So, here is what happened, as I remember it:
On 4th / 5th April 2017 news outlets around the world started reporting that the Syrian airforce had used chemical weapons in an attack. Pictures appeared on social networks and the internet with experts claiming that the most likely cause was Sarin gas. The Syrian regime denied any wrongdoing and claimed they had attacked a rebel hideout and in the process hit a rebel weapons dump where the chemicals were stored.
“Experts” claimed that this was an unlikely scenario. Most news outlets said that all pictures and “proof” was from local sources only and had not been confirmed, but never the less the articles made it sound like a Syrian airstrike was the only possible explanation and that the Assad regime, of cause, would deny it.
I myself was convinced of this narrative and did not question it, as it fit nicely with previous reports and actions in this war.
So, when President Trump decided to launch 60 odd Tomahawk Cruise Missiles at an airfield used by the Syrian airforce, I felt that it was justified (in my opinion not the best way to respond (or even close to it), but at least a response!).
However, research by Seymour M. Hersh, a US journalist, has now shown that “the facts” that were presented in the media actually weren’t facts at all and that things happened rather differently.
Spoiler Alert: the denial by and version of Russia/ the Syrian Regime now appears to be the true story!
Days before the airstrike, the Russians informed the Americans that they had provided the Syrian airforce with a guided bomb to be used for a high-value target. Quote from a US intelligence official: “None of this makes any sense,” one officer told colleagues upon learning of the decision to bomb. “We KNOW that there was no chemical attack … the Russians are furious. Claiming we have the real intel and know the truth ….“
The Russians (speaking for the Syrian forces) informed the Americans days in advanced about all details concerning the attack, including the intended target’s location, flight path, weapons to be used etc. US officials confirmed that the Russians played by the book.
The attack on the building, which had a store on the ground floor, triggered secondary explosions, according to US Bomb Damage Assessment report. These secondary explosions caused the toxic fallout, most likely involving fertiliser and other chemicals stored at the store.
A Guardian reporter, who reached the city first, interviewed witnesses who stated that they could smell the gas; Sarin gas is odourless and invisible.
Also, victims treated at multiple facilities around the attack site showed various symptoms, only some of them similar to Sarin gas. This points to multiple explosions and reactions of multiple chemicals, something that would not have happened with a Sarin-bomb. Also, a bomb equipped with a chemical warhead would not have any percussive or ignition power to trigger secondary explosions (why build a chemical bomb that people can see or hear and run away from?)!
The following day the American Ambassador to the UN, Haley, publicly blamed Russia to be complicit, displaying photographs of dead children. NBC News quoted American officials as confirming that nerve gas had been used and Haley tied the attack directly to Syrian President Assad.
Despite all this information, Trump could not be swayed and stuck to his interpretation which lead him to retaliate the way he did.
One prominent TV anchorman, Brian Williams of MSNBC, used the word “beautiful” to describe the images of the Tomahawks being launched at sea. Speaking on CNN, Fareed Zakaria said: “I think Donald Trump became president of the United States.” A review of the top 100 American newspapers showed that 39 of them published editorials supporting the bombing in its aftermath, including the New York Times, Washington Post and Wall Street Journal.
Lesson to be learned: DO NOT TRUST ANY INFORMATION released shortly after an event, there is always more to the story.
