Sep 28, 2013

What Happened in Moadamiyah?

If this is your first time here, I recommend starting from the conclusion page.

So far we've been very successful in collecting and analyzing evidence from the Zamalka attack, with every conclusion backed by multiple independent sources. But the Moadamiyah attack still remained with its highly inconsistent evidence. It's easy to dismiss it as just another one of the many slip-ups in the UN report and forget about it, but that's not how things are done here... So I went through all the Moadamiyah videos, reports, and UN findings and tried to settle all the discrepancies.

First, a summary of the problems with the Moadamiyah chemical attack report:
  1. No UMLACAs were found there, compared to multiple findings in Zamalka. This is especially weird as Moadamiyah is within UMLACA range of Mazzeh airport, a site from which we have multiple sightings of UMLACA launches.
  2. The only munition suspected to be associated with a chemical attack is an M14 rocket body. Its warhead was not found, even though chemical warheads should survive impact, and the UN reported that locals were bringing them various munitions.
    Update: some have claimed a strong boosting charge can destroy the warhead. In that case, serious damage should have been evident on the rocket body.
  3. While images and videos of UMLACA impact sites were uploaded by activists within hours of the attack, the first (and only) M14 video was uploaded only after four days. Furthermore, it was recorded at an arbitrary location and not in its impact crater.
  4. The M14 rocket body shows no signs of damage from impact with the ground, while all UMLACAs are bent or broken. Especially interesting since its terminal velocity is supposed to be higher due to its aerodynamic design and better fuel-to-weight ratio.
  5. No other M14 rocket bodies or warheads were reported. This is especially interesting since the UN reported another impact site it believes originated from the same launcher.
  6. The M14 has an optional 2.2 kg sarin warhead. To cause the amount of deaths reported in Moadamiyah would require between 13 and 66 M14 rockets (see full calculation by pmr9 in comments below). 
  7. The M14 is an obsolete weapon, with the markings on this one indicating it was manufactured in 1967.
  8. There are no videos or images of the Syrian Army (or anyone else in Syria) using an M14 or its launcher (if anyone has it, please share).
  9. The UN team wore gas masks near Zamalka impact sites, but not in the Moadamiyah impact site - probably since their mobile chemical detectors beeped only in Zamalka.
  10. While the UN report found sarin in 90% of samples taken around UMLACA impact sites in Zamalka, none of the samples in the vicinity of the rocket were positive for sarin, despite being taken 2-3 days before the UMLACA samples. A few of them tested positive for sarin breakdown products (DIMP, IPMPA, and MPA): 2 out of 15 tests in one lab, and 5 out of 15 in the second lab.
  11. Still, 14 out of 15 blood samples taken from victims in Moadamiyah tested positive for sarin exposure, a higher rate than in Zamalka.
  12. While in Zamalka we have videos showing the disarray in the streets, all Moadamiyah videos are taken in the hospital.
  13. The UN report provides 8 indirect quotes from victims who report being infected in Zamalka (one on Page 16, seven on 36-38), but none for Moadamiyah.
  14. While hundreds of eyewitness accounts can be found for Zamalka (see here, here, here and many more), I could only find two for Moadamiyah: One that is constantly interrupted by a local doctor and is cut off when the witness starts mentioning an "explosion", and another taken over skype by HRW (page 4) which describes no odors at the scene (highly inconsistent with Zamalka), and claims a shirt dunked in water protected him at ground zero (impossible).
  15. Reports in social media from Moadamiyah were inconsistent, alternating between descriptions of chemical and conventional shelling. 13 hours after the attack seven casualties from chemicals were claimed, and only later did this change to 56.
  16. When the UN team approached Moadamiyah, they were targeted by sniper fire. No such interruptions were reported in Zamalka.
  17. Unlike Zamalka, Moadamiyah was downwind from central Damascus during the attack, making it an unlikely target for a government chemical attack.
  18. Zamalka and Moadamiyah are on opposite sides of Damascus, which would make an attack on both targets fairly complex, and thus less likely to be carried out by the opposition.

So what happened here?


First, the positive samples from victims can be explained as Zamalka victims rushed to Moadamiyah hospitals. Since thousands of people were affected in Zamalka, the small local hospitals were quickly overrun and victims were distributed to any available opposition hospital. And indeed, when each hospital reported its casualties it created the initial impression that the attack spanned a wide area. 

So any visit to an opposition hospital near Damascus would have yielded positive samples. The only reason the investigators happened to visit Moadamiyah is because they only visited impact sites, and were informed of the intact M14 rocket body found there.

Shouldn't the UN team have picked up on this? Not necessarily:

  1. Their Moadamiyah visit lasted for only two hours.
  2. It was done in unfavorable conditions.
  3. Their charter was to find whether a chemical weapon was used, not how. So they probably put less emphasis on this issue.
  4. For some reason, the UN report chooses to ignore facts that weaken the regime attack theory.

Next, let's examine the M14 and its alleged impact site:
  1. As mentioned, the M14 is obsolete and would make for a very weird choice when UMLACAs with a sarin capacity 25 times larger are available.
  2. This video shows the rocket body one day before the UN arrival, in an obviously different location than when it was examined by the UN. The investigators still went on to analyze a "small crater/impact point" found near the rocket and treated it as if it was related. The discussions with the local activist in this video and this video from the same time give some idea as to the reliability of evidence collected from this scene. And indeed, the investigators did report that "Fragments and other possible evidence have clearly been handled/moved prior to the arrival of the investigation team".
    Update: It seems like the "small crater" that was reported to be found near the rocket is one of the two dents in the floor seen in this video. Describing this as a rocket impact crater is highly speculative, and the fact the the team used it to calculate trajectories is concerning.
  3. Even if we were to assume this rocket did hit this location, the UN report states: "[We] determined that it initially impacted the corner of the second floor of an adjacent apartment building to the east, with either the warhead functioning or shearing off from the body at that point and the motor section having sufficient kinetic energy to continue along its path to its terminal impact location"This provides an excellent alternative explanation for the rocket body being intact (other than it having a chemical warhead): its conventional explosive warhead did not detonate or detonated at a distance.
Still, we need to explain why some of the samples tested positive for sarin-breakdown products. When examining these in detail (pages 24-25 and 27-29 together) an interesting pattern emerges:
  1. The only sample positive in both labs is a soil sample from the impact point in the outside terrace (page 18).
  2. Additional four samples found positive only in Lab 2 are from two metal fragments taken from the same terrace.
  3. An additional sample found positive only in Lab 1 is from a scarf of a victim said to have died of poisoning. 
  4. The rest of the samples, which were negative in both labs, are from inside the apartment (see video) taken from the floor, a bed sheet, a slipper, a pillow, and a mattress. Some of these samples tested positive for Hexamethylentetramine, a chemical related to RDX (a type of explosive). It should be noted that the alleged poisoning occurred inside this apartment.
So the only positive tests were the 5 taken in the terrace and the one from the scarf, while the only negative tests were the 9 taken inside the apartment. However, we already know that the terrace was previously visited by activists (those who took the M14 video), or as the UN puts it "The sites have been well traveled by other individuals both before and during the investigation". This means that if one of these activists has traveled to Zamalka (e.g. to assist the victims or investigate impact sites) before visiting this scene, the soles of his shoes would immediately contaminate the area (or may even have done so intentionally). More specifically, he would contaminate the floor (and not the bed) and would do so with sarin breakdown products and not with sarin (which disintegrates quickly when exposed).

