Ha! There are near 125 millions of matters, written in the Chemical Abstract Services Registry, and every day are added near 15000 of them. Most of them can be not very good for the human health. Nobody must inform OPCW about them, until he is going to use it as a chemical weapon.
I understand your frustration but these are more or less the tactics that @184461 and @Grey Fox have been using for a long time during the course of this thread.
Repetition followed by more repetition then begin again, rinse and repeat ad nauseum ad infinitum.
It has been constant from both call signs.
Russia guilty, Putin guilty has been the only way of countering their tactics and actually appears to have been quite effective,
It’s not been successful at all, 118 was banned for reasons unknown, but not related to repetitive postings which just wreck the thread.
There are a couple of real experts on here whose contributions are worth reading and a thread in CA shouldn’t be full of playground level taunting, which is all it really is, that means that an entire page on my phone was made up of a poster repeating the same two lines over and over. It also hasn’t put either Sergey or YarS off posting.
Let's regard an example. A state delares that aggregate amount of Schedule 1 chemicals is less than allowed by the treaty. Must the state also present a list with produced chemicals or not? Or only chemicals that were produced in amounts greater than 100gr should be listed? Again, all Schedule 1 chemicals produced must be declared, because they all contribute to the aggregate amount a State Party may hold, how much is produced at each facility is irrelevant, that only effects the Verification regime they must submit to or not!
Let's return to my example with Novichok produced in Czech republic. Had Czech authorities to inform OPCW even if amount was less than 100gr? It depends whether the chemical structure complies with one of the group formulas in the Schedules of chemicals, however most State Parties declare anything that comes close to a chemical weapon just to be on the safe side (unless they want to conceal something)!
There is a big difference between moral obligations and obligations according to the treaty. We regard only obligations mentioned in the treaty. Yes, some countries are more open, others are less open. But if they follow the treaty then it means that they don't vilate the treaty. And part of the CWC is the initial declaration where it now is clear Russia failed to declare all CW activities as was their duty under the Convention.
Doesn't matter, any way you look at this Russia did not comply with the CWC, failing to declare all CW activities is a major breach, especially if the failure to declare was designed to conceal clandestine CW production after entry into force of the CWC!
Mr Lavrov obviously got it from the confidential OPCW report which was copied to all State Parties. Don't try to kid us that it wouldn't have come out by now if the confidential OPCW report hadn't identified Novichok by name and formula.
.........so the bots have moved on from 'it's nothing to do with Russia' to 'it's not a chemical weapon' which is in itself an admission of guilt, no-one quibbles about whether a chemical weapon is a chemical weapon in the strictest sense of the law unless they've got some sticky residue on their hands that they're embarrassed about and are in denial....
And as the change of direction must have been mandated from the top, this must be the first official admission of Russian guilt.........thanks guys
It is a very clear admission of guilt, they are making a big issue of it not being a Schedule 1 chemical. The only reason it isn't is because Russia concealed CW activities and failed to declare this part of their CW program. If it had been declared it would have been scheduled, the major breach of the CWC here (apart from using agent) is the failure to declare!
If somebody use Tallium, Arsenic, antiaggregants or salt as poison, it does not mean, that its became chemical weapons. Anything can be used as a poison or cure. Ask your PD-crooks, for what goal they produced this matter. If it was produced for peaceful goals, and only used as a weapon of murder - it is not 'chemical weapon' .