Theodore Postol

Last updated
Theodore A. Postol
Born30 April 1946 (1946-04-30) (age 78)
Brooklyn, New York, U.S.
Nationality American
Alma mater MIT
Known forCriticism of U.S. missile defense effectiveness
Scientific career
Fields Physicist and Science and technology studies
Institutions MIT
Stanford
Argonne National Laboratory
Office of the Chief of Naval Operations

Theodore A. Postol (born 1946) is a professor emeritus of Science, Technology, and International Security at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Prior to his work at MIT, he worked at Argonne National Laboratory, the Pentagon, and Stanford University.

Contents

He publicly criticized the US government's analysis of the 2013 Ghouta chemical attack in Syria, also analysis by the US and other western governments of the April 4, 2017 Khan Shaykhun chemical attack, and accused the OPCW of "deception" concerning the Douma chemical attack. Earlier, he criticised US government statements about the reported success rates of Patriot missiles during the first Gulf War, also known as Operation Desert Storm.

Background

Postol 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. [1]

After leaving the Pentagon, Postol helped to build a program at Stanford University to train mid-career scientists to study weapons technology in relation to defense and arms control policy. [1] In 1990, Postol received the Leo Szilard Prize from the American Physical Society for "incisive technical analysis of national security issues that [have] been vital for informing the public policy debate". [2] In 1995, he received the Hilliard Roderick Prize from the American Association for the Advancement of Science. [3] 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] On September 28, 2016 the Federation of American Scientists awarded Postol their annual Richard L. Garwin Award, [5] "that recognizes an individual who, through exceptional achievement in science and technology, has made an outstanding contribution toward the benefit of mankind." [6]

Patriot missiles in Operation Desert Storm

The Patriot Missile was used in the first Gulf War (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% during a speech at Raytheon's Patriot manufacturing plant in Andover, Massachusetts in February 1991, declaring, the "Patriot is 41 for 42: 42 Scuds engaged, 41 intercepted!" [7] 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." [8] Postol later criticized the Army's "independent" Analysis of Video Tapes to Assess Patriot Effectiveness as being "seriously compromised" by the "selective" and "arbitrary" use of data. [9] A House Government Operations Committee investigation in 1992 concluded that, contrary to military claims on effectiveness, Patriot missiles destroyed only 9 percent of SCUD missiles during attempts at interception. [10]

National ballistic missile defense

In 1996, Dr. Nira Schwartz, a senior test-engineer at defense contractor TRW blew the whistle on TRW for exaggerating the capabilities of an antiballistic missile sensor. [11] 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." [12] 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 [13] 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. [14] 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 said the visit was meant to silence him, which the Defense Security Services denied. [15]

Investigation into TRW/MIT Lincoln Laboratory report

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, [16] 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. [17] 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. [18]

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. [19] 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. [20] Postol stated that the MIT administration was compliant with the Pentagon's attempts to cover up a fiasco by dragging its feet on an investigation because defense contracts through Lincoln Laboratory constituted a major portion of MIT's operating budget. [21] [22]

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. [23] Postol disputed the impartiality of this new investigation as Augustine was CEO while Lockheed was a contractor with NBMD. [24]

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". [18]

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. [25] [26] 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. [27] [28] 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. [28] [29] The Missile Defense Agency challenged an article in The New York Times which described Postol and Lewis' results, stating that the SM-3 program was 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. [30] MDA Chief Spokesman Richard Lehner accused Postol and Lewis of basing "their assessment on publicly released photos gleaned from a sensor mounted aboard the SM-3 and postulat[ing] what they perceived to be the interceptor’s impact point although they had no access to classified telemetry data showing the complete destruction of the target missiles, or subsequent sensor views of the intercept that were not publicly released so as not to reveal to potential adversaries exactly where the target missile was struck." [31]

According to The Daily Telegraph in 2023, Postol has spent much of his career "trying to make sure that the U.S. doesn't build ballistic missile defences". [32] Also in 2023, Postol was accused by other arms control experts of allowing his "long-standing opposition to existing US missile defense programs" to affect his analysis of North Korean missiles, though they concluded Postol was arguing that a regional boost-phase system would provide a better defense than the existing US programs. [33]

