Expert speaks out!!!! [Archive] - Debate Policy

View Full Version : Expert speaks out!!!!

Tyr-Ziu Saxnot

04-17-2017, 04:32 PM

https://www.yahoo.com/news/mit-expert-claims-latest-chemical-100819428.html

World
MIT expert claims latest chemical weapons attack in Syria was staged
Tareq Haddad,International Business Times 11 hours ago

A leading weapons academic has claimed that the Khan Sheikhoun nerve agent attack in Syria was staged, raising questions about who was responsible.

Theodore Postol, a professor emeritus at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), issued a series of three reports in response to the White House's finding that Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad perpetrated the attack on 4 April.

Trending: MIT expert claims latest chemical weapons attack in Syria was staged

He concluded that the US government's report does not provide any "concrete" evidence that Assad was responsible, adding it was more likely that the attack was perpetrated by players on the ground.

Postol said: "I have reviewed the [White House's] document carefully, and I believe it can be shown, without doubt, that the document does not provide any evidence whatsoever that the US government has concrete knowledge that the government of Syria was the source of the chemical attack in Khan Sheikhoun, Syria at roughly 6am to 7am on 4 April, 2017.

Don't miss: Sir Malcolm Rifkind: 'Very strong belief' that US sabotaged North Korean missile

"In fact, a main piece of evidence that is cited in the document point to an attack that was executed by individuals on the ground, not from an aircraft, on the morning of 4 April.

"This conclusion is based on an assumption made by the White House when it cited the source of the sarin release and the photographs of that source. My own assessment is that the source was very likely tampered with or staged, so no serious conclusion could be made from the photographs cited by the White House."

Most popular: Hackers attack Britain First leaders' website: 'Stop being racist to Muslims'

The image Postol refers to is that of a crater containing a shell inside, which is said to have contained the sarin gas.

His analysis of the shell suggests that it could not have been dropped from an airplane as the damage of the casing is inconsistent from an aerial explosion. Instead, Postol said it was more likely that an explosive charge was laid upon the shell containing sarin, before being detonated.

Khan Sheikhoun crater

"The explosive acted on the pipe as a blunt crushing mallet," Postol said. "It drove the pipe into the ground while at the same time creating the crater.

"Since the pipe was filled with sarin, which is an incompressible fluid, as the pipe was flattened, the sarin acted on the walls and ends of the pipe causing a crack along the length of the pipe and also the failure of the cap on the back end."

The implication of Postol's analysis is that it was carried out by anti-government insurgents as Khan Sheikhoun is in militant-controlled territory of Syria.

Postol, formerly a scientific advisor at the Department of Defense (DoD), has previously outlined similar inconsistencies with US intelligence reports. Following the 2013 chemical weapons attack in eastern Ghouta, Postol again said the evidence did not suggest Assad was responsible – a finding that was later corroborated by the United Nations.

walid muallem

In his latest reports, Postol hit out at what he says is a "politicisation" of intelligence findings.

Postol said: "No competent analyst would miss the fact that the alleged sarin canister was forcefully crushed from above, rather than exploded by a munition within it.

"All of these highly amateurish mistakes indicate that this White House report, like the earlier Obama White House Report [from Ghouta in 2013], was not properly vetted by the intelligence community as claimed.

"I have worked with the intelligence community in the past, and I have grave concerns about the politicisation of intelligence that seems to be occurring with more frequency in recent times – but I know that the intelligence community has highly capable analysts in it.

"And if those analysts were properly consulted about the claims in the White House document they would have not approved the document going forward."

Tyr-Ziu Saxnot

04-17-2017, 06:00 PM

World
MIT expert claims latest chemical weapons attack in Syria was staged
Tareq Haddad,International Business Times 11 hours ago

A leading weapons academic has claimed that the Khan Sheikhoun nerve agent attack in Syria was staged, raising questions about who was responsible.

