Citat:
Ursprungligen postat av
Hopes.N.Dreams
OPCW:s nya rapport motsäger Hersh teorier om Khan Sheikoun attacken, som är ännu ett försvagning av både hans trovärdighet och intellektuella integriten, om ens sådana falls från första början.
Första och främst skriver OPCW att källan till den kemiska agenten är från ett krater på vägen som är den exakta kratern som publicerades av journalister på plats efter attacken. Detta strider mot vad Hersh menar är ett byggnad som innehöll vapen, ammunition, kloringas och annat som användes av "jihadisterna". Detta är ett stort backslag, som om det inte redan var uppenbart från början.
För det andra är det bekräftat att det var saringas, både av tester som syriska regimen genomförde och av oppostionella. Detta slår återigen mot Hersh som påstår att det var kloringas med stöd utav Läkare utan gränsers vittnesmål om klorinlukt. Faktum är att OPCW inte testerna inte visade positivt för kloringas.
Hoppas ni känner er lurade av den "trovärdige" Hersh-bomben. Ni vet vilka ni är.
Inläggets fakta härstammar från artikeln nedan av BellingCat.
https://www.bellingcat.com/news/mena/2017/07/04/opcw-just-trashed-seymour-hershs-khan-sheikhoun-conspiracy-theory/
Du är partisk o bryr dig inte om sanningen. Du böjer bevis o fakta för att det ska passa in i din verklighet.
Fortfarande så har inte OPCW varit på plats utan allt har kommit från dina kära terrorister. OJ! Jag menar "rebeller".
Översta kommentaren till din länk säger allt.
1. This is the first time the OPCW have carried out an investigation like this where they were not in charge of the samples. They neither collected the samples, secured the samples or transported the samples. Anotherwords they were not in control of the chain of custody. Again, this is the first time ever.
2. This is the first investigation of this type carried out by the OPCW where they have not attended the scene of an alleged chemical weapons attack to investigate the matter, interview their own witnesses or gather other information. Instead they relied on a party to the conflict, the opposition, to collect the samples, select the witnesses and carry out on the ground investigations and report back. The OPCW allowed the accusers to supply the evidence. This has never happened before!
3. Nobody has been able to find the alleged Sarin bomb. It and its fragments have simply disappeared. It’s akin to someone being accused of shooting someone yet the prosecution can’t find the gun.
4. The OPCW trusted the opposition to carry out their investigation for them and to bring them samples yet didn’t trust them to provide their investigators with safety so they could attend the scene themselves.
5. The OPCE witnessed samples being taken from 2 victims that tested positive for Sarin. Can the OPCW link these two people to Khan Shakhoun? Who are they and where did they come from? The opposition again supplied these two victims to the OPCW.
6. The OPCW report was “leaked” to several pro-opposition activists such as yourself from what you claimed was a “one use anonymous email account”. Why did only pro-opposition activists get this leak?
In your rush to attach Hersh you chose ignore all this information. Had this report been from the Russians on the opposition you would be the first to cry foul and kick and scream calling the investigation a fraud and a lie. But in looking for confirmation bias you read what you want from this report and it reaffirms your own beliefs.
“Hersh claims the source of chemical exposure was the Jihadi meeting place’s basement, filled with “rockets, weapons and ammunition, as well as products that could be distributed for free to the community, among them medicines and chlorine-based decontaminants for cleansing the bodies of the dead before burial.” The OPCW report contradicts this in two ways.”
You go on…
“First, the report states that the source of the chemical agent was a crater in the middle of the road…” – Based upon soil samples that were collected by the opposition and witnesses selected and provided to them by the opposition. FACTS.
“Samples were taken from this crater and provided to the OPCW. These samples were provided to the OPCW not only by opposition groups, but also by the Syrian government.” – The Syrian government samples are disputed at the minute by them. It remains to be seen how the Syrian government could collect soil samples from a site controlled by the opposition. Then tested these samples to prove Sarin was released and thus providing evidence of their own guilt.
Sarin doesn’t smell and doesn’t produce a cloud. Chlorine does but. The Russians said a chemical weapons store was hit, Hersh says that a building was hit that had chemicals stored in the basement. Both Russians and Hersh say that the bomb released these chemicals upon impact. Leaving aside the claim of chemical “weapons” by the Russians but stories are not that dissimilar.
You and you alone have set about on a personal journey to try and discredit Hersh. Far and beyond that of someone who felt that a story was wrong and wanted to prove it so. With you it’s a lot more than that and I would personally question your motives.
Whether Hersh is right or wrong, whether the Russians & Syrians have lied. Known of this is the real story here. Personal vendettas should have no place in serious investigations. The real story is was there a Sarin bomb dropped from the air at Khan Shakhoun. There is no verifiable evidence to say there was.
-No bomb or bomb fragments recovered
-No on the ground investigation carried out by the OPCW
-No chain of custody for the samples collected – they were collected by the opposition
-No independent witnesses selected – they were provided by the opposition
-People on video claim to “smell” the Sarin and see “clouds” – Sarin doesn’t smell or form clouds
You then finish your hit piece demanding a paper release information on its sources and if they won’t their conspiracy theorists. Yet you yourself would never dream of giving up any sources you use. So what’s your real motives here Mr Higgins? It’s not to find the evidence as I’ve pointed out. So what is it?