News story: Novichok nerve agent use in Salisbury: UK government response

The UK government are known to have put Porton Down under heavy pressure to say this nerve agent was made in Russia. They [Porton Down] said there was no evidence it was made in Russia.”

“They’ve never said this nerve agent was made in Russia, [or] was produced in Russia, [or] was manufactured in Russia.”

“The alleged chemical formula for producing Novichoks was published a long time ago – you can buy it from Amazon – it was published 12 years ago in a book. And the Iranians with OPWC [Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons] supervision synthesized Novichok in 2016. So many people can make this.”
As I understand it Novichok is not one agent but a group of agents so saying it can be made by any one would be wrong and misleading.

You are quoting someone but not indicating who and it would seem you have just put in a quote without any input from you.
 

DaManBugs

On ROPS
On ROPs
Book Reviewer
Let's think why HMG hides ms.Skripal from Russian diplomats, from journalists. There are no her photos in newspapers (unlike case with mr.Litvinenko).
There is a version that explains everything.
It could be just a provocation.
MI5 agents used relatively harmless sleeping gas against the Skripals and spreyed it in their home.
Now the Skripals could be detained and MI5 is waiting when remains of the sleeping gas vanish.
Later homeopathic dose of Novichok could be injected to 'confirm' so called 'poisoning'.

Ah, secret agents with sleeping gas!
Did they have Dick Dastardly moustaches too?
 
More obfuscation. You lie (as does your agitprop) about Consular access and are pushing the conspiraloon agenda.

Are patients in Russia who are in coma’s routinely paraded before the media?
The consular access is denied by British authorities. The Washington Post wrote about respective statement made by Russian FM Lavrov. Where do you see lies here?
There is a lot of possible versions of event. My ones (I proposed at least some versions) don't contradict to known facts and technically are possible.
Have you at least one version that doesn't contradict to known fact andtechnically realistic?
Oh, I know - the investigation is ongoing.
So it leaves room for different versions as you can not propose even one.
 
The consular access is denied by British authorities. The Washington Post wrote about respective statement made by Russian FM Lavrov. Where do you see lies here?
There is a lot of possible versions of event. My ones (I proposed at least some versions) don't contradict to known facts and technically are possible.
Have you at least one version that doesn't contradict to known fact andtechnically realistic?
Oh, I know - the investigation is ongoing.
So it leaves room for different versions as you can not propose even one.

I'll try to help you a little here to understand why many here think your theories are a bit rubbish.
First of all, just because (to use similar wording to your posting) something is 'theorectically possible',' technically possible' or you can 'imagine' a scenario doesn't mean it's true, likely to be true or even remotely likely to be true.

Now, you could/should be aware of 'Hansard', it records everything that is said in the British house of commons. Further to this the British media have live broadcast programmes on radio and tv that cover the Prime Minister's question time plus other times. In addition to this there is the Freedom Of Information act whereby the British population can ask questions and recieve specific, accurate and detailed answers to questions they may have for government departments. Also the public can ask their local memver of parliament specific questions about parliamentary matters.

In effect, when you try to allege that Britain is treating Mr Skripal and his daughter as Russian citizens, or OFFICIALLY denying Russian consular access* to the pair many of us will counter you accusation as not only did we see and hear the Prime Minisers speech on the matter live, but we can also refer to Hansard to see every EXACT word she said on the subject.

Your third hand accounts from media outlets just aren't accurate as our direct quotes from the British Prime Minister :)

*your assertion that the Russian consulate personnel in the UK havent been able to see either of the Skripals is likely to be seen from a Russian point of view, and shows your lack of knowledge of how hospitals in the UK work (which is fair enough, but with that lack of knowledge you shouldnt make assumptions).
If Ms Skripal wanted to have a visit from the Russian consulate they they would be able to see her.

Here's a little scenario for you.
Let's assume the Russian consulate want to see Ms Skripal as you seem to be saying.
Without any need at all for any official clearance or invite they could travel to the hospital in question. Go inside just like any other person in the UK (again with no invite or clearance, it's a free country).
They could walk into the intensive care department reception (just like anyone can) and ask to see Ms Skripal.
Ms Skripal would then be adked if she wanted to see the people from the Russian consulate or not.
If she wanted to see them they would be allowed to see her or get as close to her AS ANY OTHER person she wanted to see. Their country of origin or jobs would make no difference.


Now, bearing in mind the Russian president has said he wanted to kill her father, and Ms Skripal may believe that the Rusdian state tried to murder her and her father she might just say she didnt want to see them!