The scarf sample is unique in that it is not described as a sample taken personally by the investigators (and is not shown in the video), which may indicate it was given to them by locals. Until more information is provided on how it was collected, it's hard to assess the source of its contamination.

This all seems to suggest the following scenario: Moadamiyah suffered a conventional attack (like much of Ghouta), and treated patients from Zamalka (like all Ghouta hospitals). Reports related to these incidents created the confusion that the area is attacked by chemical weapons (as initially happened in all towns treating Zamalka victims). When they later saw the international impact, some local activists decided to stick to the story.
This scenario is definitely plausible, and it perfectly matches all the evidence. In comparison, the scenario of a chemical attack in Moadamiyah implies many unrealistic assumptions.

Conclusion: It's still uncertain what exactly happened in Moadamiyah. However, the evidence for a chemical attack is weak and inconsistent, while the evidence for a conventional attack that was misrepresented to be chemical is much stronger. 

83 comments:

  1. Plenty of evidence Sarin was used here: UN report says samples tested for DIMP (Diisopropyl Methylphosphonate) and is part of the thermal decomposition of Sarin) and IMPA (Isopropyl Methylphosponic Acid) which occurs in the breakdown of Sarin.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Which is why I wrote: "A few of them tested positive for sarin breakdown products". Thanks!

      Delete
  2. Burster charge would have shredded the M14 warhead into small fragments. It was not designed to survive. At least that was the design of contemporary US Army chemical warheads of the same size. Likely the Soviet version worked the same.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This definitely isn't the case with the UMLACA, and also doesn't make too much sense physically. But if it's true, it's very interesting - Would be great if you could provide some reference. Thanks!

      Delete
    2. Makes prefect sense to former US Army forces in the Chemical Weapons branch because that's how the US warheads of the same size worked.

      "The lack of a payload-carrying section indicates to me that the explosive bursting charge of the rocket functioned as intended"

      Dan Kaszeta former officer in US Army Chemical Weapons branch

      Delete
    3. Since this report contained numerous inaccuracies, it's hard to rely on this specific estimate. It also doesn't explain how the rocket body suffered no explosive damage.
      What we need is some reliable documentation of how a small chemical warhead looks like after detonation. We currently only have the 360mm warheads, and they survived very well.
      If you can get anything like that it would be very helpful. Thanks!

      Delete
  3. The video you link to in "The locals seemed very interested in its results." is from 2011 and unlocated, maybe you pasted the wrong link.

    The idea that victims from Zamalka ended up in Moadamiyah is not plausible. You are right to say that the impression that the attacks covered a large area came from reports from the hospitals in the region where apparently affected people from Zamalka went to, but that was all in East Ghouta. Moadamiyah is literally on the other side of Damascus, and large government-controlled areas are in between.

    Other than that, good summary, don't have much to add. We don't even have a subpage for this part of the story yet.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. oops. good catch. removed.

      Vehicles from Moadamiyah can reach Zamalka in less than 30 minutes, driving through contested territories (see map: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/68/Military_situation_in_Damascus_region_as_of_15th_of_September_2013.png)
      There is no way medical personnel heard of thousands of injured and just sat at their Moadamiyah hospital watching TV. They got every available vehicle and drove their like crazy.

      Thanks!

      Delete
    2. What? In the middle of the night? And then picked up CW weapons victims and drove back home to treat them? Nah, I don't think so, and your 30 minutes aren't practical anyway (your map shows no way to make it through contested areas to begin with), so bringing them there from the East Ghouta wouldn't work either. If those tested positive in Moadamiyah are not from there, then they have been brought there for the UN visit, not the treatment.

      Delete
    3. I'm not sure I understand your question about the middle of the night. It's obvious that once news of the disaster got out, all medical personnel in the Damascus area were paged, getting desperate calls for assistance and medical supplies.

      I guess you agree that at that point they would do anything they can to get to the area. So the question remains whether they can get there. The map shows a path around Damascus going through contested territory, except for 300m. I'm sure they can get there and do so regularly, but if anyone has a better understanding of the facts on the ground, please share.

      Delete
    4. The "300m" means crossing the airport road which is heavily defended.I maintain that it is not plausible that there has been any physical exchange between Moadamiyah and the East Ghouta in that night.

      Delete
    5. @sasa wawa – These is no evidence of any rescue work on the night of August 21. The victims just appeared at the hospital as out of thin air. Even more fascinating is that all victims died at the hospitals. No one seems to have died in their homes.

      Delete
    6. CE - I guess at this point we need some information about the difficulty of crossing that road. Anyone?

      Petri - What evidence of rescue work would you expect? I don't think people would just upload videos of vehicles leaving and coming back. But that's what medical personnel do when such an event happens. There should be some good explanation why they wouldn't do so here.

      Delete
    7. Plenty of reports of people having died in their homes asleep and where found days later due to the smell.

      Delete
    8. @Anonymous
      Yes, people dying in the their homes while asleep is part of the "activist say" rebel narrative, but there is no evidence to support it. There are western news stories of dead people found in their home. See BREAKING: Rescue team finds whole family dead in their house!
      There are also five different videos showing bodies in a house. All these sources are about on single location we have chosen to call the Zamalka Ghost House. The eight bodies in the house did not die in there on August 21, but were planted by known "massacre managers". The same team then took several news teams with cameras on tours of the house.

      German blogger Urs has followed the team PR team for a long time. She suspects they are not only involved in public relations massacre management but are also serial killers.

      Delete
    9. No, Petri... the Guardian was carrying stories as soon as Aug 22 that people had been found dead in their homes.

      "We began to break in houses to check out about the people inside. In one of the houses, I found four brothers sleeping opposite each other dead in their bed and their parents were dead too in another room. All of them suffocated. I could see foam on their mouths and noses."

      http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/22/syria-chemical-weapons-eyewitness

      There are many other stories...

