Syria Chemical Attack 2017

Qualiall

Member
Most mainstream and government institutions say that the Assad regime was behind the recent chemical attack.

There are claims by Russia and Syria that the recent chemical attack was either done by "terrorist groups" or were the result of bombing a facility where "terrorists" were storing such weapons. However, witnesses on the ground say that the facility that got bombed was for grain storage.

A number of "far right" groups (and "far left" I imagine) in the US are angry at Trump's response--from the usual "Stay out of Syria" mantra--but some are offering up conspiracy theories--including that it was a hoax perpetrated by the "deep state"

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump’s-far-right-supporters-turn-on-him-over-syria-strike/ar-BBzvH2t
WND has an article (sorry can't link it properly due to work related restrictions on internet usage) that says Ron Paul claims there is zero chance Assad was behind the attack.
 
Last edited:

deirdre

Senior Member.
oh, yee ha! I had 4 months in the 'when will Infowars dump Trump' pool. sweet.
 

MikeG

Senior Member.
This was also a week when multiple CT websites reported that the gas attack in Syria was a false flag.

Geoengineeringwatch.org went with a broad brush, accusing the global power structure:

http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/...ile-global-geoengineering-omnicide-continues/


The Daily Sheeple took a more specific approach, blaming Syrian volunteer civil defense workers, the “White Helmets,” for the attack:
http://www.thedailysheeple.com/anot...an-sarin-gas-attack-no-gloves-no-masks_042017
 

SR1419

Senior Member.
Here is Bellingcat's summary of the details of the chemical attack: The comments are almost more informative than the article.

https://www.bellingcat.com/news/mena/2017/04/05/khan-sheikhoun-chemical-attack-evidence-far/

 

NobleOne

Member
Website from Croatia reports that Daily Mail removed from their website an article predicting this chemical attack. The article also states reasons for this attack.
https://www.novi-svjetski-poredak.c...ede-kemijski-napad-koji-ce-podmetnuti-assadu/

However, article is still available on web.archive.org

http://web.archive.org/web/20130129...chemical-weapon-attack-Syria-blame-Assad.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:

deirdre

Senior Member.
from their website an article predicting this chemical attack
I edited your post and added text from the article as we have an "English language" policy and a No Click Policy.

I don't see in the article where it states Daily Mail predicted this attack though. The Daily Mail article in question is from 29 January 2013. And the pulled article doesn't predict anything either.
according to wayback machine it was removed Jan 31st.



add: and just because I see this bunk article has been shared by conspiracy sites since it was published :)
 
Last edited:

Hevach

Senior Member.
oh, yee ha! I had 4 months in the 'when will Infowars dump Trump' pool. sweet.
With Bannon being sidelined and rumors of the rest of the administration trying to push him out,it was going to be now. I'm actually surprised so much of the alt-media turned with him rather than try to break Breitbart and Infowars hold on the venue.
 

appletini

New Member
Has anyone answered or tried to debunk Theodore Postols arguments? They can be found here:

https://www.scribd.com/document/344...k-in-Khan-Shaykhun-on-April-4-2017#from_embed
I haven't had time to look into it in detail yet. My experience tells me Postol is somewhat of a knee-jerk critic of the U.S. (for example criticizing the Patriot-missile system during the Gulf war), but I'm curious if there is any merit to his arguments.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

deirdre

Senior Member.
Has anyone answered or tried to debunk Theodore Postols arguments? They can be found here:
Some background and links to documents is helpful to readers, so I will provide them here. Link to the government 4 page report:
and PDF of Postol's 'assessment' attached.
 

Attachments

  • Postol assessment of report.pdf
    1.1 MB · Views: 417

qed

Senior Member
I have isolated the key argument.
 

qed

Senior Member
https://www.thenews.com.pk/latest/198156-Russia-vetoes-UN-draft-resolution-on-Syria-gas-attack-probe
 

qed

Senior Member
Has the device been run over by the time it appears on Postol's image? If so, "it simply got run over" defeats Postol's main argument.
 

MikeG

Senior Member.
I have isolated the key argument.

There are a lot of assumptions in his statement, which is irritating.

Here is a picture of a rocket recovered after a 2011 attack in Iraq. The metal casing is deformed by the impact and explosion.