With that in mind it would be FAR easier for the Russian state to lie about access to Ms Skripal to a Russian public who have no idea how British hospital visiting works than to actually just turn up at the hospital, then have the assembled worlds press in Salisbury get the official story that Ms Skripal said NO she didnt want to see the Russian consulate.
 
Last edited:
The consular access is denied by British authorities. The Washington Post wrote about respective statement made by Russian FM Lavrov. Where do you see lies here?
I see lies every time you post. You're going to have to post links to the OFFICIAL request for access and the OFFICIAL denial of such access. Unless these are posted, it's just agitprop drivel (which I note Putin now uses, so maybe Dobby the House Elf (c) @TheIronDuke has a flunky which feeds him snippets from Arrse?)
There is a lot of possible versions of event. My ones (I proposed at least some versions) don't contradict to known facts and technically are possible.
You want to be treated as a serious poster and pretend you're not a Russian Troll? Yet you post agitprop and conspiraloon theories.
Have you at least one version that doesn't contradict to known fact andtechnically realistic?
I'm not sure how many times this needs to be said. I await the investigation to be completed. The media (both UK and international) push out snippets of information which feed the 'useful idiots' and troll farms. The next stage is the OPCW report. Whether it confirm's the UK assertion or is inconclusive will take us further one way or another.
Oh, I know - the investigation is ongoing.
He/she gets it ..........
So it leaves room for different versions as you can not propose even one.
Oh dear, I spoke too soon.

Two choices, get treated as a serious poster or continue to post agitprop drivel and conspiraloon theories. Your choice.
 
The OPCW, the international chemical weapons watchdog officially declared that Russia had finished destroying its stock of Novichok and similar weapons last year. The UK are among other states where such substances are still being developed.
 
The OPCW, the international chemical weapons watchdog officially declared that Russia had finished destroying its stock of Novichok and similar weapons last year. The UK are among other states where such substances are still being developed.
Now we are getting somewhere )
Can you post up a link from the OPCW website from last year where they say that, and, to save me googling it can you post up a link from this year where they say that Russia CAN'T have been the source for this NA attack so they arent investigating the NA used in Salisbury to confirm its of Russian origin as the UK allege?
I'm only asking as if you are correct then the OPCW would already have released a statement in the last few weeks saying Russia CAN'T be involved here, but I can't seem to find that press release from them.
 
The OPCW, the international chemical weapons watchdog officially declared that Russia had finished destroying its stock of Novichok and similar weapons last year. The UK are among other states where such substances are still being developed.
Are you just regurgitating agitprop? Not exactly the stance of somebody professing to be 'open minded'

OPCW say all declared Russian stocks are destroyed. Note, declared: OPCW Marks Completion of Destruction of Russian Chemical Weapons Stockpile
The OPCW’s inspection teams have verified the destruction at seven chemical weapons destruction facilities in the Russian Federation. On 27 September 2017, the last of these facilities, located in Kizner, officially concluded its operations.

With the total elimination of Russia’s declared chemical weapons programme, 96.3 per cent of all chemical weapon stockpiles declared by possessor States have been destroyed under OPCW verification.
You'll note, as you're 'open minded', that Syria also said its stocks of CW were destroyed. Yet according to the unanimously appointed UNSC JIM (Joint Investigative Mechanism), Assad's regime used CW on his own population.

Now, other than for testing of CBRN kit, which is allowed by the convention and Russia also completes as one of the OPCW testing labs, where are we 'developing CW'? Or are you being somewhat 'economical' with the truth?
 
Are you just regurgitating agitprop? Not exactly the stance of somebody professing to be 'open minded'

OPCW say all declared Russian stocks are destroyed. Note, declared: OPCW Marks Completion of Destruction of Russian Chemical Weapons Stockpile


You'll note, as you're 'open minded', that Syria also said its stocks of CW were destroyed. Yet according to the unanimously appointed UNSC JIM (Joint Investigative Mechanism), Assad's regime used CW on his own population.

Now, other than for testing of CBRN kit, which is allowed by the convention and Russia also completes as one of the OPCW testing labs, where are we 'developing CW'? Or are you being somewhat 'economical' with the truth?
You may be working too hard to give the facts known to the majority of the world here. Just just the agitprops provide the links to back up their statements.

The OPCW have released the statements you say, which means there could be over 2000 tonnes of CW left in Russian stocks. Bearing in mind we are talking of weapons where less than one gram can be fatal thats quite a deadly amount of stock left in situ.

