Tribute video to all who have died and survived chemical terrorism attacks

               

This video includes images and photos I collected from Google images of the September 15,1963 Birmingham, Alabama church bombing victim,the April 15,2013 Boston Massachusetts Boston Marathon bombing, and the August 21,2013 Ghouta chemical attacks that occurred in Ghouta,Syria.

I think all acts of terrorism or hateful. These acts of ignorance never solves our political, cultural or religious conflicts. The end results of these types of terrorist attacks loss of innocent life and grieving families.

Why are children being killed in Syria's civil war?

For more than two years Syria’s children have endured 

appalling suffering. 

According to UNHCR 1,631,981 people have now fled Syria. 

More than 1 million of them fled in 2013 alone. 

In the 162 days that passed since 1 January an average of

close to 6,500 people fled every single day.

Children make up 51.5% of the refugee population, meaning 

there are an estimated 840,000 refugee children in the region.

Save the Children has worked in the Middle East for decades. 

In July 2012 we launched an ambitious emergency appeal to

respond to the growing refugee crisis in the region and are now 

aiming to raise 161,000,000 USD for our humanitarian interventions

in Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq and Syria, aiming to reach at least 

1,255,000 people.

See Save the Children's Syria Crisis Regional dasboard with key facts,urgent needs and details of Save the Children's response by country and sector.

Last time I read about the Syrian civil war that is currently being fought between forces loyal to the Ba'ath government and those seeking to oust it, I didn't see any mentioning of children taking on the role of soldiers or rebels in the two-year long civil war.

However there are more than 11,000 children who have been died in a war being fought by uncivilized grown-ups.One hundred twenty-eight  of the children who were killed died of chemical weapons, according to a British group.

According to The Oxford Research Group study "764 children were summarily executed and 389 killed by sniper fire."

The Oxford Research Group study report is terribly disturbing.Even though no children initiated the Syrian conflict or apart of the arm forces participating in the armed conflict they are being targeted viciously.

The children living in the Syrian war zones have to live in constant fear and wonder if they will die in a conflict they do not even understand.

I don't know why children are being killed in the war or even being perceived as enemies.
I do know that any person willing to kill an innocent child is a person who should  be captured and put
a way in a underworld that I call HELL!

Why is it such a difficult task to get rid of chemical weapons?

Illustrative photo of the USS Kearsarge steaming into the Gulf of Aqaba (photo credit: Official US Navy Imagery/File)

After reading a Reuters article about the current dilemma the Organisation for the  Prohibition of Chemical Weapons is having in finding a place to destroy Syria's chemical weapons I became frustrated.

It appears that it's easier to kill hundreds of children with these evil poisons rather than to simply find some place to contain the evil devils and destroy them.

According to Reuters, some sources say that Syria's chemical weapons could be destroyed at sea.
However the OPCW stressed that there has been no decision made to destroy the chemical weapons at sea.

However the OPCW did say that destroying chemical weapons at sea was " technically feasible."
Even though technically Syria's chemical weapons could be destroyed at sea Ralf Trapp, an independent chemical disarmament specialist, said "Syria's stockpile would require more complex treatment than the World War Two bombs that Japan found on the seabed, raised and destroyed off the port of Kanda from 2004-06."

Trapp also said that burning them in a process known as hydrolysis would also be a potentially dangerous process due to the environmental pollution problems the burning process could create.


After reading the "Exclusive:Syria's chemical weapons may be destroyed at sea," I realized something.
And that something is that it is easier to do evil than good.People can easily kill others and terrorize our the world.

However finding ways to prevent such terrifying atrocities such as the killing of children with chemical poisons is our societies most difficult task.

I want to keep believing and having faith in knowing that some how some way good will prevail over evil and this world will be a better place.

Now that the Syrian chemical weapon beasts have been tamed, whats next?

Demonstrators wear masks during a protest against the dismantling of Syria's chemical weapons in Albania, in front of the U.S. embassy in Tirana, November 12, 2013.

Now that Syria has destroyed all its declared chemical weapons mixing and production facilities The Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons are having a difficult time finding a country willing to host the destruction of the evil poisons. 

