Svenskt förslag för riktig utredning av gasattack i Syrien

Här har publicerats flera artiklar om gasattacker i Syrien. Flera av dessa, och några av de mest ingående och innovativa analyserna kommer från professor emeritus Marcello Ferrada de Noli, ordförande i Swedish Doctors for Human Rights (SWEDHR) och chefredaktör för The Indicter.
Marcello 170417 V
I denna artikel som nyligen publicerats i The Indicter föreslår professor Ferrada de Noli att man inrättar en internationell, oberoende och multidisciplinär expertgrupp för att utreda gasincidenten i Khan Shaykhun 4/4 i Syrien beroende på att den av FN utsedda panelen har presenterat en utredning som enligt experter har stora brister. The Indicter: Rapporten från FN-utredningen JIM om Khan Shaykhun är inte tillförlitlig, och den är politiskt snedvriden (UN ‘Joint Investigative Mechanism’ report on Khan Shaykhun proven inaccurate, politically biased)

Jag har översatt det avslutande förslaget fritt till svenska, publicerar resten på engelska och informerar nu att litteraturlistan finns i den ursprungliga artikel. Referenser i texten till egna bloggartiklar har jag själv satt in, för den som vill ha kompletterande information.

Artikeln
Slutklämmen först:
Den ultimata mänskliga rätten är rätten att existera. Krig är den största risken för denna grundläggande rättighet. Detta är anledningen till SWEDHR:s engagemang för att fördöma dem – i Sverige eller internationellt – som provocerar eller för vidare konflikter som kan leda till en världsomspännande konfrontation, med oförutsägbar risk för kärnvapenförintelse. Det är i hög grad att krigsförespråkarna bakom de godtyckliga slutsatserna av paneler som består av ett fåtal icke-experter, och de makter som finns bakom dem avslöjas. På likande sätt måste man lyfta fram det politiskt betingade beteendet hos självutnämnda ”mänskliga rättigheter” -organisationer, såsom Human Rights Watch och andra [25] [26], och då särskilt den svenska sektionen för Amnesty International. Dessa organiseras finansieras och/eller styrs ideologiskt styrs av krigsförespråkarna. [27] [28] [29] Swedish_Doctors_for_Human_Rights

Svenska läkare för mänskliga rättigheter (SWEDHR) föreslår därför inrättandet av en internationell, oberoende och tvärvetenskaplig expertpanel av forskare för att granska de procedurer som ledde till bedömningen av ”Joint Investigative Mechanism” (JIM) för att undersöka den metodologiska frågor som ledde till deras slutsatser utan bevis.

Det föreslagna professionella panelsen ska vara en verkligt objektiv panel som inte bara berörs av den bristfälliga rapporten om Khan Shaykhun-incidenten, och som även ska granska liknande felaktiga/bristfälliga påståenden som skett de senaste åren. Dessa bildar tillsammans ett mönster av ett aggressivt geopolitiskt beteende och är ett bidragande hot mot fred i världen.

Introduktion
Carl von Clausewitz (1780–1831) [1] meant that war is the continuation of politics by other means. Instead in this modern episode, politics acts as the continuation of war: At the same rhythm in which the Syrian army and Russian forces, as well other allies, progress its irreversible military victory, the losing parties in the conflict seemingly assay to compensating their defeat by means of salacious political manoeuvres.

The strategy of deposing the secular republic presided by Mr Bashar al-Assad, via financing pro-sharia fundamentalists that for years terrorized the Syrian population, did not work. The shift in the plan appears to consist in a multiple international effort to discredit the winners, politically and ad-hominem. Specifically, this has been pursued via allegations of ‘chemical attacks’, no matter how preposterous, or evidence-deprived, these claims may be.

The most recent episode is a report of the “UN Joint Investigative Mechanism (JIM)” [2] recently discussed at the Security Council. There are multiple reasons why to question the work of the JIM, as well of the ‘UN-Commission of Inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic’ (COI), [3] now centred on the alleged incidents in Khan Shaykhun of April 2017. These reasons have to do with logical and methodological contradictions showed in the reports it self; some others are referred to political motivations and bias exercised by those commissions; and finally, related to serious flaws pertinent to the primary source for the allegations, principally the West-founded propaganda organization ”White Helmets”.
FN generalförsamling 000_was6550800_si
I have recently reported in The Indicter Magazine an updated analysis (“From Timisoara to Khan Shaykhun”) [4] regarding this and previous allegations of such a “chemical attacks”, illustrated with the so-called “Sarmin incident” of March 2015. Från Timisoara till Khan Shaykhun. Iscensatta ”massakrer” som rutin inför regimförändring
All this, in the historical context of ‘false flag’ operations devised to justify a strategy of regime-change. My early reports on the White Helmets dealt with fake medical and life-saving procedures on children presumably already dead. [5] [6] Those reports were based in analyses we did at our NGO Swedish Doctors for Human Rights, report which was later quoted by the Syrian Ambassador at the UN Security Council, in April this year. [7]

