Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
October 29, 2017

UN On Khan Sheikhoun - Victims Hospitalized BEFORE Claimed Incident Happened

A UN commission concluded that the Syrian government is responsible for a widely discussed incident in Khan Sheikhoun. An alleged gas attack by air happened in April in an al-Qaeda controlled area in Syria. It was used by the White House to justify its bombing of a Syrian airbase.

The now released report was made to fit the narrative. The details below show that it was not the result of a serious investigation. This explains why Russia blocked the extension of the mandate of the reporting commission. 

On October 26 Reuters reported: Syrian government to blame for April sarin attack: U.N. report

UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - The Syrian government of Bashar al-Assad is to blame for a chemical attack on the opposition-held town of Khan Sheikhoun that killed dozens of people last April, according to a report sent to the United Nations Security Council on Thursday.

“The Syrian Arab Republic is responsible for the release of sarin at Khan Sheikhoun on 4 April 2017,” the report from the U.N. and the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons’ Joint Investigative Mechanism (JIM) said.

The official report has not been published. But someone obtained a copy of the Seventh report of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons-United Nations Joint Investigative Mechanism (pdf) and we make it herewith available.

The reports notes "irregularities" that makes one wonder how its writers could ever have come to this conclusion:

Based on the foregoing, the Leadership Panel is confident that the Syrian Arab Republic is responsible for the release of sarin at Khan Shaykhun on 4 April 2017. The findings of the Leadership Panel regarding the evidence in this case are based on the information set forth in detail in annex II.

Note the verbal choices the commission made: ".. is confident .." is not a wording that conveys surety and " responsible for the release" does not mean that the Syrian Arab Republic in fact did it.

The reports conclusions are NOT by the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons or even endorsed by it. They were made by the "Joint Investigative Mechanism" which consists of a Guatemalan diplomat, an UN bureaucrat from Malaysia educated in the U.S. and a chemical expert who works for the Swiss government. It is a political board with a political judgement.

The reasons for that rather vague wording, which is not reflected in the news reports, can be found in the details. The report says on page 10:

The Mechanism determined that sarin was released from the location of a crater in the northern part of Khan Shaykhun between 0630 and 0700 hours on 4 April 2017.

Many of the reports findings are based on open source videos and photographs published by the opposition. It acquired witnesses statements from the area which is under control of al-Qaeda. It also examined forensic evidence for which no chain of custody existed. Some findings are strange.

In annex II, on page 36 (of 39) of the pdf, it notes:

Certain irregularities were observed in elements of information analysed. For example, several hospitals appeared to start admitting casualties of the attack between 0640 and 0645 hours. The Mechanism received the medical records of 247 patients from Khan Shaykhun who were admitted to various health-care facilities, including those of survivors and a number of victims who died from exposure to chemical agent. The admission times of the records range between 0600 and 1600 hours. Analysis of the aforementioned medical records revealed that in 57 cases, patients were admitted in five hospitals before the incident in Khan Shaykhun (at 0600, 0620 and 0640 hours). In 10 such cases, patients appear to have been admitted to a hospital 125 km away from Khan Shaykhun at 0700 hours while another 42 patients appear to have been admitted to a hospital 30 km away at 0700 hours. The Mechanism did not investigate these discrepancies and cannot determine whether they are linked to any possible staging scenario, or to poor record-keeping in chaotic conditions.

At least 23% of the alleged casualties of the incident WERE ADMITTED TO HOSPITALS BEFORE THE INCIDENT HAPPENED.

The hospital 125 km away, a two hour drive, must have been a regular one in Turkey. It is highly unlikely that such a well organized hospital would mix up the arrival time. It is impossible that the casualties admitted at 0700 hours were those of an incident in Khan Sheikhoun that happened, according to the commission, at 0630. The commission did not investigate the discrepancies and it asserts that it does not determine if the incident was staged or not.

Another curiosity:

An inconsistency was identified in one of the Fact-Finding Mission biomedical results from samples without a chain of custody. In sample number 133, the blood tested negative for sarin or a sarin-like substance, while the urine sample tested positive for the sarin degradation product isopropyl methylphosphonate. There is currently no explanation regarding the inconsistency.

