NP - Chemical Weapons Used in Syria... (or WERE they?)

[Thomas Eckhardt]

On Mon, 16 Apr 2018 16:21:28 -0400
  Mark Thibodeau <jerkyleboeuf at gmail.com> wrote:
> The blog you keep sending us to lies somewhere in the middle, edging more slightly towards bullshit than batshit,  but nonetheless, pretty untrustworthy. It's clear to me that they begin with their conclusions (FALSE FLAG!) and then do their best to validate those conclusions, evidence to the contrary be damned. 
The allegation is that it is staged, not a false flag (which would produce 
real casualties). Where is the evidence to the contrary? The BBC could have 
easily debunked the allegations by providing the rushes. They chose not to 
do so.
> Is the BBC without sin? No. Did they make some mistakes in this specific case? Obviously they did. Complete truth is difficult to come by at the best of times, and this was the middle of a war zone.
I am afraid there is not much wiggle room for honest mistakes
here. Pannell and his team either staged the scenes, or they did not.
The scene was coincidentally first broadcast a few hours before the UK 
parliament voted on military intervention in Syria.
And, of course, members of what later became known as the White Helmets, 
were also present at the hospital...
See also:
https://cultureandpolitics.org/2018/03/13/saving-syrias-children-how-the-bbc-are-embedding-their-journalists-with-jihadist-groups-in-syria/
There is a spirited and rational discussion on, well, Mumsnet. Here is a 
sensible question:
"These are damning accusations against the BBC that if untrue, any credible 
organisation would have obtained injunctions, financial damages and no end 
of legal apologies to clear their name?
So in short, in 4 years, why is Robert Stuart in the heart of London 
presenting his evidence in October 2017, unhindered by any form of 
injunction or legal

redress?"
https://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/politics/3074966-Did-BBC-Panorama-fake-a-documentary
If you want to discuss this further, I propose to do so off-list.