right back where you started pre-suspension. Due to this, I have removed the links from your posts.

[The Spoon]

To be honest, with Jolly I just view his posts from the perspective of conspiracy theory bingo. Nearly have all of them ticked off, I just need him refer to 'sheeple' then I have a full house.

[Bored chemist]

Jolly isn't the only one.
https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=71332.msg639304#msg639304

[Jolly2]

You must be mad.
Because we can not prove that the cylinders were dropped from a helicopter, you assume they must have been put there by locals who, presumably, wanted to gas themselves.

Is that really how your mind works?

No, the scientists on the ground, in their now suppressed report, suggested the barrels were most likley placed at the location. Robert Fisk who visited the town in question reported quoting a doctor at the village

“I was with my family in the basement of my home three hundred metres from here on the night but all the doctors know what happened. There was a lot of shelling [by government forces] and aircraft were always over Douma at night – but on this night, there was wind and huge dust clouds began to come into the basements and cellars where people lived. People began to arrive here suffering from hypoxia, oxygen loss. Then someone at the door, a “White Helmet”, shouted “Gas!”, and a panic began. People started throwing water over each other. Yes, the video was filmed here, it is genuine, but what you see are people suffering from hypoxia – not gas poisoning.”

The white helmets were created by James Le Mesurier a "Former" Mi6 agent incidentally.

The cylinders were not dropped from a helicopter, considering that America listed the use of chemical weapons as a red line, and that the Assad government was winning the civil war in the country at the time, the use of chemical weapons by the Assad administration which was used as justification by America to attack the country makes little sense.

Repeated American administration's since 2002 have claimed a desire to change the regime inside Syria.

There is also the hilarious story published by the Los Angeles Times, where terrorist groups funded by the Pentagon actually ended up fighting with other terrorist groups funded by the CIA inside Syria. Which also opens the possibility that one of these proxy groups were involved.

Bit of a casino really, but while Assad using chemical weapons makes little sense,  the Hoax makes more.

[Jolly2]

Jimmy Dore has been listed as a conspiracy theorist on wikipedia for reporting this information, seems to be a successful campaign afterall you just called him one.

The very link you posted states, "The evidence we were never meant to see about the Douma ‘gas’ attack". That certainly sounds like they are proposing that there is a cover-up. The web address of the page itself has "conspiracy theory" in it.

Sorry Kryptid but the links I posted were from the independent newspaper and the Nation newspaper. So I really dont get what you are talking about. Or understand why they have been removed considering that both are main steam news sources are you now suggesting the Independent is  a fake news site?

So this very much sounds like a conspiracy theory. If Jimmy Dore promotes it, then that makes him a conspiracy theorist.

Disagree, the official narrative has holes in it,  the suppression of the scientists finding which MEPs amoung other are protesting, also is highly suggestive.

In this background to expression an opinion isnt a conspiracy theory,  to label someone that offers a dissenting opinion as a conspiracy theorist however just serves as a way to dismiss them, and in a baseless way, no service to truth and just a defence of a clear false narrative.

As such, Wikipedia is not in the wrong for calling him one.

Disagree again, it is now not clear, people suggesting a hoax should be allowed to put forward that hypothesis without these labels, labels which simply serve the America agenda funnily enough but which also could be labelled a  conspiracy theory.

If you're going to convince us that Wikipedia isn't trustworthy, you're going to have to do way better than that. Wikipedia isn't unreliable simply because Jimmy Dore doesn't like being called a conspiracy theorist. Plenty of fat people don't like being called fat either. Being offended by a label doesn't make it wrong.

What makes it wrong is that CNN and wikipedia dont know, as such they have no right to decide the truth.

Also, why are you posting links again? Weren't you told not to?

I was under the impression I couldn't, and was suprised when they went up. You're the one that have repeatedly asked me to post links, I thought you'd be happy.

It's like nothing has changed at all. You are pretty much right back where you started pre-suspension. Due to this, I have removed the links from your posts.