Syrian civil war chemical attacks

In 2013, Postol and Richard Lloyd, an expert in warhead design at the military contractor Tesla Laboratories, wrote about the Ghouta chemical attack that has taken place during the Syrian civil war. [34] [35] [36] [37] Analysing YouTube footage of the attacks and its aftermath, Postol and Lloyd believed they found a number of items to be inconsistent with the US government's claims about the incident. [38] [34] [39] Postol subsequently worked with Maram Susli to analyze the Ghouta attack. [37] [40] [41] [42] [43]

In 2017, Postol criticized the unclassified intelligence assessment released by the Trump administration blaming the air forces of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad for the April Khan Shaykhun chemical attack. [44] [45] Postol analysed the photographic evidence and concluded that the chemical attack was not an air raid, but was conducted from the ground using most probably an emptied 122mm artillery rocket tube, which is normally used as munition of a multiple rocket launcher, filling it with a chemical agent and detonating it by an explosive charge laid on top of it. [46] [47] On 18 April, Postol published his findings that the crater present in the photographs could not have been the source of the necessary sarin smoke plume, as persons were seen in the video material live at the site, without appropriate protection gear. A sarin smoke plume would have killed them even hours after a sarin gas grenade explosion. [48] [49] [43] On 21 April, he corrected this view in one aspect: "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", which was however irrelevant for his main statement, that no sarin could have been emitted at the crater-site. [50] Later in April, Postol wrote that the "French Intelligence Report of April 26, 2017 contradicted the White House Intelligence Report of 11 April 2017". [51] [49] The following day he revised his view, saying he had confused the date and location for a different chemical attack four years earlier. [52] [49] [43] Postol stated that none of the forensic evidence in The New York Times video [53] [54] and a follow-on Times news article [55] on the Khan Shaykhun chemical attack supported the conclusions reported by The New York Times. [56]

In 2019, the Princeton based journal Science & Global Security, on whose editorial board Postol sat, [57] intended to publish a report titled "Computational Forensic Analysis for the Chemical Weapons Attack at Khan Sheikhoun on 4 April 2017" about the Khan Shaykhun chemical attack written by Postol, Goong Chen, Cong Gu, Alexey Sergeev, Sanyang Liu, Pengfei Yao and Marlan O. Scully. The report questioned the findings of the OPCW investigation which concluded that the Assad regime had used sarin. [58] The website Bellingcat disagreed with the report's interpretation and stated there were many caveats in the reports analysis. [59] According to Bellingcat, the report's use of simulation was methodologically flawed, as the paper only provided a simulation of a 122mm type rocket, and did not attempt to study other possible options. [60] In response to the Bellingcat article, the editors of Science & Global Security said "Regrettably, the Bellingcat group blog post contains a number of incorrect statements about the contents and conclusions of the paper to be published. Some of the statements appear to refer to an earlier manuscript and do not take account of all the changes made during the peer review and editorial process managed by this journal". [58] The journal later decided not to publish the paper after it "identified a number of issues with the peer-review and revision process". [61] [62] In response Postol (who claimed to be not involved with the deliberations for the paper) resigned from journal's editorial board, calling the decision "totally wrong and untenable". [63]

Iron Dome

In July 2014, Postol was quoted in the MIT Technology Review criticising the effectiveness of the Israeli Iron Dome antimissile system. [64] The article received so many negative comments [65] that the website invited Postol to present his evidence. His response, in August, was based on photographic evidence of the system in operation. [66]

North Korea missile tests

In August 2017, Postol shared with Newsweek a paper he co-authored with Markus Schiller and Robert Schmucker of Schmucker Technologies which stated that missiles tested earlier in 2017 by North Korea were incapable of delivering a nuclear warhead to the mainland United States despite being widely described as intercontinental ballistic missiles. [67]

