A former OPCW specialist, Ian Henderson, has blasted the chemical weapons watchdog for releasing a “sanitized” report on the alleged 2018 attack in the Syrian city of Douma, claiming it omitted key findings from its own fact-finding team.

These details, says Henderson, would have cast serious doubt on whether a chemical attack took place at all.

“The findings in the final [Fact Finding Mission] report were contradictory, were a complete turnaround with what the team had understood collectively during and after the Douma deployments,” Henderson said, addressing members of the United Nations Security Council in a recorded video address.

​The former OPCW inspector, whose visa application to attend the meeting in person had been denied, insisted the report blatantly disregarded “findings, facts, information, data or analysis” collected by the team, pertaining to witness testimony, toxicology studies, chemical analysis and ballistics.

According to the retired inspector, although in July 2018 several members of the fact finding team “had serious misgivings that a chemical attack had occurred”, the organisation’s final report released in March 2019 was compiled by a different group that hadn’t visited the incident site and claimed “reasonable grounds” for holding Damascus responsible for the attack.

 

Source: Sputnik

Advertisements
Share this article:
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
ALSO READ  Breaking: Syrian Army captures several areas in eastern Idlib

Notice: All comments represent the view of the commenter and not necessarily the views of AMN.

All comments that are not spam or wholly inappropriate are approved, we do not sort out opinions or points of view that are different from ours.

This is a Civilized Place for Public Discussion

Please treat this discussion with the same respect you would a public park. We, too, are a shared community resource — a place to share skills, knowledge and interests through ongoing conversation.

These are not hard and fast rules, merely guidelines to aid the human judgment of our community and keep this a clean and well-lighted place for civilized public discourse.

Improve the Discussion

Help us make this a great place for discussion by always working to improve the discussion in some way, however small. If you are not sure your post adds to the conversation, think over what you want to say and try again later.

The topics discussed here matter to us, and we want you to act as if they matter to you, too. Be respectful of the topics and the people discussing them, even if you disagree with some of what is being said.

Be Agreeable, Even When You Disagree

You may wish to respond to something by disagreeing with it. That’s fine. But remember to criticize ideas, not people. Please avoid:

  • Name-calling
  • Ad hominem attacks
  • Responding to a post’s tone instead of its actual content
  • Knee-jerk contradiction

Instead, provide reasoned counter-arguments that improve the conversation.

2
Discuss

avatar
1 Comment threads
1 Thread replies
1 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
2 Comment authors
Daeshbags-Sux Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Member
Famed Member
Master
Commenter
Upvoted
Stern Daler

Obviously the visa application of Ian Henderson to attend the meeting in person had been denied by the US – that are suspected to have colluded with the creation of the questionable OPCW report. IF they were not instrumental because they wanted to hide their wrongdoing. They attacked Syria with cruise missiles. An act of war with no justification.

Daeshbags-Sux
Guest
Daeshbags-Sux

Well, it’d simply had been more expensive to scrap a hundred Tomahawk missiles reaching shelve date. Sometimes you don’t need to look further than such kind of reason!