When I finally decided to read Postol's "analysis" and its addendum of the released White House report about the chemical weapons attack on Khan Shaykhun I thought I had to be looking at the wrong White House report. I searched and asked around, thinking there is no way this is the report Postol is referring to in his writing.
The reason it is so baffling is the points Postol is arguing against in his assessment do not exist in the report. One that particularly stands out is:
No competent analyst would assume that the photograph of the carcass of the sarin canister was in fact a sarin canister.
This is never stated in the WHR. Not only is Postol the only one who brings it up, he treats it as though it is true to build his theory of an improvised explosive device being used, placed up against the "sarin canister" on the ground, and detonated to disperse the sarin and create the crater.
This is a long way of saying that Postol himself is telling us he is not a competent analyst.
But no matter how inconsistent someone like Postol's arguments are, many Western leftists will continue to believe anything, so long as it isn't first hand accounts from Syrians.