You've removed links from the independent and Nation newspapers, they are highly controversial sites.

[Kryptid]

Sorry Kryptid but the links I posted were from the independent newspaper and the Nation newspaper. So I really dont get what you are talking about.

The quote came directly from the page and the word "conspiracy theory" is in the web address. I don't know what there isn't to "get".

Or understand why they have been removed considering that both are main steam news sources are you now suggesting the Independent is  a fake news site?

I removed them specifically because you were restricted from posting links as a part of the compromise to allow you back on this forum. Nothing more, nothing less.

Disagree, the official narrative has holes in it,  the suppression of the scientists finding which MEPs amoung other are protesting, also is highly suggestive.

In this background to expression an opinion isnt a conspiracy theory,  to label someone that offers a dissenting opinion as a conspiracy theorist however just serves as a way to dismiss them, and in a baseless way, no service to truth and just a defence of a clear false narrative.

Claiming that the official narrative is wrong and that the truth about it is being covered up by powerful people is exactly what makes it a conspiracy theory: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/conspiracy%20theory

Definition of conspiracy theory: a theory that explains an event or set of circumstances as the result of a secret plot by usually powerful conspirators

also : a theory asserting that a secret of great importance is being kept from the public

Just because you don't like the label doesn't mean it doesn't fit.

Disagree again, it is now not clear, people suggesting a hoax should be allowed to put forward that hypothesis without these labels, labels which simply serve the America agenda funnily enough but which also could be labelled a  conspiracy theory.

Again, just because you don't like the label doesn't mean it doesn't apply.

What makes it wrong is that CNN and wikipedia dont know, as such they have no right to decide the truth.

Nobody gets to "decide" the truth. Jimmy Dore thinks that the government is hiding the truth about what happened on 9/11 as well. That alone makes him a conspiracy theorist.

I was under the impression I couldn't, and was suprised when they went up. You're the one that have repeatedly asked me to post links, I thought you'd be happy.

That was before I knew you had restrictions imposed upon you by the other mods.

You've removed links from the independent and Nation newspapers, they are highly controversial sites.

See above.

[Jolly2]

Sorry Kryptid but the links I posted were from the independent newspaper and the Nation newspaper. So I really dont get what you are talking about.

The quote came directly from the page and the word "conspiracy theory" is in the web address. I don't know what there isn't to "get".

Again I have never seen what you suggested on either 'The Independent' or 'The Nation' news sites so I have no idea what you are talking about.

Or understand why they have been removed considering that both are main steam news sources are you now suggesting the Independent is  a fake news site?

I removed them specifically because you were restricted from posting links as a part of the compromise to allow you back on this forum. Nothing more, nothing less.

Disagree, the official narrative has holes in it,  the suppression of the scientists finding which MEPs amoung other are protesting, also is highly suggestive.

In this background to expression an opinion isnt a conspiracy theory,  to label someone that offers a dissenting opinion as a conspiracy theorist however just serves as a way to dismiss them, and in a baseless way, no service to truth and just a defence of a clear false narrative.

Claiming that the official narrative is wrong and that the truth about it is being covered up by powerful people is exactly what makes it a conspiracy theory: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/conspiracy%20theory

Definition of conspiracy theory: a theory that explains an event or set of circumstances as the result of a secret plot by usually powerful conspirators

also : a theory asserting that a secret of great importance is being kept from the public

Just because you don't like the label doesn't mean it doesn't fit.

Disagree again, it is now not clear, people suggesting a hoax should be allowed to put forward that hypothesis without these labels, labels which simply serve the America agenda funnily enough but which also could be labelled a  conspiracy theory.

Again, just because you don't like the label doesn't mean it doesn't apply.

What makes it wrong is that CNN and wikipedia dont know, as such they have no right to decide the truth.

Nobody gets to "decide" the truth. Jimmy Dore thinks that the government is hiding the truth about what happened on 9/11 as well. That alone makes him a conspiracy theorist.