Postol's findings [68] regarding the similarities between the North Korean Hwasong-18 and Russian RT-2PM2 Topol-M intercontinental ballistic missiles were roundly criticized in 2023 by a publication entitled Errors in Postol’s Analysis of the Hwasong-18 from a team of arms control analysts and professors from the Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterrey, including Daniel Allen, Madeline Berzak, Michael Duitsman, Decker Eveleth, John Ford, Sam Lair, Jeffrey Lewis, and Tricia White. [33] Postol was accused of "many errors. Most of these errors are careless.... [and] when corrected, demonstrate that Postol’s conclusions are likely wrong." [33] The team further claimed that Postol's analysis "is marred by significant factual inaccuracies. Many of these inaccuracies would have been caught by an analyst carefully looking at the totality of the evidence, rather than simply assuming the missiles are the same," and claimed that "in general, Postol works backwards to create a model that fits his assumptions." [33]

Books

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">MIM-104 Patriot</span> American surface-to-air missile system

The MIM-104 Patriot is a mobile interceptor missile surface-to-air missile (SAM) system, the primary such system used by the United States Army and several allied states. It is manufactured by the U.S. defense contractor Raytheon and derives its name from the radar component of the weapon system. The AN/MPQ-53 at the heart of the system is known as the "Phased Array Tracking Radar to Intercept on Target," which is a backronym for "Patriot". In 1984, the Patriot system began to replace the Nike Hercules system as the U.S. Army's primary high to medium air defense (HIMAD) system and the MIM-23 Hawk system as the U.S. Army's medium tactical air defense system. In addition to these roles, Patriot has been given a function in the U.S. Army's anti-ballistic missile (ABM) system. As of 2016, the system is expected to stay fielded until at least 2040.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United States national missile defense</span> Nationwide missile defense program of the United States

National missile defense (NMD) refers to the nationwide antimissile program the United States has had under development since the 1990s. After the renaming in 2002, the term now refers to the entire program, not just the ground-based interceptors and associated facilities.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ground-Based Midcourse Defense</span> United States anti-ballistic missile defense for intercepting warheads in space

Ground-Based Midcourse Defense (GMD), previously National Missile Defense (NMD), is an anti-ballistic missile system implemented by the United States of America for defense against ballistic missiles, during the midcourse phase of ballistic trajectory flight. It is a major component of the American missile defense strategy to counter ballistic missiles, including intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) carrying nuclear, chemical, biological or conventional warheads.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Terminal High Altitude Area Defense</span> US ballistic missile defense system

Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD), formerly Theater High Altitude Area Defense, is an American anti-ballistic missile defense system designed to intercept and destroy short-, medium-, and intermediate-range ballistic missiles in their terminal phase. The THAAD interceptor carries no warhead, instead relying on its kinetic energy of impact to destroy the incoming missile. THAAD was developed after the experience of Iraq's Scud missile attacks during the Gulf War in 1991.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Missile Defense Agency</span> Agency of the US Defense Department

The Missile Defense Agency (MDA) is a component of the United States government's Department of Defense responsible for developing a comprehensive defense against ballistic missiles. It had its origins in the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) which was established in 1983 by Ronald Reagan and which was headed by Lt. General James Alan Abrahamson. Under the Strategic Defense Initiative's Innovative Sciences and Technology Office headed by physicist and engineer Dr. James Ionson, the investment was predominantly made in basic research at national laboratories, universities, and in industry. These programs have continued to be key sources of funding for top research scientists in the fields of high-energy physics, advanced materials, nuclear research, supercomputing/computation, and many other critical science and engineering disciplines—funding which indirectly supports other research work by top scientists, and which was most politically viable to fund from appropriations for national defense. It was renamed the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization in 1993, and then renamed the Missile Defense Agency in 2002. The current director is Lieutenant General Heath A. Collins.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Missile defense</span> System that destroys attacking missiles

Missile defense is a system, weapon, or technology involved in the detection, tracking, interception, and also the destruction of attacking missiles. Conceived as a defense against nuclear-armed intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), its application has broadened to include shorter-ranged non-nuclear tactical and theater missiles.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Iron Dome</span> Israeli air defense system

Iron Dome is an Israeli mobile all-weather air defense system, developed by Rafael Advanced Defense Systems and Israel Aerospace Industries. The system is designed to intercept and destroy short-range rockets and artillery shells fired from distances of 4 to 70 kilometres (2–43 mi) away and whose trajectory would take them to an Israeli populated area. From 2011 to 2021, the United States contributed a total of US$1.6 billion to the Iron Dome defense system, with another US$1 billion approved by the US Congress in 2022.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sejjil</span> Iranian Medium Range Ballistic Missile

Sejil, or Sejjil, is a family of Iranian solid-fueled medium range ballistic missiles. The Sejil are replacements for the Shahab liquid-fueled ballistic missiles. According to US Pentagon sources, the missile profile of the Sejil closely matches those of the Ashura, Ghadr-110 and the Samen.

The Centre d'études et de recherches scientifiques (CERS), is a Syrian government agency that has the goal of advancing and coordinating scientific and military research activities in the country. It works on research and development for the economic and social development of Syria, especially the computerization of government agencies. It is considered to have better technical capacity and equipment than the Syrian universities. Jane's Information Group Intelligence Services and other analysts believe it is responsible for research and development of nuclear, biological, chemical and missile technology and weapons, including ballistic missiles, as well as advanced conventional arms.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Eliot Higgins</span> British citizen journalist

Eliot Ward Higgins, who previously wrote under the pseudonym Brown Moses, is a British citizen journalist and former blogger, known for using open sources and social media for investigations. He is the founder of Bellingcat, an investigative journalism website that specialises in fact-checking and open-source intelligence. He has investigated incidents including the Syrian Civil War, the Russo-Ukrainian War, the downing of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 and the poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal. He first gained mainstream media attention by identifying weapons in uploaded videos from the Syrian conflict.

There have been numerous reports of chemical weapons attacks in the Syrian Civil War, beginning in 2012, and corroborated by national governments, the United Nations (UN), the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), Human Rights Watch (HRW), and media organizations. The attacks occurred in different areas of Syria, including Khan al-Assal, Jobar, Saraqib, Ashrafiyat Sahnaya, Kafr Zita, Talmenes, Sarmin and Douma. The deadliest attacks were the August 2013 sarin attack in Ghouta, the April 2017 sarin attack in Khan Shaykhun and April 2018 Douma chemical attacks. The most common agent used is chlorine, with sarin and sulphur mustard also reported. Almost half of the attacks between 2014 and 2018 were delivered via aircraft and less than a quarter were delivered from the ground, with the remaining attacks having an undetermined method of delivery. Since the start of uprisings across Syria in 2011, Syrian Arab Armed Forces and pro-Assad paramilitary forces have been implicated in more than 300 chemical attacks in Syria.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ghouta chemical attack</span> 2013 gas attack during the Syrian Civil War

The Ghouta chemical attack was a chemical attack carried out by the forces of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, in the early hours of 21 August 2013 in Ghouta, Syria during the Syrian civil war. Two opposition-controlled areas in the suburbs around Damascus were struck by rockets containing the chemical agent sarin. Estimates of the death toll range from at least 281 people to 1,729. The attack was the deadliest use of chemical weapons since the Iran–Iraq War.

The Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic was set up by the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) on 22 August 2011 to investigate human rights violations during the Syrian Civil War to establish the facts and circumstances that may amount to violations and crimes and, where possible, to identify those responsible to be held accountable with a future prosecution of Syrian civil war criminals. The Commission posts regular updates via its official Twitter page.

The Khan al-Assal chemical attack was a chemical attack in Khan al-Assal, Aleppo, Syria on 19 March 2013, which according to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights resulted in at least 26 fatalities including 16 government soldiers and 10 civilians, and more than 86 injuries. Immediately after the incident, the Syrian government and opposition accused each other of carrying out the attack, but neither side presented clear documentation. The Syrian government asked the United Nations to investigate the incident, but disputes over the scope of that investigation led to lengthy delays. In the interim, the Syrian government invited Russia to send specialists to investigate the incident. Samples taken at the site led them to conclude that the attack involved the use of sarin, which matched the assessment made by the United States. Russia held the opposition responsible for the attack, while the US held the government responsible. UN investigators finally arrived on the ground in Syria in August, but their arrival coincided with the much larger-scale 2013 Ghouta attacks which took place on 21 August, pushing the Khan al-Assal investigation "onto the backburner" according to a UN spokesman. The UN report, which was completed on 12 December, found "likely use of chemical weapons in Khan al-Assal" and assessed that organophosphate poisoning was the cause of the "mass intoxication".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Maram Susli</span> Australian YouTube personality

Maram Susli, also known as Mimi al-Laham, PartisanGirl, Syrian Girl and Syrian Sister, is a Syrian-Australian conspiracy theorist, media personality, and political commentator who prepares videos on the Syrian civil war, United States foreign policy in the Middle East, and Gamergate. She has defended the Syrian government under Bashar al-Assad, and criticised Syrian rebels as well as ISIS.

The Khan Shaykhun chemical attack took place on 4 April 2017 on the town of Khan Shaykhun in the Idlib Governorate of Syria. The town was reported to have been struck by an airstrike by government forces followed by massive civilian chemical poisoning. The release of a toxic gas, which included sarin, or a similar substance, killed at least 89 people and injured more than 541, according to the opposition Idlib Health Directorate. The attack was the deadliest use of chemical weapons in the Syrian civil war since the Ghouta chemical attack in 2013.

The SAM-A-19 Plato was an anti-ballistic missile project developed by the United States Army in the mid 1950s. By modern standards, it would be considered a theatre ballistic missile (TBM) defense system (TBMD), providing protection to the Army field units from Warsaw Bloc short and medium-range weapons.

On 7 April 2018, a chemical warfare attack was launched by the forces of the government of Bashar al-Assad in the city of Douma, Syria. Medics and witnesses reported that it caused the deaths of between 40 and 50 people and injuries to possibly well over 100. The attack was attributed to the Syrian Army by rebel forces in Douma, and by the United States, British, and French governments. A two-year long investigation by the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) Investigation and Identification Team (IIT) concluded in January 2023 that the Syrian Air Force perpetrated the chemical attacks during its military campaign in Douma. On 14 April 2018, the United States, France and the United Kingdom carried out a series of military strikes against multiple government sites in Syria.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Tate Westbrook</span> American naval officer

Michael Tate Westbrook is an officer in the United States Navy who served as commanding officer of the USS Spruance (DDG-111) from May 2010 to May 2012. Prior to this, he served in the Pentagon on the Naval Operations Staff's Programming Division from fall 2007 through June 2009.

Goong Chen is a Taiwanese applied mathematician known for his use of computer forensics and computer simulation to recreate what may have occurred in aviation accidents. He is currently a professor of mathematics at Texas A&M University.