      Delete
    10. This is what Petri called the "activists say" rebel narrative. If you take that as evidence at face value, there's no question about most of what happened in Syria anyway and you better listen to what the White House says. And believe it or not, I knew before I went to your linked that Martin Chulov would be involved. ;o)

      Delete
  4. I agree, there is no evidence for a chemical rocket attack on Moadamiyah. Something happened though. Moadamiyah and Daraya YouTube channels started posting video of victims in hospitals and in morgues. This is not a redistribution of material from elsewhere; the victims are not in known Eastern Ghouta site. In fact the UN team visits one of the field hospitals we see on the videos.

    I am still working on the complete list of all August 21 videos. See here I have given codes DA9-DA9 and MD1-MD3 to the Daraya and Moadamiyah videos.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As I wrote in the conclusion, it's still hard to tell. The evidence just doesn't add up neatly as in Zamalka.

      Delete
    2. Petri
      You undermine the credibility of your work by using Google translator for the Arabic titles of the videos. Reading about' victims of "chemiotheraphy" ' in the list you just mention is just one example.

      Delete
  5. The online Centre for Documentation of Violations database gives 59 out of 516 civilian fatailties as having Area=Mouadamiyeh. The Area field seems to mean the area of residence as there is a separate field named "Martyrdom Location". For most records this field appears to be empty, but for the 3 records for which Martyrdom Location is listed as Mouadamiyeh, the area of residence is not anywhere in the eastern suburbs

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for the data. It's indeed not what I'd expect to see. Since the Moadamiyah story still doesn't have a strong explanation, I reworded the conclusion to be more open.

      Delete
  6. Has it been concluded that the M-14 rocket motor was actually launched? I am having doubts because I see no evidence of damage on the shell. SU made robust rockets, but not that robust - it hit a building and came to rest on the ground? Where are the photos of the side of the building that was hit? Photos of the crater? The UN report itself is very confusing (obfuscatory?) - read carefully, it states at one point that the rocket came through the foliage cover on the wall, at another it states that the rocket hit the side of the building. Which is it? Did it slide down the wall, bounce off? I am very unclear on all of this - any clarification anyone has would be appreciate.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Here is a playlist of videos from their visit. At least four show a backyard with the rocket shell. It's just lying there. They chat a bit - UN guy photographs damage at building, activist guy says "it's not from the impact, missiles come down every day". UN guy says he's not going to take the shell with him, is there solely for determining if chemicals were used, not to identify munition.

      Delete
    2. Good point! The M14 does indeed seem too intact. I will add to the post.

      Delete
    3. Here is my take on the UN Report aspect http://wp.me/p1w0fz-YE

      Delete
    4. HRIMARK - Thanks for sharing.
      Can you provide the evidence for the taller inspector noticing the building?

      Delete
  7. I think we can make a stronger statement than "there is no evidence for a chemical attack in Moadamiyah". It's not possible that a single rocket carrying 2 kg sarin without a mechanism to disperse it could have killed 60 people even if the sarin were of military-grade purity. The US estimate is that for a lethal effect you need roughly 10 kg sarin per hectare, evenly dispersed as an aerosol. A plausible population density for a low-rise urban area is 50 people per hectare. Unless there are other rocket impact sites in Moadamiyah not yet reported, the numbers just don't work.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. interesting idea.
      if you could provide sources for this estimate and make a calculation for moadamiyah, i will gladly add it.

      Delete
  8. From this source
    Office of Technology Assessment,
    “Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction:
    Assessing the Risks” (Washington, DC: U.S.
    Congress, 1993), August 1993, OTA-ISC-559.

    (available online at https://www.hsdl.org)

    we have an estimate that for sarin delivered by artillery rockets a coverage of 13 kg/hectare is needed for 50% fatality to unprotected troops. Assuming population density of about 50 people/hectare, about 30 kg of pure sarin would have to be delivered to cause 60 fatal casualties.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. thanks. what page is the fatalities by area?

      Delete
    2. see table 2-5 page 60 of the report (page 66 of the pdf)

      Delete
    3. Thanks! Adding to the post.

      Delete
    4. An alternative calculation (very simplified):
      1. Moadamiyah is claimed to have about 10-20% of Zamalka's casualties
      2. Zamalka had 12 rockets x 60 kg = 720 kg
      3. Moadamiyah would therefore need 72-144 kg
      4. Which is 33-66 warheads of 2.2 kg

      Delete
  9. No medical professionals have come forward to say there was no CW attack in Moadamiya. No patients have come forward to say they were injured in East Ghouta.

    There is no evidence to show patients made their way from East Ghouta to Moadamiya.

    The UN, CW experts & most importantly, local witnesses including health care professionals indicate there was a CW attack in Moadamiya.


    Record of chemical weapons attack on Moadamiya
    http://lopforum.tumblr.com/post/62066752245/record-of-chemical-weapons-attack-on-moadamiya

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As described in the conclusion, it's still hard to tell what happened there.

      The evidence you provide does not contradict the following hypothesis:
      Moadamiyah suffered a conventional attack (like all Ghouta), and treated patients from Zamalka (like all Ghouta). Reports related to these incidents created the confusion that the area is attacked by chemical weapons (as happened in all towns treating Zamalka victims).
      When they later saw the international effect, they decided to stick to the story, hoping this will help them win the war, or at least reduce their suffering.

      This is a very plausible scenario that explains all the weird findings in Moadamiyah and why patients haven't volunteered to say they were from Zamalka.

      On the other hand the chemical attack scenario is full of holes. Of course, if you can find another way to settle the 15 discrepancies listed in the post, I'll gladly change the conclusion. The goal of this site is just to find out what happened.

      Delete
  10. 150 are suffering from the effects in Moadamiya, to the west of Damascus, doctors said. http://www.philly.com/philly/news/nation_world/20130922_Syria_s_sarin_survivors_struggle_with_effects.html#LluqDfLSo8hJQabQ.99

    An activist with the human rights office in Moadamiya, which documents human rights violations there by the government, told Human Rights Watch that they documented 103 civilian deaths of Moadamiya residents.

    Another activist from the Moadamiya media center gave Human Rights Watch a similar account of the symptoms afflicting the injured. He said the area most affected was around Zeytouna Street, Ruweida neighborhood, and the main street.

    http://www.hrw.org/news/2013/08/21/syria-witnesses-describe-alleged-chemical-attacks

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is the same evidence that was already analyzed. It's consistent with a conventional attack and patients from Zamalka, later misrepresented to be a chemical attack.

      What I need is one reliable evidence of poisoning happening in Moadamiyah. Not of patients that were moved there, and not of people that died from a conventional attack.

      For Zamalka we have hundreds. For Moadamiyah none.

