The Khan Sheikhun Sarin Hoax, and OPCW Fraud

NB: ARTICLE IN PROGRESS

Latest update: Friday 28 July, 2017

LINKS CLICKED WILL OPEN IN A SEPARATE TAB OR WINDOW

Introduction

How long I had spent investigating the 4th April Khan Sheikhun incident when The OPCW’s first report of 12th May became available, I can’t tell you exactly, but forty hours per week would be an under-estimate, so let’s say I’d spent about 250 hours, gathering information, watching the videos, discussing with others on Twitter, composing tweets and generally building evidence.

Two days after the launch date of this hoax—I’ll not bother gracing it with euphemisms such as “alleged chemical attack”—I issued the tweet below. Nearly four months later, I have seen no reason to alter this assessment. Canards such as the Hersh article have been thrown into the ring in the meantime to raise doubts, and been quickly debunked (in this exceptional case first by me, then independently by Paul Craig Roberts, and finally by Higgins the #LeicesterLoser)

By and large, as time has passed, my original take on the affair has become more, rather than less, solid; and I would emphasise here, right at the beginning, the absolutely crucial rôle of SAMS in this fraud, totally ignored by many others.

This thread of tweets focuses mainly on the anomalies in the OPCW reports and raises questions that they simply cannot answer—NOBODY has challenged me. But behind all this is the basic fact that from the very beginning, the OPCW’s actions and those of its Director-General, Ahmed Üzümcü, were criminally interfered with, mainly by certain Western powers, not least Great Britain, in order to inculpate President Assad and his government in a chemical weapons attack that never took place. I will deal with this #OPCW_FRAUD more deeply and extensively as time goes by.

🇸🇾#Syria #Idlib #Khan_Sheikhun
❝#ChemicalAttack❞
#GhoutaWithKnobsOn #FakeNews
⚡️I ACCUSE those tagged in the image below and many more.

The ‘Questions to the OPCW’ thread and the #OPCW_FRAUD thread

Having read the 12th May report, I began a thread on Twitter in which I put Questions to the OPCW. When the OPCW published their report of 29th June I began a new thread, incorporating first the original thread, and then continuing with more questions emerging from the later report. This thread, and other tweets besides, uses the hashtag #OPCW_FRAUD, and contains to date about thirty-six tweets. It is the contents of this thread and related threads such as #MamounMorad and #Yousef that will largely be the matter of this article.

Note that the earlier questions relate to the earlier report, and there are contradictions between this and the report of 29th June, so if you are following closely, you need to be aware of this.

Xinhua, Moscow—The OPCW convened on 20th April to vote on the proposal put forward by Russia and Iran on the immediate beginning of a full investigation into the April 4 chemical attack in Syria's Idlib Province. According to the British delegation to the OPCW, the organization's executive council has "overwhelmingly rejected" the proposal.[To be accurate, 6 for, 13 abstained, 21 against; i.e. 19 were NOT against the Russo-Iranian proposal.]

"The results of the vote that just took place upset us... It should be said directly that the opponents of the proposal were primarily from the Western group." Permanent Representative of the Russian Federation to the OPCW and Ambassador Alexander Shulgin, said in remarks published on the ministry's website.

Shulgin questioned the credibility of the ongoing investigation conducted by the OPCW, specifying that it is unclear where, how and when their samples were selected, especially since the fact-finding mission itself never left for Syria.

#OPCW_FRAUD Thread—Tweet №1

The purpose of this article is to enable readers to follow the tale without switching into Twitter, so I shall begin each section with a link to the tweet in question, but all the matter of the tweet will be represented here in the text of the article.

As the thread progresses, I tag more people in the text or the images until fifty accounts are tagged. Some of these are friends, others ‘journalists’ and others individuals and entities involved in the hoax and the fraud.

This first tweet questions the reference by both Üzümcü and Guterres to the presence of the OPCW FFM (‘Fact-Finding Mission’) in Syria.