References

  1. 1 2 "Theodore Postol".
  2. ↑ "Theodore Postol, MIT ballistic missile expert, to speak March 25".
  3. ↑ "Theodore Postol, AAAS Awards and Honors".
  4. ↑ "Winners of the Norbert Wiener Award for Professional and Social Responsibility".
  5. ↑ "FAS 70th Anniversary Symposium and Awards Gala".
  6. ↑ "FAS Awards".
  7. ↑ "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.
  8. ↑ "Optical Evidence Indicating Patriot High Miss Rates During the Gulf War". April 7, 1992. Retrieved December 6, 2006.
  9. ↑ Theodore Postol (1992-09-08). "Postol/Lewis Review of Army's Study on Patriot Effectiveness" . Retrieved December 6, 2006.
  10. ↑ Killian, Michael (March 27, 2003). "Patriot missile miscalculations a cause for U.S. concern". Chicago Tribune.
  11. ↑ 60 Minutes II (December 26, 2000). "A Far-Off Dream?". CBS News. Retrieved December 6, 2006.{{cite news}}: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
  12. ↑ Keith Winstein (March 10, 2006). "Missile Dispute Enters 7th Year As Air Force Takes Over Inquiry" . Retrieved December 6, 2006.
  13. ↑ Theodore Postol (May 11, 2000). "Letter to John Podesta regarding BMDO testing claims" . Retrieved December 6, 2006.
  14. ↑ Sanjay Basu (July 12, 2000). "Ted Postol Involved in NMD Debate" . Retrieved December 6, 2006.
  15. ↑ Southwick, Ron (July 21, 2000). "MIT Professor Says Pentagon Tried to Silence Him". Chronicle of Higher Education. p. A23.
  16. ↑ Keith J. Weinstein (February 22, 2002). "Provost Denies Postol's Request for ABM Review" . Retrieved December 6, 2006.
  17. ↑ Broad, William J. (March 4, 2002). "Congressional Inquiry Cites Flaws in Antimissile Sensor". The New York Times.
  18. 1 2 "Letter and Report of Ad Hoc Committee on Research Misconduct Allegation" . Retrieved December 6, 2006.
  19. ↑ "Research Misconduct Regulations" (PDF). Retrieved December 6, 2006.
  20. ↑ "DoD Bars Inquiry on Fraud at Lincoln Lab". December 3, 2004. Retrieved December 6, 2006.
  21. ↑ Pierce, Charles P. (October 23, 2005). "Going Postol". Boston Globe Magazine.
  22. ↑ "Brown Book (Annual Report of Sponsored Research)" . Retrieved December 6, 2006.
  23. ↑ "Investigation of Alleged Research Misconduct by Lincoln Laboratory Members of the 1998-5 POET Study Team" (PDF). 2007-01-29. Retrieved 2007-12-17.
  24. ↑ Keith Weinstein (2006-03-10). "Missile Dispute Enters 7th Year As Air Force Takes Over Inquiry" . Retrieved 2006-12-06.
  25. ↑ Baker, Peter (September 17, 2009). "White House Scraps Bush's Approach to Missile Shield". The New York Times.
  26. ↑ "Fact Sheet on U.S. Missile Defense Policy: A "Phased, Adaptive Approach" for Missile Defense in Europe". whitehouse.gov . September 17, 2009 – via National Archives.
  27. ↑ "2010 Ballistic Missile Defense Review (BMDR) Fact Sheet" (PDF). U.S. Department of Defense. March 3, 2010. Retrieved 2010-05-18.
  28. 1 2 Lewis, George N.; Postol, Theodore A. (May 2010). "A Flawed and Dangerous U.S. Missile Defense Plan". Arms Control Today.
  29. ↑ Broad, William J.; Sanger, David E. (May 17, 2010). "Review Cites Flaws in U.S. Antimissile Program". The New York Times.
  30. ↑ "Missile Defense Agency Responds to New York Times Article". U.S. Department of Defense. May 18, 2010. Retrieved 2010-05-20.
  31. ↑ Hodge, Nathan. "Missile Defenders Blast Critics After Interceptor Attack". Wired. ISSN   1059-1028 . Retrieved 2024-04-09.
  32. ↑ Axe, David (June 23, 2023). "Ukraine's missile battle has transformed the image of America's Patriot interceptor". The Daily Telegraph . Retrieved June 23, 2023– via Yahoo! News.
  33. 1 2 3 4 Lewis, Jeffrey (20 August 2023). "Errors in Postol's Analysis of the Hwasong-18". Arms Control Wonk. Retrieved 9 April 2024.
  34. 1 2 Broad, William J. (September 4, 2013). "Rockets in Syrian Attack Carried Large Payload of Gas, Experts Say". The New York Times.
  35. ↑ "An Analysis of the Nerve Agent Attack by Theodore A. Postol" (PDF).
  36. ↑ Chivers, C.J. (December 28, 2013). "New Study Refines View of Sarin Attack in Syria". The New York Times.