      Delete
  11. Let's continue on from sasa's findings at the top of the page and take a constructive, nonpartisan approach in looking at the evidence (or lack of) for a rocket attack in Moadamiyah.

    I would also suggest that we try to stick as close to an evidence based discussion as possible otherwise we will end up with all kinds of conspiracy theories.

    So. It is alleged that there were 7 rocket attacks on Moadamiyah. What evidence do we have that supports this allegation?

    ReplyDelete
  12. Cart before the horse, Jim. Lopping off identification or credibility of the sources isn't a constructive approach. HRW is the secondary source for eyewitness accounts at both locations. They were the first to report them after the dust settled in the initial confusion. Those accounts were obtained through these people:

    Moadamiyah:

    Local activists told HRW of details that people had witnessed (or heard) seven distinctive-sounding rockets they associated with the CW attack. The UN had a chance to inspect one dispersion (not impact) site with rocket remains. No video or inspection of the other sites.

    East Ghouta:

    Local activists told HRW of details that people had witnessed (or heard) thirteen rockets they associated with the CW attack. The UN inspected three of those sites (with three rocket remains). A fourth set of remains was nearby and appeared in many videos, but not inspected by the UN (the plowed field). There may have been video of one additional site. There was no video or other evidence of the other eight claimed impact sites.

    Here's what HRW said:

    "...An activist with the human rights office in Moadamiya, which documents human rights violations there by the government, told Human Rights Watch that they documented 103 civilian deaths of Moadamiya residents, apparently from suffocation. They said the dead included 15 children and 20 women, and about 625 injured. Those injured were suffering from nausea, frothing from the mouth, convulsions, shortness of breath, blurred vision, and dizziness. Medical staff treated them with Atropine, epinephrine, and hydrocortisone and washed them with a disinfectant. The activist said they had run out of Atropine and first responders had also suffered from these symptoms. He said there were no chemical plants or military bases other than the Mezze military airport and the Syrian army’s 4th Division in the area.

    Another activist from the Moadamiya media center gave Human Rights Watch a similar account of the symptoms afflicting the injured. He said the area most affected was around Zeytouna Street, Ruweida neighborhood, and the main street. He said opposition fighters were on the outskirts of the city at the time of the attack.

    A resident of Daraya who was in the Daraya field hospital after the attack told Human Rights Watch that he saw the bodies of 103 civilians brought from Moadamiya, including 15 children and 20 women. All of the victims appeared to be civilians. Human Rights Watch has not been able to verify the number of fatalities in Moadamiya..."

    http://www.hrw.org/news/2013/08/21/syria-witnesses-describe-alleged-chemical-attacks

    They were fooled by the three different witnesses from Moadamiyah or they were not. If the standard of truth here is: "Was there a video of the impact sites posted on the internet and then later inspected by the UN," then you have one site in West Ghouta and three sites in East Ghouta - period.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I think there is no evidence of the 7 rockets. There is just the 1 suspicious one inspected by UN.
    Paveway is right, all the talk from ´witnesses´and HRW has close to no value.

    The question now is, what value does the UN report have. If we look at the new UN report, they found IMPA and DIMP on the rocket fragments. But this rocket has been moved. Why bother disrupting the crime scene if it is genuine. And the findings are not consistent. (eg nothing found on the carpet).

    To me, it is clear the UN is hiding stuff in their report, but a complete lie seems far fetched. I expect they are not telling the complete truth. Why for example did they change DIMP to ´interesting chemicals´ instead of by-product?

    It seems unlikely the M14 was carrying Sarin. Then there are 3 possibilities: 1- the IMPA and DIMP was staged.
    2-Or the UN labs didn´t do a good job and got false positives.
    3- Maybe Syria has an environmental problem due to their chemical weapon plants (like the US has in Arizona) and some of the sites are contaminated by IMPA and DIMP.

    What is your opinion? Is the staging really to far fetched? Which possibility is the most likely?

    ReplyDelete
  14. "An activist with the human rights office in Moadamiya……..told Human Rights Watch that they documented 103 civilian deaths of Moadamiya residents……[victims]included 15 children and 20 women."

    So the first witness was a member of the opposition. I draw attention to the fatality breakdown as it gets interesting as we move to witness number 3.

    On to the second witness:

    "Another activist from the Moadamiya media center gave Human Rights Watch a similar account of the symptoms afflicting the injured.”

    The second witness is also a member of the opposition. Now to the third witness:

    "A resident of Daraya who was in the Daraya field hospital after the attack told Human Rights Watch that he saw the bodies of 103 civilians brought from Moadamiya, including 15 children and 20 women. All of the victims appeared to be civilians.”

    We don’t know who this resident is or if he was a member of the opposition. He could indeed be a she which shows how little we know about this person. But he/she was able to verify very precisely the same fatality breakdown as the opposition member in Moadamiyah. This “witness” was able to say with a degree of certainty, it would appear, that there were 103 civilians brought from Moadamiyah (the same number of people that are alleged to have been killed - See witness one) and that of that 103 - 15 were children and 20 women (precisely the number given by the “activist” in Moadimiyah).

    So either these witnesses are telling the truth or they are not. I just don’t feel that given what we know about them that there is enough there to support what they are saying. Another issue is the source of the stories which in this case is HRW. Considering that we know how wrong they have been over the 21st August attacks, how much credibility do we lend to their claims of speaking to witnesses?

    Though incidentally it is interesting that the “resident from Daraya” says that they received bodies from Moadamiyah as that would rule out the argument that Moadamiyah was under total lockdown as previously discussed. If it wasn't under total siege then it is still plausible that victims were transferred from Zamalka.

    Are there any videos or photos of these 103 dead bodies? We know that the rebels had cameramen there at the scene so one would imagine they would have some recording of the dead?

    Lastly;

    "Local activists told HRW of details that people had witnessed (or heard) seven distinctive-sounding rockets they associated with the CW attack. The UN had a chance to inspect one dispersion (not impact) site with rocket remains. No video or inspection of the other sites.”

    Local activists (AKA rebels) told HRW that someone told them that they either seen or heard 7 rockets……..he said. she said country we are moving into.

    Is there actually anything substantial that exists that either supports the claims that a rocket or rockets landed in Moadamiyah? Let’s even leave the substantial requirement out of this and simply ask; is there any evidence that exists to support the claims that a rocket or rockets landed in Moadamiyah?

    PS: Please don't think that I am easily dismissing any argument that you present, I am not. I am just asking you if you feel there is enough evidence to support the same arguments.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Remember, Jim - I'm willing to believe HRW, MSF and the UN. Kind of. I don't think they got everything 100%, they partially explained some things but not others, they didn't follow up and everyone involved seems to have ulterior motives. I do think there were victims at both locations. I can only guess (at this point) how that's even possible.