The letter transmits the note by the OPCW Technical Secretariat containing a status update of the OPCW fact-finding mission in the Syrian Arab Republic regarding a reported incident in Khan Shaykhun on 4 April 2017. I should be grateful if you would bring the present letter and its annex to the attention of the members of the Security Council.
(Signed) António Guterres

I have the honour to transmit to you a document entitled “Note by the Technical Secretariat: status update of the OPCW fact-finding mission in Syria regarding a reported incident in Khan Shaykhun, 4 April 2017” (see enclosure).
(Signed) Ahmet Üzümcü

Khan Sheikhun Incident—Questions to the OPCW
1.
Mr. Üzümcü refers to the OPCW fact-finding mission in Syria. Please tell us where in Syria this mission was or is and give us the names, qualifications, and status of the members of this mission.

Though both Antonio Guterres and Ahmet Üzümcü refer to the Fact-Finding Mission IN SYRIA, it is quite clear there were and are no officials of the OPCW in Syria and that both these gentlemen are fully aware of that fact. How both these ‘excellencies’ should have come to make the same very obvious error, is a matter of some interest.

We are given to understand then, that all the environmental samples were collected by ‘NGOs’ that you for some reason will neither name nor give any description of. Moreover that this fact, already extremely surprising, is made all the more surprising that it needs to be corroborated by other witnesses (i.e. witnesses not members of the said ‘NGOs’) that the FFM interviewed IN TURKEY. Were these witnesses brought to Turkey together with the unspecified handers-over, specially in order so to testify?

Though samples were taken in the process of an investigation intended ultimately to provide evidence for a war-crimes trial, you then casually interviewed one representative from one of these unidentified ‘NGOs’ and got pictures and videos from him or her.

What court or judge on earth is going to accept such evidence?! My assumption is that your ‘NGOs’ are the White Helmets, paid millions by your ‘States Parties’ to produce fakeries; and SAMS, a criminal and fraudulent pseudo-charity with strong links to the Muslim Brotherhood. I ask you to point out any errors in my assessment. I shall then, and only then, replace this text with a more accurate assessment.

I received no reply to this question. The publication of the 29th June report made it quite clear that the FFM were not in Syria. At some point later they visited Damascus, but the reference to their being in Syria was clearly designed to suggest that the FFM had visited Khan Sheikhun without actually asserting it.

#OPCW_FRAUD Thread—Tweet №2

Replying to @JohnDelacour @OPCW
🇸🇾#Syria—#Khan_Sheikhun
Questions to the @OPCW on their report of 12th May, 2017
2. Claims that FFM had reports other than from social media

1.1 Immediately after the incident in Khan Shaykhun was reported in the media on 4 April 2017, the Fact-Finding Mission (FFM) commenced the collection and review of all relevant information.
1.2 These reports, including posts on the social media, presented a situation of a potentially large number of casualties resulting from possible exposure to a toxic substance.

Khan Sheikhun Incident
Questions to the OPCW
2.
You say that the reports the FFM received included posts on social media. Please make clear what reports you received that were not from social media and what the source of these reports was.

They claim in the May report to have used sources including social media. I ask them what other sources they had. There was no reply. When the June report was published, a list of links (unclickable) to their sources was included. I have rendered this as an html file so that these may be easily accessed. Needless to say, this was another deception. ALL their information came directly or indirectly from social media, and those familiar with the sources in question will be horrified!

#OPCW_FRAUD Thread—Tweet №3

🇸🇾#Syria—#Khan_Sheikhun
Questions to the @OPCW on their report of 12th May, 2017
3. Unclear meaning of ‘deployment’ of initial FFM team &c.

1.3 A preliminaiy assessment was undertaken and, in view of the gravity of the reports, the Director-General of the Technical Secretariat (hereinafter “the Secretariat") of the OPCW instructed that all FFM resources be mobilised to analyse the incident. Given that the nature and extent of the information available qualified the incident as a credible account of a possible use of a toxic chemical, an initial FFM team was able to deploy in less than 24 hours.

