Re: c’mon PTH (np though I make a tenuous connection midway)

[Raphael Saltwood]

Hippie! No follow-thru.

This will be as succinct and clear as I can make it. You could probably do better if you weren’t busy smoking cigarettes and watching Captain Kangaroo.

A little long but no (by which I mean minimal) rambling, I promise.

Ok, you, Peter, cited bellingcat.
https://www.bellingcat.com/news/mena/2019/03/01/the-opcw-ffms-report-on-the-april-7th-2018-douma-chemical-attack-versus-the-open-source-evidence/

I found this article somewhat convincing. Pictures of canister and building damage, and especially markings on the canister, square with it being dropped.


What isn’t mentioned is the background of 336 gas attacks since 2012 in Syria.

Let me interject a link I found.

According to the Global Policy Institute, 98% were perpetrated by Assad’s government forces and 2% by Islamic State. https://www.npr.org/2019/02/17/695545252/more-than-300-chemical-attacks-launched-during-syrian-civil-war-study-says

This adds weight to bellingcat’s thesis.
Rather than a one-off, Douma was one of 336.
According to GPI, a Berlin-based think tank supported by Brookings, among others, and with enough gravitas to earn a cite at NPR.



Your second cite was RT. https://www.rt.com/news/470395-khan-sheikhoun-postol-bellingcat/

Amidst quite a bit of ad hominem verbiage against bellingcat, they mention a 2nd cylinder, a goat looking more like a sacrifice than a casualty, and disparate math models of a crater. They mention Seymour Hersh’s doubts about a different gas attack.

These are interesting loose ends and deserve attention (imho) - but...

They don’t talk about the other 335 attacks at all.
If you, Peter, were a good investigator, wouldn’t you check to see whether these have slowed down since the bombing?

I couldn’t find anything. I’m not a good investigator but I hereby raise the question and did look a bit. Have you anything to add?


Your third link was https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/06/21/the-douma-gas-attack-whats-the-evidence-it-was-a-false-flag/

The author cites his mechanical experience to accord with, and buttress, a similar conclusion to bellingcat’s. It’d be physically hard to fake this.

You referred to this as “Counterpunch’s haymaker” in an attempt at humor.

He also mentions the former OPCW head Bustani, as someone corroborating the OPCW conclusion, but as you noticed, fails to place him in the current investigation.

It’s a good (well, bad) story about Bolton, but doesn’t appear to have anything to do with Douma - and what is more, you note that Bustani’s now weighed in *opposing* the OPCW report.

I found a link for that:

https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/w/chemical-attack-evidence-was-manipulated-to-blame-syrian-government-report-claims

Your posts were rambling - I have to agree with Morris. I imagine you think your impressions of the articles were amusing and informative.

Let me throw this against the wall:
Iceland Spar -
I can see your prose as amusing and informative.
But it would take a lot of hammering before the gold I can imagine there would pass any kind of assay.

Here’s a human interest link: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/syria-airstrikes-brazeh-complex-damascus-2018-04-14/

You really could’ve included this link, not only because it would give you the opportunity to write “Said Said said,” but also because of the possibility that he might not be lying about it not being a poison gas factory - and the valuable information that (you would probably call for a drumroll, but I’m not so callow)

—- the OPCW had inspected the facility prior to the bombing and found no evidence of poison gas production.

Since bogus WMD reports have not been absent from recent American policy determinations, this fact is a potent bit of info.

In conclusion,

A) evidence exists both for and against a false flag attack in Douma.

B) The Brazeh scientist denying gasmaking there was supported by the OPCW.

C) Justification for bombing would depend on reduction of poison gas in Syria after the bombing, evidence for which I couldn’t find.

D) American policy makers use the conclusions of the OPCW only when it suits them.

D) And you and I both call for winning hearts and minds by removing depleted uranium, landmines and other after effects of American depredations worldwide, and materially assisting their victims.

E) Thoughts and prayers will also help, you fershlugginer atheist!