OPCW: Difference between revisions
Created/expanded by automated agent (ComradeBanana task) |
Created/expanded by automated agent (ComradeBanana task) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
'''The OPCW''' debate — Haz responding to Jackson Hinkle's Vaush debate on the Douma findings ([https://infrared-transcripts.pages.dev/en/youtube/black-lenin/t1hkwm_t0sk/ Haz reacts to Vaush vs Jackson]). | |||
Hinkle opened accusing Haz's side of "conspiracism" ("I have a lot of experience debating Holocaust deniers"); the actual question was institutional: did the OPCW final report represent its own inspectors' findings, or was the dissenting engineering assessment suppressed? Haz's side: the leaked inspector dissent '''is''' the story, and "conspiracism" is what institutions say when their own experts contradict them. | |||
The Douma forensics themselves are at [[2018 Douma Chemical Attacks]]; the Iraq precedent at [[Scott Ritter, Waging Peace book]]. | |||
== See also == | == See also == | ||
* [[2018 Douma Chemical Attacks]] | * [[2018 Douma Chemical Attacks]] | ||
== References == | == References == | ||
Latest revision as of 10:50, 21 August 2026
The OPCW debate — Haz responding to Jackson Hinkle's Vaush debate on the Douma findings (Haz reacts to Vaush vs Jackson).
Hinkle opened accusing Haz's side of "conspiracism" ("I have a lot of experience debating Holocaust deniers"); the actual question was institutional: did the OPCW final report represent its own inspectors' findings, or was the dissenting engineering assessment suppressed? Haz's side: the leaked inspector dissent is the story, and "conspiracism" is what institutions say when their own experts contradict them.
The Douma forensics themselves are at 2018 Douma Chemical Attacks; the Iraq precedent at Scott Ritter, Waging Peace book.