Theodore Postol, a professor emeritus at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), issued a series of three reports in response to the White House's finding that Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad perpetrated the attack on 4 April.

Trending: MIT expert claims latest chemical weapons attack in Syria was staged

He concluded that the US government's report does not provide any "concrete" evidence that Assad was responsible, adding it was more likely that the attack was perpetrated by players on the ground.

Postol said: "I have reviewed the [White House's] document carefully, and I believe it can be shown, without doubt, that the document does not provide any evidence whatsoever that the US government has concrete knowledge that the government of Syria was the source of the chemical attack in Khan Sheikhoun, Syria at roughly 6am to 7am on 4 April, 2017.

Don't miss: Sir Malcolm Rifkind: 'Very strong belief' that US sabotaged North Korean missile

"In fact, a main piece of evidence that is cited in the document point to an attack that was executed by individuals on the ground, not from an aircraft, on the morning of 4 April.

"This conclusion is based on an assumption made by the White House when it cited the source of the sarin release and the photographs of that source. My own assessment is that the source was very likely tampered with or staged, so no serious conclusion could be made from the photographs cited by the White House."

Most popular: Hackers attack Britain First leaders' website: 'Stop being racist to Muslims'

The image Postol refers to is that of a crater containing a shell inside, which is said to have contained the sarin gas.

His analysis of the shell suggests that it could not have been dropped from an airplane as the damage of the casing is inconsistent from an aerial explosion. Instead, Postol said it was more likely that an explosive charge was laid upon the shell containing sarin, before being detonated.

Khan Sheikhoun crater

"The explosive acted on the pipe as a blunt crushing mallet," Postol said. "It drove the pipe into the ground while at the same time creating the crater.

"Since the pipe was filled with sarin, which is an incompressible fluid, as the pipe was flattened, the sarin acted on the walls and ends of the pipe causing a crack along the length of the pipe and also the failure of the cap on the back end."

The implication of Postol's analysis is that it was carried out by anti-government insurgents as Khan Sheikhoun is in militant-controlled territory of Syria.

Postol, formerly a scientific advisor at the Department of Defense (DoD), has previously outlined similar inconsistencies with US intelligence reports. Following the 2013 chemical weapons attack in eastern Ghouta, Postol again said the evidence did not suggest Assad was responsible – a finding that was later corroborated by the United Nations.

walid muallem

In his latest reports, Postol hit out at what he says is a "politicisation" of intelligence findings.

Postol said: "No competent analyst would miss the fact that the alleged sarin canister was forcefully crushed from above, rather than exploded by a munition within it.

"All of these highly amateurish mistakes indicate that this White House report, like the earlier Obama White House Report [from Ghouta in 2013], was not properly vetted by the intelligence community as claimed.

"I have worked with the intelligence community in the past, and I have grave concerns about the politicisation of intelligence that seems to be occurring with more frequency in recent times – but I know that the intelligence community has highly capable analysts in it.

"And if those analysts were properly consulted about the claims in the White House document they would have not approved the document going forward."

No replies!
What-- too clear, too much truth?
Too much logic, what?
Or was it the canister picture showing that it had not exploded in the manner of a missile munitions!??
THAT IT HAD BEEN FLATTENED FROM ABOVE....

Both supposed attacks blamed on Assad were faked...
Faked by the group that stood to gain-- and it damn sure was not Assad going to gain anything but harm and condemnation from most of the world!!
And what for? To murder a few civilians??
How was murdering FEW CIVILIANS GOING TO WIN FOR HIM OR EVEN MAKE A DAMN DENT??

Ok- no replies, methinks I'VE GOT MY ANSWER.. THANKS..-TYR

jimnyc

04-17-2017, 06:26 PM

Tyr-Ziu Saxnot

04-17-2017, 06:45 PM

I got mixed emotions on this one all the way around. I'm always willing to listen/read from all sides involved. I tend to lean towards giving our intelligence agencies the benefit, that they wouldn't launch that kind of missiles and money if they weren't pretty darn sure of what happened. But if they have direct proof, they ain't sharing it, at least not enough that will fully satisfy anyone. I think it's the collective reporting from multiple nations that all agreed it was Assad. But same thing as far as the direct proof is concerned. And then you have things like what you just posted. So honestly, I'm not convinced 100% in any direction.

