@ryangrim There are multiple toxicology related issues plus issues with the various claims about events at Location 2 and the hospital which remain *highly* problematic. I'll spell them out for you.
1) the NATO toxicologists consulted in June agreed with the Douma team that the immediate onset of pulmonary oedema symptom of frothing was not consistent with chlorine. wikileaks.org/opcw-douma/doc…
2) These victims would not have died on the spot, gathering in piles, and then produce foaming at the mouth. This finding was clearly spelled out in the original report but expunged, with no explanation, in the final report. wikileaks.org/opcw-douma/doc…
3) A further issue identified in the original report but expunged from the final report concerned how unlikely it appeared for there to have been any build up of gas sufficient to kill the victims almost instantaneously.
4) The original report discussed how it was considered highly unlikely that concentrations could have built up either in the building, where windows on each floor were all shattered, or in the basement
5) In fact, as set out in the original interim report, many witnesses claimed that large numbers of people died in the basement, even though no plausible explanation could be found as to how concentrations would have built up there.
6) It is also notable that some so-called 'Country X witnesses' reported some symptoms only associated with a nerve agent when, in fact no traces of nerve agents were ever found. @CL4Syr@MichaKobs
7) Other important findings, highlighted in the original interim report but left unresolved or obfuscated in the final report, concern the authenticity of some of the observed foam and the 're-positioning' bodies throughout the night of 7/8 April.
10) These hospital scenes are generally reported as occurring circa 7pm. The alleged attack times are vary between 7 pm and some are as late as 8.30. Unless we believe those staging the hospital scenes anticipated an incoming chemical attack, questions are then raised about Loc2.
11) Here it is also worth while noting that a man at location 2 is also identified at the hospital scenes, taking photographs at both:-
12) Given these substantial issues, plus the ballistics noted elsewhere in this thread, and there are many more document here berlingroup21.org/background, it is an eminently reasonable request that the @opcw now allow *all* the douma inspectors to meet and review the investigation.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
@cenkuygur@AnaKasparian and the @theyoungturks broadcast on the @OPCW /Douma/Syria chlorine chemical weapon controversy presents a distorted & factually inaccurate account and, as such, misleads its viewers. Some key points in this thread:-
1) First, the broadcast ignores the now sizeable number of experts/opinion leaders who have raised questions regarding this issue e.g. the @couragefoundation panel in 2019 heard from an @opcw official and reported scientific and procedural flaws: couragefound.org/2019/10/analyt…
2) This led to an open letter, signed by many experts including Jose Bustani, the first director general of the @opcw, calling for all the Douma inspectors to be heard couragefound.org/wp-content/upl…
That mainstream media like @bbc and @andrewmarr9 can even entertain giving air time to a man who deceived in order to start multiple wars demonstrates how broken our political and media system is. Some reminders:- #NoVaccinePassports
1) Here is Blair conspiring with US president George Bush to attack Iraq, Iran and Syria just weeks after the 9/11 event. opendemocracy.net/piers-robinson…
Dear @INakamitsu and @BWoodward_UN, once again the @opcw Director General has smeared his own inspectors and refused to address key questions regarding the controversial #Douma investigation. The questions remain:-
1) Why was the original interim secretly altered, without the knowledge of the Douma team, and then an attempt made to publish an inaccurate and 'spun' report? See @ClarkeMicah report on this hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2019/11/new-se…
2) Why was the key conclusion by 4 NATO toxicologists that the 43 deceased at Douma were not killed by chlorine at Location 2 expunged from the Final FFM Report? Consultation minutes are here wikileaks.org/opcw-douma/doc…@CL4Syr@MichaKobs
@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.
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 🤨
@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:-