This is the story on the bbc website - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23911833
This strikes me as a rather incredible claim by Putin.
PUTIN: "If there is evidence it should be shown. If it is not shown, then there isn't any."
Yet, quoting from the news story, the US say they have this evidence:
-the attack killed 1,429 people, including 426 children
-Syrian military chemical weapons personnel were operating in the area in the three days before the attack
-Satellite evidence shows rockets launched from government-held areas 90 minutes before first report of chemical attack
-100 videos attributed to the attack show symptoms consistent with exposure to nerve agent
-Communications were intercepted involving a senior Damascus official who "confirmed chemical weapons were used" and was concerned about UN inspectors obtaining evidence
Who's right?
This strikes me as a rather incredible claim by Putin.
PUTIN: "If there is evidence it should be shown. If it is not shown, then there isn't any."
Yet, quoting from the news story, the US say they have this evidence:
-the attack killed 1,429 people, including 426 children
-Syrian military chemical weapons personnel were operating in the area in the three days before the attack
-Satellite evidence shows rockets launched from government-held areas 90 minutes before first report of chemical attack
-100 videos attributed to the attack show symptoms consistent with exposure to nerve agent
-Communications were intercepted involving a senior Damascus official who "confirmed chemical weapons were used" and was concerned about UN inspectors obtaining evidence
Who's right?
via JREF Forum http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=264587&goto=newpost
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire