Talk:Theodore Postol

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: Science and Academia

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the science and academia work group.

‹See TfM›

Physics: Biographies Low‑importance

	Physics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Biographies Taskforce.

Iron Dome Timelime

the section on Iron Dome is chronologically incorrect

Postol first praised Iron Dome in November 2012, then in March 2013 was quoted in an article by the late Reuven Pedatzur. A few months later Magen Laoref (Israeli anti-Iron Dome, Pro-THEL non-profit) published Postol's FRIST memo about the Iron Dome.

Rubin's response (in the current wiki) was due to Postol's 2013 memo.

Postol wrote MORE in 2014 once the hostilities in Gaza resumed (talking points memo currently referenced in wiki). This was also addressed by Rubin in a Reuters blog — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.151.10.142 (talk) 06:29, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Listing RT - the russian propaganda portal - as a "source" (https://www.rt.com/usa/384520-postol-report-sarin-syria/) is very questionable... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.230.208.82 (talk) 14:50, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nation source

Does mention Postol—I'm not sure I understand the objection. El_C 12:08, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not a strong objection, just think 3 sources unnecessary. The current WP article text with the footnote is "Based on his own analysis of the photographic evidence, Postol has argued that the chemical attack was not an air raid, but conducted from the ground using a multiple rocket launcher, most probably a 122mm artillery rocket tube filled with a chemical agent and detonated by an explosive charge laid on top of it." The Nation article doesn't really substantiate that, it just says "Massachusetts Institute of Technology professor Theodore Postol has aggressively questioned many of these claims, however." And it's an opinion piece, not a news item, and this sentence is buried a long way down. The RT interview with Postol, or the IBT article footnoted in the previous section, seem better references to me.BobFromBrockley (talk) 13:27, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, fair enough. El_C 13:30, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted paragraph

This paragraph (much of it was long-standing, some of which was written in a month ago), which includes multiple citations, was deleted today with the justification "his paragraph is a mess and needs discussion and consensus before information therein could be included in another form":

Based on his own analysis of the photographic evidence, Postol initially argued that the chemical attack was not an air raid, but conducted from the ground using a multiple rocket launcher, most probably a 122mm artillery rocket tube filled with a chemical agent and detonated by an explosive charge laid on top of it.^[1]^[2]^[3] On 18 April, Postol published an analysis of photo evidence of the smoke plume which he argued conclusively showed that a crater he identified as the site of rebel-caused ground explosion was the site of sarin release.^[4]^[5] On 21 April, he revised this view: "In my earlier report released on April 18, 2017 I misinterpreted the wind-direction convention which resulted in my estimates of plume directions being exactly 180° off in direction."^[6]^[5] Later in April, Postol claimed that the "French Intelligence Report of April 26, 2017 directly contradicts the White House Intelligence Report of 11 April, 2017".^[7]^[5] The following day he revised his view, noting that he had confused the date and location for a different chemical attack four years earlier.^[8]^[9]^[5]

What's the problem exactly? What's messy that can't be fixed with relatively minor edits? BobFromBrockley (talk) 13:47, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

When emotions calm down he seems to be proven right - antimissile effective drops to the percent he had first stated. 2601:181:8301:4510:69AB:ECB2:8169:248A (talk) 16:50, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ "White House claims on Syria chemical attack 'obviously false' – MIT professor". RT. 12 April 2017.
^ "Democrats Shouldn't Be Trying to Banish Tulsi Gabbard". theNation. 12 April 2017.
^ "Giftgas-Angriff in Chan Scheichun: Die Fakten des Weißen Hauses sind keine". Telepolis. 13 April 2017.
^ T Postol The Nerve Agent Attack that Did Not Occur: Analysis of the Times and Locations of Critical Events in the Alleged Nerve Agent Attack at 7 AM on April 4, 2017 in Khan Sheikhoun, Syria
^ ^a ^b ^c ^d Muhammad Idrees Ahmad Chomsky and the Syria revisionists: Regime whitewashing, Al-Araby, 5 May 2017
^ T. Postol IMPORTANT CORRECTION TO The Nerve Agent Attack that Did Not Occur, 23 April 2017
^ T Postol The French Intelligence Report of April 26, 2017 Contradicts the Allegations in the White House Intelligence Report of April 11, 2017, 27 April 2017
^ http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2017/04/correction-to-the-french-intelligence-report-of-april-26-2017-contradicts-the-allegations-in-the-whi.html
^ Media Lens Correction, 27 April 2017

Destroyed vs intercepted and the patriot

We need to add a definition for each of these terms in the context of the patriot. The article seems to use them interchangeably when they are not. YEEETER0 (talk) 04:46, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

[1] "White House claims on Syria chemical attack 'obviously false' – MIT professor". RT. 12 April 2017.

[theNation-2] "Democrats Shouldn't Be Trying to Banish Tulsi Gabbard". theNation. 12 April 2017.

[Telepolis_Pany_13042017-3] "Giftgas-Angriff in Chan Scheichun: Die Fakten des Weißen Hauses sind keine". Telepolis. 13 April 2017.

[4] T Postol The Nerve Agent Attack that Did Not Occur: Analysis of the Times and Locations of Critical Events in the Alleged Nerve Agent Attack at 7 AM on April 4, 2017 in Khan Sheikhoun, Syria

[alaraby1-5] Muhammad Idrees Ahmad Chomsky and the Syria revisionists: Regime whitewashing, Al-Araby, 5 May 2017

[6] T. Postol IMPORTANT CORRECTION TO The Nerve Agent Attack that Did Not Occur, 23 April 2017

[7] T Postol The French Intelligence Report of April 26, 2017 Contradicts the Allegations in the White House Intelligence Report of April 11, 2017, 27 April 2017

[8] ttp://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2017/04/correction-to-the-french-intelligence-report-of-april-26-2017-contradicts-the-allegations-in-the-whi.html

[9] Media Lens Correction, 27 April 2017

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]