We are just going to have to agree to disagree.

I was under the impression I couldn't, and was suprised when they went up. You're the one that have repeatedly asked me to post links, I thought you'd be happy.

That was before I knew you had restrictions imposed upon you by the other mods.

You've removed links from the independent and Nation newspapers, they are highly controversial sites.

See above.

As above

[Kryptid]

We are just going to have to agree to disagree.

What you are disagreeing with is the definition of a term. This isn't a matter of opinion.

[Colin2B]

I do not wish to be drawn into a discussion on conspiracy theories, but as one has been posted it might be appropriate to explain why I do not consider them to be science subjects, but more often politically motivated. Typically a conspiracist will use some true facts, but hide other facts so presenting only one side of the events. I will use the one posted here as an example.

Let’s start with an assertion that triggered the posting of this conspiracy theory.
The assertion that Wiki tells lies about people (specifically Jimmy Dore) because it is controlled by (unnamed) powers, is in itself a typical conspiracy theory. Unnamed organisations or ‘powers that be’ are often quoted in conspiracy theories, but strangely those same powers can either tell lies or the truth depending on which side of the political fence you sit.

The specific conspiracy theory Jimmy Dore is accused of supporting is that based around the gassing of civilians in Syria. Supporters of the Assad regime, and Russia, claim the attack was set up by the opposition to draw the US into taking action against Assad.
They point to the OPCW investigation of alleged chemical weapons use in Douma, Syria which concluded that gas canisters were dropped from the air. A whistleblower claimed that a suppressed report said the gas canisters were placed on the ground rather than dropped from the air as reported by eyewitnesses. As with most conspiracy theories it is based on a true incident and this has been reported in mainstream media.
This is mentioned here as the version promoted by Jimmy Dore:

No, the scientists on the ground, in their now suppressed report, suggested the barrels were most likley placed at the location.

Like most conspiracy theories, this only puts forward one side of the story, which as we will see is not as presented.

The OPCW refused to comment directly, asking for an independent enquiry into their investigation. That enquiry concluded that the excluded report was not written by one of the team who visited the site, that the author was not a member of the Fact-Finding Mission that worked on the Douma investigation, and was in a support role that denied him access to much of the information the FFM handled. His excluded report contained diagrams of a gas cylinder that did not match photographs from the scene and was misleading as it omitted damage to the cylinder harness caused by impact to the ceiling and subsequent impact on the floor of the room below. So this ‘suppressed’ report was not by “the scientists on the ground” but was by someone who wasn’t in the team, didn’t visit the site, and which contained errors. I wonder why it was not included?

Unfortunately, the excellent journalist Robert Fisk was drawn into the controversy when he quoted a doctor who claimed that the victims where suffering hypoxia due to panic. Whether that doctor saw actual victims is questionable, but other eyewitnesses including first response medics and hospital workers noted foaming at the mouth, one of the signs of chlorine gas poisoning. Other evidence from the site noted the corrosive effects of chlorine gas around the cylinders which caused corrosion of metal objects nearby.
I have a great deal of respect for Robert Fisk and I am certain that he reported what he found in interviews. The Independent certainly gave a lot of coverage to the Douma attacks, but as far as I am aware they didn’t give the same coverage to the results of the independent enquiry into the OPCW report as other newspapers eg https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/feb/07/inquiry-strikes-blow-to-russian-denials-of-syria-chemical-attack

Why would Jimmy Dore promote this conspiracy theory? The cynics among us would say controversy increases viewing figures, which increases advertising revenue. As Jolly says, it’s all about money.

Just a word for Jimmy Dore. In one of his programmes he says of 9/11, that no other Tower has collapsed due to fire either before or after this one. Well Jimmy, look at the Tacoma Narrows bridge, no suspension bridge before or after that was destroyed by the wind; so do you think someone blew it up with explosives?
Keep smelling whatever it is you are drinking!

“woe to the arrogant as they will destroy themselves”.