IMO though, I think they're ALL scumbags. Of course it starts with anywhere ISIS has anyone they call a "soldier". I think the rebels are mostly muslim scum. I think Assad and his folks are mostly muslim scum. And I'm not trying to be a muslim hater. I just don't know which one is worse than the other? Suppose it depends on the day of the week. Wouldn't mind seeing them all disappear though. :)

Jim ISIS FAR WORSE BY MILES AND MILES -AS ISIS seeks to establish the muslim Caliphate and conquer all non-muslim nations whereas Assad just wants to hold Syria.
YOU HAVE MIXED EMOTIONS METHINKS BECAUSE THOSE OPPOSING ASSAD HAVE SPENT YEARS AND BILLIONS TRYING TO MAKE HIM OUT TO BE OUR GREATER ENEMY.
Granted, Assad is not a good guy but if a comparison is to be made, he is by far, by FAR - a lesser threat to us that is ISIS.
WE HAVE ELEMENTS AL OVER THE WORLD BATTING FOR ISIS, even elements in our own government, the corruption and duplicity is what makes this so confusing to so many--especially our mainstream media and dems are both heavily anti-Assad..
That position held by them both, should tell you right there which is the greater evil as they seem to always bat for the greater evil!
And do so repeatedly!!! -Tyr

aboutime

04-17-2017, 06:51 PM

No replies!
What-- too clear, too much truth?
Too much logic, what?
Or was it the canister picture showing that it had not exploded in the manner of a missile munitions!??
THAT IT HAD BEEN FLATTENED FROM ABOVE....

Both supposed attacks blamed on Assad were faked...
Faked by the group that stood to gain-- and it damn sure was not Assad going to gain anything but harm and condemnation from most of the world!!
And what for? To murder a few civilians??
How was murdering FEW CIVILIANS GOING TO WIN FOR HIM OR EVEN MAKE A DAMN DENT??

Ok- no replies, methinks I'VE GOT MY ANSWER.. THANKS..-TYR

i'll reply Tyr. Gotta disagree with you in the substance above, and for one reason. The author from
Tareq Haddad,International Business Times, is a Self-Proclaimed Expert only. I read his bio fully. So I must object to him being more in tune with what is taking place...over the Intelligence, and Government sources HE claims...are lying.

Until I see actual, documented proof. I will question anyone like him who claims to be Expert.

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/reporters/tareq-haddad

https://tareqhaddad.com/about/

Tyr-Ziu Saxnot

04-17-2017, 07:50 PM

i'll reply Tyr. Gotta disagree with you in the substance above, and for one reason. The author from
Tareq Haddad,International Business Times, is a Self-Proclaimed Expert only. I read his bio fully. So I must object to him being more in tune with what is taking place...over the Intelligence, and Government sources HE claims...are lying.

Until I see actual, documented proof. I will question anyone like him who claims to be Expert.

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/reporters/tareq-haddad

https://tareqhaddad.com/about/

I did some research of my own. I see nothing fake about this mad or his career.
Are you researching this man or some other guy?
As I found nothing fake about his career or his cited accomplishments after checking several sources by way of Google, my friend..
I list each below with link provided..
Perhaps show me what I missed.....--Tyr

1.

http://sts-program.mit.edu/people/emeriti-faculty/

Postol, Theodore

Professor of Science, Technology and National Security, Emeritus (STS)

postol@mit.edu

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2.
http://sts-program.mit.edu/people/emeriti-faculty/theodore-postol/