Khan Sheikhun Incident Questions to the OPCW 3. You state that an initial FFM team was able to deploy in less than 24 hours.
Please explain exactly what you mean by the word deploy in this context and name the leader and members of this initial team.

#OPCW_FRAUD Thread—Tweet №4

🇸🇾#Syria—#Khan_Sheikhun
Questions to the @OPCW on their report of 12th May, 2017
4. Extraordinary use of obfuscatory jargon & circumlocution

1.4—Active monitoring of the media by the Information Cell and by the FFM continued. This allowed the FFM to map the site of the reported incident, and to identify potential interviewees and possible evidence. Through reports and information from States Parties, the Secretariat was made aware of a number of casualties having been taken, or having made their way, to a neighbouring country.

Khan Sheikhun Incident—Questions to the OPCW

4.—In this paragraph you seem to be at great pains to hide and to cloud your meaning. The expression States Parties is perfectly meaningless except as esoteric OPCW jargon. How, and through what agents precisely, did these reports and information percolate to your Secretariat?

Five countries can be considered neighbouring to Syria, but it is well known that the country to which you refer is Turkey. It is quite remarkable that you should use this circumlocution to avoid naming this country.

#OPCW_FRAUD Thread—Tweet №5

🇸🇾#Syria—#Khan_Sheikhun
Questions to the @OPCW …
5. Request to correct & supply omissions to my interpretation of your §2.1

5. Since your §2.1 is a little vague and unspecific, I have prepared an interpretation for the benefit of the less informed. Please correct any errors or omissions you find in this interpretation.

OPCW Original
2. Deployment Activities
2.1—As the FFM was already engaged in analysing a number of recently reported incidents on the alleged use of chemicals as weapons, it had access to lines of communication with parties with knowledge of and connections to the area in question. These contacts were used to quickly identify the initial casualties from this incident. This rapid mobilisation was crucial, in the first instance, in allowing FFM team members to attend the autopsies of three victims and to witness the extraction of biomedical samples from the bodies.

Translation
We are in regular contact with officials from the Muslim-Brotherhood-dominated Syrian-American Medical Society—SAMS—who manage the hospitals in Idlib and send us frequent reports of régime chlorine attacks in Idlib. The founder of SAMS, Dr. Mohammed Zaher Sahloul of Chicago, is our principal contact and source of information. When our FFM Initial Team had watched a few of the videos Dr. Sahloul and his colleagues had prepared for us, including one from a certain Dr. Shajul Islam, who we are informed by States Parties is disqualified for life from practising in a certain country, Dr. Sahloul kindly offered to have three corpses shipped up to Antakya so that we could watch his colleagues prepare satisfactory samples for us. We were told that many of the victims had the surname Al-Yousef but that we and Human Rights Watch would also be introduced to two surviving Al-Yousefs.

#OPCW_FRAUD Thread—Tweet №6

❝ After 175 attacks in Syria with chemical agents [by Sahloul’s tale—JD], the World Health Organization and the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, which is responsible for enforcement of chemical weapons protocols, still have no process to confirm which chemical agent was used to kill innocent Syrian people. ❞
—ZAHER SAHLOUL, Globe and Mail Friday, 7th Apr, 2017 8:25 pm EDT

Zaher Sahloul is a Syrian-American physician, and former president of the Syrian American Medical Society

Question 6:—Dr. Sahloul of SAMS, no doubt the ‘NGO’ you so pointedly avoid naming your preliminary report, claims that the OPCW has no process to confirm which chemical agent was used. Since he is a close collaborator with you, will you please explain how he can make this affirmation while you contradict him by reporting that you have had positive results for ‘sarin or sarin-like substance’?

Please give also the chemical formulæ for those substances you describe as sarin-like.