According to the Associated Press "Not a single European Union nation came forward on Monday offering to host the destruction of Syria's poison gas stockpile,with many instead calling for the arsenal to be eradicated close to Syria itself." 

Albanian Prime Minister Edi Rama rejected a U.S. request that Albania host the destruction of Syria's poisonous weapons. 

In a speech,Mr.Rama said it is "impossible" for the Balkan nation to take part in the operation.He also said no other nation have stepped forward to house a facility to dismantle the weapons.

The Foreign Minister Didier Reynders advised the OPCW to send experts and technology to the site in Syria so that the weapons can be destroyed in Syria's backyard.

"To transport them over long distances to bring them on our soil-we do not really see how to do that,and not only in Belgium, also in other European states," Reynders said, highlighting the resistance found  amid 28 EU nations.

I learned that  the final phase in destroying  the Chemical weapons stockpile is risky so I really can't pick a bone with the EU country leaders and civilians who seem to basically be saying"HELL NO WE WON'T HOST!" 

However, I will definitely feel a sense of relief once the weapons has finally been destroyed. Until then, we we are all just waiting to see who will reach out to OPCW with open arms for the devilish stockpile of chemical weapons. 

I wish a 40-foot statute of Jesus could stop chemical warfare

Syrian rebels and militia of Sednaya halted fire while Jesus statute was being set up in midst of Syria's civil war  Image Credit: Free Republic

The Washington Post reported, "in the midst of a conflict rife with sectarianism , a giant bronze statute of Jesus has gone up on a Syrian mountain, apparently under cover of a truce among three factions in the country's civil war."

According to the Washington Post,"Al-Ghad ban said that the main armed groups in the area Syrian government forces,rebels and local militias of Sednaya, the Christian town near the statute site-halted fire while organizers set up the statute." 

On the Cherubim mountain"Jesus stands arms outstretched , over looking a route pilgrims took from Constantinople  to Jerusalem in ancient time."

When I read about this amazing development in the ongoing Syrian conflict I wished a statute of Jesus could have could have influenced the Ghouta attackers to refrain from firing missiles  containing lethal chemical materials.

I couldn't help but wonder if there had been a massive statute of the Son of God in the Markaz Rif Dimashq suburbs, if Ghouta attackers would have felt condemned before they unleashed their evil wrath  just by seeing the Good Shepherds' face.

I wish a statute of  Jesus would give the Syrian rebels and militias and other other forces love peace  and grace.

I saw 43 seconds of hell on earth

< /



I have seen a lot of things in my life time. I have seen a lot of ugly things. I have seen the evil
inside of man. I once saw a young man bleeding from a gunshot wound right under my window.

I even saw deceased person laying on a busy street pavement while on a rainy day.I have seen monstrous disasters like the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami that took 230,000  people chance away
from seeing another sunny day.

On television I have seen riots, masses of angry protestors and mobs. While riding on the Chicago
CTA 'L'I have even seen people robbed. Nothing prepared me for the things I have seen. Just
as quick as my eye blinks I am consistently bearing witness to another evil thing.

Some things I have seen may have been Gods will. Other things I have seen had me believing
that on this day God must have been ill.God must have had a bad day and needed to some time
 to chill.

When I saw a baby victim of the Ghouta attack struggling to hold on to every breath I wished
my eyes could see no evil or witness human suffering and pain. I almost wished I was blind so
I could no longer see hell on earth again.

What are chemical weapons and what are they supposed to be used for?

Chemical weapons or rather chemical agents have been used since World War1 to injure, demoralize and kill individuals considered to be an opposition force, rebel or enemies in times or war. They have also been used by radical terrorist seeking to make a social or political statement.

 In the YouTube video Truthloader channel talks about what chemical weapons are and what legitimate purposes they are sussposed to be used for such as preventing"the multiplication of cells, or as fumigants, herbicides or insecticides" according to Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons.

 Although chemical weapons can be used for positive purposes throughout history these agents have been used to destroy like and eradicate thousands of people. Just like cocaine, chemical weapons were not considered to be socially destructive or even dangerous a few decades ago.