Theodore Postol
Postol, Theodore - Emeriti

Professor of Science, Technology and National Security, Emeritus (STS)

postol@mit.edu

Theodore Postol is Professor of Science, Technology and National Security Policy in the Program in Science, Technology, and Society at MIT. He did his undergraduate work in physics and his graduate work in nuclear engineering at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. After receiving his Ph.D., Dr. Postol joined the staff of Argonne National Laboratory, where he studied the microscopic dynamics and structure of liquids and disordered solids using neutron, x-ray and light scattering, along with computer molecular dynamics techniques. Subsequently he went to the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment to study methods of basing the MX Missile, and later worked as a scientific adviser to the Chief of Naval Operations. After leaving the Pentagon, Dr. Postol helped to build a program at Stanford University to train mid-career scientists to study developments in weapons technology of relevance to defense and arms control policy. In 1990 Dr. Postol was awarded the Leo Szilard Prize from the American Physical Society. In 1995 he received the Hilliard Roderick Prize from the American Association for the Advancement of Science and in 2001 he received the Norbert Wiener Award from Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility for uncovering numerous and important false claims about missile defenses.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3.

http://sts-program.mit.edu/people/emeriti-faculty/theodore-postol/

Theodore Postol
Postol, Theodore - Emeriti

Professor of Science, Technology and National Security, Emeritus (STS)

postol@mit.edu

Theodore Postol is Professor of Science, Technology and National Security Policy in the Program in Science, Technology, and Society at MIT. He did his undergraduate work in physics and his graduate work in nuclear engineering at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. After receiving his Ph.D., Dr. Postol joined the staff of Argonne National Laboratory, where he studied the microscopic dynamics and structure of liquids and disordered solids using neutron, x-ray and light scattering, along with computer molecular dynamics techniques. Subsequently he went to the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment to study methods of basing the MX Missile, and later worked as a scientific adviser to the Chief of Naval Operations. After leaving the Pentagon, Dr. Postol helped to build a program at Stanford University to train mid-career scientists to study developments in weapons technology of relevance to defense and arms control policy. In 1990 Dr. Postol was awarded the Leo Szilard Prize from the American Physical Society. In 1995 he received the Hilliard Roderick Prize from the American Association for the Advancement of Science and in 2001 he received the Norbert Wiener Award from Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility for uncovering numerous and important false claims about missile defenses.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodore_Postol

Theodore Postol
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Theodore A. Postol
Born April 1946 (age 71)
Brooklyn, New York
Nationality American
Fields Physicist and Science and technology studies
Institutions MIT
Stanford
Argonne National Laboratory
Office of the Chief of Naval Operations
Alma mater MIT
Known for Criticism of U.S. missile defense effectiveness

Theodore A. Postol (born 1946) is a professor of Science, Technology, and International Security at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and is a prominent critic of U.S. government statements about missile defense. He has also criticized the US narrative of the 2013 Ghouta chemical attack in Syria. He has argued that the Ghouta chemical attack does not seem to have been launched by the Syrian government. He has also criticized the US narrative of the April 4, 2017, Khan Shaykhun chemical attack in Syria. Working in collaboration with Maram Susli (known online as 'Syrian Girl' and 'PartisanGirl')[1] and Richard Lloyd, he has argued that the Ghouta chemical attack does not seem to have been launched by the Syrian government.

Contents

1 Background
2 Patriot missiles in Operation Desert Storm
3 National ballistic missile defense
3.1 Allegations of research misconduct
3.2 SM-3 interceptor
4 Iron Dome
5 Syria
6 Books
7 References
8 External links

Background

He received his undergraduate degree in physics and his PhD in nuclear engineering from MIT. Postol worked at Argonne National Laboratory, where he studied the microscopic dynamics and structure of liquids and disordered solids using neutron, X-ray and light scattering techniques, along with molecular dynamics simulations . He also worked at the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment, where he studied methods of basing the MX missile, and later worked as a scientific adviser to the Chief of Naval Operations.