The commission also notes a point that we had detailed back in April:

The Mechanism observed from open sources that treatment of victims from Khan Shaykhun frequently involved oxygen and cortisone therapy. This treatment is not recommended for sarin intoxication, but is mainly for lung damage, as would be caused by either chlorine or vacuum bombs.

The report misses the early reporting we had documented shortly after the incident happened:

First reports on that day by the Turkish government news agency Anadolu mentioned only chlorine ... The first OPCW statement on April 4 referred to chlorine, not sarin or similar ... The first report of the Turkish government also said chlorine

Moreover, according to local press reports the first 30 casualties that arrived at the Turkish border were diagnosed as chlorine affected, not as Sarin casualties. Neither did the patients in any of the videos show strong Sarin symptoms nor did the emergency personal take the necessary precautions for handling a Sarin incident.

The incident was most likely not caused by an air attack at 0630 that distributed Sarin. It was probably caused by a local Chlorine release that must have happened at an earlier point in time. The Sarin and air attack story was only later attached to it. The incident was adopted as a show the White House used to justify its bombing attack on Syria and to thereby divert from its domestic problems. It released an amateurish "intelligence assessment" on the incident that was not prepared by any intelligence agency but by the White House itself.

All evidence the investigation says it obtained from Khan Sheikhun, biomedical, environmental, physical sample as well as media, were obtained without a chain of custody. It was taken by Al-Qaeda or by groups Al-Qaeda allows to work in areas it controls. The terrorist and the opposition to the Syrian government, and certainly their sponsors, had an obvious interest in manipulating evidence of the incident to then blame it on the Syrian government.

The former prime minister of Qatar just admitted on TV that Qatar, in tight cooperation with Saudi Arabia, Turkey and under direction of the United States delivered weapons and money to the "opposition" in Syria, including to al-Qaeda, since the very beginning of the conflict:

Al-Thani even likened the covert operation to "hunting prey" - the prey being President Assad and his supporters - "prey" which he admits got away (as Assad is still in power; he used a Gulf Arabic dialect word, "al-sayda", which implies hunting animals or prey for sport). Though Thani denied credible allegations of support for ISIS, the former prime minister's words implied direct Gulf and US support for al-Qaeda in Syria (al-Nusra Front) from the earliest years of the war, and even said Qatar has "full documents" and records proving that the war was planned to effect regime change.

These same forces, especially the U.S., are still determined to "regime change" Syria. To this purpose the U.S. military is preparing for a long-term occupation of the areas its Kurdish proxies in north-east Syria now control.

Note: Parts of the above are based on the work of Syricide

Posted by b on October 29, 2017 at 17:03 UTC | Permalink


It is indeed interesting how urine from the same subject was inconsistent with blood. I guess that some people chose a more humane method of falsifying the samples: rather than poisoning the subjects and collecting samples from them, they could collect samples from healthy people and contaminate them. That could also explain consistent "chlorine victims": while the photography crew of "civil defense" is top-notch, the lab personnel can be sloppy, mislabel jars with poisons or misread them etc.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Oct 29 2017 17:30 utc | 1

Another example of fakery of the incident. The report (linked above) notes this, but draws no conclusion:

... In particular, the Mechanism noted that fully equipped hazmat teams appeared at the scene later that afternoon and reported early detection of the presence of sarin, seemingly using a Dräger X-am 7000 ambient air monitor, which was not known to be able to detect sarin.
Of further concern to the Mechanism was the relative unprofessionalism by which certain environmental samples appear to have been taken, e.g. sampling from a muddy puddle.
The Mechanism also noted scenes recorded just after the incident at the medical point to the east of Khan Shaykhun, where rescue and decontamination activities filmed shortly after 0700 hours showed rescue personnel hosing down patients with water indiscriminately for extended periods of time. Such video footage also depicted a number of patients not being attended to, and some para-medical interventions that did not seem to make medical sense, such as performing heart compression on a patient facing the ground.

But based on all of that, and on the patients that arrived in hospital before the incident happened, the report concludes that Syria dropped Sarin at a moment and place that made zero military or political sense...

