An MIT professor who debunked Obama’s 2013 claims of a chemical attack in Syria has now destroyed the Trump administration’s narrative blaming the Assad government for the April 4 chemical weapons attack.
On Tuesday, the White House released a declassified intelligence brief accusing Syrian President Assad of ordering and organizing the attack, in which Syrian planes allegedly dropped chemical ordnance on civilians in the rebel-held town.
BYPASS THE CENSORS
Sign up to get unfiltered news delivered straight to your inbox.
While many experts questioned the White House narrative, pointing out the dubiousness of the claims, MIT Professor Theodore Postol is the first chemical weapons expert to analyze the declassified intelligence brief – and his verdict is damning.
The report “contains absolutely no evidence that this attack was the result of a munition being dropped from an aircraft,” wrote the MIT chemical weapons expert, who reviewed it and put together a 14-page assessment, which was published on Wednesday
“I believe it can be shown, without doubt, that the document does not provide any evidence whatsoever that the US government has concrete knowledge that the government of Syria was the source of the chemical attack in Khan Shaykhun,” wrote Postol.
There is no doubt a chemical attack with a nerve agent did occur, he said, but the available evidence does not support the US government’s conclusions.
“I have only had a few hours to quickly review the alleged White House intelligence report. But a quick perusal shows without a lot of analysis that this report cannot be correct,” Postol wrote.
“Any competent analyst would have had questions about whether the debris in the crater was staged or real,” he wrote. “No competent analyst would miss the fact that the alleged sarin canister was forcefully crushed from above, rather than exploded by a munition within it.”
Instead, “the most plausible conclusion is that the sarin was dispensed by an improvised dispersal device made from a 122mm section of rocket tube filled with sarin and capped on both sides.”
Which is interesting, considering the fact that the CIA purchased hundreds of Iraqi chemical weapons in 2005 including Borak rockets, the tubes of which are 122mm. This fact was widely reported by mainstream media last year.
With the amount of evidence we have that the Obama/Clinton administration were working hand-in-hand with the rebels (Al-Qaeda and ISIS) in Syria, the question must be asked – which is more likely, the White House approved narrative (that Assad gassed his own people, despite the fact it would do his cause nothing but harm) or, whisper it, the rebels in Syria used CIA-purchased chemical weapons to create a false flag and trick Trump into helping them topple Assad?
"[al-Quada] is on our side in Syria"–email from policy advisor to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (Feb 2012) https://t.co/Jq5FDgD2hr pic.twitter.com/k6hIk68nvC
— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) April 12, 2017
“We again have a situation where the White House has issued an obviously false, misleading and amateurish intelligence report,” Theodore Postol concluded, recalling the 2013 situation when the Obama administration claimed Assad had used chemical weapons against the rebels in Ghouta, near Damascus.
“What the country is now being told by the White House cannot be true,” Postol wrote, “and the fact that this information has been provided in this format raises the most serious questions about the handling of our national security.”