&NCS_modified=20130819191902&MaxW=640&imageVersion=default&AR-307149963.jpg

http://www.thenational.ae/news/worl...-in-iraq-rocket-attacks-it-says-leads-to-iran

A good point of reference on this story is Gregory Koblenz, “Syria’s Chemical Weapons Kill Chain,” Foreign Policy (7 April 2017).
http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/04/07/syrias-chemical-weapons-kill-chain-assad-sarin/
 
Postol has further arguments debunking the Trump Whitehouse story.

THE NERVE AGENT ATTACK THAT DID NOT OCCUR:
ANALYSIS OF THE TIMES AND LOCATIONS OF CRITICAL EVENTS IN THE ALLEGED NERVE AGENT ATTACK AT 7 AM ON APRIL 4, 2017 IN KHAN SHEIKHOUN, SYRIA

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2017/04/67102.html

 
Australia's Media Watch program has covered the whole affair and pointed out the intersection between Russia, 'Left Wing Academics' and Alex Jones in pushing an 'Al Qaeda did it' line.

The link below goes to a transcript of the segment which includes the original video broadcast on the 10th of April 2017

http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s4651439.htm
Did the link you posted contain any evidence relating to the incident?
 

TEEJ

Senior Member.
I have isolated the key argument.

It looks like the remains of the rocket propellant body. Notice that Postol carefully words his assessment to only suggest a "122mm artillery rocket" and stays clear of any suggestion that it could be an air to ground 122mm rocket.

The US assess that the Syrian aircraft was an Su-22 Fitter. The 122mm unguided rocket type used by the Su-22 is the S-13 series.

upload_2017-4-22_8-21-9.png

From Rosoboronexport catalog

http://roe.ru/eng/catalog/aerospace-systems/air-to-air-missile/s-13-t/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-13_rocket
 

Ray Von Geezer

Senior Member.
Postol appears to be basing his analysis, and most of his theory that it was some kind of placed ground explosive, on pictures taken after the scene has been tampered with.

As can be seen in this picture (and others in the video @qed linked at post #15), the pipe is actually impacted into the ground, and also doesn't seem to be as "flattened" as the later pictures.



From the pictures Postol uses, it appears an attempt has been made to either remove it, or bend it back into the hole, which has likely caused the flattening and possibly the fracturing. It also dates this picture as having being taken later than the others - note the absence of the disk-shaped object.



I think that also "debunks" this theory specifically, since the picture doesn't represent the canister's original position or condition, which is his entire evidence. It had one end buried deep enough in the ground that it could be bent, and the other end was sticking up into the air.


Ray Von
 
I think that also "debunks" this theory specifically, since the picture doesn't represent the canister's original position or condition, which is his entire evidence. It had one end buried deep enough in the ground that it could be bent, and the other end was sticking up into the air.
Postol says that the WHR cannot be right, and for more reasons than you mention.
If you read Postol his claim is that the site was tampered with, and you have at least noticed that.

The WHR needs to show that the site was not tampered with and as you correctly show, it was tampered with.
So the Trump WHR report is amateurish, at best, and a deliberate piece of fake news at worst
 

Ray Von Geezer

Senior Member.
Postol says that the WHR cannot be right, and for more reasons than you mention.
If you read Postol his claim is that the site was tampered with, and you have at least noticed that.

The WHR needs to show that the site was not tampered with and as you correctly show, it was tampered with.
So the Trump WHR report is amateurish, at best, and a deliberate piece of fake news at worst
No, I don't mean tampered with as in maliciously, a poor choice of word I my part, but you're attaching a motive to that I don't share. The only suspicious purpose I can imagine is a failed attempt to remove the evidence, but equally it could have been an ill equipped attempt at recovery, or even done accidentally as QED suggested.

Whatever the reason it was moved, the key thing for this claim is that Postol appears to have either missed or ignored that it was. I can't see anything beyond that mistake as evidence for his 'crossed pipes' scenario being likely. Can you?

Remember Metabunk deals with individual claims, so if you find any of Postol's other theories compelling then probably best to spell them out clearly per the guidelines so they can be considered. Hopefully there'll be something more credible.