#OPCW_FRAUD Thread—Tweet №7

Time for a little light relief before we continue. Here we have Mr. Faruq Shami, a.k.a. the Uzbek Squeaker, accompanying the White Helmets as they collect samples. So far as I know, Shami is NuNusra’s only Russian-Speaking ‘media activist’. As you will see, you need neither Arabic nor Russian to work out that what they are dealing with here is SARIN. See tweet №10 below for an alternative scenario.

🔝🇸🇾#Syria—#Khan_Sheikhun
Questions to the @OPCW …
7. What ❝NGOs❞ collected the environmental samples, & how is their evidence to be trusted❓

2.7 Environmental samples such as clothing, soil from the crater of the suspected impact point, and soil from locations close to the suspected impact point were received by the team on 13 April 2017.
2.8 At the time of handover, the team was informed that all samples were taken by Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs). This information was corroborated by the testimony from other witnesses interviewed by the FFM. A representative of an NGO was also interviewed and provided photographs and videos from the scene of the alleged incident.

Question 7
Though both Antonio Guterres and Ahmet Üzümcü refer to the Fact-Finding Mission IN SYRIA, it is quite clear there were and are no officials of the OPCW in Syria and that both these gentlemen are fully aware of that fact. How both these ‘excellencies’ should have come to make the same very obvious error, is a matter of some interest.

We are given to understand then, that all the environmental samples were collected by ‘NGOs’ that you for some reason will neither name nor give any description of. Moreover that this fact, already extremely surprising, is made all the more surprising that it needs to be corroborated by other witnesses (i.e. witnesses not members of the said ‘NGOs’) that the FFM interviewed IN TURKEY. Were these witnesses brought to Turkey together with the unspecified handers-over, specially in order so to testify?

Though samples were taken in the process of an investigation intended ultimately to provide evidence for a war-crimes trial, you then casually interviewed one representative from one of these unidentified ‘NGOs’ and got pictures and videos from him or her. What court or judge on earth is going to accept such evidence?! My assumption is that your ‘NGOs’ are the White Helmets, paid millions by your ‘States Parties’ to produce fakeries; and SAMS, a criminal and fraudulent pseudo-charity with strong links to the Muslim Brotherhood.

I ask you to point out any errors in my assessment. I shall then, and only then, replace this text with a more accurate assessment.

#OPCW_FRAUD Thread—Tweet №8

🔝🇸🇾#Syria—#Khan_Sheikhun
Questions to the @OPCW …
8. How do you explain nothing detected on samples of clothing? Please identify labs.

2.7  Environmental samples such as clothing, soil from the crater of the suspected impact point, and soil from locations close to the suspected impact point were received by the team on 13 April 2017.
2.8  At the time of handover, the team was informed that all samples were taken by Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs). This information was corroborated by the testimony from other witnesses interviewed by the FFM. A representative of an NGO was also interviewed and provided photographs and videos from the scene of the alleged incident.

In your Annex 3 you list five samples described as clothes from an unspecified medical facility, three of which you claim to have sent to unspecified ‘Designated Laboratory’ №1 and two to DL №2. On none of these unspecified items of clothing was anything detected; and yet in a sample of soil, allegedly collected 100 metres from the alleged impact location, your DLs detected IMPA, [MPA] and DIMP. Is there a simple explanation for this apparent anomaly?
Please give the name and location of all the Designated Laboratories you have used in the course of this mission together with the names, nationalities and status of those charged with the testing of the samples.

#OPCW_FRAUD Thread—Tweet №9

Note again that this tweet is from 8th June, three weeks before the publication of the June report. Below is a picture of this metal object embedded in the “crater”, which in one or more of its many transmogrifications appeared in the world’s press on the day of the hoax, the very emblem of the massacre of scores of nine-year-olds, and yet there is no mention of this thing in the report! This will surely strike you as extraordinary already, but wait till you hear below the fate of this curious pipe-like™ according to the June report.