After leaving the Pentagon, Postol helped build a program at Stanford University to train mid-career scientists to study weapons technology in relation to defense and arms control policy. In 1990, Postol received the Leo Szilard Prize from the American Physical Society. In 1995, he received the Hilliard Roderick Prize from the American Association for the Advancement of Science and in 2001, he received the Norbert Wiener Award from Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility for "uncovering numerous and important false claims about missile defenses." On September 28, 2016 the Federation of American Scientists awarded Professor Theodore Postol from MIT their annual Richard L. Garwin Award[2] for his work in assessing and critiquing the government's claims about missile defense.
Patriot missiles in Operation Desert Storm
Main article: Patriot missile success rate

The Patriot Missile was used in Operation Desert Storm to intercept descent-phase SCUD missiles fired by Iraq. The U.S. Army claimed a success rate of 80% in Saudi Arabia and 50% in Israel, claims that were later reduced to 70% and 40%. But President George H. W. Bush claimed a success rate of more than 97 percent during a speech at Raytheon's Patriot manufacturing plant in Andover, Massachusetts during the Gulf War, declaring, the "Patriot is 41 for 42: 42 Scuds engaged, 41 intercepted!"[3]

In April 1992, Postol told a House committee that "the Patriot's intercept rate during the Gulf War was very low. The evidence from these preliminary studies indicates that Patriot's intercept rate could be much lower than 10 percent, possibly even zero."[4]

The House Government Operations Subcommittee on Legislation and National Security later reported,

The Patriot missile system was not the spectacular success in the Persian Gulf War that the American public was led to believe. There is little evidence to prove that the Patriot hit more than a few Scud missiles launched by Iraq during the Gulf War, and there are some doubts about even these engagements. The public and the Congress were misled by definitive statements of success issued by administration and Raytheon representatives during and after the war.[5]

Postol later went on to criticize the Army's "independent" Analysis of Video Tapes to Assess Patriot Effectiveness as being "seriously compromised" by the "selective" and "arbitrary" use of data.[6] The Army ultimately downgraded its assessment of the systems' effectiveness.
National ballistic missile defense

In 1996, Nira Schwartz, a senior engineer at defense contractor TRW blew the whistle against TRW for exaggerating the capabilities of an antiballistic missile sensor.[7] The sensor was subsequently used in a "successful" missile test in 1997. The then-Ballistic Missile Defense Organization launched an investigation in 1998 and asked a Pentagon advisory board called POET (Phase One Engineering Team), which included two staff members from MIT's Lincoln Laboratory, to review performance of TRW software, using data from the 1997 flight test. These engineers concluded in their report that Schwartz's allegations were untrue and despite failure of the sensor, the software "basically worked the way TRW said it worked."[8] In December 1998, TRW's contract was not extended by the government, which chose a competing system built by Raytheon.

In 2000, Schwartz gave Postol an unclassified version of the POET report from which sensitive text and graphs had been removed. Based on this redacted report, he notified the White House[9] and senior MIT officials of possible fraud and research misconduct at TRW and MIT Lincoln Laboratory. The Pentagon responded by classifying the letter and dispatching Defense Security Service members to his office.[10] Three agents of the Defense Security Services arrived unannounced to his campus office and attempted to show him other classified documents, but Postol refused to look at them. If he had read them, he would not have been able to criticize the antimissile system without putting his security clearance at risk. Postol claimed the visit was meant to silence him, which was denied by the Defense Security Services.[11]
Allegations of research misconduct

Postol demanded the MIT administration under President Charles Vest and Provost Robert Brown investigate possible violations to MIT policies on research misconduct. The administration initially resisted,[12] but later appointed another faculty member to conduct a preliminary investigation. In 2002, this professor's investigation found no evidence of a credible error, but he subsequently recommended a full investigation when Postol provided a statement of additional concerns. A subsequent 18-month investigation by the General Accounting Office in 2002 found widespread technical failures in the anti-missile system, contradicting the original report in 1997.[13] In May 2006, a panel composed of MIT faculty members concluded that the investigator recommended a full investigation "because of his inability to exhaust all the questions that arose during the inquiry," not because it appeared likely misconduct had occurred, and that a full investigation had not been warranted.[14]