      Now, to your point (and the one I was trying to make): Taken at face value, I would say the internet 'evidence' in Moadamiyah has not satisfied any substantial level of proof (legal or whatever). In fact, I would argue - like you and I believe Veritas - that a lot of it seems kind of fake. If you get to that point and consider the UN findings, you naturally want to explain how their findings fit in to the faked attack. If there is some reasonable explanation (transported evidence and victims, opposition handlers), then you would still be pretty sure it was all a fabrication.

      What I keep trying to do (apparently unsuccessfully) is to convince anyone that the East Ghouta trail of evidence started in the exact same manner, so the UN results should be viewed with equal skepticism. I'll spare everyone the quote by quote, but I'm pretty sure I could replicate what you did above with the Moadamiyah reports for East Ghouta: witnesses are either opposition members, sympathizers (activists for the opposition, doctors treating the opposition) or residents living in opposition-controlled territory. They made claims to HRW or MSF, but how can we trust that? HRW said that *they* described 13 UMLACA impact sites in East Ghouta. Where's the evidence of that? Why only videos of three (maybe four) of them if HRW said they geolocated 13 based on witness claims?

      Now one of the three (or four) rockets was handled and the UN didn't even bother inspecting it. Rule that out as 'evidence' just like for Moadamiyah.

      The other three rockets? Well, one site didn't have *any* rocket remains - the UN just collected samples. No signs of a rocket besides a hole in the wall and some metal fragments. Write that off as 'no verified evidence'.

      So we're down to two: one by the fence in a field, and one in someone's living room. So we're trying to explain the deaths of hundreds of people based on an unusually small sample of rocket remains when HRW shows the exact locations of 13 (or 14 or whatever).

      Remember: the opposition provided access to the UN and took them to the selected sites. Hmmm. Now, where is the exact same skepticism for this weak evidence when it comes time to consider what the UN found? Instead of 0 for 7 we have 2 for 13 rocket remains which were claimed to be realted to the attack (claims made by opposition sympathizers via HRW). We can't even verify the two rockets were fired on the 21st. All we have is 'claims' by the opposition that they were.

      After that, we have the UN going through the same motions: interview victims, take some samples, interview medical personnel. How do I know that these weren't Sarin victims bussed up from Moadamiyah or somewhere else? How do I know the doctors aren't lying? How do I know the opposition didn't spike the sample sites with Sarin before hand?

      I'm not saying that's the case. I'm just not seeing anything dramatically different about East Ghouta than West Ghouta. There's certainly no *overwhelming* evidence that the West Ghouta story is bogus and East Ghouta story is legit. Of course, there is some marginal level of difference in the amount of supporting evidence - the East Ghouta story is better in that sense. But not enough (for me, anyways) to accept one and reject the other. Both are 'maybe'.

      Delete
    2. Thanks for that reply Paveway.

      I can now see your argument a bit clearer after that post. If I have picked you up correctly you seem to be saying that there is very little actual evidence of the 21st August attacks in any area and that what evidence is available is not complete. And therefore if you are to believe the words of HRW, MSF and the UN when it comes to Zamalka then what is the issue with believing them when it comes to Moadamiyah. Is that close enough?

      And to be honest I think you do raise an interesting argument therein. There is a lack of hard evidence and I wouldn't suggest that everyone is lying either, well I do think what HRW says needs to be treated with a caution for obvious reasons as they come across as believable as FARS News agency at times. But what I was hoping to do here was just concentrate on Moadamiyah and to see if we can any evidence that supports the official narrative of what happened there and then maybe take a closer look at Zamalka later. Then again is it possible to look at one without the other? I'm not sure.

      I think it is very dangerous to decide to believe organisations in the absence of any evidence based on a blind trust that those organisations wouldn't lie to you. I tend to need evidence before I reach any form of opinion but I respect your honesty on the matter.



      Delete
  15. Veritas, I share your uncertainty.

    "The question now is, what value does the UN report have. If we look at the new UN report, they found IMPA and DIMP on the rocket fragments. But this rocket has been moved. Why bother disrupting the crime scene if it is genuine. And the findings are not consistent. (eg nothing found on the carpet)."

    My first question is, why was the rocket moved away from its impact site? My second question would be; is there even an impact site? The UN noted themselves that the evidence had been "moved" and "manipulated". Why was there a need to move and/or manipulate evidence? Maybe this is why the UN didn't want to see anymore in Moadamiyah. Maybe the'd seen enough to tell them the site was staged?

    "What is your opinion? Is the staging really to far fetched? Which possibility is the most likely?"

    I think the evidence points to the scene in Moadamiyah being staged or at the very least doctored. That is what I think the evidence tells us. We know the munition was moved. We know that evidence was "manipulated". We have not seen ANY evidence of impact craters where any of the 7 rockets were alleged to have fallen. All environmental samples tested negative for Sarin. The IMPA and DIMP that was found on rocket fragments needs to be looked at from the point of view that the UN said the evidence had been "moved" and "manipulated". What was manipulated about it? Is this another term for "doctored" or "staged"?

    I offer up another theory that I believe the evidence supports. Moadamiyah was not under total siege but rebels had their own way in and out of the town. The town did not come under rocket attack on the night in question but as soon as they heard that Zamalka had been attacked they dispatched help. Upon the arrival of this help the Moadamiyah visitors seen that medical staff there were overwhelmed so they decided to take as many people as they could back with them for treatment. Whilst there some rebels decided to lift some rocket fragments to take back with them so that they could claim that Moadamiyah was attacked that night too.

    That theory explains why people tested positive for Sarin, why rocket fragments tested positive for IMPA and DIMP and other small issues like the scarf etc.

    How plausible or implausible is that theory? Is there any part of it that the evidence doesn't support?

    ReplyDelete
  16. First part of scenario: plausible
    So that means someone, or more likely a group of people decided at a certain moment to stage a scene in M´yah because they knew there was no Sarin. The scarf was an easy plant, could even have been a last minute decision of an individual. The metal scrap of "an" ordnance and the contaminated soil needed more planning but I guess it is possible. When the UN comes, the guides just blatantly lie about the victims in the apartment and this shows we can´t trust anything that is said.
    There is only a little IMPA and DIMP as the evidence is moved making degradation even more likely.

    Second part:
    Remain the "Petri videos" with victims from Zamalka we assume (especially MD2 and MD3). I still don´t think it is logical that you would move contaminated people in the middle of the night (the upload time of the video´s is very early the 21st I think) in a car for minimum half hour drive to the other side of Damascus to a clinic that is not much more than a basement. Wouldn´t the confined space of the car kill victims, driver and doctor due to contamination of clothes? There really is no logic in it.
    Looking at the videos there is hardly any treatment given (much less than in Zamalka videos). To decide to move people to another clinic makes sense if you´ve got more facilities but this does´t seem to be the case.
    If these people on videos were not from Zamalka but the UN got it right this time and they´re from M´yah, it could not have been Sarin that caused their illness. What was it then????

