Thread: Former Russian spy critically ill in Britain after exposure to unidentified substance

One things for sure, if the England goes to the world cup, there's going to be plenty of casualties. .

Russia says Britain must have its own supply of the ‘Novichok’ nerve agent and could have supplied what poisoned Skripal

Vasily Nebenzya, Russia’s permanent representative to the United Nations, says Britain could be the source of the nerve agent used to poison former GRU Colonel Sergey Skripal and his daughter.


Speaking at a session of the UN Security Council called by London, Nebenzya argued that “more than 200 open sources” confirm that Western intelligence agencies “extracted” several Russian specialists who developed the chemical weapon, and later recreated and began testing the nerve agent themselves.


The Russian diplomat says chemical weapons “of this type” were also developed and produced at the British Defense Ministry laboratory in Porton that identified the chemical used to poison Skripal. According to Nebenzya, the British would have needed a sample of the nerve agent to identify what poisoned the former spy. Russia’s UN representative also complained that the British investigation into Skripal’s case is being conducted “non-transparently.”


Afterwards, the UK blocked a joint Security Council statementprepared by Russian diplomats, adding amendments that “distorted the meaning of the document,” Moscow says. The statement expressed “deep concern regarding information that a nerve agent was supposedly used” in Great Britain, and called on all interested nations to “consult and cooperate in the investigation of this matter.”


What triggered this UN Security Council session?

The British called for it after Prime Minister Theresa May suspended high-level government contacts with the Russian Federation and announced the expulsion of 23 Russian diplomats, following Moscow’s refusal to explain how a Russian nerve agent was used to poison Skripal, his daughter, and several others in the Salisbury area on March 4.


Skripal spied for MI6 for nine years, before the Russian authorities caught him and imprisoned him for treason. He was later included in a spy swap that sent him to England in 2010, where he’s lived ever since.


The Kremlin has denied any role in his poisoning and responded angrily to the British government’s allegations. On March 15, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said Moscow would retaliateby expelling several British diplomats, though he didn’t initially say how many.


https://meduza.io/en/news/2018/03/15...isoned-skripal

Good factual point. Thanks

What's the factual point of that article?

Originally Posted by AntRobertson

What's the factual point of that article?

I would have thought

the British would have needed a sample of the nerve agent to identify what poisoned the former spy.

?

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

I think you mean "Comrade Corbyn does his usual and protects foreign adversaries who pay him".

Originally Posted by OhOh

Originally Posted by AntRobertson

What's the factual point of that article?

Originally Posted by misskit

According to Nebenzya, the British would have needed a sample of the nerve agent to identify what poisoned the former spy.

Looks like an opinion to me.

We will not give you no fckukig sample!
You did it and that's it.
You want what? We will give you our dossier.
Then you can shut up as you shut up 15 years ago and with you all the others.
Shut up and go away...

Originally Posted by AntRobertson

Looks like an opinion to me.

If you are a chemical weapons specialist analyst, your own opinion may have some weight.

Ootherwise you carry the same weight as 'arry , opinion wise.

Originally Posted by OhOh

If you are a chemical weapons specialist chemist, your own opinion may have some weight, otherwise you carry the same weight as 'arry , opinion wise.

I'm not. Neither, I presume, are you and nor is Mr. Nebenzya.

What I do know however is that opinions aren't facts and how to distinguish between the two.

This event also has to take into account Russia's previous in the Alexander Litvinenko assassination in London in 2006, the prime suspect for which is now a Russian MP, with the Russians refusing to co-operate in his extradition to aid the investigation.

Problem with this latest attack, the UK has sufficient knowledge of the nerve agent to be able to name it's group, and to invite the Russians to participate in the investigation is frankly ludicrous as there is a high risk that the UK's sources of information would be compromised. Porton Down, the UK's NBCW centre, is a world leader in it's sphere of knowledge and expertise, and from whom the UK Government and investigating agencies will be taking direction, and I personally have no doubt that their findings will be verified by the OPCW once they have themselves analysed samples.

That the US, Germany and France have joined with the UK in a joint statement condemning Russia for this act, in spite of current relations between these 4 nations not being at their most cohesive, has to be taken in the context that they would not have done so had there been any possibility that the attack was carried out by a third party or indeed the UK itself.

No doubt there is more to come on this, particularly when the exact location of where and how the agent was administered is revealed.

Is it your opinion that; to ensure a correct validation/comparison of one chemical agent, a known, verified example of the chemical agent, is a factual requirement?

Originally Posted by OhOh

Is it your opinion that; to ensure a correct validation/comparison of one chemical agent, a known, verified example of the chemical agent, is a factual requirement?

I think that it has to be borne in mind that these are banned substances so verified examples of them, as opposed to knowledge of their chemical composition is highly likely. I think the ultimate question is whether the UK Government is to be believed in it's assessment. Personally, I do, as apparently do the leaders of the US, Germany and France.

On the point of the UK's erroneous assessment of the Iraq MWD fiasco, there can be no comparison. This was not a rumour, nor an supposed intelligence gathering to seek out the possibility of the existence of a chemical. This was an actual attack which has led to 3 people being hospitalised and reportedly lucky to still be alive. Hopefully, they'll all make a full recovery, not least because they will be able to shed further information of potential contact locations and means.

The British have already said they will be giving the OPCW all information related to the attack.

OhOh seems to think the British have either faked this attack or staged it.

But then again, he is a bit of a whackjob.