Just let the agitprop types provide the links to direct source info from the OPCW to back up their 'none left' claims :)
 
Now we are getting somewhere )
Can you post up a link from the OPCW website from last year where they say that, and, to save me googling it can you post up a link from this year where they say that Russia CAN'T have been the source for this NA attack so they arent investigating the NA used in Salisbury to confirm its of Russian origin as the UK allege?
I'm only asking as if you are correct then the OPCW would already have released a statement in the last few weeks saying Russia CAN'T be involved here, but I can't seem to find that press release from them.
Careful there slime , if you don’t just acquiesce you will be labelled a mong by the old fool.
 
Britain and U.S. clash with Russia at U.N. arms control forum over...
Bit of a handbags at dawn in the UN with Corbyn giving the Russians some ammunition. Lets see what the OPCW report says Jeremy rather than the obfuscators and liars:
“We would note that even the leader of the (British opposition) Labour party Jeremy Corbyn has asked to have at least a parliamentary appraisal of the investigation, but he has also received negative response, and I don’t need to comment any further on this,” Denis Davydov, a Russian representative, said.
Now we know where some of the 'useful idiots' are getting their lead from;
Russia’s destruction of its chemical weapons after the fall of the Soviet Union had been verified, and Russia had not conducted any research into Novichok although research continued in Britain and possibly in many other countries, he said.

The attack on the Skripals took place in the town of Salisbury, close to the British government’s laboratory at Porton Down, which had the potential to produce Novichok, Davydov added.

One of the ingredients also existed in the United States for a long time, he said.

British Ambassador Matthew Rowland said Russia was using “a series of wild hypotheses and half truth and half lies” to deflect attention from the truth, and its claim to have destroyed Novichok was “not clear at all”.
Allegations by the country that vetoed the renewal of the Syrian Civil War Joint Investigative Mission three times.:
Rowland disagreed with Davydov that Russia had a right to see the evidence, saying he was trying to confuse the picture with misleading procedural arguments.

“Russia’s attempt to hide behind a false interpretation of the chemical weapons convention should fool no one,” he said.

U.S. disarmament ambassador Robert Wood said Russia’s suggestion that the nerve agent used against Skripal could have come from a British or a U.S. facility was “just absurd” and an example of typical Russian propaganda in which Moscow blamed others for what it itself had done.
The tired old meme about Blair and the 'dodgy dossier'. Has someone told them it was 15 years, three PMs, two different Governments ago and Jeremy now leads that Party?
“We all remember very well that public opinion in that country believed the word of Prime Minister Tony Blair when he led his country into the Iraq war. He confirmed and was completely convinced that the Saddam Hussein regime possessed chemical weapons, but as it turned out he himself was set up by his own allies.”
 