At first glance, we may see a similar pattern between the above episode and regarding the Khan Shaykhun official narrative. This refers both to the discussable credibility of primary sources been used –i.e. the White Helmets– [8] who reported the allegations to the “open sources”, which in turn are used as separated, independent sources. Added the astonishing lack of “quality control” of those testimonies from the part not only of the UN investigators, but also by a number of Western delegations at the Security Council.
Fundamental principles of verifiability and reliability are ignored by the non-experts investigative panel.
Syrien gas Steigan II 170406 white-helmets-no-fly
May I remind that fake videos which the White Helmets fabricated in 2015 were shown at the UN [9] without a minimal verification regarding the authenticity or correctness of the “life-saving” procedures on dead children shown in the materials. [5] [6] This, to the point that the then U.S. ambassador Samantha Power declared to the press after the White Helmets video-show at the UN headquarters 16 April 2015, “If there was a dry eye in the room, I didn’t see it” [10]

I

The narrative authored by the “Seventh report of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons ­­­– United Nations Joint Investigative Mechanism” tells that a main probe that one bomb containing a chemical substance of highest toxicity was dropped by the ‘Syrian government’ consists in a crater left in a Khan Shaykhun road. The same JIM authors acknowledge that rebels in Khan Shaykhun have however destroyed evidence by filling the purported impact “crater” with concrete.

Why the “rebels” have done that – and what consequences that sabotage would have for the investigation of facts is not even considered by the panel. Instead, what the JIM reports is that “The high security risk of a site visit to Khan Shaykhun, which is currently in a situation of armed conflict and under the control of a listed terrorist organization (Nusrah Front), outweighed the benefits to the investigation.”

What the panel is really messaging is that their own perception of a personal risk outweighs their unethical behaviour of condemning the Syrian government without investigating an essential piece of evidence. But equally true is that a visit on-site would make difficult for he JIM to disregard evidence that may contra the departure-premises of the investigators: ‘al-Assad is guilty’, ‘Russia is guilty’, ‘Iran is guilty’, and all those that oppose the U.S. pipeline dream in the Middle East shall be ‘guilty’ the same.

Besides, what danger al-Nusra and the rest of the “moderate terrorists” would possibly pose to the JIM team? Those forces have been militarily, logistically and politically supported by the same Western powers behind the JIM ‘conclusions’.

II

As regarding the ‘bomb crater’ version defended by the JIM, the panel reports about witnesses’ testimonies, photographs and even “satellite imagery”. These efforts would be appropriate in case some one would be questioning the existence of the crater. But the existence of the hole in the road is NOT the issue in discussion. The issue is instead to discern what caused that crater. In this regards, it is incomprehensible that the JIM neglected to report details of the exhaustive investigations conducted by Ted Postol, professor emeritus at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and who demonstrated that such a crater could not possibly be the result of an aerial bombing. [11] Framstående USA-expert:Skedde verkligen en gasattack i Syrien som beskrivits?

III

By acknowledging that Khan Shaykhun was then under control of al-Nusra, the JIM report exhibits yet another methodological contradiction: That would mean that al-Nusra and its jihadists allies, by having control of the area, they were also in control of the ‘official’ information delivered from Khan Shaykhun on the alleged incident. This would imperatively call for a questioning of the reliability/credibility (bias) of main sources that the panel used for its allegations.

Particularly concerning propaganda organizations such as the White Helmets and other formations “under control of al-Nusra” (it is what JIM says), or in frank collaboration. For the White Helmets, main source at the UN reports of recent years, could possibly function in those areas only insofar a convergence would exist towards the local powers in control. No need to remind that territories occupied by terrorists do not function as a democracy.
white-helmets-al-qaidaWhite Helmets och deras vänner i al-Qaida
IV

What those biases not investigated by JIM would consist of? The answer is in what has been the core of the propaganda strategy of al-Nusra / FSA/ White Helmets and the rest of the sharia-adept jihadist organizations of the “Syrian opposition”, and from the very beginning: [12] the constant advocating for an escalation of the U.S./EU military intervention. For instance –as I have already pointed out in The Indicter Magazine and in interviews with Russian and EU media– each time an allegation of “chemical attacks” arises from the part of the “Syrian opposition”, and in particular by the White Helmets, those claims have been immediately followed by their renewed international pledge for a No-Fly Zone in Syria. [13] [14] [15] [16] Fekad propagandafilm om White Helmets vinner Oscar
White Helmets och CNN medger falsk videopropaganda
Skavlan marknadsför terroristvännen ”White Helmets”