Ray Von
 
Last edited:
No, I don't mean tampered with as in maliciously, a poor choice of word I my part, but you're attaching a motive to that I don't share. The only suspicious purpose I can imagine is a failed attempt to remove the evidence, but equally it could have been an ill equipped attempt at recovery, or even done accidentally as QED suggested.

Whatever the reason it was moved, the key thing for this claim is that Postol appears to have either missed or ignored that it was.
That is wrong. In fact Postol criticises the WHR because the WHR assumes that the site was not tampered with!!
Did you read his report?
Source: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_Vs2rjE9TdwR2F3NFFVWDExMnc/view

Here are Ted Postols own words at the beginning of his report.
Postol clearly say that the White House Report .....

In the light of this you'll probably agree you jumped the gun a bit
 
Last edited:

None of that shows Ted Postol used the wrong photographs.

But it matters not because it is impossible to show that Postol used the wrong photographs.
Postol is reviewing the WHR, and commenting on it.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive...Chemical-Weapons-Report-White-House.html?_r=1

The WHR contains no photographs! So we have no idea whether they are the same ones or not. But they likely could be or are.

The WHR report only refers to
, and
 
Last edited:

deirdre

Senior Member.
The WHR contains no photographs! So you have no idea whether they are the same ones or not
so we agree that Postol's photographic evidence of 'tampered site' used by the WH' claims are not evidence, since he has no idea which photos
the CIA (or whoever) looked at. His 'evidence' is just theory at best.

Does this prove the CIA was using video of the crater taken the day of the attack? no. But it proves Postol was not using the earliest photos in his assessment. and since there are several such photos (pre-pipe falling over) and videos out there, it's kinda a stretch to think the CIA didn't see them.

ex: heres the pipe from the other side published on April 5th. still 'standing up'.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...a-assad-claims-experts-evidence-a7668996.html
syria-chemical-attack5.jpg
copyright Reuters
 
Last edited:
so we agree that Postol's photographic evidence of 'tampered site' used by the WH' claims are not evidence, since he has no idea which photos
the CIA (or whoever) looked at. His 'evidence' is just theory at best.
Deidre can you please read the reports rather than creating strawmen? Thanks

This not that hard. All we have is a bunch of photos and videos posted on the internet. We have no idea if they were planted or how much they were tampered with.
We have no official assessment from CIA analysts on it either. We have the Trump Whitehouse giving us a suspect story
 
Last edited:

deirdre

Senior Member.
Deidre can you please read the reports rather than creating strawmen? Thanks
BTW, in case you are confused... this is Metabunk. We look at "claims of evidence" here.

I do agree with his overall argument that the "report" (seems more like a press briefing to me) doesn't prove who did the attack, as the "report" doesn't give us actual evidence other than the Russians admitting the attack.

But the "tampered site" evidence Postol is trying to use to prove that, is bunk.
 

Ray Von Geezer

Senior Member.
That is wrong. In fact Postol criticises the WHR because the WHR assumes that the site was not tampered with!!
Did you read his report?

Here are Ted Postols own words at the beginning of his report.
Postol clearly say that the White House Report .....

In the light of this you'll probably agree you jumped the gun a bit
I think we really need to focus here, because you seem to be ignoring the specific claim addressed and diverting into a myriad of other claims Postol has made. The claim addressed is his "crossed pipes" theory, which he's apparently based on later images which don't represent the intact site.

Whether Postol commented on possible tampering isn't relevant to that claim itself, beyond perhaps wondering why he made it anyway if he already suspected he was using the wrong images.

I think it's important to clear this up before moving on, because it looks like you still believe his claim is valid:-

Deirdre said:
except Postol was using the wrong photographs, as already pointed out in this thread. Time to move on.
That has not been demonstrated.

In which post do you think that was demonstrated? Provide a link please.

thanks

Earlier image of the scene:-




Summary of Postol's claim and the image he bases it on:-



Please say clearly why you still believe Postol wasn't using the later photograph. If you're casting doubt on whether the first photograph was taken earlier, note the crater edge, particularly the overhang of concrete at around 1 o'clock on the crater which is intact in the first photograph and has collapsed into it in the second.

Please don't divert into whether the site was interfered with, obviously it has been but speculation on motives or who by is just that.