However humans began to use chemical weapons irresponsibly and for their own selfish reasons.

 Leaders of countries and radical groups desperately seeking to obtain control and demonstrate that they have power has relied of chemical weapons in the same manner that coke heads rely on cocaine.

The more frequently these weapons are used for evil the more corrupt our world is gradually becoming. It seems that now whenever a leader or radical group wants to fend off their enemies or silence their critics they rely on chemical weapons to do the job for them instead of simply having face to face discussions,debates or making compromises with each other.

 I don't believe God intended for humankind to settle their disputes with poisoning each other and causing massive human suffering just to say they were the last one to have the last word in an argument. But somehow our society has grown to believe that they must used chemical weapons as their new boxing gloves as they are lethal fighting each other in a boxing ring until they both sides are completely knocked out.

God bless all the medical workers who helped the Ghouta victims

'We don't know where all the weapons are' U.S. Senator Saxby Chambliss says

As I was reading a blog post by Atlanta Journal Constitution Political Insider blogger,
Jim Galloway I began to feel a bit nervous after reading what U.S. Sen. Saxby Chambliss 
said to Galloway sat down and talked to him.

Senator Chambliss said"Im concerned about the movement of weapons out of Syria into 
another country,so we don't have an opportunity to destroy them.

The senator also said "That's why I'm concerned about it. I'm not saying they are moving 
them,but there's  too much in the way of opportunity, because we don't know where all 
the weapons are.I'm not sure Assad himself knows where all the weapons are." 

"If they get in the hands of Hezbollah,it could present real problems," he said.

As I thought about what he said I wondered how many different types of chemical
weapons will Syria hide under there bed or in their closet or bury in the ground.

I wondered how which one of Syria's neighbors will hold on to their weapons for
safe keeping even as Syria has joined the Chemical Weapons pact.

I wonder if some of the chemical weapons will be sold to some psycho dictator
that anxious to show the world what his government is working with.

Well I guess I will just keep wondering about it and pray that after  Russia
helps Syria remove the weapons Syria has chosen to display that these
weapons are not unleashed on women, men and children ever again.

Hell has frozen over! Syria joined the UN chemical weapons pact!

 Okay folks I believe hell has finally frozen over. I couldn't believe what I was reading in the online news articles where I saw the headlines,
 Syria asks UN to join chemical arms treaty 
 UN accepts Syria arms treaty application 
 Syria joins chemical weapons pact

In case you may not know what the chemicals arms treaty is, I must tell you that the treaty pact was established on April 29,1997 and it consist of 165 signatories from countries around the world as a result of the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC),which outlaws the production,stockpiling and use of chemical weapons and their precursors.

I was was shocked to have learned of this initially, but I realized that the Syrian government will do anything to improve their image of being a  heartless government who has no desire to prevent such monstrous attacks from being inflicted on their citizens again.

I feel confident in saying that Syrian government had no plans to be apart of the chemical weapon free pact or getting rid of their weapons before hundreds of people died from the senseless attacks having occurred in Syria.

Although it is a darn shame that an act of terrorism had to occur in Syria before they decided to join the Chemical Weapons pact.

 Now I am just wondering when the UN and international community is going to wake up and put the pressure on Angola,Egypt,North Korea and South Sudan to join regardless of whether they have or do not have WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION, and before an act of chemical weapon terrorism is carried out by another anonymous terrorist in these countries.

Are digital technologies directing us or are we directing it? How does social media coverage affect our viewpoint of the Ghouta chemical attacks?

The author argues that modern technology (cell phones,i pads, e-mail accounts,social networking sites
and the internet) controls human interactions with each other.According to Rushkoff humans allow
modern digitial technology to change the way their life is experiences. He claims that the way we
purchase goods and services and communicate with each other on a daily basis has changed
dramatically from how we interacted with each other before the digital revolution.In his book, Program
or Be Programmed: Ten Commands for the Digital Age, Rushkoff claims that human interaction has
become distant and less up close and personal as well. The authors main purpose for writing the book is
to advocate for digital awareness and tell the digital technology generation that they should start
directing how digital technology impacts them instead of allowing digital technology to decide how
they will be impacted.