Numerous photos of the damaged tarmac alleged by the terrorists and your ‘NGOs’ to have been caused by a chemical munition dropped from an Su-22, show this alleged what-not sticking up out of the ground together with a circular metal cap of some sort. It seems to me extraordinary that your FFM claims to have collected a soil sample from 100 metres distant from the damaged tarmac, not to speak of a dead bird from an unspecified location and the hair of a dead goat, delivered and dragged to a spot not far away, and yet there is not a word in your report mentioning the conveyance by which the ‘sarin or sarin-like substance or related metabolites’ is/are alleged to have been delivered to this little hole in the road. Did your ‘NGO’ carelessly omit this central item from the collection of samples they handed over to you in Turkey, or is this simply a slight omission from your report not considered important enough that you should issue a correction?

#OPCW_FRAUD Thread—Tweet №10

🔝🇸🇾#Syria—#Khan_Sheikhun #OPCW_FRAUD👈
Questions to the @OPCW
10. TRUSTED¿NGO? ❝#Idlib👻Health☠Directorate❞ collect samples for OPCW FFM 😂😂😂😂😂

The scene in this video is probably taken by many to be the official record of the secure gathering of the samples from the roughed-up tarmac commonly spoken of as ‘the crater’. I ask you to imagine a similar situation in your country with a scientific team from the police or the army performing this task, and then watch this video.

In fact I have two videos besides this one that show different people gathering specimens from the same hole at different times of day and with different by-standers and passers-by lending them company.

The conclusion I reached in the tweet below, that the whole report was humbug, could easily have been drawn at this stage, but I left that till 6th July after reading the June report. It’s well worth noting that this tweet (click to view with graphics) was ‘liked’ by a considerable official of the OPCW itself—at which point I was certain I was on the right track.

John Delacour‏ @JohnDelacour Jul 6
👓👉#OPCW_FRAUD👈👓 #Khan_Sheikhun #SARIN_HOAX
By page 11, @OPCW has admitted, in small print, that THEIR WHOLE REPORT IS HUMBUG

#OPCW_FRAUD Thread—Tweet №11

A veritable landmark in this tale is when His Excellency Director-General Üzümcü, fifteen days after the hoax, announces to the world (click for saved web-page) that “The results of these analyses from four OPCW designated laboratories indicate exposure to Sarin or a Sarin-like substance. While further details of the laboratory analyses will follow, the analytical results already obtained are incontrovertible.”

🔝🇸🇾#Syria—#Khan_Sheikhun #OPCW_FRAUD👈
Questions to the @OPCW
11. Lab tests were ‘incontrovertible’ 2 months ago. Why the delay in reporting❓

On 13th April, 9 days after the alleged Khan Sheikhun incident, your Fact-Finding Mission took delivery of environmental samples, got together by unqualified so-called ‘NGOs’ in conditions totally devoid of any security or monitoring.
Six days later Mr Üzümcü was able to announce ‘incontrovertible’ lab results proving exposure of alleged victims to sarin, or the mysterious ‘sarin-like substance’ of which you have failed to provide the chemical formula in spite of repeated requests. FIFTY-SEVEN days later, that is to say TEN TIMES LONGER than it took you to reach your initial incontrovertible results, no news is forthcoming from you of the promised ‘further details of the lab analyses’, which can be assumed, by your tale, to have the sole virtue of extra incontrovertibility to the initial indisputable and absolute certainty. Please explain why your web-site, your SM pages, the mainstream media, and all the usual suspects are now totally silent on the matter of your undisputable Khan Sheikhun Sarin Massacre.

#OPCW_FRAUD Thread—My Reply to Tweet №5

OPCW Original
2. Deployment Activities
2.1—As the FFM was already engaged in analysing a number of recently reported incidents on the alleged use of chemicals as weapons, it had access to lines of communication with parties with knowledge of and connections to the area in question. These contacts were used to quickly identify the initial casualties from this incident. This rapid mobilisation was crucial, in the first instance, in allowing FFM team members to attend the autopsies of three victims and to witness the extraction of biomedical samples from the bodies.

