Warning

Warning: This site contains images and graphic descriptions of extreme violence and/or its effects. It's not as bad as it could be, but is meant to be shocking. Readers should be 18+ or a mature 17 or so. There is also some foul language occasionally, and potential for general upsetting of comforting conventional wisdom. Please view with discretion.

Sunday, December 26, 2021

Patrick Hilsman's Pro-War Syria Conspiracy Theories at Counterpunch

December 26, 2021

Apologies for being incredibly slow with blog posts (and everything else) lately. I still have some amazing information to develop and share, but it seems like a lull where I'm waiting for something, maybe internal or external, to say it's finally time. But it seems I have now avoided zero posts in all December, after just 2 in November. 

In that vein, I may be saying more later about "journalist" Patrick Hilsman and his background. For now - carpe diem - I'll focus just on what he says, now at the long-esteemed progressive, anti-war site CounterpunchConspiracy Theories and Tragedy in Douma, Syria, Part One was published December 5, initially behind a paywall but now freely viewable. Someone may have noticed it's not fit to be premium content one pays to read. 

Hilsman has previously been published at the Intercept, Vice News, The Daily Beast, Vocativ, Syria Deeply, BBC, etc.. At this blog, I've covered his appearance on The Young Turks questioning the reporting of Aaron Maté on the April, 2018 Douma alleged chemical attack, and the related findings of OPCW veteran inspector Ian Henderson, who led the Fact-Finding Mission's initial engineering study regarding that incident. That had found the terrace damage associated with the attack was most likely caused by explosive weaponry rather than the impact of a gas cylinder, which in turn seemed to be manually placed next to that mismatching damage. That's not the one shown in the inset image, but Henderson had serious points against that one as well. Of course his findings were excluded from public OPCW reports, a decision Hilsman endorses. 

At that link, I show Henderson's view to be correct, in great detail; all 4 inner walls of the terrace and at least 3 walls of the room below are marked with obvious, if oddly-spaced, primary and secondary fragmentation marks that can only emanate from about where that cylinder was shown, and the corner it would have impacted first. Cratering at the impact site, spalling across the ceiling below, and some reinforcing bar broken and bent in past 90 degrees, with other bars left intact and passed around, further suggest a blast wave with shrapnel, not a falling gas cylinder that was barely even dented (while its aerial harness was inexplicably stripped off and separately flattened), and then couldn't even fall through the hole it allegedly made.  

Part 2 may revisit Hilsman's dispute with Henderson and reality but will surely cover how he also disagrees with the OPCW's first-consulted toxicology experts; he's certain the chlorine in that cylinder caused the 35 seemingly sudden deaths we were shown, whereas the experts were almost as sure that could not be the case. That might improve on the points he's raised on TYT and elsewhere, but is bound to be absurd. If it ever appears, I should and might cover it here as well. 

For now I'll address part 1, which focuses on the 2018 Russian press conference with Douma locals, including the boy Hassan Diab, where it was claimed there was no chemical attack, on the staged hospital scene Diab as seen in, and its relation to the alleged chlorine attack and fatalities at what the OPCW calls "Location 2." 

Exposing Russian-Syrian Conspiracy to Manipulate Witnesses 

Hilsman decided the witnesses at the "surreal" Russian press conference at the OPCW headquarters in The Hague were "held" - and not just hosted - at a Russian military base, in "frightening" circumstances and almost surely compelled to lie. As reader Andrew put it in a recent comment. the gist is "they used a "military facility" to coerce a boy who by Hilsman's own admission hadn't been a victim of a chemical attack to say... he wasn't in a chemical attack." AFP photo via BBC: note in video footage the total lack of redness in the boy's eyes. This detail has always agreed with his testimony on that point.


Hilsman worries other Russian-held witnesses may have been murdered, maybe when they refused to lie on command; "Russia had promised to produce a far greater number of witnesses to back up claims that were ultimately never substantiated, raising further questions about the location and safety of the witnesses who never showed up. " He theorizes conspiracies that don't even make sense, in the service of dismissing eyewitness evidence and sticking it to "conspiracy theorists" who, by and large, do make sense.

Exposing Lies About What Riam Dalati Said

Hilsman's major thrust involves the findings of BBC Middle East producer/editor Riam Dalati - on seeing two dead children arranged for a photo published as a "last hug" staged photo "expressed disgust on Twitter." "Dalati felt that opposition activists were manipulating the optics of a real tragedy for more emotive images." In a similar vein, Hilsman suggests, Dalati "would eventually come out on record that despite the reality of the Douma chlorine attack, there was evidence that Jaysh Al Islam had staged the hospital chaos to create a more evocative scene for international media." Dalati announced this in February 2019, following on 6 months of investigation. "Dr. Abu Bakr Hanan, a “brute and shifty” doctor affiliated with Jaysh al-Islam" was one of those filming the hospital scene rather than helping, he revealed. "Will keep the rest for later," he said, but these findings still haven't been published, going on 3 years later (via Brandon Tuberville). 

It all caused some sensation, with many skeptics and knee-jerk critics eager to hear a trusted BBC editor admitting something in Douma was staged. Many suggested and some sloppily claimed Dalati had found the whole event was a fraud. Hilsman decries how those tweets "have been endlessly misread and misquoted by conspiracy theorists who, unlike Dalati, claim the attack itself was staged." He notes Dalati's "public rebukes and explicit insistence that the attack indeed took place," and was presumably the sole cause of the 43 reported deaths. But it should be noted he's a BBC news employee, not a chemical weapons investigator who actually understands what makes sense and what doesn't. 

Hilsman shows the Gray Zone's Max Blumenthal for an example (tweet), but I've seen clearer ones (e.g. ZeroHedge via MintPress, and see my take; what Dalati found is "evidence" for the whole attack being staged, to Max, myself, and others). And he suggests Blumenthal's cohort Aaron Maté  - who has read and reported extensively on the subject - did the same, but without bothering to name him: "a Canadian reporter would repeat the bewildered lie that the attack itself had been staged." 

