ぼやかせていただいております。

Assad may be cruel, brutal but he’s not mad

2017年04月21日 02時30分12秒 | Weblog
The Chemical-Weapons Attack In Syria: Is There a Place for Skepticism?
The American media has excluded dissenting expert opinions in its rush to embrace Trump’s war on Syria.
By James CardenYESTERDAY 12:05 PM


Former British ambassador to Syria Peter Ford told the BBC last week that he seriously doubted that Assad was the culprit. “Assad,” said Ford, “may be cruel, brutal but he’s not mad. It defies belief that he would bring this all on his head for no military advantage.” Ford said he believes the accusations against Syria are “simply not plausible.”

And so, on what evidence and intelligence was Trump’s decision based upon?

On April 11, the White House released a declassified four-page report meant to prove its case against Assad and serve as a belated justification for the Tomahawk attack on Syria’s Shayrat air base.

The report, which was authored not by US intelligence agencies but by the White House under the supervision of national-security adviser H.R. McMaster, says that “The United States is confident that the Syrian regime conducted a chemical weapons attack, using the nerve agent sarin, against its own people in the town of Khan Shaykhun in southern Idlib Province on April 4, 2017.”

The report relies on “open source” videos for proof of its claim that a “chemical munition landed not on a facility filled with weapons,” as the Russians and Syrians have claimed, “but in the middle of a street in the northern section of Khan Shaykhun. Commercial satellite imagery of that site from April 6, after the allegation, shows a crater in the road that corresponds to the open source video.”


Yet the administration’s report has come under withering scrutiny from Dr. Theodore Postol, a professor emeritus of science, technology, and national-security policy at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, who once served as a scientific adviser to the chief of naval operations at the Pentagon.

Postol’s exhaustive critique of the White House report notes that “The only undisputable facts stated in the White House report is the claim that a chemical attack using nerve agent occurred in Khan Shaykhun, Syria.” And yet, according to Postol, “the report contains absolutely no evidence that this attack was the result of a munition being dropped from an aircraft. In fact, the report contains absolutely no evidence that would indicate who was the perpetrator of this atrocity.”

Postol writes that “The only source the document cites as evidence that the attack was by the Syrian government is the crater it claims to have identified on a road in the North of Khan Shaykhun.” Yet his analysis of the photographs of the crater provided by the White House “clearly indicates that the munition was almost certainly placed on the ground with an external detonating explosive on top of it that crushed the container so as to disperse the alleged load of sarin.”

 And so, “In order to cover up the lack of intelligence to supporting the president’s action, the National Security Council produced a fraudulent intelligence report.” Postol concludes that the “report is completely undermined by a significant body of video evidence taken after the alleged sarin attack and before the US cruise missile attack that unambiguously shows the claims in the WHR [White House Report] could not possibly be true.”



シリアのサリン攻撃について、確かなことは、化学兵器がシリアのハーン・シャイフーンで使用された、ということだが、それが、シリア政府によるものだ、というのは証明されていない、と。

 アメリカ政府は、道路にできた穴から、政府が飛行機から化学兵器を落としたのだ、と言っているが、写真を仔細に分析すると、地面に置かれた弾薬を爆発して、容器が破壊され、サリンが拡散したことは明確である、という研究者。

もう一人、シリアの元イギリス大使はアサドは冷酷、残忍な男だが、気違いではない、として、アサドがやったという容疑を疑っている、と。

記事は、結論については、留保しているが、英米のメディアが、こうした議論を報道しないことを批判している。

ジャンル:
ウェブログ
コメント   この記事についてブログを書く
この記事をはてなブックマークに追加
« “North Korea will never, ev... | トップ | 米のサイバー攻撃説は根拠薄... »
最近の画像もっと見る

コメントを投稿


コメント利用規約に同意の上コメント投稿を行ってください。

数字4桁を入力し、投稿ボタンを押してください。

あわせて読む