Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Doctors Without Borders confirmed: "mass exposure to a neurotoxic agent" [View all]ProSense
(116,464 posts)22. I can read, the
You can't read
MSF did not confirm anything because they have no firsthand knowledge of the situation. None of their personnel, despite your claim higher in the thread, are in Syria. They have been extremely clear about this in the two press releases. If you're going to make false claims, don't link the evidence that shows it.
Sheesh, you even highlighted the section from the press release which emphasizes the fact they haven't confirmed anything. Read closer in the future.
MSF did not confirm anything because they have no firsthand knowledge of the situation. None of their personnel, despite your claim higher in the thread, are in Syria. They have been extremely clear about this in the two press releases. If you're going to make false claims, don't link the evidence that shows it.
Sheesh, you even highlighted the section from the press release which emphasizes the fact they haven't confirmed anything. Read closer in the future.
...the question is can you. Here:
Although our information indicates mass exposure to a neurotoxic agent, MSF clearly stated that scientific confirmation of the toxic agent was required, and therefore called for an independent investigation to shed light on what would constitute, if confirmed, a massive and unacceptable violation of international humanitarian law.
Confirmed: "mass exposure to a neurotoxic agent."
Unconfirmed: type of "toxic agent."
The latest massive influx of patients displaying neurotoxic symptoms in Damascus governorate comes on top of an already catastrophic humanitarian situation facing the Syrian people...
Clearly a "massive influx of patients displaying neurotoxic symptoms" isn't a figment of the group's imagination.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
99 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Doctors Without Borders confirmed: "mass exposure to a neurotoxic agent" [View all]
ProSense
Sep 2013
OP
No one has been claiming that the DWB could certify the "precise origin of the exposure
pnwmom
Sep 2013
#4
No. They didn't want people to think that they were asserting more than they were.
pnwmom
Sep 2013
#21
The "primary purpose" doesn't take away from the fact that they confirmed the situation. n/t
ProSense
Sep 2013
#26
That part supposidly that the MSF issued a press release to criticize Obama and Kerry....Where did
lumpy
Sep 2013
#66
He is saying that government justifications for war have been shown to be incorrect
daleo
Sep 2013
#24
"The MSF has reason to suspect that agents other than the assad regime may have caused the
lumpy
Sep 2013
#63
You are deflecting. You made a claim about the UN, and then dismissed the UN statement. n/t
ProSense
Sep 2013
#96
No, that was at the time of the statement, which was only days after the incident
ProSense
Sep 2013
#12
Pooh-poohing nerve gas' effectiveness. God, this place is classy today. (nt)
Posteritatis
Sep 2013
#35
There can be no more serious discussion, even on the internet, than talking about killing people.
rug
Sep 2013
#48
MSF and UN members are not permitted to draw political conclusions as to who is responsible
lumpy
Sep 2013
#71
You misread it. It is: if it turns out the attack came from one of the opposition forces.
rug
Sep 2013
#72
Oh thanks, you didn't make that clear. I haven't made up my mind as yet, if you really care.
lumpy
Sep 2013
#75
They've moved on from "Do we even know there was a chemical attack" and "So what if there was?"
alcibiades_mystery
Sep 2013
#50
No they didn't. They are prevented to draw conclusions as to who perpetuated the gas attack.
lumpy
Sep 2013
#81
scientific confirmation of the toxic agent was required - meaning it's not confirmed by MSF
idwiyo
Sep 2013
#53
MSF does not confirm anything. MSF clearly stated they had second hand info. MSF also
idwiyo
Sep 2013
#77
You used a misleading OP title to add weight to your statement. MSF does not confirm what you insist
idwiyo
Sep 2013
#82
The only nonsense before your latest response was the title of your original OP.
idwiyo
Sep 2013
#99
I am gone. This is too much. Clearly there is lack of reading comprehension, a lot of ignorance,
lumpy
Sep 2013
#85
I like the fact that Doctors Without Borders want an independent investigation
David Krout
Sep 2013
#91
Do you remember the memes that Iraq had chemical WMD because we sold them to Saddam...
freshwest
Sep 2013
#98