But "repeating" the "lie" he just explained is not what Aaron did. The linked tweet is a short video he made IN Douma: "the site of a major atrocity & pro-war deception: the massacre of civilians by insurgents to frame Syria’s government — a crime covered up the OPCW along w/ US-UK-France." He mentions Dalati's finding in its proper context along with other reasons, and adds now, at my request "I’ve always stressed that Dalati only says the hospital was staged (while sitting on his findings [Thinking face]). Me staying the scene at the apartment is staged is based on the suppressed OPCW findings & open source material showing zero evidence of a CW attack & ample evidence of staging." And he explained at the time, in a second tweet: "I believe, but don't know for sure, that the insurgents killed these victims. It's remotely possible that they died some other way & that the insurgents then used their bodies to stage the scene. Key point is that OPCW's probe into what actually happened was censored." Unless he's lying about his beliefs, that means he didn't issue any lie, repeated, bewildered, or otherwise.

Refuting Lies About the Attack Timeline 

Maybe not a crucial point but well worth including was how "Conspiracy theorists have additionally claimed the hospital footage was filmed before the attack itself," while the bodies at Location 2 "had been filmed hours earlier" than the hospital scene. He allows that some on video may have been victims of the chlorine attack "which had killed civilians at a block of flats earlier," but they would be rather slow cases, and "many" of those seen, if not all of them, were instead "sheltering from conventional bombing in the chaos following" the alleged attack. It's unclear why people would be shouting chlorine and hosing down kids on video "hours" after that incident, but he cites "chaos," and that can explain just about anything to a mind like Hilsman's.

I don't recall seeing this claim that "the hospital footage was filmed before the attack itself" from any "conspiracy theorists," but it's likely someone has argued that, come to think of it. I'm a bit hazy on such claims, and unsure about the details, and so far, I haven't seen reason to question the FFM's final report S/1731 on this point; "Shortly after 19:00, 10 to 20 patients, including children and adults, arrived in groups at the emergency department of Douma Hospital covered in dust and with blackened faces." This refers to the same scene and probably means just after the attack around 7:30 PM, or also put as "shortly after 19:00." That's not before the attack, but it's not hours after it either.

And according to the FFM, the first "images depicting decedents" at Location 2 "were taken between 22:00 and 23:00 on 7 April." NYT had a time stamp of 10:06 PM on what seems to be the first video at location 2, and it seems all other imagery is contemporaneous or later. The signs suggest the victims died around 7:30 or not much earlier, but they were never seen until some 2.5 hours after the hospital scene, not hours before it. 

It's during this time, I suspect, the 35-43 corpses were transported from the gas chamber(s) where they were killed, probably via Jaysh al-Islam's tunnel system that opened less than two blocks away from to Location 2. This time span does not even exist in Hilsman's mind. 

It's not clear where he picked up this confusion. Most likely he just learned thetwo events were hours apart and then forgot which came first. By way of explanation, he says the FFM and all of us "can be contradicted by following a simple timeline of the available evidence," linking to an article about the 2013 Ghouta attack. Yeah, he's confused.

Exposing Russian-Led Incident Conflation 

OK, so the conspiracy theorists messed up the timeline to push their lies, Hilsman said while doing that himself, conflating incidents year apart. Another thing he says they did, with the Russians and Syrians leading, is to conflate that fake hospital scene and the real chlorine attack just a few hours apart to suggest both had been staged. 

"Subsequent international coverage of the incident gave the impression that the panicked civilians filmed at the underground hospital were all victims of the chlorine attack, which had killed civilians at a block of flats earlier when in reality many were sheltering from conventional bombing in the chaos following the chlorine strike. This confusion has been at the center of Russian and Assad regime attempts to obfuscate guilt for the crime."

"...conspiracy theorists have since taken the surreal moment as evidence that witnesses testified that the White Helmets had staged the attack, a notion which clearly originates with the Syrian and Russian diplomats, and not the witnesses, many of whom had been spotted at the hospital as opposed to the block of flats where the attack actually occurred. As an aforementioned BBC producer mentioned, this is why Russia chose to focus on the hospital and not the block of flats where the attack actually occurred."

So Hilsman would urge you not to confuse the two, as the Russians and Syrians want you to do. He echoes the BBC's Riam Dalati, who said "no one knew what really happened at the flats apart from activists manipulating the scene there. This is why Russia focused solely on discrediting the hospital scene." It's the only part they knew much about. 

It's curious then how the little girl Masa is one of those seen at the hospital. She and her mother Amani claim to have been next door to the chlorine release (along with sister Malaz, father Diaa, and an uncle), where just 3 people out of 75 sheltering died. As reported, they suffered instant foaming, paralysis, and unconsciousness that chlorine doesn't actually cause, but were lucky enough to hear the sound from the neighboring roof (Masa grinningly recalls hearing the gas cylinder's valve open with "feeesh" sound), allowing them to break the paralysis or something. The neighbors - she thinks - could only smell it killing them horribly for probably over an hour, so had no choice but to stay inexplicably frozen and endure it (aside from at least Naser Hanan who says he heard it pop from the basement, and also managed to escape. It remains unclear what the dead did or didn't hear). 

And so Masa and kin survived while "everyone" next door died (except of course the 5+ miracle survivors on record, none of whom they bumped into?) and then, we're to believe, they sought treatment amid that staged scene Hilsman thinks happened hours later. Just as with Hassan Diab who was in no gas attack, little Masa is all wet but has no hint of redness in her eyes, even if her backpack really did reek of bleach etc. a week later.


And so these folks at least were at both scenes, allegedly - the staged one, and the disputed one - adding to the confusion the Syrians and Russians supposedly invented as the linchpin of their denials. 

On the Masa/Amani story, see a prior post on that which centered on "shelter confusion" that has been mostly resolved (it doesn't seem they claimed their own building was impacted, as it had initially read), but the post still needs updated to reflect that. The story is still highly implausible.

