Yes, and for the record, I think the interview and accompanying article in @offguardian have aged rather well, one might say the analysis was right on the money!:-
And I note, with some hilarity, that it is the corporate 'liberal' media who are today peddling little green men stories 😂😂 ...well done folks, keep up the good work 🤨
@thomasphipps, you seem to suffer from a rather limited vocabulary .... 'useful idiot', 'war crime denier' when talking about the alleged Douma attack. Perhaps you would like to, on behalf of the UK government, answer the following questions:- @OPCW@DanyaChaikel@SaretaAshraph
1) Why was the key conclusion by 4 NATO chem. weapon experts that the 43 deceased at Douma were not killed by chlorine gas at Location 2 censored in the Final OPCW report? You can read the minutes from the consultation here:- wikileaks.org/opcw-douma/doc…
2) It concluded that chlorine gas would not have caused these civilians to drop dead on the spot, gathering in piles.
@bellingcat & @N_Waters89 continue attempts to smear @OPCW whistleblowers & all those raising questions about the investigation of the alleged chemical weapon attack in Douma/Syria 2018 and, most seriously, suppress the truth about this event. @ClarkeMicah@2ndNewMoon
2) With respect to the Douma incident itself, remarkably, @bellingcat were caught deleting a tweet that evidenced manipulation of a cylinder allegedly dropped from a Syrian Air Force helicopter, at Location 2:-
As the @opcw's DG has chosen to again spread false information regarding whistleblower scientists from his own organisation, it is worth reminding why so many people, eminent and otherwise, are concerned about the Douma investigation @aaronjmate@PaulWalkerGG@ambLisaHelfand:-
2) It is also now established that a toxicology assessment from NATO experts, which ruled out chlorine gas as the cause of 43 deaths at Location 2, was effectively deleted from the Final Report @DarylGKimball
Ambassador Ahmet Üzümcü & @CSRisks, asking questions and not getting straight answers from the @opcw does not constitute an 'intense defamation campaign'. Let's ask some of the key questions again shall we:- @Tim_Hayward_
2) Why was the assessment of 4 NATO toxicologists, that the victims at Location 2 were not killed by chlorine gas, removed from the Final Report with all record of the NATO assessment removed? @2ndNewMoon
2) @NathalieLoiseau attempted this act of censorship in full knowledge of her own involvement with the French government when it decided to bomb Syria following the alleged attack in Douma:- thewallwillfall.org/2021/04/19/pro…