V

Further, the JIM presents a highly confusing argument on that the purported ‘sarin’ would not be properly sarin, but instead some sort of substance of the like. Then the panel admits that the mysterious substance is not actually ‘Syrian” sarin as such, but instead it would contain something that previously would also has been present in chemical materials time ago stockpiled in Syria (Syria destroyed all chemical weapons between 2013-2014). [17] But considering the documentation existing a) on the possession of chemical weapons (inclusive sarin) by opposition forces –[18] which comprises ISIS sarin; [19] b) on the rebels ‘homemade’ amateurish fabrication and stockpiling; and c) on the actual weapon-transfers that has existed between jihadists formations in the area, ISIS included, [20]: Who would possibly accept such an ambiguous JIM argument on the “semi-sarin” as unequivocal evidence that the alleged attack was ordered by the Syrian government?

VI

Finally, the panel states, again paradoxically, that “Should conditions improve and it be determined that an on-site investigation would produce valuable new information, a visit could take place in the future.” So, if I may ask, why not waiting for that possibility instead of passing judgement and declaring Syria ‘guilty’ already now, in absence of solid evidence?

The answer is elsewhere in the JIM document, where the panel admitted that the more time passes, the less possibilities remain for evidence collection. So, they may think, why to hurry?

To the above it should be added the numerous incongruences in the documentation and testimonies that the JIM accepted to include in its report. For instance, that several dozens of ‘victims’ of the alleged attack were admitted and registered in the vicinity hospitals at a time-point before the purported occurrence of the said attack; or the notorious clinical disagreement reported in samples taken from same individuals, etc. These and other kinds of epidemiological flaws or oddities, such as an atypical ratio between injured and reported fatalities, are equally prominent in the parallel COI report.

The JIM conclusions in its latest report [2], which declared ‘guilty’ the Syrian government for a ‘war crime’ on the base of “open sources” and one-sided or non verifiable information, further entails –precisely as its sister report issued by the COI [2]– two fundamental forensic flaws:

i) Absence of a ‘crime motive’ demonstration.

The JIM fails to demonstrate what conceivable purpose would exist from the part of the Syrian government, the wining side in the war, to indulge in such a self-damaging decision. At the contrary, such imputation against the Syrian government is deprived of logic, particularly ‘geopolitical logic’. [21] As indicated by former British Ambassador to Syria, Mr Peter Ford, the allegations against Syria are simply not plausible. [22]

ii) Absence of the “beyond doubt” principle.

Typically, any mob’s judgement that has further leaded to a lynching, appeal to the principle “We have reasons to believe”. At the contrary, a forensic, scientific, or juridical conclusion reached by any authentic experts-panel or court regarding severe criminal charges has to be based in the “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard. This is not the case in the unprofessional conclusions issued by The JIM and COI, whose reports refer to allegations of “war crimes”, and not a kind of lesser crimes where the required standard could be of a lesser solidity. [23] [24]

What to do?

“The use of chemical weapons –an immoral and condemnable act anywhere, at any time, and under any circumstances.” ­–The Syrian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 27 October 2017