Side-note: Masa et al blamed falling barrel in one day's worth of interviews on April 16, then went quiet as others spoke up; clean-shaven young men claiming to have survived from Location 2 itself, after losing close family. These later witnesses did not, as far as I know, appear at that hospital scene, though one was named Naser Hanan (any relation to Dr Abu Bakr Hanan?). These would variously blame no one or even blame Jaysh al-Islam and the White Helmets for a different but implausible scenario where people lived there and died from the gas with the same instant foam, paralysis, and loss of consciousness, among other shifting, dubious or impossible details (see here). 

Ignoring all eyewitness accounts - even those at the Russian press conference, those interviewed by Robert Fisk, etc., and focusing on the physical evidence as available, I still propose a third option put well enough by a certain Canadian journalist as "the massacre of civilians by insurgents to frame Syria’s government." 

Covering for the Possible Perps 1: JaI, Narrative Kidnappers 

Jaysh al-Islam (hereafter JaI, meaning "Army of Islam," and formerly Liwa (banner of) al-Islam), a Saudi-backed extremist militia that for years dominated the Damascus suburbs, are the prime alternate suspects for the Douma massacre, as well as for the 2013 Ghouta chemical massacre. They come in for some criticism and something Hilsman seems to couch as balance.

"Zahran Alloush’s gangs, who terrorized the population, paraded Allawi hostages in cages, kidnapped opposition activists, dismantled revolutionary organizations, and used civilian hostages as slave labor to dig tunnel fortifications. ... The ruthlessness with which Jaysh al Islam had tried to seize control of narratives, even those which painted the regime in a terrible light, is hardly surprising"

Their legendary brutality and seizing of civilians on sectarian grounds and freely abusing them makes JaI prime suspects for ... staging a hospital scene "hours later," to kidnap just a narrative. To Hilsman, it doesn't make them suspects for anything worse, because he's already decided the Syrian government is to blame for dropping that chlorine cylinder on people no one held prisoner. 

Explaining further, Hilsman noted how JaI "had kidnapped activists involved with the very organizations that had documented the 2013 East Ghouta Sarin attack after all." And they presumably killed the "Douma four," as threatened by JaI founder Alloush long before the December, 2013 kidnapping JaI denied but never investigated, and considering the activists never re-appeared except as traces within JaI prisons. 

And the "Violations Documentation Center" (VDC) they ran from Douma didn't even find the truth of the Ghouta incident (or didn't report it). It was some researchers including myself who earlier this year found - by a unique combination of rocket ballistics and video evidence - Jaysh al-Islam or allies carried out that sarin rocket attack from a spot only they could access. This adds to prior findings for a managed massacre; for example, the hundreds of victims seen don't appear to have died from sarin as alleged, and at least one who survived a gassing, probably with Carbon Monoxide, had his throat cut in between videos at an insurgent-run "clinic" in Kafr Batna, with clear signs the site's basement was used as a gas chamber to kill some 85+ people there. 

Hilsman, among others, has tried weakly to deny this latest evidence, without finding any significant errors or alternate explanations. (his bit: I was a "ghoul" collaborating with an "Israeli tech firm" and we were wrong, obviously)

Consider also how days after Douma, as part of the surrender deal, Jaysh al-Islam released their civilian captives who remained alive, and it was only about 200 of them; some 3,000 were just unaccounted for, quite possibly killed to stage events like the Ghouta and Douma chemical massacres. And note that some 1/3 or more of the identified victims in Douma are probably related by blood or marriage to a prominent opponent of JaI, Mohammad Dyab Bakryieh, founder of the Douma Martyr's Brigade that would launch a failed rebellion against JaI in 2015. 

Two extremist, sectarian "civil society leaders" in Douma - Abu Omar Burkhush and "Abu Azzoun" - helped manage the largest collection of bodies in the 2013 massacre (top images below), using dead babies to damn the "Nusayri (Alawite) regime." It seems they did the same in 2018; the two still swore in a 2019 interview with Turkish TRT World that the attack used sarin and actually killed 187 people, whom they personally helped recover from "bunkers." Oddly, early reports had running totals that stopped about the same - 180-200 killed by the sarin attack, before reverting with poor explanation to "more than" a confirmed 42, later decided as 43. These two guys seem to know what they're talking about. But where were the other 144 people killed, and where was that "sarin" released and how? They probably know this as well, but don't say.  


So why in 2018 would these monsters with Jaysh al-Islam stage a scene relating to the Douma chemical massacre but NOT arrange the whole false-flag massacre (if there were one)? They were perhaps the only party capable of that, and there's much evidence suggesting it happened; the apparent staging of bodies at Location 2, the concealment of their true manner and place of death, peripheral staging like the hospital scene, etc. And finally, note that JaI-affiliated activists reportedly controlled the scene of Location 2, preventing anyone else from accessing it or witnessing their manipulations. The mentioned VDC reported on April 9 "Jaish Al-Islam also made it difficult to hold independent investigation and documentation of the site yesterday and tried to bar witnesses from documenting and photographing any evidence." 

Dalati: "I can tell you that Jaysh al-Islam ruled Douma with an iron fist. They coopted activists, doctors and humanitarians with fear and intimidation." They also used the more enduring method of actual ideological sympathy - maybe that's why so few have spoken up even after JaI's threats grew less credible.

Covering for the Perps 2: Exposing the Lie of Body Planting

"Over 40 bodies were found in a single block of flats" as Hilsman puts it. It was reported as 35, with 34 seen and one pregnant, and for an accepted 43 deaths, some 8-9 died in another location no one has ever specified. Otherwise, so far so good.

