Leaked documents show the Syrian chemical attack was probably a FF or hoax.

The alleged chemical weapon attack by the Syrian government against rebels last year was widely discussed here on ATS. Guess what? Leaked documents suggest the skeptics were probably right.

Establishment Narrative-Managers Struggling With New Syria Plot Holes

Last week, a document from the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) was leaked. It appears that one of their top inspectors, a guy named Ian Henderson who has 20 years' experience with the organization, doubted the claims that the gas cylinders were dropped out of airplanes -- as the Rebels and Western government claimed.

The document, whose authenticity the OPCW has confirmed, contends that the official story which was used to justify an air strike by the US, UK and France about poison gas being dropped on civilians from Syrian government helicopters is scientifically implausible, saying “In summary, observations at the scene of the two locations, together with subsequent analysis, suggest that there is a higher probability that both cylinders were manually placed at those two locations rather than being delivered from aircraft.”

This matches what many people tried to point out at the time: that the cylinders in the photos didn't look like they had been dropped out of a helicopter, and the one lying on the bed should by all logic have crushed the bed when it landed.

Most here at ATS kind of figured it was a fishy incident. I can't believe Trump fell for it.

"Probably a hoax" is a bit of a stretch when all that is disclosed is differing opinion as to the method of delivery, and what looks like an internal squabble over involvement and professional judgement.

The papers question the narrative that the chemicals were air-dropped and NOT that there was a chemical attack. If air-dropped then it was Russia or Syria who were complicit, yet if not then it could have been the rebels who were responsible.

Here's the OPCW Fact Finding Report on report on Douma

a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

You could easily say it's just a failure on the part of military intelligence, despite the hundreds of millions in budget etc., if not for the fact it was probably those same people who did indeed attempt to murder Syrian civilians and blame it on other people, namely the "Assad Regime", or Syrian government, if your perspective has remained un-warped by Western propaganda.

The US war machine requires plenty of oil in order to operate effectively, this accounts in large part to the desperation they have displayed in trying to take Syria, and now of late, Venezuela also

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan
contends that the official story which was used to justify an air strike by the US, UK and France about poison gas being dropped on civilians from Syrian government helicopters is scientifically implausible

When reporting can we actually say it was the crook politicians of these nations who chose to attack, as most sane people who just go to work each day, dont wanna bomb any other nation EVER, I have zero belief that mass destruction in anyway resolves conflict on foreign soil.

So thanks to all the crooks in power, dont matter which side of the coin they playing, its the same crappy old penny we have seen 1000 times before.

originally posted by: rickymouse
Most here at ATS kind of figured it was a fishy incident. I can't believe Trump fell for it.

I don't think Trump was fooled.

I've always felt the US' response was rather phoned in. We dropped a bunch of bombs and then said "OK, that's been handled." To all appearances the US airstrikes didn't accomplish anything. It's always looked to me like Trump made a token response to the incident.

a reply to: rickymouse

Trump didn't fall for it! He was part of the conspiracy!

originally posted by: rickymouse
Most here at ATS kind of figured it was a fishy incident. I can't believe Trump fell for it.

Oh please.... Trump is more informed in the conspiracy world than any of them. He knew. Juts like Iran, he knows. But it is business as usual. Your savior was just the Trump card. I was a Trumper but I see now for a little while what is going on.

I think anyone who was paying even a little attention had very strong doubts about that attack. It made zero sense.

originally posted by: paraphi
"Probably a hoax" is a bit of a stretch when all that is disclosed is differing opinion as to the method of delivery, and what looks like an internal squabble over involvement and professional judgement.

The papers question the narrative that the chemicals were air-dropped and NOT that there was a chemical attack. If air-dropped then it was Russia or Syria who were complicit, yet if not then it could have been the rebels who were responsible.

Here's the OPCW Fact Finding Report on report on Douma

You conveniently leave out that this was hidden on the actual delivered report and instead they lied. And now instead of admitting to the lie they try to figure out how it leaked so that further lies can't be exposed and that doesn't bother you at all?

What about this?

www.realclearpolitics.com...

And this

www.realclearpolitics.com... _weapons_allegations.html

And this

www.thenewamerican.com...


And then there's a lot more out there, and Roger Waters that everyone kept insulting and trying to take down because he thought it was all fake

And how convenient that this evidence of the US lying comes up and suddenly we hear this

www.rt.com...
www.nytimes.com...

Of course, right? This is so embarrassing, i wish they would just shut up and pretend they did not know anything about it instead of doing this lame games when everyone can see what's really going on

Maybe you just don't want to see reality at all

Can our American brothers and sisters finally put Nikki Haley in a little concrete room with bars. She has been the lying mouthpiece for all of these retaliatory strikes.

She even claimed to have 100% proof Assad instigated the last gas attack, without ever showing the world one percent of it.
And she proclaimed to know that Assad would be behind any future chemical attacks.

I honestly despise the woman. I know she isn't the only one responsible but hearing her speak to the UN everytime made me want to bang my head against something.

www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2018/september/05/psychic-nikki-haley-if-there-is-a-future-chemical-weapons-attack-assad-did- it/

If you don't leave America or Europe you may find it hard to believe these staged events.

Speak to people on the ground and things become clear. This is a set up.

So what was the motive? I recall a lot of predictions that it was a false flag to justify an invasion. We never invaded.

Also, from the article linked in the OP:

The leaked document doesn’t by itself prove that the Engineering Assessment is correct and the official OPCW findings are incorrect, it just proves that there were other analyses which differed sharply with the official conclusions we’ve been permitted to see, and that we weren’t permitted to see those analyses.

originally posted by: face23785
So what was the motive? I recall a lot of predictions that it was a false flag to justify an invasion. We never invaded.

Because Trump isn't on board with supporting the Rebels (many of whom are known al-Qaida affiliates). As I said above, my read has always been that Trump just made a token show of force in response to the incident.

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan

originally posted by: face23785
So what was the motive? I recall a lot of predictions that it was a false flag to justify an invasion. We never invaded.

Because Trump isn't on board with supporting the Rebels (many of whom are known al-Qaida affiliates). As I said above, my read has always been that Trump just made a token show of force in response to the incident.

Does anyone seriously question that that's all it was? All the predictions that it was the prelude to something more have been proven wrong by time.

a reply to: face23785

What predictions are you talking about exactly? The US already invaded Syria from the moment the first boot on the ground was established because Assad never invited them or gave them permission to enter his country. And there were plenty of boots to follow, all before those chemical attacks.

Iirc the last 2 gas attacks were both carried out around the time the war was going very favourably against isil and the US was stating it was going to pull out a lot of it's forces. This was why it was so unbelievable that the Assad regime would be the culprit.

The war was being won. The US was pulling out. Then come the chemical attacks, because apparently Assad is so dumb and blood-hungry that he carries out internationally condemned attacks that will surely call for retaliation.
And both times the US did ofcourse oblige Assad by sending some rockets his way. And the demonisation of the Assad regime was helped along another bit for a while longer.

That's about all I made of it anyways.

a reply to: Balans

And that changed precisely what? Is Assad gone? The government has all these super secret master plans that always fail

a reply to: face23785

Nobody is saying the US concocted these chemical attacks. Why are you even implying this?
It is believed isil and the white helmets staged these attacks to prolong US opposition to Assad. There's no super secret master plans here.