Posted by: b | Oct 29 2017 18:19 utc | 2

There was a story (sorry, lost any references) that stated that at least one of the US warships that launched the Tomahawks after this incident, was still in Spain on April 2nd. So that ship had to travel across the Mediterranean at full speed (and not at cruise speed) to be on time for the attack.
And that implies the attack was know by the US forces beforehand, and their riposte was also planned and decided before the attack took place.

Posted by: Jeff | Oct 29 2017 18:26 utc | 3

I have come to the point of 100% initially assuming that reports by the MSM in the West are fabrications and then work back to find the few percent of truth, if any.

Lying is normal in the West. Honestly is getting very rare, and is abnormal.

Posted by: AriusArmenian | Oct 29 2017 20:23 utc | 4

With Trump and T Rex now saying the right things, the hegemon is back up to speed. The US crossed there rubicon when Obama made his speech at the UNGA a couple of years back. No way China/Russia will be able to give the US a soft landing. Hard times when the bubble bursts for the US.

Posted by: Peter AU 1 | Oct 29 2017 20:28 utc | 5

All those who rule the Western world through control of finance have bankrupt morals because of their fealty to the God of Mammon. War and treachery are the tools that fit their mental condition and if they can't BS you into being cowed by their existence they will bomb you into submission.

Negotiation for God of Mammon acolytes is for losers and they will keep the carousel spinning furiously until they are neutered or they take us with them in a blaze of what they consider nuclear glory......I have never seen any of the assholes that my life has presented me with show a smidge of contrition for glaring facts about their societal perfidy.....they double down like Trump does regularly and I suspect it is likely we will see such grandstanding with this situation as well.

War is a cover for anti-humanistic leadership which is the best that can be bought in Amerika.

Posted by: psychohistorian | Oct 29 2017 20:29 utc | 6

It's irksome that 6:55 is the time Hersh gave for the bombing he was told about. If it were an hour or two earlier, it would make sense of what I take to be his idea - that some bomb-induced chemical disaster was 'converted' into a sarin episode after the fact.

Posted by: Mark | Oct 29 2017 20:35 utc | 7

The bombed building was most likely part of the prep. Possibly chemicals or perhaps simply somthing that woukd give oiff yellow smoke placed into the building then its co-ords slipped into inteligence somehow as an AQ headquarters or whatever so it would become a target for the bombing. The US were notified that the building would be hit and at what time, so AQ/whitehelmets would have been alerted and ready to go into logie award winning action at the allotted time.

Posted by: Peter AU 1 | Oct 29 2017 21:03 utc | 8

b, thank you again for your analyses.

Posted by: Robert | Oct 29 2017 21:24 utc | 9

Thanks for deconstructing this latest bogus report.

We are now living in "Reality TV", sad to say.

Not to be naïve or sentimental about it, but government and civic institutions used to maintain at least a modicum of integrity, probity, and objectivity.

Now, official investigations are routinely compromised by nefarious political and social interests. Bad enough that law enforcement and state-security agencies habitually distort or fabricate information to serve their own ends, and their masters' ends.

But it's somehow more insidious when nominally independent investigative bodies become channels of authoritarian governments' infoganda.

This series of slanderous, manufactured, trumped-up (no pun intended) accusations that the Syrian government/military used chemical weapons is practically a "sub-genre" by now.

But it also brings to mind NIST's fraudulent analysis of the destructive events in New York City on 9/11/01, and the equally fraudulent findings of the Dutch-led Joint Investigation Team tasked to investigate the downing of the MH-17 aircraft.

I thought of "reality TV" because all of these tendentious reports from ostensibly prestigious organizations are merely props-- items to wave around in front of the camera, and allude to sanctimoniously in support of some reprehensible official policy or narrative.

Thus, I fully concur with AriusArmenian | 4.

Posted by: Ort | Oct 29 2017 22:12 utc | 10

I sort of hate to take up bandwidth with nothing substantive to add, but have to say that I am once again in awe of b's investigative and analytical skills. And an additional shout out to the moonies (mooners? moonites? moonchkins?) who comment here with such intelligent, clear-headed additional insights.