Translation
We are in regular contact with officials from the Muslim-Brotherhood-dominated Syrian-American Medical Society—SAMS—who manage the hospitals in Idlib and send us frequent reports of régime chlorine attacks in Idlib. The founder of SAMS, Dr. Mohammed Zaher Sahloul of Chicago, is our principal contact and source of information. When our FFM Initial Team had watched a few of the videos Dr. Sahloul and his colleagues had prepared for us, including one from a certain Dr. Shajul Islam, who we are informed by States Parties is disqualified for life from practising in a certain country, Dr. Sahloul kindly offered to have three corpses shipped up to Antakya so that we could watch his colleagues prepare satisfactory samples for us. We were told that many of the victims had the surname Al-Yousef but that we and Human Rights Watch would also be introduced to two surviving Al-Yousefs.

All I wrote in tweet 5, where I interpreted the meaning of the 12th May report, turned out to be exact.

🔝 #SARIN_HOAX 👉#OPCW_FRAUD👈👓 @OPCW has not disappointed in the slightest detail. ✻ALL✻ their samples were collected by CRIMINAL NGOs

From OPCW Report of 29th June, 2017

Selection of interviewees
3.17 Through liaison with representatives of several NGOs, including Same Justice/Chemical Violations Documentation Centre Syria (CVDCS), the Syrian Civil Defence (also known as White Helmets, and hereinafter “SCD”), the Syrian American Medical Society (SAMS), and the Syrian Institute for Justice (SIJ), the FFM identified a number of witnesses to be interviewed. These witnesses were expected to provide testimony and potentially relevant evidence.

Results from biomedical specimens taken in Syria
5.87 Table 4 summarises results from specimens taken, where the taking of specimens was not witnessed by FFM team members. Samples numbered 1 to 7 in Table 4 were taken by medical staff under the auspice of the IHD [‘Idlib Health Directorate’—JD]; samples numbered 8 to 14 in Table 4 were taken under the auspice of SAMS. These were handed over to the FFM together with supporting documentation.

🔝 #SARIN_HOAX 👉#OPCW_FRAUD👈👓@OPCW has not disappointed in the slightest detail.
✻ALL✻ their samples were collected by CRIMINAL NGOs pic.twitter.com/SIQ5ixf2SH

— John Delacour (@JohnDelacour) July 5, 2017

#OPCW_FRAUD Thread—Tweet №12

This tweet was in reply to a comment, but I added it to the thread because I feel very strongly about this point. Not only those involved in the planning and execution of this hoax, not to speak of other hoaxes, but also those involved in falsifying the evidence and lying about the affair, including notably the British Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson and the British Ambassador Geoffrey Adams, ARE CRIMINALS by any rational yardstick, and their actions are designed to perpetuate war and cause more deaths. They are therefore accessories to murder. We, the people, must bring them to justice.

Replying to @yenanoha @_radikalek @OPCW
In this case it is people in @OPCW @UK_OPCW 👉@dstlmod👈 @sams_usa i.a. that are accused by me. THEY must be punished⚖ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1832084/

#OPCW_FRAUD Thread—Tweet №14

#Khan_Sheikhun #SARIN_HOAX #OPCW_FRAUD
Sir G Adams @GeoffreyDAdams
UK Ambassador to the Netherlands @UK_OPCW
IS A BLOODY LIAR
Let him sue me

Click the image to read his whole speech

#OPCW_FRAUD Thread—Tweet №15

#OPCW_FRAUD Thread—Tweet №16

#OPCW_FRAUD Thread—Tweet №17

#OPCW_FRAUD Thread—Tweet №18

👉#OPCW_FRAUD👈👓
🇸🇾#Syria— #SARIN_HOAX The first environmental ¿sarin-touched? samples took OVER 3 WEEKS to reach the ❝designated labs❞‼
18

#OPCW_FRAUD Thread—Tweet №19

#OPCW_FRAUD Thread—Tweet №20

👉#OPCW_FRAUD👈👓
🇸🇾#Syria— #SARIN_HOAX
Please read this VERY CAREFULLY:
SARIN (as opposed to harmless metabolites) WAS NOT DETECTED 20

