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

**Neo** · 17-03-2018, 07:33 PM

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

As demonstrated above, this bloke is full of shit and thus lacks any credibility.

oh dear harry... you really are in a hole.

You really think this guy is full of shit..?

I am alarmed by the security, spying and armaments industries’ frenetic efforts to stoke Russophobia and heat up the new cold war. I am especially alarmed at the stream of cold war warrior “experts” dominating the news cycles. I write as someone who believes that agents of the Russian state did assassinate Litvinenko, and that the Russian security services carried out at least some of the apartment bombings that provided the pretext for the brutal assault on Chechnya. I believe the Russian occupation of Crimea and parts of Georgia is illegal. On the other hand, in Syria Russia has saved the Middle East from domination by a new wave of US and Saudi sponsored extreme jihadists.

He seems to hold the same views as you regarding Russia... although you have such a hard on over Putin that probably you would prefer a Middle East overrun with Jihadists than concede Russia has played a vital role in eliminating them, and that in this case of poisoning your myopia makes it impossible for you to concede that you could be wrong to jump to conclusions.

**harrybarracuda** · 17-03-2018, 07:53 PM

Originally Posted by Neo

oh dear harry... you really are in a hole.

You really think this guy is full of shit..?

He seems to hold the same views as you regarding Russia... although you have such a hard on over Putin that probably you would prefer a Middle East overrun with Jihadists than concede Russia has played a vital role in eliminating them, and that in this case of poisoning your myopia makes it impossible for you to concede that you could be wrong to jump to conclusions.

You are so easily manipulated.

**Neo** · 17-03-2018, 07:55 PM

again with the ironic one liners harry... rather snub-esque

**harrybarracuda** · 17-03-2018, 08:01 PM

Originally Posted by Neo

again with the ironic one liners harry... rather snub-esque

It's simply no surprise that the whackjobs lap up his nonsense.

**Klondyke** · 17-03-2018, 08:20 PM

The Novichok Story Is Indeed Another Iraqi WMD Scam 521
14 Mar, 2018 by craig

Craig John Murray (born 17 October 1958[1][2]) is a former British ambassador to Uzbekistan. He was the Rector of the University of Dundee (2007–10).

While Ambassador in Tashkent, he accused the Karimov administration of human rights violations, which he argued was contrary to the wishes of the British government. Murray complained to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office in November 2002, January or early February 2003, and in June 2004 that intelligence linking the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan to al-Qaeda was unreliable, immoral and illegal, as it was thought to have been obtained through torture.[3] He described this as "selling our souls for dross".[4] Murray was removed as ambassador to Uzbekistan on 14 October 2004; he attributed this to his complaints about human rights violations.

As recently as 2016 Dr Robin Black, Head of the Detection Laboratory at the UK’s only chemical weapons facility at Porton Down, a former colleague of Dr David Kelly, published in an extremely prestigious scientific journal that the evidence for the existence of Novichoks was scant and their composition unknown.

In recent years, there has been much speculation that a fourth generation of nerve agents, ‘Novichoks’ (newcomer), was developed in Russia, beginning in the 1970s as part of the ‘Foliant’ programme, with the aim of finding agents that would compromise defensive countermeasures. Information on these compounds has been sparse in the public domain, mostly originating from a dissident Russian military chemist, Vil Mirzayanov. No independent confirmation of the structures or the properties of such compounds has been published. (Black, 2016)
Robin Black. (2016) Development, Historical Use and Properties of Chemical Warfare Agents. Royal Society of Chemistry

Yet now, the British Government is claiming to be able instantly to identify a substance which its only biological weapons research centre has never seen before and was unsure of its existence. Worse, it claims to be able not only to identify it, but to pinpoint its origin. Given Dr Black’s publication, it is plain that claim cannot be true.

The world’s international chemical weapons experts share Dr Black’s opinion. The Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) is a UN body based in the Hague. In 2013 this was the report of its Scientific Advisory Board, which included US, French, German and Russian government representatives and on which Dr Black was the UK representative:

[The SAB] emphasised that the definition of toxic chemicals in the Convention would cover all potential candidate chemicals that might be utilised as chemical weapons. Regarding new toxic chemicals not listed in the Annex on Chemicals but which may nevertheless pose a risk to the Convention, the SAB makes reference to “Novichoks”. The name “Novichok” is used in a publication of a former Soviet scientist who reported investigating a new class of nerve agents suitable for use as binary chemical weapons. The SAB states that it has insufficient information to comment on the existence or properties of “Novichoks”. (OPCW, 2013)
OPCW: Report of the Scientific Advisory Board on developments in science and technology for the Third Review Conference 27 March 2013

Indeed the OPCW was so sceptical of the viability of “novichoks” that it decided – with US and UK agreement – not to add them nor their alleged precursors to its banned list. In short, the scientific community broadly accepts Mirzayanov was working on “novichoks” but doubts he succeeded.