Some have noted the various clues of staging here besides the hospital, including: several victims are seen to have no dust on their feet from walking to these spots - those outside include one on a stretcher, one seemingly set to be carried in when the work was halted, 2 others laid as if ready (or do you read all that backwards, with bodies carried out dustless feet first?) - those inside are often piled or strangely posed near entrances or the stairs only to the second floor, as if they were too heavy to carry further - a door had to be taken off its hinges for the victims to gain desperate access to a room just inches above the street-level gas they had just run BACK inside to escape (and they're educated to get above such gas, as Hilsman has emphasized, not to stay level with it and just lay there) ... and around the corner from that door, bodies piled on a single rug someone had dragged to the shower, where the corpses all had their faces and hair washed, long after death and shortly before images were allowed. Someone left wet dingy rags and a removed respirator, as if to protect from fumes the people put off. Etc. 

Hisman has a partial answer in "a detail which has been erroneously seized upon by conspiracy theorists who claim the moving of bodies was proof of the bodies having been planted outright." As he claims with no explanation, corpses were moved around some only because of "the first responders on the scene who checked the corpses for signs of life," and not for any nefarious reason. 

Their faces were and hair were washed to check for signs of life? This girl (below) was being checked for signs of life around 1 am by this White Helmets member, was incidentally photographed, striking a poignant note, and was then left atop the pile of bodies at that rescuer's feet? (victim code: G10 - see mapping and analysis)


This older girl was moved half a flight of stairs down to check for signs of life? This new position was seen in 2 new videos released just this year (see here), claiming to show the 2013 Ghouta attack, but showing later scenes of the 2018 one, in the early morning around dawn, it seems. 

Here she's next to another girl just above the second floor, matching better with Khaled Abu Jafaar's prior claim of carrying a girl under each arm when he collapsed on his third dash down the stairs (Al-Jazeera). But she was still on the landing at 10 PM, some 2.5 hours after the alleged attack. (victim codes: G1, G2)

This woman's wedding ring was stolen as they checked for signs of life? (deduced as W1, face left-side-down in brown fluid next to similar-looking W2, as seen earlier w/ring vs. flat, brown face seen later, moved from empty original spot onto a rug a feet away, posed in a near-hug with a relocated G5, and with no ring)

So there are the noted clues for planting, several bodies moved between videos, photo ops and some valuables taken, and ... The head of a team of German toxicology experts consulted by the OPCW's FFM in June, 2018, was more circumspect than the non-expert Mr. Hilsman. As the meeting summary put it, upon seeing imagery of those killed, the chief expert felt they COULD have died in a real chemical attack OR, seeing how that made little sense with just the chlorine found, the body array could be a "propaganda exercise." In the opinion of one employee who had been at the meeting and heard the fuller explanation, that suspicion was "fueled by" by how the deaths "do not match chlorine rather than corpses arranged for propaganda purposes." This chief expert theorized a possible conspiracy, citing the visual evidence and his own expert analysis, as sought by the OPCW. This isn't some Russian-inspired internet troll twisting Dalati's words. 

https://wikileaks.org/opcw-douma/document/actual_toxicology_meeting_redacted/

https://wikileaks.org/opcw-douma/document/correctly_redacted_emails_re_toxicology_minutes/

OPCW response: the FFM leadership erased that expert consultation from their process and replaced it with another one months later, which also failed to link chlorine to the deaths, but probably did so differently, with less conspiracy theorizing, and maybe with strategically narrow lines of questioning, etc. No details have been clarified. Hilsman ignorantly endorses all this, and supports that with a baseless assumption; the insurgents and thair allies didn't stage any corpse propaganda... except a little bit. Mainly, they were just hoping there was still someone they could save. They didn't kill anyone, or help to launder such.

Side-note: Having found no one alive, Hilsman writes, the would-be rescuers "left the cameras rolling as they opened the eyes of some of the victims to record the burning of their corneas," which would result from chlorine exposure. But this scene was filmed the next morning outside the underground hospital, FWIW, alongside that "last hug" image. And they failed to show any corneal burning, which always involves redness (as was noted above as lacking at the staged hospital scene). These people just show postmortem clouding of the sclera and zero redness, which is odd considering the other signs of caustic gas exposure and resultant pulmonary edema. It doesn't seem the German experts brought this up, but it's true, maybe too obvious to see. This oddity seems related to the very unusual pattern of yellow-brown staining and/or irritation seen on the faces of most or all the visible fatalities (and on none of the alleged survivors) that excludes the eyes in a perfectly goggle-shaped zone. This weird discoloration in turn probably explains the unusual - and failed - efforts to wash those stains off their faces before the video propaganda commenced. For a long time now I've had more to say on this aspect, and that remains so now. Don't stay tuned, but be ready to tune back in for that.

Monitor on Massacre Marketing: Douma's Mask of Death, part 1 (libyancivilwar.blogspot.com)

Conclusion: No Rogue Precog 
So Hilsman ... disagrees with the German toxicologists consulted by the FFM, with the FFM's original engineering sub-team, and the FFM's timeline of events, though he'll be correcting the last point. And feels the conspiracy theorists should defer as he does to the FFM investigation only as it came out in the end - he agrees with OPCW leadership and the governments corrupting it, including France and the US (the two he identifies most with), the UK, Israel and Saudi Arabia, and also with Jaysh al-Islam - if not on every detail each has offered. 

He poses as "rogue precog" - I think - for defying early US calls for an Assad chlorine-sarin attack, with an early guess that it was an Assad chlorine attack with no sarin, rather than an insurgent massacre covered by a staged/fabricated sarin-then-chlorine attack. He issued that call April 11, just a week after the incident - even before the sarin claims had completely fallen apart (link, and see below). As a recent tweet to me shows, he's still proud of being "right when the US government was lying to the press" - along with the White Helmets and others Hilsman would never accuse of lying - and he's still a bit too eager to prove that he "doesn’t give a shit what the US gov thinks." The fairly random reasoning behind his lucky guess was explained on TYT (something about hardened bunkers etc. made it obvious to him, tactically - I'd have to review to clarify that). Others like former US Secret Service man Dan Kaszeta already had some cause to back off sarin claims, and may have informed Patrick's views (see below). April 12 Hilsman said the same to HRW's Ken Roth, adding "I'm not qualified to make that determination but this is what independent exerts [sic] are hinting at." 