Evidence does the author use to support arguments
In the Ten Commands for the Digital Age the author mainly uses two types of evidence to support his
argument throughout book. The two types of evidence he uses are facts, judge and personal testimonial
evidence.Another method the author used to argue his point was by making references to well
documented literary work.

In Rushkoff Chapter about “Time” he employs facts and judgement in the text in order to produce a
more effective argument about how digital technologies are biased against time and how “ we end up
divorcing ourselves from rhythms,cycles, and continuity on which we depend for coherence.”Rushkoff
states:
What's different now, however, is that its not just list dates, and recipes
that are being stored for us, but entire processes.The process we use for
finding a doctor or a friend, mapping a route or choosing a restaurant
are being replaced by machines that may in fact, do it better. What we
lose in the bargain,however, is not just the ability to remember certain
facts, but to call upon certain skills.
(Rushkoff, 33)

Rushkoff talks about how new modern technologies has given our society choice as whether or not we
will use telephone books and rely on word of mouth to find people or rely on smart phone applications
and Google although he refrains from directly stating specific types of technology commonly used
today in the chapter. He uses factual evidence by because it is a fact that much of our society relies on
digital technology in lieu if relying on the old school methods of getting information.Being that people
now rarely use compasses and paper maps for traveling to one city to the next and instead they choose to
use GPS navigators on their phones and other devices the type of evidence Rushkoff uses aids him in
persuading his readers that modern processes have played a large role in changing the way we retrieve
information.

In the “Place” chapter the author talks about how digital technologies are decentralized technologies.
According to Rushkoff digitial technologies “work from far away, exchanging intimacy for distance.”
The author gives his readers a personal testimony in order to convince the reader that he has drawn a
solid conclusion about the point he makes in this chapter being that he has personally witnessed humans
replacing face to face social interactions with digital technologies such as online simulations. Rushkoff
talks about an experience he had with being escorted by a college administrator to a classroom that had
been used for a model of the United Nations for the past ten years. According to Rushkoff that year
things were done differently. Instead of having the students re-create the General Assembly in their
classroom, they would do it in an online simulation called Second Life he said. “When I got to the
room, I saw forty students sitting at desks outfitted with high resolution computer screens”
(Rushkoff,43). The author claims that students were in the same place at the same time,however they
were not looking at one another except for “the monitors on their desks.”The author personal testimony
is employed in the text in order to convince readers that digital technology has contributed to humans
becoming more distant.His personal testimony helps the reader understand why Rushkoff has come to
the conclusion he comes to in the “Place” chapter.

In the “Choice” chapter Rushkoff talks about how digital technologies have forced us to make
decisions or choices we would not have made without such technologies in place to assist us with
making decisions. He talks about an experiment a scientist from Stanford conducted in order to provide
his readers with evidence that digital technologies play a huge role in the choices we make. He also
seeks to convince readers that digital technologies give us a false perception of what real life
experiences we've had. Rushkoff states, “A Stanford scientist testing kids memories of virtual reality
experiences has found that at least half of children cannot distinguish between what they really did and
what they did in the computer simulation” (Rushkoff,63). Rushkoff use of findings from a scientist at a
credible university is effective in persuading his readers that there is some truth behind the conclusions
he has come to about the digital realm and its effect on human choices and its impact on the validity of
real life experiences.

 Evidence the author uses to support arguments
The types of evidence the author uses such facts, personal testimony and experiments supports his
arguments because it enables him to provide his readers with a logical argument. The authors
argument is logical because he provides he uses facts about what digital technologies are capabilities in
order to proof that digital technologies has the ability to replace human ability to figure out how to find
places and people.Therefore, it is reasonable for him to make a claim that these technologies can replace
our ability to “remember certain facts,... and to call upon certain skills.”

Also the author is effective in supporting his argument by using personal testimony being that his
readers are more likely to believe that digital technologies are capable of making us more distant in our
social interactions with each other because Rushkoff personally witnessed how online technology
created a distant relationship among st students sitting next to each other inside of one classroom.
Lastly, Rushkoff mentioning of a experiment the Stanford scientist conducted on children aids him in
persuading his audience that digital technologies can alter a persons judgement and direct the choices
they make.