Given that the OPCW has taken the view the evidence for the existence of “Novichoks” is dubious, if the UK actually has a sample of one it is extremely important the UK presents that sample to the OPCW. Indeed the UK has a binding treaty obligation to present that sample to OPCW. Russa has – unreported by the corporate media – entered a demand at the OPCW that Britain submit a sample of the Salisbury material for international analysis.

Yet Britain refuses to submit it to the OPCW.

Why?

A second part of May’s accusation is that “Novichoks” could only be made in certain military installations. But that is also demonstrably untrue. If they exist at all, Novichoks were allegedly designed to be able to be made at bench level in any commercial chemical facility – that was a major point of them. The only real evidence for the existence of Novichoks was the testimony of the ex-Soviet scientist Mizayanov. And this is what Mirzayanov actually wrote.

One should be mindful that the chemical components or precursors of A-232 or its binary version novichok-5 are ordinary organophosphates that can be made at commercial chemical companies that manufacture such products as fertilizers and pesticides.
Vil S. Mirzayanov, “Dismantling the Soviet/Russian Chemical Weapons Complex: An Insider’s View,” in Amy E. Smithson, Dr. Vil S. Mirzayanov, Gen Roland Lajoie, and Michael Krepon, Chemical Weapons Disarmament in Russia: Problems and Prospects, Stimson Report No. 17, October 1995, p. 21.

It is a scientific impossibility for Porton Down to have been able to test for Russian novichoks if they have never possessed a Russian sample to compare them to. They can analyse a sample as conforming to a Mirzayanov formula, but as he published those to the world twenty years ago, that is no proof of Russian origin. If Porton Down can synthesise it, so can many others, not just the Russians.

And finally – Mirzayanov is an Uzbek name and the novichok programme, assuming it existed, was in the Soviet Union but far away from modern Russia, at Nukus in modern Uzbekistan. I have visited the Nukus chemical weapons site myself. It was dismantled and made safe and all the stocks destroyed and the equipment removed by the American government, as I recall finishing while I was Ambassador there. There has in fact never been any evidence that any “novichok” ever existed in Russia itself.

To summarise:

1) Porton Down has acknowledged in publications it has never seen any Russian “novichoks”. The UK government has absolutely no “fingerprint” information such as impurities that can safely attribute this substance to Russia.
2) Until now, neither Porton Down nor the world’s experts at the Organisation for the Prevention of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) were convinced “Novichoks” even exist.
3) The UK is refusing to provide a sample to the OPCW.
4) “Novichoks” were specifically designed to be able to be manufactured from common ingredients on any scientific bench. The Americans dismantled and studied the facility that allegedly developed them. It is completely untrue only the Russians could make them, if anybody can.
5) The “Novichok” programme was in Uzbekistan not in Russia. Its legacy was inherited by the Americans during their alliance with Karimov, not by the Russians.

With a great many thanks to sources who cannot be named at this moment.

Please Also Read My follow-up to this article: “Bothered by Midgies” https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archi...ed-by-midgies/

https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archi...raqi-wmd-scam/

**harrybarracuda** · 17-03-2018, 08:43 PM

See, little Klondyke laps the shit up.

**OhOh** · 17-03-2018, 09:29 PM

"

This from a "Briefing Note" in the UK Parliament Library 15/3/18. These notes are for MPs and Government offices assitance in answering any questions from cconcerned UK citizens. backgound on OPCW work inside Uk and external. General background education stuff.

https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/CBP-8258

The attack in Salisbury

"On 4 March 2018 two individuals, Sergey and Yulia Skripal, were taken seriously ill in the city of Salisbury.

On 8 March the Foreign and Commonwealth office informed the OPCW Technical Secretariat that they had fallen ill following exposure to a nerve agent.

On 12 March the Prime Minister gave a statement in which she confirmed the substance used was a military-grade nerve agent of a type developed by Russia, part of a group of agents known as ‘Novichok’ agents. The Prime Minister said it is “highly likely that Russia was responsible” for the attack. The Foreign Secretary asked Russia to provide to the OPCW immediate, full and complete disclosure of the Novichok programme to the OPCW by the end of 13 March.

By coincidence the OPCW is holding one of its regular Executive Council meeting between 13-16 March 2018.

The UK addressed the on 13 March. Repeating the Government’s conclusions, as outlined in the Prime Minister’s statement, the Permanent Representative of the UK to the OPCW said:

The stark conclusion is that it is highly likely that Russia, a fellow State Party to the Chemical Weapons Convention and fellow member of this Executive Council is implicated in chemical weapons use, whether by failure to control its own materials or by design.