I'll try to help you a little here to understand why many here think your theories are a bit rubbish.
First of all, just because (to use similar wording to your posting) something is 'theorectically possible',' technically possible' or you can 'imagine' a scenario doesn't mean it's true, likely to be true or even remotely likely to be true.
You are absolutely right. Some my versions of events are merely 'theoretically possible'. I invite others to propose alternative 'theoretically possible' versions. And ... I expect some problems. How it is possible to explain known facts?
Now, you could/should be aware of 'Hansard', it records everything that is said in the British house of commons. Further to this the British media have live broadcast programmes on radio and tv that cover the Prime Minister's question time plus other times. In addition to this there is the Freedom Of Information act whereby the British population can ask questions and recieve specific, accurate and detailed answers to questions they may have for government departments. Also the public can ask their local memver of parliament specific questions about parliamentary matters.
I'm well ware about it.
In effect, when you try to allege that Britain is treating Mr Skripal and his daughter as Russian citizens...
Mr.Scripal is British citizen while ms.Skripal is Russian citizen.
..., or OFFICIALLY denying Russian consular access* to the pair many of us will counter you accusation as not only did we see and hear the Prime Minisers speech on the matter live, but we can also refer to Hansard to see every EXACT word she said on the subject.
As I understand mrs.May just doesn't mention issue of consular access to ms.Skripal and Russian consulate has not recieved confirmation that the consular access is possible. That in fact means that it is denied. Russian FM said about it directly in public statement. I'm unaware about even one public statement made by HMG about consular access to ms.Skripal.
Your third hand accounts from media outlets just aren't accurate as our direct quotes from the British Prime Minister :)
I don't think that the Washington Post is something like 'third hand account'.
And please quote mrs.May. Has she said anything about consular access to ms.Skripal?
*your assertion that the Russian consulate personnel in the UK havent been able to see either of the Skripals is likely to be seen from a Russian point of view, and shows your lack of knowledge of how hospitals in the UK work (which is fair enough, but with that lack of knowledge you shouldnt make assumptions).
So can Russian consular officer visit the hospital where ms.Skripal is treated now, can he get information about state of her health and see her at least through a window or/and from the distance? I don't understand why it is so hard task. Why it is impossible?
If Ms Skripal wanted to have a visit from the Russian consulate they they would be able to see her.
You are absolutely right. But in this case British authorities should inform Russian consulate that ms.Skripal doesn't wish to see any Russian official. I'm not aware about such a notification.
Here's a little scenario for you.
It's interesting. I adore to discuss different versions.
Let's assume the Russian consulate want to see Ms Skripal as you seem to be saying.
It is a reasonable assumtion, moreover there are reports in mass media about it.
Without any need at all for any official clearance or invite they could travel to the hospital in question.
But where is this hospital? Maybe on the territory of Porton Down base?
Go inside just like any other person in the UK (again with no invite or clearance, it's a free country).
Just to hear that there is no any ms.Skripal in the hospital or/and access to her is not allowed for random persons - only for those who are approved by British authorities.
They could walk into the intensive care department reception (just like anyone can) and ask to see Ms Skripal. Ms Skripal would then be adked if she wanted to see the people from the Russian consulate or not. If she wanted to see them they would be allowed to see her or get as close to her AS ANY OTHER person she wanted to see. Their country of origin or jobs would make no difference.
Your version is excellent but there are specific procedures in consular relations. Consular officers should be given exact address and should be allowed to make consular visit by the authorities.
Now, bearing in mind the Russian president has said he wanted to kill her father...
For the fists time I hear that he said it.
..., and Ms Skripal may believe that the Rusdian state tried to murder her and her father she might just say she didnt want to see them!
Yes she may believe, she maight say... They are just suppositions. By contrast Russia as a state according to the Convention signed by HMG has right that is denied.
With that in mind it would be FAR easier for the Russian state to lie about access to Ms Skripal to a Russian public...
Russian FM Lavrov made public statement about denial of consular access. Russian diplomats are unaware about exact location of ms.Skripal.
...who have no idea how British hospital visiting works than to actually just turn up at the hospital, then have the assembled worlds press in Salisbury get the official story that Ms Skripal said NO she didnt want to see the Russian consulate.
There is very easy solution. Russian consular officer accompanied by representative of FCO visits the hospital and is allowed to see ms.Skripal and that's all.
 
As I understand mrs.May just doesn't mention issue of consular access to ms.Skripal and Russian consulate has not recieved confirmation that the consular access is possible. That in fact means that it is denied. Russian FM said about it directly in public statement. I'm unaware about even one public statement made by HMG about consular access to ms.Skripal.
What a load of rubbish. Unless Consular access has been asked for, how can it be denied? Are HM govt supposed to be clairvoyant? Make an official request and see what happens, not the constant lies and obfuscation.
 
@KGB_resident
I would hope that the needs of the patient (Ms Skripal) take precedence over any political point scoring, why should they be granted access to a critically ill patient who may not be able to communicate in any meaningful fashion, or indeed wish to communicate with anyone apart from their own close family.

You will just have to accept that this is not a freak show where people are allowed to observe a patient whenever they wish. How would you like it if you were in such a situation seriously ill in hospital and someone you have never met demands to see you in all your glory linked to various machines including possibly a ventilator which would preclude speech.

Allow Ms Skripal some dignity in this matter treat her as a person and not some pawn in a game, accept the doctor's statement that she is in the hospital and receiving the appropriate treatment for her condition.

If you have a problem with the doctor and his statement approach the BMA and make a complaint they are the independent body that are responsible for the conduct of medical professionals in this country not the government.
 
As I understand mrs.May just doesn't mention issue of consular access to ms.Skripal and Russian consulate has not recieved confirmation that the consular access is possible. That in fact means that it is denied. Russian FM said about it directly in public statement. I'm unaware about even one public statement made by HMG about consular access to ms.Skripal.
I would leave this one. Let the Russian government ask officially in a documentary form. I suppose an email would be ok.

Sergei, have you had a think about how said nerve agent could be administered. I asked you a while back? You ask us but I would like you to give a valid hypothesis. the reason is that you list possible scenarios but fail to develop them. In order to be taken as anything other than obfuscation, we really need to see how they could be played out in a real world scenario. If we tell you what we think, I dare say it will be fed back up the chain and in due course could be used to make things a little less detectable, given that state sponsored assassinations will continue across the world by many regimes.

Would you also consider what the Russian response will be if ( note I say IF) the results come back indicating Russian involvement?

As stated by others, you seem to want to be taken seriously and some of your manifestations are a pleasure to read. And yet at the moment, your prose seem to be mere agitprop.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top