Seems unlikely that the rebels could get the sarin.
Sarin is quite difficult to use effectively, like most chemical weapons, but it isn't hard to produce. The Aum Shinrikyo sect was able to synthesise Sarin in a few months ("in 1993, the leader Asahara directed his cult members to begin the mass production of Sarin, and in November 1993, they had succeeded"), while trying to hide it from police. The difficult part is to use it as an effective weapon on your enemies.
But I know that nothing that you say to a "false flag conspiracy" theorist will ever be listened to.
It's funny (or sad) that you say that, while you're trying to support your point of view using the same "false flag conspiracies" you seem to disdain so much: the Khan-al-Assal chemical attack was perpetrated on Assad's Syrian positions, killing scores of soldiers and loyalist civilians.
The official rebel claim on the issue: "Qassim Saadeddine, a spokesman for the Free Syrian Armys Higher Military Council in Aleppo, [...] accused the government of attacking its own people in order to smear the opposition". That's a flase flag in my vocabulary, perhaps yours has different words depending on who is accused.
Amazing how the rebels keep bombing themselves with chemical weapons while never hitting Assad-controlled areas with them.
They did. The first reports of usage of chemical weapons in Syria were about the rebels using them against Assad.
Moreover the manufacturing of dangerous chemical components is quite easy. The difficult part is to use them effectively against an enemy. It is far easier to use them in false flag operations, than directly hit your foes.
And how they keep simultaneously destroying their hospitals at the same time. Silly rebels!
The rebels sold all the medical equipment they found to hoard money for their war. Those hospitals were already destroyed.
Putin and the people working for him are very good at asking that sort of "question" and that is where this one comes from.
After Saddam's weapons of mass destruction, after Nayirah's testimony, after Afghanistan involvement in 9/11, after a lot of other "facts" that I'm not listing here (including alleged atrocities committed by Gaddafi), I'd say that sort of "question" is quite legitimate.
So: the original XBox One was a Kabini 8 Core with a DDR3 crippled Radeon 7850, the new one is a tweaked Kabini with a beefier RX 480 videocard and finally decent RAM for its purpose.
Xbox One GPU is a DDR3 crippled 7750-7770. It was the original PS4 that had a 7850-7870.
Linus used XP for PowerPoint.
It's a geek toy.
Depending on the application, WINE can give almost native performance, where almost means a negligible difference. There is professional software (CAD applications) released with WINE compatibility.
They [...] have about 1/5 the amount of games as Xbox
It's the other way around, a lot of indie and not so indie titles (mainly Japanese stuff, but also games like Tropico 5) are out on PS4, but not on Xbone.
"If the code and the comments disagree, then both are probably wrong." -- Norm Schryer