Document Page: First | Prev | Next | All | Image | This Release | Search

File: 950901_0617rpt_00.txt
Page: 00
Total Pages: 1

EVIDENCE AGAINST USE OF CW IN DESERT STORM


Filename:0617rpt.00
	
          EVIDENCE AGAINST USE OF CW IN DESERT STORM

1. [   (b)(1) sec 1.3(a)(4)   ]

2. Unanimous statements of [   (b)(1) sec 1.3(a)(4)   ]POWs stating 
no intent. a. fear of massive retaliation b. coalition better 
prepared to fight in CW environment, thus no advantage for them

3. No CBW munitions found in the KTO to this day a. statement of [  
 (b)(6)   ].  Over 14,000 tons of ordinance (includes 350,000 mines) 
and NO CW WEAPONS.

4. No casulties reported. Army private only one with similar 
symptoms but analysis of flak jacket and swab indicate conclusively 
no CW.

5. No confirmed detections. a. many false alarms but no 
confirmations b. two step process c. CZ only confirmed instance and 
we're just taking their word for it [      (b)(1) sec 1.3(a)(4)    ]

6. All samples taken before, during, and after the war which were 
analyzed in KTO and at ERDEC were found negative. Soil, liquid and 
air samples all negative.

7. Long term low level exposure DEFIES THE LAWS OF PHYSICS a. Law of 
diffusion. Movement from greater concentration to lesser 
concentration. If in one area or time the concentration is low, at 
some other area or time the concentration must be high. Ergo people 
die, other detections are made etc. b. CZ detection lasted 40 
minutes in an area of a few kilometers at best. Confirmation on one 
day only. c. Only possible explanation for long term low level 
exposure below detection range is continuous low level release over 
wide spread area. Facts don't support.

8. Release from bombed targets ruled out by: a. WX data -- wind and 
rain make it very unlikely b. distance covered c. no IZ casulties.

 



 

 



Document Page: First | Prev | Next | All | Image | This Release | Search