DISINFO: Non-transparent report of OPCW on Douma attack is biased

DISINFORMATION CASE DETAILS

AI translations:

DISINFO: Non-transparent report of OPCW on Douma attack is biased

SUMMARY

The OPCW report on the alleged use of toxic chemicals as a weapon in Douma is full of gaps, discrepancies, and inconsistencies. The OPCW, which announced the use of chlorine in Douma in April 2018, did not take into account elements presented by Russia, Syria and even by British journalists, in particular the recent statement by the British journalist Riam Dalati. After 6 months of investigation, according to this journalist, he could prove, without any doubt that the scene in the hospital of Douma was staged and no death occurred in the hospital. The investigation conducted by OPCW was not transparent enough.

RESPONSE

Recurring disinformation narrative on the chemical attack in Douma and the OPCW report covering it. OPCW's investigations of the use of chemical weapons are technical in nature and are designed to establish whether or not chemical weapons have been used, not to identify who used them. The methodological considerations, activities and timeline are an integral part OPCW's final report on Douma. It does not leave any doubts on the detection of chlorine on Douma: "based on the levels of chlorinated organic derivatives, detected in several environmental samples gathered at the sites of alleged use of toxic chemicals, which are not naturally present in the environment, the FFM concludes that the objects from which the samples were taken at both locations had been in contact with one or more substances containing reactive chlorine" (page 3 of the report). The tweet of BBC's producer Riam Dalati, mentioned in the claim, doesn't deny the chemical attack; "The producer was expressing his personal opinions about some of the video footage that emerged after the attack but has not claimed that the attack did not happen", the BBC spokesperson told Sputnik.

Disclaimer

Cases in the EUvsDisinfo database focus on messages in the international information space that are identified as providing a partial, distorted, or false depiction of reality and spread key pro-Kremlin messages. This does not necessarily imply, however, that a given outlet is linked to the Kremlin or editorially pro-Kremlin, or that it has intentionally sought to disinform. EUvsDisinfo publications do not represent an official EU position, as the information and opinions expressed are based on media reporting and analysis of the East Stratcom Task Force.

    Why do you not like our audio?

    it will help us to improve it

      Your opinion matters!

      Data Protection Information *

        Subscribe to the Disinfo Review

        Your weekly update on pro-Kremlin disinformation

        Data Protection Information *

        The Disinformation Review is sent through Mailchimp.com. See Mailchimp’s privacy policy and find out more on how EEAS protects your personal data.

        🎵 Playlist