By accepting you will be accessing a service provided by a third-party external to https://blog.alor.org/

More Establishment Scientists Calling Out Trump over False Flag Syrian Gas Attack by Peter Ewer

The Syrian gas attack has fast become another 9/11, with increasingly more establishment figures calling out Trump over the attack, which they believe is a false flag.
The latest scientist to criticise the gas attacks is Theodore Postol, a professor emeritus at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT): http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/mit-expert-claims-latest-chemical-weapons-attack-syria-was-staged-1617267. He has issued three reports attempting to refute the White House’s claim that Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad perpetrated the attack on 4 April.

He concluded that the US government’s report does not provide any “concrete” evidence that Assad was responsible, adding it was more likely that the attack was perpetrated by players on the ground.
Postol said: “I have reviewed the [White House’s] document carefully, and 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 Sheikhoun, Syria at roughly 6am to 7am on 4 April, 2017.

“In fact, a main piece of evidence that is cited in the document point to an attack that was executed by individuals on the ground, not from an aircraft, on the morning of 4 April.
“This conclusion is based on an assumption made by the White House when it cited the source of the sarin release and the photographs of that source. My own assessment is that the source was very likely tampered with or staged, so no serious conclusion could be made from the photographs cited by the White House.”

Postol is referring  to a crater containing a shell inside, which is alleged  to have contained the sarin gas. He believes that this could not have been dropped from an aircraft, as the damage to the casing is not consistent with the expected damage, such a drop would have caused. It is more probable that the explosive charge was laid first, then detonated.
It sounds a lot like 9/11, the real version: http://www.911truth.org/.

 

Comments

No comments made yet. Be the first to submit a comment
Already Registered? Login Here
Guest
Friday, 10 July 2020
If you'd like to register, please fill in the username, password and name fields.