Originally Posted by PAG

This event also has to take into account Russia's previous in the Alexander Litvinenko assassination in London in 2006, the prime suspect for which is now a Russian MP,

Proven where, in a UK court in secret?

Originally Posted by PAG

Russians to participate in the investigation is frankly ludicrous as there is a high risk that the UK's sources of information would be compromised

Of course the nearest suspect, the UK agencies, is equally ludicrous, yes? Only the UN OPCW team are considered independent, when the internationally agreed procedures are followed, scrupulously. That was the down fall in the alleged Syrian CWA.

Originally Posted by PAG

I personally have no doubt that their findings will be verified by the OPCW once they have themselves analysed samples.

Your opinion will no doubt be crucial to the investigation, when it takes place.

Originally Posted by PAG

That the US, Germany and France have joined with the UK in a joint statement condemning Russia for this act

The French have not agreed the fact that Russia is to blame, they are waiting, as Russia is, for the official investigation to take place. Which however has already been compromised by the UK authorities. They have strongly attached the the CWA, whoever commited it.

"The leaders of Britain, the US, Germany and France have released a joint statement strongly condemning the Salisbury nerve agent attack as “an assault on UK sovereignty” and saying it is highly likely Russia was behind it."

https://www.theguardian.com/world/france

No court in a civilised world would send a country to war, well except for some western warmongers, with only "highly likely" evidence. As we saw in the sexed up evidence used to start the GWI and II. But you probably accept it was a legal war.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

OhOh seems to think the British have either faked this attack or staged it.

Really absurd. Only a putin worshiper could be stupid enough to buy into something like that.

Originally Posted by bsnub

Only a putin worshiper

A believer in facts, not person. Unlike the ameristanis, who appear to be that way inclined.

Obviously a cunning plan by the British government to poison their own spy and blame it on the Russians. May needed a plan to distract people from how she has cocked up the Brexit negotiations. She can now happily go on getting rogered by Barnier while everyone is tut tutting at the Russians. Mystery solved.
Shirlock Cow to the rescue yet again.

Originally Posted by PAG

these are banned substances so verified examples of them

Care to share your source for who "banned" this named/unamed/undocumented substance and where it identified and agreed as a "banned" substance?

As I previously posted there is an OPCW document which discusses an unknown Russian substance but at the time 2013 they had no details of it and currently do not include the unamed substance in their own banned list.

The OPCW helpfully provides an Annex which describes, in the schedules 1, 2, and 3, the agreed, named CW and their precursors. The web pages may be viewed here:

https://www.opcw.org/chemical-weapon...-on-chemicals/

https://www.opcw.org/chemical-weapons-convention/annexes/annex-on-chemicals/schedule-1/

https://www.opcw.org/chemical-weapons-convention/annexes/annex-on-chemicals/schedule-2/

https://www.opcw.org/chemical-weapon...ls/schedule-3/

Originally Posted by Hugh Cow

Shirlock Cow to the rescue yet again.

One possibility.

Another is the attempt by the UK company/nationals Orbis Intelligence aka Christopher Steele/Pablo Miller, both lived around Salisbury, both ex MI6 who were stationed in Moscow. They produced a dossier for the Clinton camp used to discredit the ameristani President.

Another is Israel's Mossad. They certainly have a motive. Destroy Russian standing in the middle east

Another is ameristan they have a motive. Just destroy Russia.

To suggest the Russians planned and possibly executed an attempt on an ex Russian spy and a Russian citizen a week before the Russian elections is ludicrous. The 2018 World Cup scheduled for this summer. Both high profike events.

What benefit do they accrue?

An ex UK Ambassador with experience of UK adoption of dirty methods has his views here for those with enquiring minds:

https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archi...ge-1/#comments

Originally Posted by OhOh

Care to share your source for who "banned" this named/unamed/undocumented substance and where it identified and agreed as a "banned" substance?

As I previously posted there is an OPCW document which discusses an unknown Russian substance but at the time 2013 they had no details of it and currently do not include the unamed substance in their own banned list.

The OPCW helpfully provides an Annex which describes, in the schedules 1, 2, and 3, the agreed, named CW and their precursors. The web pages may be viewed here:

https://www.opcw.org/chemical-weapon...-on-chemicals/

https://www.opcw.org/chemical-weapons-convention/annexes/annex-on-chemicals/schedule-1/

https://www.opcw.org/chemical-weapons-convention/annexes/annex-on-chemicals/schedule-2/

https://www.opcw.org/chemical-weapon...ls/schedule-3/

At the risk of feeding what appears to be a troll habit you're developing, my referral to 'banned substances' was a reference to generic chemical weapon samples. Whether the UK or other governments had samples of what appears to be an undeclared CW who knows, though they appear to have sufficient knowledge of it's group to give it a name.

The UK, as with most countries, are concerned with the establishment and production of antidotes to chemical weapons, not the manufacture of CW per se.

Originally Posted by PAG

At the risk of feeding what appears to be a troll habit you're developing, my referral to 'banned substances' was a reference to generic chemical weapon samples. Whether the UK or other governments had samples of what appears to be an undeclared CW who knows, though they appear to have sufficient knowledge of it's group to give it a name.

The UK, as with most countries, are concerned with the establishment and production of antidotes to chemical weapons, not the manufacture of CW per se.

And, as I've already told him, the OPCW can't categorise or ban it because Russia has never provided a sample.

That may partially change when the UK have handed over what they have.

Not that it will make much difference because Russia won't admit they've got it, especially now.