Thread by @PiersRobinson1

Again @Tom_H_Wright misleads the public. In fact, the central issue with the @opcw/Douma issue relates to the obfuscation and suppression of evidence by the @opcw:- @ClarkeMicah @aaronjmate

1) @Tom_H_Wright refers to the finding of two yellow cylinders as part of the @opcw's 'long list of evidence'

2) But he ignores the suppressed original interim report and the sidelined leaked analysis provided by an OPCW inspector which identified the inconsistency between the damage observed on the cylinders and the impact damage. wikileaks.org/opcw-douma/doc… @CL4Syr

3) At location 2, for example, the bent rebars, bent through greater than 90 degrees (see right above) cannot be explained by the cylinder which had been stopped by a rebar; nor can the lack of indentation on the cylinder head be explained.

4) It was also noted in the suppressed/sidelined original reports that no explanation could be established for the remarkable sideways bouncing cylinder at location 4.

5) The Final OPCW report refers to 3 independent experts but provides no substantial analysis, simply asserting the following:

6) The final report also fails to provide an analysis to explain the sideways bounce at location 4, instead glibly stating the following whilst providing a graph that does not explain the bounce:-

7) Wright suggests that the OPCW final report confirmed the presence of chlorine gas:

8) but pays no attention to the very specific issues raised by the OPCW inspector, still unaddressed by the @opcw, regarding the mismanagement of the chemical analysis: berlingroup21.org/background

9) Wright refers to toxicology evidence and the deceased at location 2:

10) This is again misleading. The original toxically report (suppressed) by 4 NATO CW experts concluded that chlorine gas was not the cause of death for these victims. This is ignored by Wright. wikileaks.org/opcw-douma/doc…

11) Both the sidelined Douma team inspectors and the NATO toxicologists were clear that the deaths of these civilians, gathered in piles, was not consistent with chlorine gas (the scene was actually more indicative of a nerve agent [which was never found]) @MichaKobs

12) Wright refers to witness testimony as part of the OPCW's body of evidence supporting the conclusion that the alleged attack occurred:

13) In doing so Wright omits the fact that witness testimony diverged whilst the OPCW final report obfuscated this fact. Note in the right hand clip witness testimony linked to white helmets supplied witnesses reports symptoms associated with nerve agent (no nerveagent was found)

14) In sum, @Tom_H_Wright, @bbc and @chloehadj have chosen to censor clear and documented scientific/procedural flaws w.r.t. the Douma investigation and, instead attempted to smear a scientist by insinuating financial motives

15) As such, they are continuing a sustained smear campaign against anyone asking questions about Douma, a campaign which started the day the US, UK and France bombed Syria having accused it of carrying out the Douma attack. @MaxAbrahms @GarethPorter @johnpilger @RossAshcroft

f.y.i. @ClarkeMicah @aaronjmate @wallacemick @ClareDalyMEP @SusanSarandon @rogerwaters @bbclysedoucet @christoframes @2ndNewMoon @wirt_dan @medialens @afshinrattansi @VanessaBeeley @Tim_Hayward_ @martinbright @McCormack_Tara