Coincidentally, the sarin claims were falling apart for everyone, and soon unspecified US officials came to the Hague, on the 4th of July, and told OPCW they were investigating an Assad chlorine attack (see below), against much of the evidence they had gathered up to then. Soon the OPCW reformed its probe and more easily found what US officials suggested, "confirming" Hilsman and his bit of supposed anti-establishment psychic inference.

A real rogue precog might, for example, see Obama issue his "red line" threat/offer on August 20, 2012, or miss that and notice him repeating it on December 3, and then start watching for false flag allegations of Assad CW use, and see them appear starting 3 days later. That would be me, over here. But Pat came up with the phrase. It's neat.

Here as before, Patrick Hilsman promotes hostile propaganda to underpin unjust war, sanctions, etc. while posing as pro-truth and anti-war. He claims to be pro-science while failing to get it - on this front anyway - and second-guessing everyone who does get it. He claims to be anti-authority while constantly appealing to authority and generally conforming to it. He signals liberal virtues while assisting the world's most powerful bloc of nations and interests to weaken or eliminate opposition, crush dissent and impose their global profit and control agenda as uniformly as possible. He's a type we know all too well, and one worth knowing a bit better.  

35 comments:

  1. Witnesses at the hospital scene - I think there is only the CBS "neighbor"

    https://youtu.be/2m_gpBch0Fs?t=53

    https://www.facebook.com/Douma.Revolution.2011/videos/1739292736151634/
    (not sure if second link works as it wants me to login, 16s video where the man appears to be dribbling)

    Perhaps someone could clarify whether it is only lack of opportunity that stops JaI or others manufacturing an entire attack for "maximum effect" or some unwritten rule that they're only allowed to lie a bit? And maybe clarify how far things can be moved before it becomes suspicious - next room.. next street? And if those things might be covered in nerve agent?

    Worth noting that Arwa Damon is sticking her nose into that backpack in a 15 April video - before it was ever confirmed that there was no sarin.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hard to see how anybody could be seriously interested in what happened while claiming victims wouldn't recognise that the building was full of chlorine gas concentrated enough to kill 40+ people.

    Or how anyone could be serious while inventing victims or survivors not mentioned in any FFM witness interviews or other bodies not collected and prepared for burial by the White Helmets (FFM 2.10, 8.67, 8.74, 9.5), claiming FFM expert observations are wrong (8.96) and that victims died "stuck in the crowd".

    Or seriously claiming that victims 'couldn't go outside' when we have a tweet with timestamp 8:02pm (people already affected, made it to the hospital and chlorine gas reported), Hanan saying he was sat in the street, FFM 8.63 by 9pm and even Amani saying the neighbours were out in the street (although there isn't much evidence of what she claims).

    ReplyDelete
  3. https://twitter.com/PatrickHilsman/status/1476211209942839297

    So a "conspiracy theory" that the US presentation was to try and influence and represented the US position. A presentation that has literally no other purpose

    The position being that any chemical attack justifies strikes on CW facilities because it shows willingness to use and by extension develop CW

    Or he thinks no such meeting happened in which case he needs to argue it with Mayday podcast's 'anonymous Leon'

    https://twitter.com/PatrickHilsman/status/1476197138820390914


    "He thinks that means I have the timeline backwards cause he’s confused footage time w attack time."

    Hilsman article - "the much grislier scene that had been filmed hours earlier at Location 2"

    The hosing was filmed at the time of the panic

    Higgins doesn't understand that either (or just doesn't read Hilsman's crap articles)?

    ReplyDelete
  4. I see his audience/supporters/whatever haven't even watched the videos.

    Probably all too much of a struggle when Hislman apparently doesn't understand the difference between earlier and later, high ground and ground floor, official gov. position and anonymous newspaper quote, doesn't know the testimony, doesn't know they can light somewhere up with a phone etc. etc.

    Maybe Hilsman is just a liar, jackass and a waste of time - like Bellingcat being 'unable' to measure Mr Henderson's diagrams properly or understand his (unbiased western university) simulations

    ReplyDelete
  5. Just to stress not because "Leon" isn't a liar, more to get their lies on the same page. Director General Arias says "Leon" is a liar and I agree -

    https://www.un.org/press/en/2021/sc14540.doc.htm

    "Turning to a BBC Sounds podcast from November 2020, which featured an interviewee named Leon, [DG Arias] emphasized that the OPCW Secretariat does not know any such person and did not authorize any staff members to speak with the broadcaster."

    ReplyDelete
  6. https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/04/17/how-social-media-built-the-case-for-trumps-strike-on-syria/

    "Before the U.S. airstrikes, NBC News cited two unidentified officials claiming Washington has obtained smuggled blood and urine samples from a victim in Douma that show traces of poisoning by chlorine and a nerve agent.

    But the U.S. assessment, released immediately after the U.S.-led missile strikes, did not include that specific claim, citing only unspecified information indicating that sarin may have been used.

    U.S. Defense Secretary James Mattis, meanwhile, voiced uncertainty during his Friday press briefing over the use of sarin, saying, “We are not clear on that yet.”

    “We’re very confident that chlorine was used,” he added. “We are not ruling out sarin right now.”"

    but Hilsman thinks

    https://twitter.com/PatrickHilsman/status/1476972283344347139

    "Nerve Agents was the sole justification presented"

    Oh dear.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Official link about how targets were chosen-

    https://www.defense.gov/News/Transcripts/Transcript/Article/1493658/briefing-by-secretary-mattis-on-us-strikes-in-syria/


    "I'd like to address how this evening's strike were qualitatively and quantitatively different than 2017."

    "This evening we conducted strikes with two allies on multiple sites that will result in a long-term degradation of Syria's capability to research, develop and employ chemical and biological weapons"

    "We chose these targets because they were specifically associated with the chemical program, the Syrian chemical program"

    "SEC. MATTIS: Yes, we're very confident that chlorine was used. We are not ruling out sarin right now."