Posted by: Daniel | Oct 29 2017 22:51 utc | 11

@11 charles de drake - "i really do believe in the future hospitals will have a better success rate if we can get the cadavers into surgery before these events happen"

One of your best lines ever.


@13 Daniel

I think it's always substantive to praise b for a job well done when so inspired. He's usually so, um, substantive, that anyone can plunge straight into discussion, which I hope he takes as a compliment for his outstanding journalism. It's similar to movie soundtrack people who I've always heard are most satisfied when no one notices their work.

Posted by: Grieved | Oct 29 2017 23:28 utc | 12

There was a story (sorry, lost any references) that stated that at least one of the US warships that launched the Tomahawks after this incident, was still in Spain on April 2nd. So that ship had to travel across the Mediterranean at full speed (and not at cruise speed) to be on time for the attack.
And that implies the attack was know by the US forces beforehand, and their riposte was also planned and decided before the attack took place.

Posted by: Jeff | Oct 29, 2017 2:26:25 PM | 3

Maritime tables give ca. five days from Gibraltar (near American naval base) to the sea between Greece and Lebanon, based on 15 knots, and navy cruisers can have 30 knots. And in actuality, more often then not they do not bump into merchant ships at that speed, unwise as it may be in the busiest waters like Strait of Malacca or the vicinity of largest Japanese ports. Mediterranean is quite wide.

Loading missiles could take few hours, and sailing to the launch spots could be done in 3 days at 25 knots.

Posted by: Ort | Oct 29, 2017 6:12:35 PM | 12
But it's somehow more insidious when nominally independent investigative bodies become channels of authoritarian governments' infoganda.

Luckily, we have infoganda on behalf of democratically elected governments, so not as insidious. As they rely, to some extend, on the opinions of the public (re-election etc.), they have high needs to shape the "facts".

If I recall, at the time of Khan Sheikhoun incident, Turkey was still supporting the jihadists, and Erdogan already made it a high crime to undermine the official versions. There is no telling how far the falsification extended. E.g. the suspiciously early arrivals could be sloppily falsified by clerks who were not aware how far Khan Sheikhun is from the border crossing with Turkey. I suspect that just in case, some number of victims were actually poisoned, who knows when and where, and some number of cases was simply forged.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Oct 29 2017 23:35 utc | 13

The UN report now is the foundation for further attempts to decapitate the Syrian government, and, at the least, to perpetuate terrorism throughout Syria as Israel and the CIA choose.

The form of perpetual war in Syria will be insurgencies. US-protected areas in the northeast, east and south for the next year or so will enable the long war to be stretched out. Reconstruction will be delayed, China likely to stay out (they are the big player for reconstruction), and the Hegemon to swagger in the region, limiting Russia's plans.

Russia has to clean up the Turk issues, the Kurd issues, and further annihilate al Nusra.
The Astana structure must become the foundation for political resolutions.

Only clear military dominance by Russia-Syria-Hezbollah-Quds Force will prove to the opponents of Assad-Iran (US, Israel, Saudi Arabia) that their proxies have no way to affect the future. Rapidly deployed counterinsurgency forces will be needed to crush the proxies.

The propaganda for more war depends completely on "Assad the war criminal", and 'Poison gas' is the established 'truth' of that propaganda-infowar. Thus the relevance of the fabricated UN report.

It is all they have but it has currency with American public, where the dollars come from.
More War—The Hegemon's Way.

Posted by: Red Ryder | Oct 30 2017 0:13 utc | 14

"Malaysian..." -- and following the MH17 disaster and subsequent cover-up what credibility should one give this report? Don't fly Malaysian airlines and don't trust this type of UN 'investigation'. Clearly the official narrative on Syria is beyond repair. Did not the Russians ensure that all Syrian government gas stocks were destroyed to ensure this type of scenario could not have any credibility? Obviously, if there was any sarin gas involved it belonged to the terrorist forces and storage was either hit during the attack or deliberately released to fuel this type of investigation.

Posted by: x | Oct 30 2017 1:03 utc | 15

Odd that in most non-Western countries the stereotype is that if people are asked or required to meet a series of deadlines, they usually end up spreading the tasks over several hours or even several days or weeks and do them according to "local" time, however they interpret this.