    Jim, the problem with the suggested scenario is, that it stands and falls with the victims being transported from Zamalka. And that is the least plausibel part of the scenario...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I will post my reply Jim Dobbin's original question: What evidence do we have for 7 rocket attacks on Moadamiyah? (The responses above are not in a thread, as they maybe should be.)

      There is this video of an alleged witness in Moadamiyah:
      Because of chemicals in Madamiya Al-Sham on 21st of August morning between 4-5 am. Those who rushed to rescue had died more than those affected.
      His Father and brother died. May God accept them.
      And he is affected as you can see. The issue is of its owner. There is no power but God Almighty. We belong to God and to him we shall return.
      We were not able to do anything...
      – Which area of Madamiyah Al-Sham has been shelled, Sir?
      The area that was mostly shelled was Al-Rawda street.
      – Al-Rawda street?
      And he was affected with his family on Al-Rawda street. Al-Rawda street and Al-Zeitoune street, five chemical rockets...


      ***

      The list of Moadamiyah videos is here. The videos from Daraya seem to show the same field hospital.

      Delete
    2. veritas,
      I imagine it's the other way around: all medical personnel in the area rushed to Zamalka. They initially helped at the spot, but when everything filled up and supplies were running short they started moving them back.
      Note that it's definitely possible that there was second-hand contamination. No one said otherwise.

      Delete
    3. Sasa, Petri,
      I guess it is possible but the MD2 and MD3 videos were the ones uploaded "20-8-13". What time Damascus time would that be?
      Let´s make a reconstruction:
      So it´s the middle of the night, doctors (how many are left in that area??) hear about the Zamalka attack, rush to that area (no one is scared of becoming contaminated too) through contested area, of course they did not think of bringing their atropine shots and IV´s (seems to be the only treatment they had), saw that already the hospitals were completely full, they decided they had floor space in M´day (it shows out of the videos there are no real beds), and then put the deadly sick people back in their cars (hoping there would be no vomiting and the rest...), to first decontaminate them (videos show rinsing with water) and then give them a dry floors space in that basement ´hospital´. In these first videos there is very little injecting but a lot of heart massage. All on those very sick, dying people who had just travelled more than half hour by car, probably under sniper fire.
      Interesting would be to see the upload time and check if at least time wise it is possible. Logically I would say very implausible.

      Delete
    4. Thanks Petri, but what I was looking for was any actual evidence that rockets landed in Moadamiyah. According to HRW rebels told them that residents told them that they think there may have been 7 rockets fired. What I am trying to ascertain is that if there exists any evidence to support that claim such as, but not limited to, impact craters.

      "Which area of Madamiyah Al-Sham has been shelled, Sir?
      The area that was mostly shelled was Al-Rawda street.
      – Al-Rawda street?"

      How reliable is that witness in the video Petri? He looks deranged but certainly not as if he had been exposed to Sarin. If he isn't suffering from Sarin exposure what is he suffering from? What other evidence do we have that rockets landed in Al-Rawda street? Is there other video Petri?

      Delete
    5. "Jim, the problem with the suggested scenario is, that it stands and falls with the victims being transported from Zamalka. And that is the least plausibel part of the scenario..."

      Yes I agree it does hinge on that scenario. Maybe we can revisit it at later stage then if more evidence comes to light.

      OK, so how do you assume the victims were exposed to Sarin in Moadamiyah if not by rocket?

      Delete
    6. I added some timestamps to the wiki page. The first video, MD1 was uploaded at 3:35 am UTC. There is thus time for Zamalka victims to reach Moadamiyah of Darayya. This video claims to show Zamalka and Ain Tarma victims being treated somewhere in Douma. There is thus evidence that victims were transported.

      There is however another problem with the timestamps, in fact a fundamental flaw in all the evidence. Sarin kills in less than 15 minutes. Sarin victims with a lethal dose can thus only be treated on the spot. By the time they reach a field hospital they would be long dead. Yet in the videos we see several victims first treated in hospitals and then literally dying into the hands of doctors. This slow but inevitable death is far more consistent with chlorine.

      In the two sets of Darayya videos we see six rebel (or hostage?) looking men taken to a morgue. In the first videos they still seem to be alive and receiving treatment

      ***

      It now seems to me that the Darayya field hospital is distinct from the Moadamiyah field hospital. We may have a total of six different field hospitals in cellars with almost identical construction. It is very difficult to tell apart the locations on the videos.

      Delete
    7. I don´t agree with you that there is time for the Zamalka victims to reach M´yah to fill up the hospital and get the video on the internet by 3:35 (see my reconstruction below). Don´t you have time stamps of MD2 and MD3? These are the more convincing videos of the 3 MDs.
      Sarin can kill within 15 minutes but it is not digital. There are in between situations that you recover or die later on (was also case in Japan). I guess with the unorganized treatment given in Ghouta, your chances were pretty slim of surviving...

      Delete
  17. Upload times are stamped Pacific Daylight Time (location of YouTube servers). UTC-7 with Damascus at UTC+3. Ten hour difference, so even at 9:55 A.M. on Aug. 21st in Damascus, it was still only 11:55 P.M., Aug. 20th in California.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Paveway, Sasa,
    Is 11:55 the time of the MD1-3 videos ( I´m not so good with Youtube...)? Then I guess theoretically it would be possible for the patients to come from Zamalka.
    Suggested timeline (time taken in brackets):
    -patients get poisoned by Sarin in Zamalka at 2:30 AM,
    - they get transferred to a Zamalka hospital (+30 min),
    - get selected by a M´yah medic for better treatment (+30 min),
    - driven to M´yah in a packed car or ambulance (seen the number of patients in de videos, the cars or vans must have been packed or there would have been a real convoy heading to M´yah) (+30 min),
    - unloaded and put on the floor in the basement clinic (15 min).
    - Take an extra half hour to fill the clinic up to the level we see in the video (+30 min)
    - Another 15 min to make the actual footage (+15 min),
    - the footage has to be put on the internet (+15 min).

    This whole procedure adds up to around 3 hours. I think 3 hours is very optimistic (eg that would have meant an evacuation to the Zamalka clinic while the Sarin cloud was still fully developing, driving to M´yah through the Sarin cloud...) but even if we double the time taken, we would still be within the 9:55 AM (Damascus time) when the video was uploaded. So seems possible.

    But Paveway and Sasa, does it seem likely to you the patients are not from M´yah?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Good theoretical work there veritas.

