Inspectors from the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) have issued a statement confirming that they successfully visited the Douma and taken samples from the site of the alleged April 7 chemical attack.
Officials did not provide a timetable for results, but have said it is possible a second visit to Douma could happen if they need additional samples. The inspectors had sought visits all of last week, but the UN Department of Safety and Security (UNDSS) blocked that, citing security concerns.
Despite the OPCW being kept out all week, Western journalists from several outlets managed to visit without issue. CBS and AFP reporters managed to get to Douma readily, while CNN bizarrely got a reporter into the sites to inspect, and sniff, evidence.
The US, Britain, and France all seem to anticipate the OPCW probe not going their way. Each made claims over the course of the last week that Syrians and Russians were “tampering” with the site. They also claimed the Russians were responsible for the delays to the OPCW.
That was never true. The OPCW confirmed that the only obstacle to visiting Douma over the past week was the UNDSS. Experts are also dismissing the tampering claims, saying there is no reason to think that evidence even could be removed if the site happened.
And there are plenty of reasons to doubt it didn’t. A number of reporters visiting Douma found locals dismissing the claims. It is entirely possible the death toll was the result of conventional airstrikes, and no chemicals were used.
In the meantime, spurious claims about what happened continue to circulate, including media claims the OPCW is looking for “nerve agents,” even though no official has ever even alleged that any such thing was used.
Since the US, France, and Britain already attacked Syria on April 13 over the Douma allegations, they are probably not looking forward to the results. Anything that challenges their allegations is likely to be dismissed as in some way flawed, or indicative of a coverup, despite experts saying such a coverup would be physically impossible.
Second visit huh?
Coming home with “I luv Douma, it wasn’t a gas” souvenir T-shirts from the locals probably didn’t please their bosses.
The shelf life of this particular false-flag event was hours rather than days. That’s why Trump had to attack Syria before an inspection was conducted. Now, it’s all last week’s news whatever they find.
Exactly!…The OPCW team probes for what happened, not who did it!…. It’ll be an open-ended investigation!…Similar to Malaysian airliner crash over Ukraine….And then forgotten!
I don’t see the connection. Does spinning the OPCW outcome depend on the timing of the attack? Would the delay on the inspection have been different ? Would an article like this one be written in one case and not in the other:
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/doctors-ordered-gunpoint-deny-syria-12381739
I hope we get some answers soon.
Regardless of the results, there was NO justification for the bombing by the F/UK/US gang, acting quickly to forestall evidence that there was no “gas attack” at all, and destroying a research centre needed to make antivenom and other materials needed because of the sanctions already on Syria.
Pretending that war crimes were legal, the three fearless leaders did not even ask their parliaments for advice, so quick were they to attack immediately.
Jason, there’s a typo: “Experts are also dismissing the tampering claims, saying there is no reason to think that evidence even could be removed if the site (sic) happened.”
The UN Department of Safety and Security (UNDSS) has no reason to be in Syria other than (1) the US needed it to block the OPCW Fact Finding Mission and (2) the UNDSS is led by a US puppet Australian, Peter Drennan.
Also note that:
>The OPCW is NOT a UN agency.
>OPCW does not make their reports public. They got to the requester, which in Salisbury was the UK which buried the Skipal report. Douma was different, Syria requested the OPCW report. Therefore the need to block the OPCW.
My observation from watching videos and looking at photos is the the so called chlorine attack is false. Here are my reasons:
The white helmets are wearing dust masks not chemical protection masks. Think photos of WW 1 soldiers wearing gas masks. Hmm
No bleach blondes. The bleaching agent for bleach blondes is chlorine. Everybody still has black hair. Hmm
The “victims” are still wearing their clothes. Chlorine would stick to the fibers and cause burning, itching, rashes and blistering. If it was chlorine everybody would be nude and being given a 15 minute hosing down with water. Pictures show some water being poured over their bowed heads for a few seconds. Hmm
Chlorine gets in eyes and causes tears, redness, blistering etc. No pictures of eyes being flushed and no pictures of damaged eyes. Hmm
The babies (Their bonnets must have protected them from becoming blondes) show no sign of chlorine blisters. They don’t even show signs of chlorine rashes that you might get in a swimming pool. They are as unblemished as babies in an Ivory Snow commercial. Hmm
I have experience in using storing and handling chlorine cylinders