In this instance though the takfiris and their handlers seem to want to do everything ahead of schedule.

A case of facts being laid out on the ground ahead of the script being written for Reuters and the UN?

Posted by: Jen | Oct 30 2017 1:07 utc | 16

Just imagine if the report said that the Syrian government was not responsible for the chemical attack!
Trump would have been responsible for an unjustified military attack on another country. It would be a humiliation for the USA and a cause for calling for huge reparation.
Tillerson thought it was appropriate to call for Bashar Al Assad's removal to give some credibility to the report.
Russia did well to stop its process and to reject it bluntly as biased and innacurate.
The UN report is 'confident' about Syria's guilt but does not present overwhelming proofs.. All very subjective.

Posted by: Virgile | Oct 30 2017 1:48 utc | 17

@17 Virgile

Yes, thank you. It's good to step back and see the bigger picture.

Even if we think we live in the age of blanket propaganda, it's not total, and it's not free of consequences - people are still careful to hedge their bets and be careful of their language, because a situation can come to a court of law, even if it takes years. With Syria and those rich nations who opposed it, there would be huge reparations indeed.

Just in the last couple of days we hear from the former Prime Minister of Qatar of the collusion between it and Saudi Arabia, Turkey and the US in a conspiracy to overthrow the lawful government of Syria. And the thinking in Syrian analysis is that this public testimony will form the "basis for compensation claims." - In Shocking, Viral Interview, Qatar Confesses Secrets Behind Syrian War

People sue countries in the courts all the time. Wars end in legal settlements, or else end frozen or in disputes that last for decades, all recorded in legal terms.

In a way, the disregard for law does everything to show the regard for law. Every grievance is recorded and remains outstanding until settled. The modern world is full of such disputes, and a scholar could list them for us. And sometimes a dispute gets settled.

The good news, from Virgile's comment, is that the law still matters. And it carries more weight than sheer propaganda empty of lawful sanction. And this report is the weasel language of people scared of being called to present real evidence.

It's valuable to see and recognize this fear. It shows the power of rightfulness. The US in its disregard for law is still being recorded at each transgression. It may well take the point of a sword to redress a grievance, but the recording of that grievance is dependably left in the hands of the law.

Posted by: Grieved | Oct 30 2017 3:36 utc | 18

If the aircraft was flying E-W at the time the bomb was dropped, it would have no S-N velocity. From an altitude of 10,000 m (maximum suggested in JIM and no mention of parachute retardation) it takes about a minute for a bomb to hit the ground, so the bomb would have to be travelling S-N at 300 kph to have travelled that 5 km in the minute available. Even if it was only 3 km (as suggested by Bellingcat), that would require the bomb to be travelling S-N at 180 kph yet we are told by the JIM that the wind speed was 0.5m/s or 1.8 kph. The physics for the bomb just doesn't add up.

My figures are not precise but approximations - I guessed a terminal velocity for Russian bombs which are not particularly aerodynamic of 180 m/s meaning every additional 1,000 m after terminal velocity is reached takes 5.5 seconds. I saw a mention that a particular US bomb has a terminal velocity of 270 m/s.

Posted by: Ghostship | Oct 30 2017 5:22 utc | 19

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

By Theodore A. Postol, professor emeritus of science, technology, and national security policy at MIT. Postol’s main expertise is in ballistic missiles. He has a substantial background in air dispersal, including how toxic plumes move in the air. Postol has taught courses on weapons of mass destruction – including chemical and biological threats – at MIT.