Läs vidare i några artiklar om gasattacker i Syrien, och om annat.
FN-rapporten om gasattacken i Syrien i april håller inte
Tidigare och kommande (?) gasattacker (av terrorister) i Syrien
Svensk expert slår hål på Frankrikes rapport om gasolyckan
Framstående USA-expert:Skedde verkligen en gasattack i Syrien som beskrivits?
Håller USA:s bevis för att Syrien stod bakom giftgasangrepp i Khan Shaykhoun?
Medietystnad när Trumps bevis för gasattacken i Syrien sågas
Rebellerna utförde gasattacken i Ghouta – indikation från FN:s inspektörer
Chefen för Israels säkerhetstjänst bekräftar Israels stöd till ISIS och al-Nusra
Väst hindrar FN att undersöka gasincidenten i Syrien
Varning till president Trump från säkerhetsexperter i USA
Vem orsakade gasattacken i Syrien?
Storbritanniens ambassadör – Syrien orsakade inte gasattacken
Debatt i Läkartidningen om krig och etik 19/5
DN:s ”fake news”-attack på Swedish Doctors for Human Rights” (The Indicter) 1/5 2017
Debatt i Läkartidningen om SWEDHR, gasattacken i Syrien mm 28/4 2017
Vanställd kritik i DN, Expressen och Aftonbladet av fredsorgansationen SWEDHR om Syrien. 22/4 2017
Stora brister i SvT:s rapportering om Syrien
Har Pentagon tränat terrorister i användning av kemiska vapen?
Nya provokationer planeras av terrorister i Syrien
IS och al-Qaida firar USA:s anfall och går till angrepp i Syrien
Intervju med Syriens president al-Assad
Nytt brott mot FN-stadgan. USA attackerar Syrien
IS och al-Qaida firar USA:s attack och går till angrepp i Syrien
USA trappar upp det brutala angreppskriget mot Syrien
Rapporten om gasattack kom innan Syrien bombade terroristers gaslager
Stackars Syrien. False flag förleder,förvanskar fakta
Kemgasattacken i Syrien och journalistikens kollaps
Syrien bombade terroristfabrik för kemiska vapen i Idlib, har tidigare informerat FN om terroristers kemiska vapen
Gasattack? De vanliga lögnerna mot Syrien före fredsmöte?
Seymour Hersh: Obama stoppade Syrien-anfall pga. bevis om att rebellerna utförde gasattacken i Ghouta, Damaskus
Hur Turkiet planerade gasattacken i Syrien med USA:s hjälp
Syriens rebeller planerar ny gasattack
USA:s färska och äldre stöd till terrorister
Besvikna terroriststödjarna USA & Co desinformerar om Aleppo
Kongressledamot i USA: Vi finansierar terroristgrupper i Syrien
USA:s plan för styckning av Syrien
USA har använt utarmat uran i Syrien och Irak enligt Pentagon
EU villigt betala Assad om terrorister får styra del av Syrien
USA hjälper ISIS att inta stora staden Deir Ezzor i Syrien
Varför kapitulerar inte rebellerna?
http://jinge.se/allmant/ambassador-niklas-kebbon-skadar-sveriges-utrikespolitik.htm
http://jinge.se/allmant/massakern-i-ghouta-syrien-falska-videoinspelningar.htm

Ledamot i USA:s kongress har lagförslag för att hindra fortsatt stöd till terroristerna
Fekad propagandafilm om White Helmets vinner Oscar
White Helmets och CNN medger falsk videopropaganda
Skavlan marknadsför terroristvännen ”White Helmets”
New York Times: USA-stödda moderata rebeller strider tillsammans med al-Qaida
Människor i Aleppo firar julen och segern över USA-stödd terrorism
USA: Bra kongressrapport om Syrien
USA:s interventionspolitik huvudorsak till svälten i Syrien
Vapenvila och fortsatt kamp mot terroristerna i Syrien som fått nya vapen av USA
USA gav ISIS 45 minuters förvarning inför bombning
Hersh: Obama stoppade Syrienanfall pga bevis om att rebellerna utförde gasattacken i Ghouta
Aftonbladet låter Bana göra reklam för terroristerna i al-Nusra
Bana är ingen Anne Frank – används i hänslös propaganda för terrorister som halshögg 11-årig pojke
Aftonbladet desinformerar om Syrien
Fortsatt svenskt stöd till terrorister i Syrien
http://jinge.se/mediekritik/atta-problem-med-amnestys-rapport-om-syrien.htm
De USA-stödda ”moderata rebellerna” i FSA i Syrien nära kollaps
Caesar: Gammal otillförlitlig rapport om Syrien dammas av
Amnesty: Ny partisk och otillförlitlig rapport om Syrien
Artikel av mig i Flamman 19/11 2015:Syrienkriget är en av USA planerad intervention
Lögner om Syrien
Vem startade kriget i Syrien?
USA-general, Obama, Biden: Vi har medvetet släppt fram al-Qaida och ISIS i Syrien
Vi har beskjutits av terrorister i 4 år

i Andra om: , , , , , , , , , , ,, , , krig

  1 comment for “Svenskt förslag för riktig utredning av gasattack i Syrien

  1. Väst ligegr bakom gasattackerna !
    19 november, 2017 at 11:41

    Att det är i själva verket Pentagon som ligger bakom gasattackerna i Syrien (via sina ombud) halshugga terrorister avslöjades av tidningen Daily Mail redan 2012. Nyheterna om att USA planerar tärna halshuggare i att använda gasbomber dök upp redan 2012.

    https://www.globalresearch.ca/pentagon-trained-syrias-al-qaeda-rebels-in-the-use-of-chemical-weapons/5583784

Comments are closed.