Read on Twitter
Look at @EliotHiggins' "response": he won't answer my question ( https://twitter.com/aaronjmate/status/1321123817863917568?s=20), but he will try to weasel his way out of it by impugning me to others.
I'd say he's getting desperate to save his reputation, but in fact he's only affirming it: a NATO state-funded coward. https://twitter.com/EliotHiggins/status/1321151764230557698
I'd say he's getting desperate to save his reputation, but in fact he's only affirming it: a NATO state-funded coward. https://twitter.com/EliotHiggins/status/1321151764230557698
Update: NATO state-funded propaganda outlet @Bellingcat and its founder @EliotHiggins still have not answered my simple question: did they verify the claim at the heart of their latest attempt to attack the OCPW whistleblowers? Their silence speaks volumes. More to come.
Anyone want to know the answer to why @EliotHiggins never answered my question? Because it exposed that the premise of @Bellingcat's latest attack on OPCW whistleblowers was an egregious falsehood.
@TheGrayzoneNews has the proof: https://thegrayzone.com/2020/10/28/draft-debacle-bellingcat-smears-opcw-whistleblower-journalists-with-false-letter-farcical-claims/
@TheGrayzoneNews has the proof: https://thegrayzone.com/2020/10/28/draft-debacle-bellingcat-smears-opcw-whistleblower-journalists-with-false-letter-farcical-claims/
Bellingcat claimed to have uncovered a letter that disproves OPCW inspectors who challenged the censorship of their Syria chemical probe. But in one of many falsehoods, @Bellingcat's "letter" was in fact only a draft that was never sent. @TheGrayzoneNews obtained the real letter.
@Bellingat's hit piece on the OPCW whistleblowers is based on a letter they thought was sent, but actually wasn't. Based on that false premise, they made outlandish claims & accused others, including me, of concealing evidence that doesn't actually exist.
. @Bellingcat's false premise leads to a series of nonsense. They try to claim that five paragraphs of an unsent draft letter somehow "proves that a chemical attack did occur" in Douma & "that any notion of a cover-up at the OPCW is false." Those are quite the five paragraphs!
Aother insane @Bellingcat claim: "...behind closed doors, the Russian and Syrian governments have both agreed with the conclusions of the OPCW report" that, Bellingcat says, proves Syria's guilt. Yes that's right: according to Bellingcat, Syria & Russia have secretly confessed!
It's worth considering what this claim says about the intellectual seriousness of Bellingcat & those who amplified their article. They're asserting that Syria and Russia secretly declared themselves guilty of a murderous chemical attack, all while fighting the claim in public.
Beyond their imagination & limited intellectual capabilities, this insane claim is based on a maximalist, fanciful reading of two paragraphs in Bellingcat's unsent OPCW draft letter, that in no way supports the conclusion and is contradicted by what Russia & Syria actually said.
We have also published an April 2019 letter from OPCW scientist Dr. Brendan Whelan -- author of the original, censored Douma report -- to the Director General outlining his concerns about the manipulation of his investigation & the dubious final report.
https://thegrayzone.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/BW-letter-to-OPCW-DG-April-2019.pdf
https://thegrayzone.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/BW-letter-to-OPCW-DG-April-2019.pdf
Just compare Dr. Whelan's eight-page letter to the five *paragraphs* published by Bellingcat (from a draft letter that wasn't even sent!) and judge for yourself who is more credible, and substantive. https://web.archive.org/web/20201026212840/https://www.bellingcat.com/news/mena/2020/10/26/unpublished-opcw-douma-correspondence-raises-doubts-about-transparency-of-opcw-leaks-promoters/