#OPCW_FRAUD Thread—Tweet №21

#OPCW_FRAUD
🇸🇾#Syria— #SARIN_HOAX
The biomedical & environmental specimens (including corpses and ‘victims’) were produced by ☠@SAMS_USA☠
21

#OPCW_FRAUD Thread—Tweet №22

#OPCW_FRAUD Thread—Tweet №23

#OPCW_FRAUD Thread—Tweet №24

#OPCW_FRAUD Thread—Tweet №25

#OPCW_FRAUD Thread—Tweet №26

#OPCW_FRAUD Thread—Tweet №27

#OPCW_FRAUD Thread—Tweet №28

#OPCW_FRAUD Thread—Tweet №29

#OPCW_FRAUD Thread—Tweet №30

30—#OPCW_FRAUD
🇸🇾#Syria—#SARIN_HOAX
See twt №25/Q.13
I attach a map showing the relative location of the roughed-up tarmac & the common.

To the most obvious question The OPCW’s ‘fact-finders’ must answer, there is no acceptable answer:

At ~6:30 am, White Helmets say (in a video) that they had a crew at the ‘impact site’ near the silos. The man who claims, by your tale, to have seen the boy fuel seller from his balcony fall to the ground, makes no mention of seeing anybody else, let alone a crew of your misnamed ‘SCD’.

It is common knowledge that the White Helmets never go anywhere without cameramen to record their heroic actions. According to SAMS-owned Dr. Morad, there were about four hundred people lying flat on the ground at this spot. The White Helmets, not wishing to impress or exaggerate, talk of two hundred, at the impact site

By your tale, all and sundry were alerted on the walkie-talkie to this extraordinary scene near the silos, and rushed to the assistance of the alleged victims—all of them without smartphones or cameras! QUESTION:—How is it that there is not a single photograph of this appalling scene of (say a hundred, to err on the safe side), I repeat, a hundred people lying flat on the ground, dead, dying, twitching, frothing at the mouth, gasping and displaying their pin-point pupils and other curious exhibitions?

The closest we see any pretended victims to the ‘impact site’ is over a mile away on the common to the west of your quaintly coded ‘MF-F’ SAMS-owned medical facility (aka the ‘Mercy Hospital’), which is, incidentally, not ‘in the vicinity of’ the WhiteHelmets HQ [fortified bunker] but part and parcel of it. I must add that the scene I refer to is recorded in bright noonday sunlight; that is, six hours after the alleged chemical event. I repeat, SIX HOURS.

Where are the photographs and videos taken near the hole in the tarmac near the grain silos? You link us to a SMART agency picture of a dead or drugged goat that somebody claims was nearby, but of human victims neither you nor any of the hundreds of videos and photos present the slightest trace.

This question must be answered, but you can have no answer to it that would satisfy a crossing-sweeper let alone any magistrate.

#OPCW_FRAUD Thread—Tweet №31

#OPCW_FRAUD Thread—Tweet №32

#OPCW_FRAUD Thread—Tweet №33

33—#OPCW_FRAUD
🇸🇾#Syria—#SARIN_HOAX
The Damascus interviews. Longest yet! I have all the references to explain my reasoning. Ask away!

3.20  Furthermore, two people were presented as interviewees by the Government of the Syrian Arab Republic.
5.10 …Due to the inability to interview more of such witnesses, it was not possible to corroborate this narrative. The narrative is, however, included for completeness.