      For me it's about trying to figure out how the people in or of Moadamiyah were infected by Sarin. To date there exists no evidence that rockets landed in the town and this is the method of chemical attack we are told. So if there were no rocket attacks and the argument for victims being bussed in from Zamalka doesn't appear plausible then we need to try and find out how the SAA got Sarin into the town to poison the people there.

      I have studied this at length the last few days and I have it narrowed down to the following possibilities (tell me if there are anymore):

      1. Moadamiyah was attacked by SAA rockets on the 21st August carrying Sarin (number of rockets is said to be 7) - We have no evidence to support this theory. No videos, no pictures of impact craters and the UN wasn't interested, apparently, in looking for any.

      2.There were no rocket attacks in Moadamiyah that night from the SAA but instead they found another method to deploy Sarin in the town to affect the people there. - This theory has never been suggested even by the opposition so it can be pretty much discounted.

      3.There were no rocket attacks on Moadamiyah but as soon as they heard that Zamalka had been attacked they dispatched medical assistance. Upon arrival and seeing that the medical teams already there were under pressure the Moadamiyah team decided to ship some of the victims back with them. - This theory, as already discussed, is not without its hurdles but out of the other 3 scenarios it makes most sense.

      4.There were no rocket attacks on Moadamiyah and nobody was bussed there to get medic help. Instead what happened was that a rebel group unleashed Sarin (which there is mounting evidence of the rebels having) by another means poisoning the people themselves in the hope to trigger a US response. - This theory is supported by the fact that there is no evidence of a rocket attack and does away with the theory that people were bussed in from Zamalka for assistance. The issues with this theory are that no environmental samples tested positive for Sarin so how did they realise it?

      Can anything be added to that list? Has anyone came across any confirmation of the number of fatalities in the town? If we can't confirm number of dead then this does limit the number of possibilities.

      Delete
    2. Jim, let´s discuss theory 4.

      There are some environmental samples that tested positive for breakdown products in M´yah. Seen there is no complete agreement between the labs, it is probably just a ´trace´dosis (let´s not assume it were false positives....). I think NO GB is completely realistic seen the elapsed time (following literature you would not expect to find GB, it would be degraded). The IMPA and DIMP does not originate from the planted rocket, it is totally unrelated.
      The pos enviro samples were found on the outside terrace. The Sarin could have been unleashed at another location, the plume spread and got thinner. Where the UN inspected, they found just a little. The Sarin might even have been released in a confined space and with time spread out.
      Look at the early ´Petri´ M´yah videos (Petri, what a great job you did collecting this material!). The victims are apparently all adult male. I don´t see children, only 1 female victim (all covered up in a blue blanket, what kind of treatment is that!), in a seemingly very bad conditions (seems to have died, but later on she is getting an injection).
      The victim population in these early videos is completely different from the Zamalka videos. Is this an indication of how Sarin was unleashed on them?

      Delete
    3. Another scenario, Jim: the opposition was storing quantities of Sarin, other CWs and maybe other conventional ammunition in the buildings. Opposition forces would have been there in force to secure the stockpiles. These would have been a natural target for SAA artillery, which would have had individual buildings pretty well dialed-in after several months of shelling.

      For what it's worth, the al Rawda mosque had been partially destroyed from bombardment weeks earlier according to YouTube vids. The target there appeared to be a building next to the ruined mosque that morning, not the mosque itself. The second building attacked was half a kilometer to the east. I believe one of the witnesses reported that everyone in that second four-story apartment building died.

      Delete
  19. MD1 to 3 seem to be filmed in darkness, means that would be before +-7:00AM. Does anyone else think it is filmed at night? That gives a max timeframe of 4hours and 30 minutes to get everything done. Seems like a tight schedule but still possible...

    ReplyDelete
  20. Sasa and Jim,
    Petri adds a time stamp of 3:35 Damascus time to MD1. I think that rules out your M´yah scenario Sasa?

    ReplyDelete
  21. I guess the time is 6:35 Damascus time. Which makes the transfer in the suggested scenario still theoretically possible, but unlikely Sasa?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think it's possible, but I agree our understanding of Moadamiyah is still lacking.

      The few eyewitness accounts we have seem to center around a "big explosion" in the Al Rawda mosque, but the UN was not brought there but rather to the house where the rocket body was planted. So that probably wasn't a chemical attack.

      The fact that many people seemed to have been killed in a conventional attack in Moadamiyah, just a few hours after social media was filled with reports of a chemical attack elsewhere makes it very difficult to understand the reports and videos.

      The proposed scenario of someone just distributing sarin in the air is plausible, but I somehow feel there must be a better explanation.

      Delete
    2. From checking the Petri video time stamps, I think M´yah has some of the earliest videos. That makes the info extra valuable since no time for staging. Don´t you think the almost exclusive male victims ratio in these videos is interesting?
      Maybe the combination with Paveway´s scenario just here above could be interesting. Let´s say the Vulcanoes were used in Zamalka (fired by the Liwa brigade as shown on video), M´yah was out of reach and to complex to stage another launch, so the false flag team had an alternative solution for M´day. A quantity of sarin was released by triggering an explosion in a building where it was stored. Maybe the building was close to a safe house of rivaling rebels (infighting avant-la-lettre). That explains the male victims.

      Of course the rebels didn´t want to show the crime scene to the UN (internal explosion would have been clear indication of rebel culpability), instead they staged the rocket scene.
      On the outside terrace degradation products were found in trace quantities, because M´yah had been attacked and the apartment was somewhat in the downstream edges of the plume.

      That the victims were bussed in at that early hour does really not make sense to me. Before 6:35 there where already victims, not arriving there, but ´fully installed´ (check with the time reconstruction).
      The only reason the idea came up of the victims being bussed in was to explain the lack of Sarin detected by UN in relation to the rocket. But degradation products were found, but not related to the rockets. Additionally the videos are there.
      I think we´re attaching to much importance to UN analysis in relation to the M14. If Zamalka is a false flag, M´may may be one too with another method of dispersal.

      Delete
    3. I still think the current explanation is the most likely, but I must say the "second false flag" theory is starting to make more sense to me.

      Delete
    4. We´re treating the M´yah evidence differently from the E. Ghouta evidence. I support what Paveway says:

      "I'm just not seeing anything dramatically different about East Ghouta than West Ghouta. There's certainly no *overwhelming* evidence that the West Ghouta story is bogus and East Ghouta story is legit."

      Concerning the videos:
      We accept Zamalka evidence as proof.
      We try to explain away the M´yah videos.