Posted by: Bolt | Oct 30 2017 6:25 utc | 20

Grieved | Oct 29, 2017 11:36:43 PM | 18
The US empire is above the courts.
The Republic of Nicaragua v. The United States of America (1986) ICJ 1 is a public international law case decided by the International Court of Justice (ICJ). The ICJ ruled in favor of Nicaragua and against the United States and awarded reparations to Nicaragua. The ICJ held that the U.S. had violated international law by supporting the Contras in their rebellion against the Nicaraguan government and by mining Nicaragua's harbors. The United States refused to participate in the proceedings after the Court rejected its argument that the ICJ lacked jurisdiction to hear the case. The U.S. also blocked enforcement of the judgment by the United Nations Security Council and thereby prevented Nicaragua from obtaining any compensation.[2] Nicaragua, under the later, post-FSLN government of Violeta Chamorro, withdrew the complaint from the court in September 1992 following a repeal of the law which had required the country to seek compensation.[3]

Posted by: Peter AU 1 | Oct 30 2017 6:26 utc | 21

This whole CW scam would be comical if not because innocent Syrians died in the US regime attack to the airbase.The tribunal criminal case is enlarging daily, thousands of people are involved in this brutal criminal war of aggression agains the Syrians, soon people will start being jailed and brought to justice.There is already evidences that will force many countries to pay Syria for the destruction of infra structure. 2018 will be an interesting year.

Posted by: Canthama | Oct 30 2017 9:43 utc | 22

I believe that Virgile @17 comes closest to the truth: having "shot his wad" in haste over this event, Trump simply could not allow any other finding other than "Assad done did it!"

And nobody on that board has the slightest intention of pissing off the USA, whereas Syria simply can't do anything except continue to pronounce its innocence.

But the report itself contains subversive information e.g.
"The Mechanism did not investigate these discrepancies and cannot determine whether they are linked to any possible staging scenario, or to poor record-keeping in chaotic conditions."

in a report that ends up saying:
"Based on the foregoing, the Leadership Panel is confident that the Syrian Arab Republic is responsible for the release of sarin at Khan Shaykhun on 4 April 2017."

Pardon? The board is on record as saying that it cannot determine whether this event was staged, yet in the same report it can express "confidence" that it wasn't staged.

It would be like admitting that nobody knows if it was that Kryptonite that made Superman sick but, no matter, we are confident that Superman is invulnerable.

Posted by: Yeah, Right | Oct 30 2017 11:44 utc | 23

I believe that Virgile @17 comes closest to the truth: having "shot his wad" in haste over this event, Trump simply could not allow any other finding other than "Assad done did it!"
That's probably true but means nothing unless Trump takes some action as the result of this report. As they say, propaganda only becomes dangerous when you start believing your own is true. If the huddled masses believe that Assad was responsible so what as they have little capability to do anything except fund the terrorists and end up in prison, or head off to Syria to fight and die. Having already fired a few obsolete missiles at Syria, Trump can say he's already punished Assad enough, although there might be pressure on him for a Wag the dog moment with the Mueller investigation but the Wag the dog tactic is so clearly known that he actually would be an idiot to use it. Anyway, that's only going to happen after much tweeting and after the ISIS Caliphate ceases to exist. Even then, I suspect Trump will want to destroy Al Qaeda as part of his MAGA effort - having Al Qaeda around particularly when it still exists thanks to the idiots in the CIA really pisses on his parade aspirations.

Finally, this report demonstrates just how impotent and unimportant Eliot Higgins (Bellingcat) and Abu Lister al-Britani have become. I hope they'll both get their P45s and will be signing on soon for their JSA. Unfortunately for the rest of us some moronic Washington think tank will keep on paying them.

Posted by: Ghostship | Oct 30 2017 12:15 utc | 24

Thanks for the conclusive report,links and posts.I have never really believed what was reported on western MSM.It just didn't make sense.Assad is no fool.But in a digitized world the people have access to many sources and can't be so easily be deceived anymore.

Posted by: Theo | Oct 30 2017 12:18 utc | 25

Oh, dear, I've just read the full report and something in it just screams "It's A Stitch-Up!"

It is this: the USA did not supply any additional radar information to "the Mechanism".

Note this:
"The Mechanism obtained substantial information on activities of the Syrian Arab Air Force (SAAF) on 4 April 2017."

Well, yeah, No S**t Sherlock. Can't imagine why you'd want that.......

So, obviously, that "substantial information" came from the USA, right?

Err, no, actually.