Under National Science Foundation regulations governing research misconduct, a preliminary inquiry should be completed within 90 days of an allegation, and a full investigation within 180 days subject to penalties as severe as suspension of federal funding.[15] By December 2004, four years later, no formal investigation had been performed, and the Missile Defense Agency formally rejected MIT's request to investigate the classified data.[16] Postol asserts that the MIT administration has been compliant with the Pentagon's attempts to cover up a fiasco by dragging its feet on an investigation because defense contracts through Lincoln Laboratory constitute a major portion of MIT's operating budget.[17][18]

In early 2006, a compromise was reached whereby MIT would halt any attempt to conduct its own investigation and senior Air Force administrator Brendan B. Godfrey and former Lockheed Martin chief executive Norman R. Augustine would lead a final investigation.[19] Postol disputes the impartiality of this new investigation as Augustine was CEO while Lockheed was a contractor with NBMD.[20]

In May 2006, an MIT Ad-Hoc Committee on Research Misconduct Allegation concluded delays in the investigation were caused by a number of factors, including: "initial uncertainty about the applicability of MIT's research misconduct policy to a government [non-MIT] report"; government classification of relevant information, possibly in an attempt to make it unavailable to plaintiffs in the TRW whistle-blower trial; and Postol's failure to provide a clearly written summary of his allegations, which changed repeatedly during the investigation. The committee also found that Postol repeatedly violated MIT confidentiality rules "causing personal distress to the Lincoln Laboratory researchers, their families and colleagues".[14]
SM-3 interceptor

In September 2009, President Barack Obama announced that his administration was scrapping the Bush administration's proposed anti-ballistic missile shield in Europe and replacing it with reconfigured SM-3 missiles.[21][22] A "Ballistic Missile Defense Review" was completed in March 2010 concluding that existing ballistic missile defense technologies provided a reliable and robust defense against limited ICBM attacks.[23][24] In May 2010, Postol and George N. Lewis published an analysis concluding that the majority of SM-3 interceptor tests classified as "successful" actually failed to destroy incoming warheads.[24][25] The Missile Defense Agency challenged the New York Times article, claiming that the SM-3 program is one of the most successful programs within the Department of Defense and that the New York Times chose not to publish information supplied by the MDA in response to the allegations made by Postol and Lewis.[26]
Iron Dome

In August 2014, Postol critiqued the effectiveness of the Israeli Iron Dome antimissile system, based on watching YouTube videos of the system in operation.[27]
Syria

Postol has investigated the 2013 Ghouta chemical attack, and he has collaborated with Maram Susli (known online as 'Syrian Girl') in investigating the incident through examining YouTube footage and other sources.[28][29] Together they believe they found a number of items to be inconsistent with the conventional narrative of the incident. Together with 'Syrian Girl' and Richard Lloyd,[30][28][31] Postol argued that the Ghouta chemical attack did not seem to have been launched by the Syrian government.[32]

Postol has also criticized the unclassified intelligence assessment released by the Trump White House blaming the air forces of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad for the April 2017 Khan Shaykhun chemical attack. Postol wrote that the assessment "contains absolutely no evidence that this attack was the result of a munition being dropped from an aircraft" and that photographic evidence used in the assessment pointed to an attack by people on the ground using a 122mm artillery rocket tube filled with a chemical agent and detonated by an explosive charge laid on top of it.[33]
Books

Blair, Bruce G.; Dean, Jonathan; Fetter, Steve; Goodby, James; Lewis, George N.; Postol, Theodore; Von Hippel, Frank N.; Feiveson, Harold A. (June 1999). The Nuclear Turning Point: A Blueprint for Deep Cuts and De-Alerting of Nuclear Weapons. Brookings Institution Press. ISBN 978-0-8157-0953-4.