      Concerning the UN report, (enviro samples):
      We accept the Zamalka enviro samples as proof.
      We explain away the M´yah samples (we say the proof is staged)

      Concerning the medical samples:
      We accept the Zamalka samples.
      Again we explain away the M´yah samples (victims test positive because they are not from where they say they are).

      Concerning the oral reports:
      We accept the Zamalka reports as carrying some truth.
      We explain away the M´yah samples (all untrue even concerning that there were any victims at all there).

      And the difference in treatment of all the evidence is because of the 1 badly staged M14...

      Delete
    5. Yeah, that's exactly what I meant. Thanks, Veritas.

      Delete
    6. I completely disagree. The evidence in Zamalka is far stronger, including:
      1. Multiple authentic-looking impact site, containing several spent warheads capable of carrying sarin.
      2. Dozens of reliable eyewitness accounts describing nerve agent symptoms.
      3. Videos showing panic in the streets.
      4. Amount of sarin matching the number of fatalities (Moadamiyah requires 50-100 M14s).

      Bottom line is Moadamiyah is an easy fabrication job (still done badly). Zamalka would be a huge effort, executed perfectly - probably the best in history.

      Delete
    7. Sasa, I have not seen any evidence for a gas attack on Zamalka, apart from dead pigeons in Erbin on August 24. People were killed, yes, but there is virtually no evidence that poisonous gasses had been released into the atmosphere.

      "Activist say" type of evidence does not count. (Maybe you should start o page on witness testimony.) There is a total of 30 seconds of panic video from Kafr Batna.

      The only evidence that links the UMLACA rockets to chemical attacks is the Liwa al-Islam video. If that is fake, then there is little reason to believe that the rockets were the delivery mechanism, apart from – once again – "activist say".

      Delete
    8. Petri, No geolocation for the M´yah medical center? Would be interesting to know where the MD1-3 videos were recorded...

      Delete
    9. Petri,
      I'm definitely open to alternative explanations. What is the scenario you suggest for:
      1. Multiple authentic-looking impact site, containing several spent warheads capable of carrying sarin.
      2. Dozens of reliable eyewitness accounts describing nerve agent symptoms.
      3. Videos (video?) showing panic in the streets.
      4. Sarin findings on site and in blood.

      Delete
  22. Sasa,
    I think you are working here with the premise that the only Sarin delivery mechanism are rockets.
    1. You don´t need images of authentic-looking impact sites if the delivery mechanism isn´t a rocket. (alternative for M´yah: internal explosion in a building)
    2. and 3. Maybe the public relation department in M´yah was less organized.
    4. Same as in 1., who says rockets were the delivery vehicle? Very unlikely it were M14´s, no evidence at all for that.

    Possibly there is less evidence than in Zamalka, that does´t mean we should dismiss what evidence there is.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That part is definitely plausible. What I think is implausible is staging the mountains of evidence in Zamalka without making any major slip-ups.

      Delete
  23. Sasa, what is your opinion on MD1 and MD3 Petri videos regardless of where the victims came from? I notice strange stuff but I can´t imagine these scenes being staged completely.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. In general, looks very authentic. The most obvious thing is that everyone's dead. There is no one exhibiting symptoms of nerve agent poisoning. This is a good match to the theory of them being transported from Zamalka - you either recover or die by this time.

      Delete
    2. In MD1, the victims seem dead indeed(except victim number 2 with black T-shirt, he moves his hand).
      In MD2 and 3, the victims seem to be alive. Why else would they be decontaminated (if transferred, would have expect contamination to be done in Zamalka) and be given heart massage ? The women in blue is even getting an injection, although she seems to have died (she is being held by the neck, strange...). She also seems to be the only women victim there.
      I agree, the symptoms seem to be different from the later videos.

      Do you think they are getting specialized treatment there, enough to have them moved through a war zone? There seems to be less treatment there than in Zamalka.

      Delete
    3. Good catch on the guy moving his hand. weird.
      As to decontamination and heart massage - pretty standard. They just got a truckload of bodies from Zamalka. They don't know their history. They have to decontaminate and attempt CPR.

      Delete
    4. Don´t think CPR will be very successful the way they´re doing it. Decontaminating a DEAD body doesn´t make any sense either does it, neither does CPRing dead bodies.
      "a truckload of bodies"? Come on Sasa, you know things don´t add up with the Zamalka scenario here! Love your sense of humor.

      Delete
    5. Help me understand the problem:
      I'm imagining they received a van containing some ten victims of a chemical attack. They don't have any other details. First thing they do is decontaminate. Then they check vital signs and see no pulse. They don't know that these people are dead for 2 hours, so they do CPR.
      Sounds like a pretty plausible scenario. No?

      Delete
    6. No Sasa, that does´t seem plausible (are you teasing me??).

      First thing that doesn´t seem plausible is loading a truck with deadly sick people from Zamalka to M´yah not to get intensive care but floor space and nothing else. Remember, in the confusion, the average rebel doesn´t know where the rockets have landed! In the first confusion, Chemical weapons were everywhere, also in M´yah. How could they have known there was still floorspace available there (as if you would´t be able to get floorspace somewhere closer by!).

      Secondly this does´t seem plausible: "They don't know that these people are dead for 2 hours, so they do CPR".
      I think a person being dead is obvious to anyone (especially if the person was already dead for 2 hours...), certainly to someone who knows how to do CPR. Maybe they believed a collective miracle was possible but that seems far fetched, don´t you think so?


      Delete
    7. The Mint press Yaya article was dismissed due to not in line with the evidence. Maybe it is in line with some evidence???? It is just not in line with the M14 evidence which we know was planted... The info from the article might have some seeds of truth in it.

      Delete
    8. Definitely not teasing. Just trying to understand where you feel uncomfortable with the scenario.

      It's not just floor space. It's medics and supplies.

      The conventional attack in Moadamiyah was only at 5AM, so there was no confusion yet. All reports were from the Zamalka area.

      How is it obvious that a person is dead? Rigor mortis sets in only after 3-4 hours. In an emergency situation when you get a person without a pulse, you do CPR. Why not?


      As to the Mint press story - It provides zero evidence. Just a few ambiguous quotes. Way below the threshold of what we usually require. If we are going to trust this level of evidence, then Moadamiyah was an M14 chemical attack beyond any doubt... (:

      Delete
    9. I give up! I definitively don´t have enough expertise to comment on this issue. I had this idea that recognizing a dead person should not be that difficult but I guess that is not a generally shared assumption....

      Delete
  24. Something happened in Darayya today. The Darayya Local Council YouTube account has published five videos of gas victimes in a field hospital:

    YallaSouriya: #Syria, 5 videos of Wounded due to using of poisonous gases in Daraya

    Some of the victims are given oxygen, some seem to be receiving atropine shots.

    ReplyDelete