Ray Von
 
Please say clearly why you still believe Postol wasn't using the later photograph.
Please say clearly how you proved any photo is untampered with.
Then if you wish you can also explain how you know which photo is prior.
It's not for me to accept your unproven assumptions. You need to demonstrate why your assumptions are correct.

All you have is some photos fed to you from an area controlled by al nusra and similar groups. You need to show why we should accept them on face value.

As the photos do not fit with what we would expect to see on that day at that time, you can't ask anyone to assume they are untampered evidence.
All the evidence should fit together. Where the hole is, what direction the wind was blowing, what time it happened, etc etc...
If these things don't fit together then it looks fake, and it certainly doesn't look like it should according to the Trump White House report.
After all, this is the whole point of Postols analysis. The pieces don't fit. So your insistence that you know things about the photos, including the sequence, is groundless.
 

Ray Von Geezer

Senior Member.
Please say clearly how you proved any photo is untampered with.
Are you now diverting into claims of tampered photographs?

Who, other than you, is making that claim?
Then if you wish you can also explain how you know which photo is prior.
It's not for me to accept your unproven assumptions. You need to demonstrate why your assumptions are correct.
I thought I had, above? I doubt a team of navvies came along and repaired that overhang.

See also the timing of the tweet Deirdre posted. We have, at least, posting times for both images.

Please give the reasons why you dispute that point, not just that you do.

All you have is some photos fed to you from an area controlled by al nusra and similar groups. You need to show why we should accept them on face value.
Which is also all Postol has. Why are you holding me up to a higher burden of proof than him?

Why won't you acknowledge he used a later photograph?

As the photos do not fit with what we would expect to see on that day at that time, you can't ask anyone to assume they are untampered evidence.
All the evidence should fit together. Where the hole is, what direction the wind was blowing, what time it happened, etc etc...
If these things don't fit together then it looks fake, and it certainly doesn't look like it should according to the Trump White House report.
After all, this is the whole point of Postols analysis. The pieces don't fit. So your insistence that you know things about the photos, including the sequence, is groundless.
Individual claims of evidence. You've been here long enough :)

Let's please clear up the photos before moving onto anything else. You keep disagreeing with Postol having used the wrong photograph but won't give a reason why.

Ray Von
 
Are you now diverting into claims of tampered photographs?

Who, other than you, is making that claim?
.
Of course not, as I have already said, Postol points out that the site was tampered with. The photos of are the site.

But all of this is a distraction as we know which way the wind was blowing and we know what lay in that direction. The evidence doesn't fit.
But feel free to keep harping on that you have "proved" something about the sequence if the photos.
Even if you could do that ...so what? So...what...you need to deal with the meat of Postols case, and that is the layout of the area and the wind direction.
 

Qualiall

Member
Of course not, as I have already said, Postol points out that the site was tampered with. The photos of are the site.

But all of this is a distraction as we know which way the wind was blowing and we know what lay in that direction. The evidence doesn't fit.
But feel free to keep harping on that you have "proved" something about the sequence if the photos.
Even if you could do that ...so what? So...what...you need to deal with the meat of Postols case, and that is the layout of the area and the wind direction.

Russia, Postol, and everyone else agree that a chemical weapon was deployed and killed people. What does your claim about "wind direction" have to do with anything?
 
Russia, Postol, and everyone else agree that a chemical weapon was deployed and killed people. What does your claim about "wind direction" have to do with anything?