Interviews conducted in Damascus
5.27 The narrative collected from two interviews conducted in Damascus over the period of 21 – 22 June 2017 differs. One interviewee stated that “members of” ... an armed opposition group... “had evicted tenants from a house in Khan Shaykhun, replacing them with new tenants and the house was used for the storage of weapons, munitions and barrels some two months prior to the incident on 4 April 2017”. That house appeared to have been damaged at some time during the incident on 4 April 2017.
5.28 The other interviewee recalled that at around 07:00 on 4 April 2017, he was woken by the sound of an explosion and observed a cloud above a building which he described as a “chemical warehouse”. Approaching the location of the cloud he felt dizzy, and feeling unwell, he went back to his house to rest while his condition improved. Two to three hours later, on hearing ambulance sirens, he left his house to witness casualties being decontaminated and treated by first responders wearing respiratory protection. He recalled that the roads were blocked and only ambulances from Turkey* and water tankers were allowed inside the affected area. The casualties, some of whom appeared unresponsive with shallow breathing, were transported to Al Rahma field hospital in Khan Shaykhun.
*original uses the expression “from a neighbouring country”
5.29 Both interviewees informed the interview team that there was an established early warning system that used hand-held radios to pass warning messages in case of aircraft overflights† so that townspeople could take cover. However, on the morning of the incident they reported that no such warnings were received until around 11:00 to 11:30 and no aircraft were observed until that time
†This is almost certainly the case”

It is hard to believe that the narrative presented by the ‘fact-finding’ teams based on these two interviews is not deliberately obfuscated. If the information necessary to evaluate the two tales was not obtained by the interviewers, then they are guilty of gross negligence, since without certain elementary facts being included, the accounts of these two alleged witnesses are practically worthless.

1. With regard to the first tale, we need to know the exact location of the requisitioned building, which would obviously be known to the interviewee, and we need to know the name of this ‘armed opposition group’ (i.e. which terrorists? in rational parlance.)

2. As to the second interview, we need to know precisely where this person’s house is, and the precise location of his ‘chemical warehouse’. If indeed “he left his house to witness casualties being decontaminated and treated by first responders”, then his house must be right next to the common on the road to the White Helmets’ bunker-cum-‘medical facility MF-F’; or, within view of that establishment—which is impossible, since there are no houses there. And since it is only in these two places (on the common or at the WH complex) that anything resembling the activities he describes were to be seen, according to the videos used in evidence, then his house can only be on the edge of the common. Here indeed there were alleged victims to be seen according to the videos, but not ‘two or three hours later’; rather four or five hours later. Neither the condition of these ‘victims’ nor the ministrations they were receiving concur with his description. In principle, then, this is a tale of cock and bull.

3. Let it be made quite clear that the al-Rahma ‘hospital’ a) is not a hospital, let alone a ‘field hospital’ but a room with four or five beds within the White Helmets’ rock-built bunker; b) is not in Khan Sheikhun but just outside to the east; c) is at no point in the documentation shown being used to treat ‘victims’.

I have all the references to back up this short account if anybody wishes me to clarify matters.

Finally, as to the section I have typed in bold in the report above : of this I have absolutely no doubt.

#OPCW_FRAUD Thread—Tweet №34

#OPCW_FRAUD Thread—Tweet №35

#OPCW_FRAUD Thread—Tweet №36

Continuous weather data is available for Idlib city, but for Khan Sheikhun there is no data for the period 20th December, 2016 until 19th April, 2017. There are no gaps in the record before or after this period.

36—#OPCW_FRAUD #cwJIM
🇸🇾#Syria—#SARIN_HOAX
There must be an innocent explanation for why no weather data exists for this period. Please help

#OPCW_FRAUD Thread—Tweet №37

#OPCW_FRAUD Thread—Tweet №38

John Delacour‏ @JohnDelacour Jul 30
38—#OPCW_FRAUD #cwJIM
#SARIN_HOAX
I have begun a ⚡️🆕 thread—#hrwqs—questioning primarily @OleSolvang but also @OPCW

John Delacour @JohnDelacour 9:47 AM - 30 Jul 2017
❓Q1 to @OleSolvang of @hrw
3 consecutive frames from yr video. Source of f1?
#Khan_Sheikhun #Sarin_Hoax #OPCW_FRAUD
https://www.hrw.org/report/2017/05/01/death-chemicals/syrian-governments-widespread-and-systematic-use-chemical-weapons …