    ReplyDelete
  8. https://twitter.com/PatrickHilsman/status/986368923733037057

    Hilsman's theory is -Firas Abdullah denounced Jaish al Islam therefore everyone hated them (even though searching in Arabic shows people calling them "Mujahideen"...)

    But Abdullah doesn't seem to mention JaI until after he has left Douma.. at least I can't find any mention of them as criminals (or جيش الإسلام). Was this something he and presumably others couldn't do until they were no longer under JaI control?

    I'm not finding much evidence of the White Helmets denouncing the crimes of JaI either, no mention on their twitter or e.g.
    https://reliefweb.int/report/syrian-arab-republic/syrias-white-helmets-seek-help-saving-civilians-suffering-eastern-ghouta
    Has it ever happened?

    Hilsman ignores that the 'chemical attack' was literally JaI's excuse for having to surrender to save "civilians" so actually quite 'convenient' for them..

    https://web.archive.org/web/20200207014837/http://nedaa-sy.com/en/reports/163

    "What is behind the establishment of new camps of Jaish al-Islam in the north?

    Hamza Bairkdar ["spokesman for the Army Staff"]: At the beginning it must be remembered that our exit from the eastern Ghouta imposed on us and it was not a choice, our choice was to resist the Russian campaign until the targeting of civilians with chemical weapons which claimed the lives and wounded hundreds, so we decided to go to the north of Syria."

    .. but unlike Bhatti (at the time anyway), Hilsman does actually criticize JaI..

    https://twitter.com/PatrickHilsman/status/1257025177818406914

    ..although he also calls people "Shabiha" and thinks his camera is a "weapon".

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. + probably relevant here, Hilsman's one single example of an 'anti-JaI activist' is the same person that uploaded the "last hug"

      https://archive.vn/5xMiM

      Delete
    2. Having scrolled through all of Firas Abdullah's tweets and the links that actually worked and aren't paywalled, including...

      WION, BBC Newsnight, Catapult Magazine, Bild, the BBC again (about how the "regime" will definitely kill him), TRT (on 8 April about how the "central hospital" was "out of service"), a Bulgarian article, Sky News, NYT, TV2, Bright Magazine, the Syria Campaign disconnect-athon Q&A, Buzzfeed ("The people here have solidarity with the rebels. The rebels are defending the civilians here".. whoops?)...

      Before leaving Douma, FA only mentions Jaish al Islam in *one* tweet or link and not in relation to any crimes

      https://twitter.com/firasabdullah_/status/946661758348988416


      Also refers to Russia designating "moderate" groups "terrorist" here-

      https://twitter.com/firasabdullah_/status/779813657052061696

      https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-mideast-crisis-syria-sanctions-idUKKCN0XO2BL


      So Hilsman's best example of an activist who 'hates JaI' and would then surely witness and report any of their crimes.. is someone whose twitter and interviews never mentioned said crimes once and even said that people were in "solidarity" with them.

      Delete
  9. Great stuff, Andrew. I had a few points, but they were minor. I did take up this point: https://twitter.com/CL4Syr/status/1476763243615961091

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The fact he replies about "attack time" when it's about comparing the times of two bits of video...

      But then when the '148cm' rubbish has made it onto Wikipedia when it can be debunked by someone with a ruler, perhaps there aren't many people to actually fact-check the mess that comes from Hilsman's crazy mind. Who then declares himself the 'winner' in a Trump-esque way and denies his own mistakes.

      Here is a strange thing-
      8.60 states the "Red Crescent" were unable to respond and 8.67 that people were "washed and assisted" at the "Red Crescent facility". But...

      https://twitter.com/SYRedCrescent/status/983002600101568514

      "The sub-branch of Syria Arab Red Crescent (SARC) in Douma was declared out of service on April 7th 2018" (what FA was *actually* referring to?)

      and a fact checking site has a quote-

      https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2018/apr/13/antiwarcom/syrian-red-crescent-did-not-deny-chemical-attack-d/

      "Neither the Syrian Arab Red Crescent nor the International Federation are in a position to confirm or deny any attack."

      How could this be they were "responding" to it and when people were "washed and assisted" by them?

      Delete
    2. It looks like pretty much everything was reported as out of service

      https://twitter.com/ZouhirAlShimale/status/982696551675039745

      but they were actually filming at Point One (which is also called (8.49) "Douma hospital" which would be strange if it isn't considered the "major hospital")

      Delete
  10. A bit depressing that it's now been two years since we went through the cylinder modelling/Ian Henderson report summary but people are still denying that his diagram is

    a) To scale

    b) Appears (and I've no doubt is in fact) accurate to FFM A.7.6

    c) The hole through to the room below being smaller than the outer crater dimensions is even backed up by Forensic Architecture's own attempts to measure from the room below (70cm!)
    https://imgur.com/a/az0R0GU

    d) Forensic Architecture and Bellingcat created garbage with 2 measurements that weren't even proportional (for just one example...)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Just to note the body of Mr Henderson's cylinder *is* 140x35 as shown in image above, all I did was scale it. The x axis is clear and measures 166cm (funnily enough). Your 148/9cm measurement is right if you then include the valve.

      Delete
    2. Also find it frustrating reading this kind of thing https://twitter.com/DaveDignity/status/1478357894101876738

      They are looking at the wrong Blender model instead of the first one that FA shared in 2019 (at least when I downloaded)
      https://imgur.com/lWbgE7A

      I think this blueprint image has been stretched by the way
      https://twitter.com/MichaKobs/status/1478349363558690819

      Quick and lazy measurement 1550=~428px and 350=~115px shows the proportions aren't right which is why it might look off. The measurements are the important bit, 155cm including cylinder cap would be about right.

      Delete
  11. A forensic pathologist wasn't needed after all, we have this guy who also "knows" "Russia" 'took the harness away at L2 (in the same way that while brown-nosing Hilsman they simply made up the 'pretext for strikes' instead of reading the unambiguous US briefing transcript).