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2017/04/67182.html

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thread starter Related Articles Forum Replies Date
Mick West Russia Predicts US Will Use Fake Chemical Attack In Syria as Pretext for Missile Attacks Current Events 9
Mick West Russian Claims of a "False Flag" Chemical Weapons Attack in Douma, Syria Current Events 10
S RT claims BBC stages Syria chemical attack to propagate war. [BBC Responds] Conspiracy Theories 49
Critical Thinker US 'backed plan to launch chemical weapon attack on Syria, blame it on Assad govt' Conspiracy Theories 5
Mick West Debunked: Photo claiming to be Iraqi Chemical WMDs in Syria [Photo is actually in Utah] General Discussion 11
Oxymoron Is there a conspiracy around chemical weapons attacks in Syria Conspiracy Theories 272
TEEJ Debunked: Claim of Iraq/Syria ISIS Convoy with US Helicopter Escort 2015 Conspiracy Theories 0
Mick West Did Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev say "World War"? General Discussion 28
Mick West Debunked: Obama's "Worst Nightmare" Realized As Chinese Troops Flood Into Syria [Hoax] General Discussion 5
TEEJ Contrails during Russian Navy Cruise Missile Strike in Syria, 2015 Contrails and Chemtrails 3
NotQualified Claim: Pictures show Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi is a Mossad agent named Simon Elliot General Discussion 13
BombDr Debunked: Simpsons Syria 'premonition'...? [old flag] Conspiracy Theories 13
Trigger Hippie Claim: US is funding al-Qaeda in Syria Conspiracy Theories 44
Oxymoron Saudi Arabia Sends 1300 Death Row Inmates to Syria to Fight for Jihad? Conspiracy Theories 5
SabreSaint Eisenhower Warns of New World Order, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria? Conspiracy Theories 55
qed Syria MacDonald Emails. Hacked and/or Faked? Conspiracy Theories 7
Oxymoron Poll: Should the U.S Attack Syria? General Discussion 51
Grieves American involvement in Syria: Theory or fact? Conspiracy Theories 43
Marin B Claim: Passenger luggage limited to make room for chemical tanks Contrails and Chemtrails 15
MikeG Chromium-6 threatens "mass chemical suicide of America" Health and Quackery 0
Mick West Why "Chemtrail" Tests on the Ground Find Metals That Don't Occur Naturally Contrails and Chemtrails 14
Suzanne Burgess Contrail Chemical storage containers Contrails and Chemtrails 29
Mick West Debunked: Public Law 105-85 Allowing Testing of Biological and Chemical Weapons [It's the Opposite] Conspiracy Theories 21
L Photos of trails over Switzerland [back to the 1970s] and Chemical Analysis of Jacuzzi Cover Water Contrails and Chemtrails 18
moderateGOP Poking holes in "Syrian Rebels" Claims about Chemical Weapons Use General Discussion 137
joelb79 Video shows missile hitting West Texas fertilizer plant Conspiracy Theories 272
Mick West Chemical Composition of Rain and Snow - Aluminum, Barium, etc. Contrails and Chemtrails 33
tadaaa Debunked: Fake photos-Novichok attack Russian 'agents' (side by side gates) General Discussion 34
Whitebeard Sergei Skripal 'Nerve Agent' Attack Current Events 46
Mick West "Sonic Attacks" at the US Embassy in Cuba - Mass Hysteria? Current Events 69
Mick West Explained: Charlottesville Car Attack License Plates - Ohio GVF 1111 (and GVF 1122) Conspiracy Theories 2
Trailblazer Debunked: CNN reported "psyop" re London Bridge attack [actually "SIOC"] Current Events 0
Mick West 2017 Westminster attack Current Events 23
Mick West 2016 Berlin Truck Attack Conspiracy Theories Current Events 13
deirdre Debunked: Blanketman photo proves Nice attack a false flag Conspiracy Theories 2
M Guccifer Claim: Nuclear attack in Chicago or Pennsylvania 2015 Conspiracy Theories 11
Hevach Debunked: Philae Landing Faked Conspiracy Theories 20
AluminumTheory Anonymous: False Flag 9/11 Style Attack in LA in May Be Imminent (on or around November 15th) Conspiracy Theories 16
A Evidence of Prior Knowledge of a Planned Attack 9/11 4
Alchemist Odigo Says Two Workers In Israel Received Message Predicting Some Attack Hrs Before 9/11 9/11 6
Mick West London Woolwich Knife Attack: Conspiracy theories debunked by Infowars Conspiracy Theories 233
Oxymoron Surveillance/Attack Drones... Coming to an area near you. Wonderful world. Conspiracy Theories 99
Oxymoron Is Israel planning unilateral nuclear attack on Iran starting in December Conspiracy Theories 28
Mick West Debunked: Alex Jones, PJ Watson, Geoengineering: Our Environment Under Attack Contrails and Chemtrails 12
Related Articles












































Related Articles

Top