Note this:
"The Mechanism compared the flight times of SAAF aircraft taking off from Al-Shayrat
airbase as provided by the Syrian Government with other flight information
received. Both the Syrian and other accounts are consistent that SAAF aircraft
were in the air at the relevant time. Where the accounts diverge is with respect to
whether or not the aircraft flew over or in the immediate vicinity of Khan

So the Syrian government was co-operating with this investigation, and if the board asked for something then that was made available to it.
Flight logs? Sure, here you are.
Can we interview your pilots? Of course.
Is it OK to visit your airfield? Yeah, it's this way.

Surely the USA would be equally forthcoming?

Err, no.....
"On 7 April 2017, United States authorities publicly released a statement and a map
depicting a flight path of an aircraft originating from Al-Shayrat airbase that “was
over Khan Shaykhun” at approximately 0637 and 0646 hours."

Note the weasel-worded phrase "publically released", which means that the only thing the USAF gave to the investigation were the press clippings from the New York Times.

Just to stress that point:
"The Governments of France and the United States publicly provided
information that an SAAF Su-22 took off from Al-Shayrat airbase
on 4 April 2017, were “over” Khan Shaykhun at 0637 and 0646 hours, and
launched up to six attacks “around” Khan Shaykhun"

Again, note the weasel-worded "publically provided", which is not at all the same thing as this phrase: were made available to the mechanism.

I urge people to read this report through that prism: All that the investigators were given were the original American allegations that had already been "publically released". Nothing more. No less.

I mean, a Cuban Cicada can't fly inside Syrian airspace without a USAF X-Band radar recording it. And the *original*, undoctored recording would be crucial evidence in determining if a Syrian SU-22 made a bombing run on this town at that time.

But the report makes clear that the investigating team never saw those radar recordings, merely the "maps" that the USA had "publically provided".

Which can have only two possible explanations:
a) The board is incompetent, and therefore never thought to ask.
b) The board did ask, and the Americans said "F**k off, no way".

Posted by: Yeah, Right | Oct 30 2017 12:45 utc | 26

@24 "That's probably true but means nothing unless Trump takes some action as the result of this report."

No, I think you have this backward.

If the report had come out and said that Assad didn't do it then Trump would had launched an attack on a Syrian airbase for No Good Reason, in which case the USA is open to compensation claims.

The USA does pay those, in cases where it bombs something that it shouldn't.
The USA pays those all the time. As well they should, since they keep blowin' s**t up.

Trump appears to have no ability to admit a mistake, and so the important point about this report is that he doesn't have to admit to a mistake. Cooking up this report in order to accommodate his character-flaws is a small price to pay if you are riding on the UN gravy-train.

But nothing more will come of this: "the West" can't shun Assad any more than they are shunning him now. "the West" can't scream "Assad Must Go!!!" any louder than they are doing now.

But "the West" isn't interested in bombing Assad out of his palace.
They got away with that once w.r.t. Gaddafi, and the Russians and the Chinese took note.

Heck, even when Trump did his "look how big my Tomahawk is!" show'n'tell he warned the Russians and the Syrians to evacuated the airbase.

Nothing will happen, other than that Trump's ego will grow a little bit more monstrous.

Posted by: Yeah, Right | Oct 30 2017 12:57 utc | 27

>>>> Yeah, Right | Oct 30, 2017 8:57:01 AM | 26

Trump appears to have no ability to admit a mistake

For an American president that's probably a necessary feature because admitting you made a mistake is for losers and Americans only like winners. Just look at Obama, it was pretty obvious during his first term that Libya and Syria were mistakes but he only admitted it at the tail-end of his presidency.

No, the far more important thing for a political novice like Trump is to understand when you do make a mistake and learn enough from it that you don't make the same mistake twice and I think Trump has that ability.

As for his ego, just looking at how ridiculous his appearance is suggests to me that he suffers from little in the way of vanity and his appearance of having a monstrous ego is, like much of what he does, an act.

Posted by: Ghostship | Oct 30 2017 13:51 utc | 28

36 messages last night today 27
tel aviver clean up crew benn in removing live organ dealing comments.
shirley the body parts of the people of syriana are important ye no
they must be as it is a billion dollar industry for israhell.

during 7 and 7 in london a portable mortuary was set up on the 6th
the day before the event
like jane stanley bbc 25mins before the 911 event

things often happen before the incidents happen
that is the way satanists roll init

word deletion is anti semetic and ask a nazi like

Posted by: charles drake | Oct 30 2017 14:04 utc | 29

Khan Shaykhun or al-Rashideen ?