    Unless it's Blender experts Forensic Architecture lecturing about autorefrigeration or Hilsman and Higgins talking about.. well, anything at all.. it's important to have an "appropriate background".

    Engineer Ian Henderson has "zero engineering background" because he can draw to scale as a "baseline configuration, for illustrative purposes". The previous tweet shows they haven't actually read Mr Henderson's report summary. Or the FFM expert assessment beneath A.7.6.

    Henderson should have noticed "weathering" at L2.. even though he never went to L2. And the inspectors who did go there found corrosion consistent with "natural factors" (8.16).


    Anyway, I have to concede that camera differences don't explain the colours at L4. Allowing for the filter AJ seem to put over everything, there are some clear spots on the blanket where the colour is in keeping with later videos:

    https://imgur.com/vdirwWp
    https://youtu.be/rBSguGHnA6o?t=1652

    Maybe a fine yellow/green dust that blows away by subsequent videos?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. https://twitter.com/PatrickHilsman/status/1479080369353859082

      "That rebar would have rusted"

      But not corroded at all when exposed to enough chlorine gas to kill >40 people? Not sure how they've come up with "not rusted" either

      https://youtu.be/GY-1vaY85fA?t=75
      https://youtu.be/S_WX10kqwbo?t=14

      But sure, why not. And when it suits them, the rebar will become the most corroded thing ever seen etc.

      For the bed, I think powder from the ceiling foam or maybe even cylinder paint by the way. Not 100% but I don't think that AJ shot was in the older videos

      Delete
    2. https://twitter.com/PatrickHilsman/status/1479089500265631744

      "the rebar would not experience autorefrigeration"

      ... amazing. Depending on whether you believe they ever so slightly pulled the cylinder backwards before setting fire to the room below, it's either practically resting on or just above the rebar isn't it?

      The clearest picture I've found is the one on page 53 FFM first draft or page 58 FFM final. But I'm not sure how anyone is meant to 'inspect' the state of it from those photos after the fire.

      Delete
    3. FFM 8.16 lists corrosion on "harness" - the inference being that the "corrosive substance" involved is the "molecular chlorine or hypochlorus acid" in 8.17 and 9.1

      Henderson (and BC/FA do not disagree on this) says the cylinder is attached to a "crude mild steel framework and fins".

      So presumably the steel rebar (in comparable proximity) at L2 would be affected by any water/chlorine/acid/melting ice etc. combination in the same way or is there some caveat with the particular type of steel?

      But then I'm also not sure why a huge coverup forcing everyone in Douma to say they don't know of any chemical attack (aside from a handful who appear to stay in the immediate vicinity of L2 who they *don't* force to say this) so journalists like Robert Fisk (who 'sneak off' as Borg did) can go anywhere, talking to anyone at random is more plausible than the few at/by L2 deliberately waiting there to be 'chance encounters'.

      Or why a great Russian plot is more plausible than some lowly soldier had to move the fins at L2 to be able to put the 'sniper screen' up seen in the photos, maybe throwing them off the building with all the other junk and broken windows as seen in the Panorama video.

      Or why moving some cylinders to another *declared* facility years after the examination is complete and 2 years after the final report has been issued provokes such faux outrage.

      Delete
    4. Or how the evidence could be 'hidden' in the apartments - one seen being hosed down by the White Helmets the other visibly cleaned up when journalists talk to Hanan.

      Also, not Douma related but if the Syrian gov. hands over a filled sarin IED and all sarin is supposedly made from the Syrian stockpile, how is this *not* an admission they've lost control of it?

      Delete
  12. I'd like to know what this is about
    https://twitter.com/KostjaMarschke/status/1480182302760132609

    "There will be more content on this issue."

    Bellingcat are surely not going to try again?

    Paul Blanc commented but they couldn't be bothered to actually quote him, use his name.. but not his words? Blanc was "incredulous" (if he had the actual details I don't believe this) but you'll just have to trust Bellingcat on that as Blanc can't just make his own public statement specific to the thick foam seen at Douma (not excessive salivation) for some reason. The victims don't *have* 2-4 hours.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I think it's crazy that every time chemicals are mentioned, the 'rebels' suddenly become one homogenous group that would be gassing "themselves" or "their own children".

    Dr Hazem was beyond lucky.. no point in going over that and Turkey reporting his samples as "Sarin gas, with cyanide and intensive chlorine" again. But there is also some contradiction with JIM #59 (and, of course, the Syrian government going above and beyond to corroborate White Helmet samples and also incriminate themselves thanks to 'their' anonymous volunteer).

    Looking back at the leaking Iraqi shell, was the NYT linking the dark colour directly with the "internal burning" - "Although sarin is described as colorless, a dark liquid was extracted, revealing signs of internal burning"?

    March 24 bubbling liquid being (FFM 5.14) "similar to water"- would actually match the river level being high at the time, the 'faded vegetation' looking like any other flood and being in the exact place the river used to be. Also, that would explain it lasting for "days"- maybe the river still flows underground, floods from the hills/irrigation ditches or similar.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I've been looking at the Ghouta LaI rocket videos and am not sure the 'paved' area matches. Doesn't appear to be paved and there seem to be 2 bushes(?) growing out of it - big enough to appear on the satellite photos.

    https://imgur.com/EX7G5Vh

    The shadow furthest left looks to be a square building of some kind, maybe a shed. Neither seem to be in the videos?

    Also, in general at least as far as I have seen, the electricity poles follow the roads (as might be expected)

    https://youtu.be/aSa_bLNOfSU?t=5954

    The field you've identified looks to have always been used for farming and considering the layout of the surrounding buildings, I can't see any good reason why they would put a pole in the middle of it. What purpose would it have?

    It might be explained (imho) by the large truck being parked on a second dirt road at a fork, the pole then one of a line running alongside.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Ha, so now the intent was "clear", a BC copied-from-that-other-list 'typo' and it is now "that had occurred earlier"..