  37. 1 2 The Kardashian Look-Alike Trolling for Assad 10.17.14 The Daily Beast, Noah Shachtman Michael Kennedy
  38. ↑ "Initial Investigation of Chemical Weapons by Richard M. Lloyd" (PDF).
  39. ↑ 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
  40. ↑ Echoes of the Past, War on the Rocks1 May 2017: "Postol asserted that it was impossible for the Syrian government to have been responsible, and he enlisted the help of pro-Assad conspiracy theorist and Infowars contributor Maram Susli to help prove it."
  41. ↑ Ellis, Emma Fray (2017-05-31). "To Make Your Conspiracy Theory Legit, Just Find an 'Expert'". Wired . Retrieved 2017-09-27.
  42. ↑ Le Monde: "Maram Susli, qui a collaboré aux travaux de Richard Lloyd et de Theodore Postol, ne fait pas mystère de ses sympathies pour le régime."
  43. 1 2 3 George Monbiot A lesson from Syria: it’s crucial not to fuel far-right conspiracy theories, The Guardian, 15 November 2017
  44. ↑ "Addendum to A Quick Turnaround Assessment of the White House Intelligence Report Issued on April 11, 2017 About the Nerve Agent Attack in Khan Shaykhun, Syria" (PDF). 11 April 2017.
  45. ↑ "MIT expert claims latest chemical weapons attack in Syria was staged". International Business Times. 17 April 2017.
  46. ↑ "Democrats Shouldn't Be Trying to Banish Tulsi Gabbard". theNation. 12 April 2017.
  47. ↑ "Giftgas-Angriff in Chan Scheichun: Die Fakten des Weißen Hauses sind keine". Telepolis. 13 April 2017.
  48. ↑ 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
  49. 1 2 3 Muhammad Idrees Ahmad Chomsky and the Syria revisionists: Regime whitewashing, Al-Araby, 5 May 2017
  50. ↑ T. Postol Important Correction TO The Nerve Agent Attack that Did Not Occur, 23 April 2017
  51. ↑ 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
  52. ↑ ""Correction to: The French Intelligence Report of April 26, 2017 Contradicts the Allegations in the White House Intelligence Report of April 11, 2017 by Professor Theodore A. Postol" by Publius Tacitus".
  53. ↑ "How Syria and Russia Spun a Chemical Strike". The New York Times. 2017-04-26.
  54. ↑ "How Syria and Russia Spun a Chemical Strike". The New York Times. 2017-04-27. Archived from the original on 2021-12-14.
  55. ↑ Browne, Malachy (2017-05-01). "The Times Uses Forensic Mapping to Verify a Syrian Chemical Attack". The New York Times.
  56. ↑ "The New York Times Video Analysis of the Events in Khan Sheikhoun on April 4, 2017: NONE of the Cited Forensic Evidence Supports the Claims" (PDF). 2017-05-29.
  57. ↑ al-bab.com Brian Whitaker, postol resigns Archived 17 October 2019 at the Wayback Machine
  58. 1 2 "From the Editors - From the Editors". scienceandglobalsecurity.org. Archived from the original on 25 September 2019. Retrieved 2019-11-20.
  59. ↑ "Tulsi Gabbard's Reports on Chemical Attacks in Syria – A Self-Contradictory Error Filled Mess". 2019-08-04.
  60. ↑ "Simulations, Craters and Lies: Postol's Latest Attempt to Undermine the Last Vestiges of his Reputation". 2019-09-13.
  61. ↑ "From the Editors - From the Editors". scienceandglobalsecurity.org. Archived from the original on 14 December 2019. Retrieved 2019-11-20.
  62. ↑ Kupferschmidt, Kai (2019-09-24). "Scientists clash over paper that questions Syrian government's role in sarin attack". Science | AAAS. Archived from the original on 20 November 2019. Retrieved 2019-11-20.
  63. ↑ KUPFERSCHMIDT, KAI (14 October 2019). "Prestigious journal pulls paper about chemical attack in Syria after backlash". Science.org. Retrieved 9 April 2024.
  64. ↑ Talbot, David. "Israel's "Iron Dome" Anti-Rocket Technology".
  65. ↑ Talbot, David. "Israel's "Iron Dome" Anti-Rocket Technology".
  66. ↑ Postol, Theodore. "An Explanation of the Evidence of Weaknesses in the Iron Dome Defense System". MIT Technology Review. Retrieved 18 October 2015.
  67. ↑ "Newsweek Exclusive: North Korean Missile Claims are a 'Hoax'". Newsweek . 2017-08-11.
  68. ↑ Postol, Theodore (2023-08-17). "The Transfer of a Russian ICBM to North Korea?". Beyond Parallel. Retrieved 2024-04-09.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.