Syria's Extremist Opposition
How Western Media Have Whitewashed the Rebels' Record

Posted by: Virgile | Oct 30 2017 14:17 utc | 31

@AriusArmenian #4

Yup. Exactly! And on ALL issues. The acceptability and ease of a blatantly and demonstrably false narrative on Syria can only suggest, with cause, the same mechanism elsewhere.

Posted by: ritzl | Oct 30 2017 17:00 utc | 32

A while back, I tried, admittedly not very hard because of the obvious one-sided agitprop of the original report on Ghouta, to find the make-up of the "Mechanism." No luck. If anyone can point to WHO constitutes the "Mechanism" that would be great.

I assume it's some sort of committee led and staffed (funded?) by interventionists.

Posted by: ritzl | Oct 30 2017 17:07 utc | 33

what a shitty blog this is,
are you still trying to spread your RT misinformation
you russians are disgusting people

Posted by: moonofretardstoday | Oct 31 2017 2:58 utc | 34

@33 ritzl.. here is a quote from a reuters article from aug 17 2017.. "Determining blame for the use of chemical weapons is the task of a separate United Nations-OPCW mission in Syria, the Joint Investigative Mechanism, established in 2015. A spokesman for the Joint Investigative Mechanism referred questions to the OPCW." here is a wikipedia page on that here...

@34 moa retard.. explain what is going on in this 6 minute video.. are they suffering from a chemical gas attack, or play acting??? who is financing this shit? some are too easily deceived.. some are not...

Posted by: james | Oct 31 2017 4:17 utc | 35

"In 10 such cases, patients appear to
have been admitted to a hospital 125 km away from Khan Shaykhun at 0700
hours while another 42 patients appear to have been admitted to a hospital 30
km away at 0700 hours. The Mechanism did not investigate these
discrepancies and cannot determine whether they are linked to any possible
staging scenario, or to poor recordkeeping in chaotic conditions."
It is amazing how many questions this part of the report raises.
First of all: How could admitting 10 patients to a hospital 125 km away from the incident create chaotic conditions at the hospital? Why were the first patients send to the most distant hospital? What were the diagnosis of those patients? What were their names and origin? Why isn't the hospital in question named?
All the same questions should be asked about the 42 patients that were send the hospital 30 km away.
It beggars belief that the Mechanism did not investigate these matters as it is obvious that if the time registrations are correct, then the whole narrative would be falsified if just one of the victims had been poisoned by sarin. It is also obvious that the origin of the victims matter greatly as khain Shakoun is hardly an important tourist destination.

Posted by: sven lystbak | Oct 31 2017 5:52 utc | 36

"Doc" Islam is still on Twitter. That guy has death written all over his face.

Posted by: James Graham | Oct 31 2017 6:05 utc | 37

@james 35

Thanks. Lead me here:

Currently lead by Mr. Edmund Mulet (Guatemala), former Chief of Staff (Chef de Cabinet) to Ban Ki Moon (Hmm.). No other names. Funded by the UNGA general fund. IDK. From that I guess one can read anything into his motivations but the staff is still opaque, and the investigative scope and conclusions are still skewed to dismiss Syrian government rebuttals early and easily.

Again thanks. I'll dig deeper.

Posted by: ritzl | Oct 31 2017 17:44 utc | 38

Here's what should be a funny video taken of the White Helmets staging their "collection of sarin gas evidence."

White Helmets film themselves collecting proof of Sarin attack in Khan Sheykhun, Syria | April of 2017

Posted by: Daniel | Oct 31 2017 22:00 utc | 39

Something is missing in the Walid translation of the video on Zerohedge; the guy says "everything we sent (us = Qatar+KSA, under the direction of Qatar, who was in charge of the logistics)went to Syria via Turkey, coordinated between the Turks, the Americans AND THE BROTHERS and whoever was there among the militaries at the border".

And now this one,

Posted by: Mina | Nov 1 2017 10:05 utc | 40

The comments to this entry are closed.