References

The Kardashian Look-Alike Trolling for Assad 10.17.14 The Daily Beast, Noah Shachtman Michael Kennedy
"FAS 70th Anniversary Symposium and Awards Gala".
"Remarks to Raytheon Missile Systems Plant Employees in Andover, Massachusetts". February 15, 1991. Archived from the original on November 8, 2006. Retrieved December 6, 2006.
"Optical Evidence Indicating Patriot High Miss Rates During the Gulf War". April 7, 1992. Retrieved December 6, 2006.
Activities of the House Committee on Governmental Operations, One Hundred Second Congress First and Second Sessions, 1991 - 1992. "Performance of the Patriot Missiles System". Retrieved 2006-12-06.
Theodore Postol (1992-09-08). "Postol/Lewis Review of Army's Study on Patriot Effectiveness". Retrieved December 6, 2006.
60 Minutes II (December 26, 2000). "A Far-Off Dream?". CBS News. Retrieved December 6, 2006.
Keith Winstein (March 10, 2006). "Missile Dispute Enters 7th Year As Air Force Takes Over Inquiry". Retrieved December 6, 2006.
Theodore Postol (May 11, 2000). "Letter to John Podesta regarding BMDO testing claims". Retrieved December 6, 2006.
Sanjay Basu (July 12, 2000). "Ted Postol Involved in NMD Debate". Retrieved December 6, 2006.
Southwick, Ron (July 21, 2000). "MIT Professor Says Pentagon Tried to Silence Him". Chronicle of Higher Education. p. A23.
Keith J. Weinstein (February 22, 2002). "Provost Denies Postol's Request for ABM Review". Retrieved December 6, 2006.
Broad, William J. (March 4, 2002). "Congressional Inquiry Cites Flaws in Antimissile Sensor". The New York Times.
"Letter and Report of Ad Hoc Committee on Research Misconduct Allegation". Retrieved December 6, 2006.
"Research Misconduct Regulations" (PDF). Retrieved December 6, 2006.
"DoD Bars Inquiry on Fraud at Lincoln Lab". December 3, 2004. Retrieved December 6, 2006.
Pierce, Charles P. (October 23, 2005). "Going Postol". Boston Globe Magazine.
"Brown Book (Annual Report of Sponsored Research)". Retrieved December 6, 2006.
"Investigation of Alleged Research Misconduct by Lincoln Laboratory Members of the 1998-5 POET Study Team" (PDF). 2007-01-29. Retrieved 2007-12-17.
Keith Weinstein (2006-03-10). "Missile Dispute Enters 7th Year As Air Force Takes Over Inquiry". Retrieved 2006-12-06.
Baker, Peter (September 17, 2009). "White House Scraps Bush's Approach to Missile Shield". The New York Times.
"Fact Sheet on U.S. Missile Defense Policy: A "Phased, Adaptive Approach" for Missile Defense in Europe". The White House. September 17, 2009.
"2010 Ballistic Missile Defense Review (BMDR) Fact Sheet" (PDF). U.S. Department of Defense. March 3, 2010. Retrieved 2010-05-18.
Lewis, George N.; Postol, Theodore A. (May 2010). "A Flawed and Dangerous U.S. Missile Defense Plan". Arms Control Today.
Broad, William J.; Sanger, David E. (May 17, 2010). "Review Cites Flaws in U.S. Antimissile Program". The New York Times.
"Missile Defense Agency Responds to New York Times Article". U.S. Department of Defense. May 18, 2010. Retrieved 2010-05-20.
Postol, Theodore. "An Explanation of the Evidence of Weaknesses in the Iron Dome Defense System". MIT Technology Review. Retrieved 18 October 2015.
Broad, William J. (September 4, 2013). "Rockets in Syrian Attack Carried Large Payload of Gas, Experts Say". The New York Times.
An Analysis of the Nerve Agent Attack by Theodore A. Postol
Initial Investigation of Chemical Weapons by Richard M. Lloyd
Lloyd, Richard; Postol, Theodore A. (14 January 2014). "Possible Implications of Faulty US Technical Intelligence in the Damascus Nerve Agent Attack of August 21, 2013" (PDF). MIT Science, Technology, and Global Security Working Group. HTML version
The Kardashian Look-Alike Trolling for Assad 10.17.14 The Daily Beast, Noah Shachtman Michael Kennedy

