CNN is infamous for lying us into wars with unconfirmed propaganda and at the same time mocking alternative media outlets questioning dubious official narratives.
The masters of fake news have out done themselves by showing a reporter inhaling objects supposedly exposed to deadly chemical weaponry.
The mainstream media is actively hostile to the president on nearly every issue, but they have finally found something he is doing that they can embrace.
The warmongering, corporate media love war. Their war promotion campaigns are essential components of the war machine.
Intelligence agencies manufacture scenarios which provide a moral pretext to military aggression, and an incurious or controlled press sell these specious arguments to a distracted public.
A survey by FAIR of the top 100 papers in the US by circulation found not a single editorial board opposed to Trump’s April 13 airstrikes on Syria. Twenty supported the strikes, while six were ambiguous as to whether or not the bombing was advisable. The remaining 74 issued no opinion about Trump’s latest escalation of the Syrian war.
This is fairly consistent with editorial support for Trump’s April 2017 airstrikes against the Syrian government, which saw only one editorial out of 47 oppose the bombing (FAIR.org, 4/11/17). The single paper of dissent from last year, the Houston Chronicle, didn’t publish an editorial on last week’s bombing.Seven of the top 10 newspapers by circulation—USA Today, Wall Street Journal, Los Angeles Times, New York Post, Chicago Tribune, Newsday and Washington Post—supported the airstrikes. The New York Daily News and San Jose Mercury News offered no opinion, while the New York Times (4/13/18) was ambiguous—mostly lamenting the lack of congressional approval, but not saying that this meant the strikes were illegal or unwise. “Legislation should…set limits on a president’s ability to wage war against states like Syria,” is the Times’ conclusion. A complete list of editorials on the airstrikes can be viewed here.
“There’s definitely something that stings,” comments CNN’s Arwa Damon as she sniffs a backpack that belongs to a child who was caught up in the chemical weapons attack.
“The smell is still quite strong, maybe these were the things they weren’t able to wash,” she subsequently states.
Towards the end of the report, Damon suggests that the air strikes launched on Syria were not enough and that more intervention is necessary.
The clip is rendered even more bizarre by the fact that sarin gas, which CNN itself reported was used in the chemical weapons attack, is odorless and could not be detected by smelling objects.
Why Damon has apparently no concerns about inhaling substances used in a chemical weapons attack is also unclear.
Respondents on CNN’s YouTube channel questioned why the reporter was trying to inhale chemical weapons.
“Take another whiff of that potentially chemical covered backpack,” remarked one.
“Sniffing a backpack contaminated by Sarin gas would kill you,” added another.
“Make sure we save some of the chemical laced clothes for when CNN comes and smells them. We don’t want people thinking this entire event was a hoax or anything,” joked another.
Sarin, or NATO designation GB (G-series, 'B'), is a highly toxic synthetic organophosphorus compound. A colorless, odorless liquid, it is used as a chemical weapon due to its extreme potency as a nerve agent. Exposure is lethal even at very low concentrations, where death can occur within one to ten minutes after direct inhalation of a lethal dose, due to suffocation from lung muscle paralysis, unless antidotes are quickly administered. People who absorb a non-lethal dose, but do not receive immediate medical treatment, may suffer permanent neurological damage.
Something stinks indeed, and it is not just the stuff this idiotic reporter is sniffing.
It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.