    But relevant questions here -
    1. Is all 'foaming at the mouth' the same thing?
    2. What could explain the foam seen at Douma?
    3. How long would it take 2. to develop

    If 3 is longer than "instantly" and they accept NYT's 7:26 pm for the helicopters beginning to circle, "shortly after 19:00" would be before or, being really generous, at the same time as the attack. Not "earlier".


    https://www.amboss.com/us/knowledge/Gas_toxicity/

    "Acute low-dose exposure: excessive salivation"


    https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=4cLZAAAAQBAJ&pg=PA262&lpg=PA262#v=onepage&q&f=false

    "High enough concentrations may displace enough environmental oxygen to cause asphyxiation" "Chlorine is highly irritating .. Because of this, victims will attempt to leave the area quickly. Victims also will develop headache, excessive salivation"


    https://ksltv.com/415369/freak-accident-sends-dozens-to-hospital-for-chlorine-exposure-mostly-children/

    "Dr. Miller said it takes less chlorine to hurt a child. “It just takes less of the chlorine exposure to affect them as much, because of the smaller size of their lungs… and airways,” he said."

    - so considering this, 4. Would all victims have been equally affected at the same time?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. + even if you move the hospital timing somehow later, this would still put Douma Revolution at the right place to film to the 500+ supposed genuine casualties. Reported at 8:02pm, 8:03, 8:06 8:10 and 8:11. Red Crescent reported out of service hours earlier (5:48pm) https://twitter.com/shaamnews/status/982631179722649600 so it can not be true that people were washed/helped there instead.

      Delete
    2. Perhaps Bellingcat or whoever can actually do some investigative journalism.

      We also know that someone was there to film after 9pm, filming a grand total of 4 people

      https://youtu.be/rBSguGHnA6o?t=774

      FFM A.11.7 shows they have no media with metadata before around 9pm. If JaI and friends cannot move cylinders or bodies around without witnesses, why did no-one film the *hundreds* of people with the symptoms described in 8.56? How could they possibly miss that?

      Why do the children filmed *not* display those symptoms but go on to claim to have been neighbours and victims of the same chlorine gas cloud? Whatever anyone thinks about being filmed outside the Officer's Club, why ignore the fact that Hassan Diab has never displayed the symptoms listed in 8.56?

      8.69: "At approximately 22:30 on 7 April, first responders were notified of the presence of another yellow cylinder in a residential building" ... "A witness arrived at this location at approximately midnight on 7 April"

      If the witness arrived at midnight, who notified "first responders" an hour and a half earlier? Shouldn't this person be the witness?

      8.68 about another cylinder is expanded in the draft interim 7.26 "the FFM team could not corroborate this statement and found no evidence that this was the case".

      So why were people making up chlorine cylinders? Especially as some believe they are so heavy they cannot be moved and the bombing so terrible no-one could go out. Although someone carried them both out for the OPCW, L4 cylinder complete with harness attached but still..

      Delete
    3. I did think it might have been the same woman twice from the WH ambulance (with the editing) but it probably is two different people. Neither are wearing black as Amani was that night.

      Delete
    4. Amani (having first been knocked unconscious etc. etc.) -

      https://imgur.com/qA7xt8X

      Delete
    5. In the video Amani turns to walk towards her husband Diaa Mohammed

      https://imgur.com/iRpnZXr

      At this point, he still has his glasses on and doesn't seem to need oxygen

      Delete
  16. What a self-obsessed nutcase Mr/Mrs/Whocares 'Tumbling' is

    https://twitter.com/ASpinOfTheWheel/status/1488349790257700869

    Searching a random tweet... shock horror.. it's been crawled too

    https://web.archive.org/web/*/https://twitter.com/CL4Syr/status/1482578384022433793

    https://web.archive.org/web/20220113110350/https://twitter.com/CL4Syr/status/1481581460393840648

    https://web.archive.org/web/20211231224851/https://twitter.com/StevenDorsher/status/1477047858272612352

    But 'Johnson' believes it's a conspiracy against them personally. Someone "archiving on Wayback every tweet".

    https://twitter.com/ASpinOfTheWheel/status/1476653295812947976

    ReplyDelete
  17. Relevant to Douma, https://www.opcw.org/sites/default/files/documents/2022/02/s-2020-2022%28e%29.pdf 7.89:

    "Frothing from the mouth was noted in a single casualty" ... "The secretion was described as saliva, without any other colour"

    And again, though exact simulation conditions do not appear to be included (pg53), consultants could determine the angle of impact needed for the damage (8.8) (something paranoid-Johnson weirdly dismisses for Douma).

    ReplyDelete
  18. Also to compare to Douma- "green gas being released from the barrel, with no associated noise perceived" (7.30)

    I do like how for Kafr Zita with a 6km/h "light breeze", "at a lower elevation" "in a valley" in just a few minutes White Helmets in a vehicle 1-2 km "to the south" (across a large valley, up a steep hill) can smell the "odour".

    https://imgur.com/Jm8dYSB

    And Dr Hasan Alaraj seems to have found women and children in caves entirely populated by "armed groups".

    ReplyDelete
  19. I suppose "poor visibility" would also be comparable with Douma's (demonstrably bad) visibility. Although table 1 gives visibility as "excellent", 7.27 says "poor due to low ambient light". 7.58 is saying they identified/targeted the "ventilation openings"? White Helmets photos show that the next day was clear blue sky but, according to FFM timeline, no-one then turns up to bomb anything until the afternoon.. and even then just Al Maghara. It seems strange to me that they weren't rushing to destroy the thing they had apparently just identified.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That is assuming the ventilation openings weren't illuminated in any way, 7.27 suggests people on the ground believed aircraft couldn't target them in darkness (so equally poor visibility for helicopters spotting targets).

      Delete

Comments welcome. Stay civil and on or near-topic. If you're at all stumped about how to comment, please see this post.