"White House claims on Syria chemical attack ‘obviously false’ – MIT professor" 04-12-17 RT News

External links

MIT Faculty Webpage for Theodore Postol
Science, Technology and Global Security Working Group
Going Postol, Boston Globe Magazine
Rogue State, ABC Australia
Why Not to Go Postol, National Review
The Missile-Defense System and University Research, The Chronicle of Higher Education
Postol vs. the Pentagon, Technology Review, April 2002
M.I.T. Studies Accusations of Lies and Cover-Up of Serious Flaws in Antimissile System, New York Times
MIT physicist knocks anti-missile system, San Francisco Chronicle
Theodore Postol's presentation for his August 2007 report at the Congress
July 2007 Postol's appearance in a show on White House Plans for Missile System in Eastern Europe

Categories:

1946 birthsLiving peopleMassachusetts Institute of Technology facultyAmerican physicists

I see nothing fake about the guy... but I am always willing to learn.. --Tyr

sear

04-17-2017, 08:14 PM

gabosaurus

04-17-2017, 08:20 PM

Theodore Postol has been criticizing the U.S. military weapons program since the first Desert Storm. Some say this makes him an "expert." I think it makes him a crackpot. Postol believes the military response in both Iraqi campaigns to be staged and overstated. He believes the U.S. to be responsible for other gas attacks. I believe he is also a 9-11 denier.

aboutime

04-17-2017, 08:25 PM

I see nothing fake about the guy... but I am always willing to learn.. --Tyr

Tyr. I didn't say he was a fake. You did. I said he is a self-proclaimed Expert.

The world, Colleges, Universities, and the INTERNET are full of so-called, self-proclaimed Experts. They have millions of uninformed, unwilling, under-educated...FOLLOWERS who listen to them, and actually BELIEVE them without question. Much like those same people have always believed how IMPRESSIVE Obama was with his mastery of English, and a wordsmith that convinces the lesser educated to be endlessly impressed.

Tyr-Ziu Saxnot

04-17-2017, 08:46 PM

"No replies!
What-- too clear, too much truth?
Too much logic, what?" TZ #2

What difference would it make?

Would you, or MIT have us believe Assad is a choirboy?

If MIT proves Hitler didn't kill 6,000,000 Jews, but only 5,999,999
would you have us exchange our Welsh Corgis for Alsatians,
and our Hyundais for innies and Audis?

Assad is a monster, architect of one of the most severe and sustained cesspools of human misery anywhere in the solar system.

I don't care much for the: "the other guy's a bum too!" defense.

STFU MORON.. THE OTHER GUY IS A MONSTER STRATEGY IS EXACTLY WHAT HAS BEEN PLAYED AGAINST ASSAD.
AS WE ALL KNOW ISIS IS- SO THIS CHORUS OF PAINTING ASSAD AS A GREATER ENEMY IS EXACTLY WHAT HAS BEEN GOING ON.
You are nothing more that a propagandist, lurking and acting a moron's part here at this forum.
Nobody, neither myself nor MIT has declared Assad a choir boy.
So take that red herring and eat it asswipe.
MIT has never tried to prove Hitler did not murder millions of Jews!

Toss out a few more lies and side-spins idgit..

You do no care much for logic, truth or honest debate either..
You are obviously a propagandist shill, likely be paid to act the troll.
Sure remind me of tailspin a lot.. With that insufferable arrogance and superiority complex you have.-Tyr