Counter Arguments
Although the author makes a logical argument in the text he some people in our society may disagree
with the conclusions he has made. They may disagree with him for the following reasons. First not
every one is heavily influenced by digital technology and social network sites. They are not
controlled by them because there are some people that rarely use the internet and instant messaging or
even smart phone applications.Some people may login to the internet only to read online news
publications or conduct research. While there are other people who find their selves becoming slaves to
the digital world because they have created multiple online social network accounts such as Facebook,
Twitter and Instagram that they seem to always be connected to from their mobile and laptop devices.
Also some people may criticize the authors claims that digital technology direct us instead of us
directing it being that they believe the digital technology doesn't direct our behavior.Some people may
believe that this technology simply assist our society in becoming well informed people who are more
socially interactive with each other as a result of modern digital technology. For instance I find myself
conversating more frequently with relatives on Facebook then I would be if I did not have a Facebook
account at all. Due to my busy schedule I may not have the time to call my cousin and have a
conversation with him or her.However, I can maintain an ongoing social relationship with my relatives
and even become more closer to some relatives I rarely see face to face because Facebook chatting
sessions have enabled me to do so.

Although the authors argument is open for debate and criticism he does provide valid and logical
evidence about the conclusion he has made about digital technology. The facts, personal testimony and
even the experiment evidence he uses is effective in persuading readers that his viewpoint is
reasonable. For instance as I thought about the authors argument I realized that online media and
social networking sites such as twitter has convinced many people that the Ghouta Chemical attacks in
Syria perpetrators where the Syrian government. Individuals who he avidly rely on online media and
social networks to get information about news and form opinions about such current events may not
take the time to conduct research and critical think about the events having occurred in Syria.Therefore
they could easily believe that its is an undisputed fact that the Syrian government is responsible for the
Ghouta Chemical attacks. So from 1-5 I give Rushkoff a 4 for the effectiveness of the argument he
makes about modern digital technologies impact on us.
.

Destroying chemical weapons won't stop chemical terrorism !

In an online (CNN) article I read that Syrians will soon began the process of 

destroying their chemical weapons and a international team is tasked with 

overseeing the effort. 

A news release from the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons

said the weapons being removed includes " missile warheads, aerial bombs and

mixing and filling equipment."

The OPCW team will be monitoring Syria's compliance with the international 

demands to destroy chemical weapons stockpiles and production facilities 

according to the OPCW news release. 

Although I feel some relief in knowing that the Syrian government chemical 

weapons will be removed I can only wonder if the international community 

efforts to ensure that the sort of horrific chemical weapon terrorist attacks

having occurred a few weeks ago will only just be a waist of their time and 

energy. 

I believe as long as there are people in Syria that are willing to kill innocent 

people just to make a political statement then a chemical attack could still 

man has the intellectual ability to make chemical weapons.

Even if all chemical weapons were removed in the country and an inspector 

verifies that all the evil agents have been removed I can still only wonder 

if the government or rebels will have some chemical weapons hidden in 

their closets or under their beds. 

Chemical weapons should have been removed from the world when on 

March 13,1988 in the city of Halabja around 5,000 people were killed

at the hands of Iraqi armed forces. 

Chemical weapons should have been removed from the world and never

to show its ugly face again after 4,700people were treated in hospitals 

following the the sarin attack on a Tokyo subway on March 20,1991. 

Thousands of people suffered with temporary vision problems after 

the Tokyo chemical weapon attack on INNOCENT people at the hands 

of  the EVIL members of Aum Shinrikyo.

I don't believe forcing Syria to trash their chemical weapons will prevent

another chemical attack from occurring within the country being that 

after a series of chemical terrorism incidents have occurred around 

the world, the international community has not figured out a way to stop

such incidents from happening over and over and over again. 

Dear Anonymous Ghouta Attackers :Why did you poison all those people?

 DEAR ANONYMOUS GHOUTA ATTACKERS:

  Why did you poison all those people ? 

