Citizens Electoral Council of Australia

Media Release Thursday, 12 July 2018

Craig Isherwood‚ National Secretary
PO Box 376‚ COBURG‚ VIC 3058
Phone: 1800 636 432
Email: cec@cecaust.com.au
Website: http://www.cecaust.com.au

OPCW reports no nerve agent used in Douma, Syria

The British and Australian media are full of reports on the alleged poisoning of a couple near Salisbury in the UK, with the same novichok nerve agents that Russia supposedly used to poison Sergei and Yulia Skripal in April. The British and Australian governments are again blaming Russia. The Skripal incident coincided with the alleged chemical weapons attack in Douma, Syria, which then British Foreign Minister Boris Johnson linked to Salisbury, as another example of Russian complicity in the use of chemical weapons. Curiously, the same media are barely mentioning the official report of the inquiry into the Douma incident, which discredits the accusations against Russia. The following release is an article by Richard Bardon in the 11 July Australian Alert Service.

The rationale for the illegal 14 April 2018 US-UK-French missile attack on Syria has just gone up in smoke. Contrary to the Trump Administration’s so-called assessment, published 13 April just hours in advance of the bombardment, that the Syrian “regime” one week earlier had used both chlorine-gas munitions and the organophosphorus nerve agent sarin on civilians in Douma, eastern Damascus, investigators from the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) now report that no traces of nerve agent could be found, while the only chlorine compounds discovered were common substances used in water purification and household cleaning products.

In its “Interim report of the OPCW Fact-Finding Mission in Syria regarding the incident of alleged use of toxic chemicals in Douma, Syrian Arab Republic on 7 April 2018”, published 6 July, the OPCW Technical Secretariat reports that the Fact-Finding Mission (FFM) collected samples from four sites in Douma—including the locations of the two alleged chemical-weapons strikes, and the hospital where “victims” were treated—in the ten days beginning 21 April. Contradicting Western government and media accusations that the Syrian government and Russian military had hindered the investigation, the report states that whilst the FFM “was not able to enter Douma for almost a week after its arrival”, this was due to “high security risks to the team, which included the presence of unexploded ordnance, explosives, and [jihadist] sleeper cells still suspected of being active in Douma.” The report makes clear that these security risks were confirmed by UN Department of Safety and Security (UNDSS) personnel on site, and were not the invention of the Syrian or Russian authorities. The team’s security detail even came under small-arms fire on 18 April, during a reconnaissance visit to two sites of interest. Once these concerns had been addressed, however, the team was able to proceed without incident or interference. “Environmental sampling at the alleged incident sites in Douma was conducted by the FFM team, using its own equipment and ensuring full chain of custody throughout the operation in accordance with OPCW standard operation procedures, work instructions, and guidelines”, the report states. “Samples were collected, sealed, and documented in photos and video recordings in the presence of Syrian Arab Republic representatives, and unpacked at the OPCW Laboratory for splitting and redistribution to the OPCW designated laboratories in the presence of the Permanent Representative of the Syrian Arab Republic to the OPCW.” The FFM also received environmental and biological samples in a second country, referred to as “Country X”, which it handled according to the same procedures from the moment of receipt; inspectors also conducted interviews with, and drew blood samples from “witnesses allegedly exposed to toxic chemicals” in both Country X and Syria.

Over 100 samples in total were collected and transported to the OPCW’s laboratories, 31 of which were selected for the first round of analysis. The results speak for themselves: “analysis of the prioritised samples submitted to the designated laboratories were received by the FFM team on 22 May 2018. No organophosphorus nerve agents or their degradation products were detected, either in the environmental samples or in [blood] plasma samples from the alleged casualties.” (Emphasis added.) In other words, there cannot have been a sarin attack. To anyone not brainwashed by Western propaganda, this should already have been obvious, as the release of such a potent nerve agent in a densely populated area would have killed thousands—including the Syrian soldiers already pouring in to Douma, who took control of the whole district mere hours later—and would thus have been impossible to cover up. But the OPCW report removes any doubt.

Chlorine compounds no smoking gun

The OPCW did report that “Various chlorinated organic chemicals were found in samples from Locations 2 and 4 [sites of the alleged chemical strikes], along with residues of explosive”, a sentence cherry-picked by mainstream media to claim that the OPCW had proven the Syrian government guilty of using chlorine gas—deliberately ignoring the caveat that “Work by the team to establish the significance of these results is ongoing”, as are efforts to determine the provenance and significance of the two cylinders allegedly used to deliver the gas. None of the chemicals listed in the report are primarily military in their application. Chloral hydrate along with di- and trichloroacetic acid, for example, are all by-products of the chlorination of water (including by the water-purification tablets which are reportedly used widely in Syria’s war zones). Di-, tri- and tetrachlorophenol are common in household fungicides, herbicides, insecticides and disinfectants. All are toxic in large doses, but there is nothing in the report to suggest that more than trace amounts were discovered. And the explosive in question is 2,4,6-trinitrotoluene (TNT), common to nearly all explosive munitions the world over including those used by both sides in the battle for Douma, which, as already noted, was ongoing at the time of the alleged attack.

It is of course possible that chlorine weapons were used in Douma at some point, since the main jihadist group which controlled the area, Jaish al-Islam, is infamous for using chemical weapons improvised from household chemicals. Be that as it may, the OPCW’s interim findings are consistent with what veteran British war correspondent Robert Fisk reported in the 17 April Independent, based on eyewitness interviews; and what Douma residents and medical staff reiterated, in detail, at a 26 April press conference in the Netherlands: No-one was affected by toxic gas in Douma on the evening of 7 April, only by choking dust and smoke kicked up by the fighting. Allegations and video “evidence” to the contrary were cooked up by the British Intelligence-created, UK- and US-funded fake-humanitarian White Helmets to suck US President Donald Trump into maintaining the USA’s illegal military occupation in eastern Syria. Let us hope Trump is properly briefed on these findings, because on 11 June Russian Defence Ministry spokesman Igor Konashenkov warned that the jihadist-dominated Free Syrian Army was again preparing to stage a chemical attack, in the eastern Syrian region of Deir ez-Zor.

Click here for a free copy of the latest issue of the Australian Alert Service.

Click here to join the CEC as a member.

Click here to refer others to receive regular email updates from the Citizens Electoral Council of Australia.