Credibility Lost, OPCW Smears Truth-Telling Whistleblowers

Credibility Lost, OPCW Smears Truth-Telling Whistleblowers

by Stephen Lendman ( – Home – Stephen Lendman)

In deference to US-led Western interests, the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) abandoned its mandate and credibility.

Its doctored Fact Finding Mission (FFM) report on an April 2018 false flag Douma, Syria CW incident, pretending otherwise, shows the organization can never be trusted.

Publishing truth-telling information from an OPCW whistleblower last November, WikiLeaks exposed the organization as a pro-Western imperial tool.

The alleged Douma incident was fake. No one died, was hospitalized, or became ill from exposure to chemical or other toxins.

Local eyewitnesses and medical personnel debunked the OPCW’s falsified narrative. 

Russian technical experts found no evidence of chemical or other toxins in soil samples and other analysis of the site in question.

Yet the OPCW FFM turned reality on its head, doctoring its findings to serve US-led Western interests, falsely blaming Syrian authorities for a CW incident that never happened.

Former OPCW inspection team leader Ian Henderson exposed the ruse, setting the record straight on Douma, explaining that the FFM found no evidence of a CW incident.

Yet the doctored OPCW report falsely claimed otherwise, its assessment polar opposite facts on the ground.

In response to whistleblower truth-telling, OPCW director general Fernando Arias claimed “possible breaches of confidentiality,” adding:

“(T)wo former OPCW officials violated their obligations concerning the protection of confidential information related to the FFM Douma investigation” — referred to as “Inspector A and Inspector B (Henderson and a second inspector called Alex).”

Detailed damage control followed, failing to overcome truth-telling revelations that the organization doctored its final Douma report to comply with anti-Syria Western interests.

No canisters containing chlorine were airdropped in Douma, evidence showing they were manually placed on the ground.

OPCW damage control revealed no new information, nothing refuting whistleblower truth-telling, nothing discrediting them.

Calling them disgruntled staffers who breached agency confidentiality, not whistleblowers, fell flat.

Urging new measures to prevent leaks was code language for wanting enhanced cover-up efforts ahead.

Claiming Henderson and Alex had incomplete information defied reality. So was calling their hard truths non-credible.

Henderson explained that the “final FFM report…d(id) not reflect the views of (OPCW) team members (sent) to Douma,” adding:

It “did not make clear what new findings, facts, information, data, or analysis in the fields of witness testimony, toxicology studies, chemical analysis, and engineering, and/or ballistic studies had resulted in the complete turn-around in the situation from what was understood by the majority of the team, and the entire Douma team, in July 2018.”

“In my case, I had followed up with a further six months of engineering and ballistic studies into these cylinders, the result of which had provided further support for the view that there had not been a chemical attack.”

He accused the OPCW of ignoring toxicological and chemical analysis, along with eyewitness testimonies.

OPCW head Arias defied reality, falsely saying:

“Inspectors A and B are not whistle-blowers (sic).” 

“They are individuals who could not accept that their views were not backed by evidence (sic).” 

“When their views could not gain traction (sic), they took matters into their own hands and breached their obligations to the organization (sic).” 

“Their behavior is even more egregious as they had manifestly incomplete information about the Douma investigation (sic).” 

“Therefore, as could be expected, their conclusions are erroneous, uninformed, and wrong (sic).”

Facts on the ground revealed by Henderson and Alex turned the above disinformation on its head.

Flouting its mandate time and again, the OPCW lost all credibility.

Disbanding and replacing it with an independent chemical watchdog, free from external influence and control, is the only acceptable option. 

VISIT MY WEBSITE: (Home – Stephen Lendman). Contact at


My newest book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: How the US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at

Up ↑

Create your website with
Get started
%d bloggers like this: