Thread by @Qoppa999

Some thoughts on the status of the Engineering Assessment leaked by the
"Working Group on Syria, Propaganda and Media"

#Douma #OPCWScandal

@PiersRobinson1 @Tracking_Power @Tim_Hayward_

syriapropagandamedia.org/working-papers…

In response to the leak, the OPCW denied Henderson was part of the FFM, and spin doctors were quick to suggest he was just "a consultant" (@ScottLucas_EA ), was working "on the sidelines of the FFM" (@Brian_Whit, -> medium.com/@Brian_Whit/le…), "a disgruntled employee" (Higgins) ...

- but this is not borne out by the leaked report itself, which was written on the *explicit* understanding it presented nothing less than the (authorised) findings of the engineering sub-team of the FFM!

Of course, Henderson could write anything on paper what he liked - but it wouldn't make any sense to be pretending to be part of the official OPCW process in a "draft for internal review" for team members, if this were not the case!

And here, we're back to the terse official OPCW response:
they couldn't investigate the "unauthorised release" of a document that was not officially authorised.
Hence, the Henderson memo was part of the OPCW process.
Hence, it must indeed be precisely what it pretends to be!

The final draft of the Engineering Assessment is dated 27 February, the official Final OPCW report 1 March 2019, -- evidently not enough time to consider (and incorporate, either accept or reject) the findings of the engineering sub-team.

=> The decision by the OPCW Technical Secretariat to sideline their own Engineering Assessment must have been taken long before - while Henderson and his team were still working on the understanding to provide just that.

A clear & blatant violation of due process!
#OPCWScandal

There may be wiggle room for byzantine manoeuvres with designations and/or separate, alternative expertise - but NOT for the basics that the Henderson report (at least until 27 February) was part of the official "OPCW process"!
It's really simple.

https://twitter.com/lindajjacobs/status/1131189951096328192

Indeed - and reason to suspect the official report was released on 1 March in order to have a pretext *not* to consider the Engineering Assessment.
This is extremely fishy!

https://twitter.com/JodocusQuak/status/1131203957383151616

Official timeline: in October and November OPCW consult with engineering experts, in December they receive "engineering studies" (Annex 3).

Note the vague plural ...
And all the while, Henderson worked on what he must have assumed would be the report of the engineering sub-team!

!!! - New article by @Brian_Whit in which he relays the explanation of "an informed source" that Henderson's report was allegedly excluded because, by concluding the cylinders were manually placed, it "came too close to attributing responsibility"!

medium.com/@Brian_Whit/le…

This is ludicrous: "manually placed" is no more and no less an attribution of responsibility than "air-dropped"!

And it reeks of desperation, - utmost desperation: OPCW have realised there is just no other way they can spin the suppression of their own Engineering Assessment.

And so, the informed anonymous source from OPCW assures us, the Henderson report will surely be considered by the new "Investigation and Identification Team" (IIT - keep the new abbreviation in mind!) whose mandate it is to assign responsibility .... 😮🙃

Let's be clear about what is happening here: OPCW know they f****ed up massively, and they might be down for good! Nothing less, really.

So, Henderson's report will be considered, which will give them time for new spin, and failing that the IIT report will be quite different.