This image provided by Shaam News Network on Thursday, Aug. 22, 2013, which has been authenticated based on its contents and other AP reporting, purports to show bodies of victims of an attack on Ghouta, Syria on Wednesday, Aug. 21, 2013. Syrian government forces pressed their offensive in eastern Damascus on Thursday, bombing rebel-held suburbs where the opposition said the regime had killed more than 100 people the day before in a chemical weapons attack. The government has denied allegations it used chemical weapons in artillery barrages on the area known as eastern Ghouta on Wednesday as "absolutely baseless."(AP Photo/Shaam News Network)


Dear Anonymous Ghouta Attackers:


 Why did you poison all those people? Why did you use one of the
most dangerous weapons on mass destruction to kill real people
whom had not harmed you in any way. I'm sure most of the people
you killed you did not know.But you unleashed lethal doses of
this poison on women, men and children.

 Why did you decide to make children children shake and
go into deadly convulsions until their spirit and soul left
and they became a pale sleeping corpse on the floor?

  Why did you do these things anonymous Ghouta attackers?
Please do explain! Please tell me did all those people die
because you wanted to win the Syrian war? Or did you
 murder hundreds of children to gain political strength ?

  I really want to know if you poisoned so many people
cause you wanted to show the world who the boss is
or you wanted to make Syrian people afraid and left in
awe of your wrath.

  Can you tell me why I will wait for your answer. I will
wait for you to tell me the answer to what I already know.
I will wait for you to say " I killed them because I am selfish
and full of hate and could care less about another mans fate."

  I will wait for you to tell me because I really must hear you
be brave and say why you killed people who did nothing
to you.

  Anonymous Ghouta attackers I must know your reason
please tell me you plans. Why did you feel they had to
suffocate and shake like that?

 The logic you used  in deciding to play God is something
I must understand !


 Sincerely,
        A real person with real feelings

WAS THE SYRIAN FOREIGN MINISTRY SPOKESMAN PROMISE NEVER TO USE CHEMICAL WEAPONS ON HIS OWN PEOPLE REALLY A CRUEL JOKE?

WAS THE SYRIAN FOREIGN MINISTRY SPOKESMAN PROMISE NEVER TO USE CHEMICAL WEAPONS ON HIS OWN PEOPLE REALLY A CRUEL JOKE?

I wonder if the Syrian Foreign Ministry spokesman Jihad Makdissi was just really joking

when he said,"Syria will not use any chemical or other unconventional weapons against

its civilians, and will only use them in case of external aggression," in a media conference 

back in July of 2012 at the Syrian Capital.

I wonder if he was just really joking when he made what now seems to be an outlandish
statement to the media and  the Syrian people.

Although Makdissi said that the government would not use weapons of mass destruction
to resolve the internal problems within the country, such  as the conflict between the loyal
 Ba'ath government and those seeking to oust it, there have been several incidents when
 either civilians or rebel forces has been attacked by chemical weapons such as the Sarin
 nerve gas.

It seems that the United States government and other governments should have foreseen
 that catastrophic Ghouta scene was going to occur.The U.S. government should have allied with other governments to sanctioned the Syrian government when 16 government soldiers and 10 civilians had been killed in the Khan al-Assal chemical attack after a rocket landed on Khan al-Assal in March 19,2013 .

What external forces and international organizations should have done did not occur.
Therefore,1300 people lost their lives on August 21,2013, possibly because the
international community did not  realize as chemical attack after chemical attack incidents
were reported or discovered in Syria that the Syrian Foreign Ministry spokesman was
 really joking when he promised that Syrians would not be exposed to WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION.







In the You Tube video the Director of Roosevelt University interdisciplinary International
Studies Program, David Faris Ph.,D says the Syrian government has consistently unleashed chemical weapons on its own people in order to scare their rebels into silence.

 Faris also said that U.S. military intervention is "not worth it in lives in money  that we would have to throw at it."The best course of action the U.S. government should take Faris says,"The best route is not to do anything right now," unless the international community is going to figure a broader and long term solution to the problem.


What do you think the United States Government and the rest of the international
community should do to respond to the chemical warfare and terrorism on civilians
that Jihad Makdissi said would never occur in Syria?