The Russian Permanent Representative responded in a statement to the Council on 13 March. The Russian Ambassador described the UK’s “unfounded accusations” as “absolutely unacceptable”. The Ambassador said the UK should avail itself of the procedures provided for in Article IX(2) of the Convention and made it clear the Convention allows for 10 days for a receiving State to reply, describing the UK’s demand for a response within 24 hours as “absolutely unacceptable

================================================== ==============================================
The Prime Minister updated the House of Commons on 14 March. The Prime Minister said there is no alternative conclusion other than that the Russian state was culpable:

The Russian Government have provided no credible explanation that could suggest that they lost control of their nerve agent, no explanation as to how this agent came to be used in the United Kingdom, and no explanation as to why Russia has an undeclared chemical weapons programme in contravention of international law.

The Prime Minister said the Government had informed the OPCW about Russia’s use of this nerve agent “and are working with the police to enable the OPCW to independently verify our analysis.

In his response, the Leader of the Opposition, Jeremy Corbyn, asked if the Government had made a formal request for evidence from the Russian Government under article IX(2) of the Chemical Weapon Convention.”

================================================== ==============================================

Compare the above 14/3/18 alleged briefing with the actual statement as recorded and published by the 14/3/18

https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/pm-commons-statement-on-salisbury-incident-response-14-march-2018#full-history

Oral statement to Parliament

PM Commons Statement on Salisbury incident response: 14 March 2018

"With permission, Mr Speaker, I would like to make a Statement on the response of the Russian government to the incident in Salisbury.
First, on behalf of the whole House, let me pay tribute once again to the bravery and professionalism of all the emergency services, doctors, nurses and investigation teams who have led the response to this appalling incident.

And also to the fortitude of the people of Salisbury. Let me reassure them that – as Public Health England have made clear – the ongoing risk to public health is low. And the government will continue to do everything possible to support this historic city to recover fully.

Mr Speaker, on Monday I set out that Mr Skripal and his daughter were poisoned with a Novichok: a military grade nerve agent developed by Russia.

Based on this capability, combined with their record of conducting state sponsored assassinations – including against former intelligence officers whom they regard as legitimate targets - the UK government concluded it was highly likely that Russia was responsible for this reckless and despicable act.

And there were only two plausible explanations. Either this was a direct act by the Russian State against our country. Or conceivably, the Russian government could have lost control of a military-grade nerve agent and allowed it to get into the hands of others. Mr Speaker, it was right to offer Russia the opportunity to provide an explanation.

But their response has demonstrated complete disdain for the gravity of these events. They have provided no credible explanation that could suggest they lost control of their nerve agent. No explanation as to how this agent came to be used in the United Kingdom; no explanation as to why Russia has an undeclared chemical weapons programme in contravention of international law. Instead they have treated the use of a military grade nerve agent in Europe with sarcasm, contempt and defiance.

So Mr Speaker, there is no alternative conclusion other than that the Russian State was culpable for the attempted murder of Mr Skripal and his daughter - and for threatening the lives of other British citizens in Salisbury, including Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey.

This represents an unlawful use of force by the Russian State against the United Kingdom.

And as I set out on Monday it has taken place against the backdrop of a well-established pattern of Russian State aggression across Europe and beyond.
It must therefore be met with a full and robust response - beyond the actions we have already taken since the murder of Mr Litvinenko and to counter this pattern of Russian aggression elsewhere.

As the discussion in this House on Monday made clear, it is essential that we now come together – with our allies - to defend our security, to stand up for our values and to send a clear message to those who would seek to undermine them.

This morning I chaired a further meeting of the National Security Council, where we agreed immediate actions to dismantle the Russian espionage network in the UK, urgent work to develop new powers to tackle all forms of hostile state activity and to ensure that those seeking to carry out such activity cannot enter the UK, and additional steps to suspend all planned high-level contacts between the United Kingdom and the Russian Federation.

Let me start with the immediate actions.

Mr Speaker, the House will recall that following the murder of Mr Litvinenko, the UK expelled four diplomats.
Under the Vienna Convention, the United Kingdom will now expel 23 Russian diplomats who have been identified as undeclared intelligence officers.
They have just one week to leave.

This will be the single biggest expulsion for over thirty years and it reflects the fact that this is not the first time that the Russian State has acted against our country.

Through these expulsions we will fundamentally degrade Russian intelligence capability in the UK for years to come. And if they seek to rebuild it, we will prevent them from doing so.

Second, we will urgently develop proposals for new legislative powers to harden our defences against all forms of Hostile State Activity.
This will include the addition of a targeted power to detain those suspected of Hostile State Activity at the UK border. This power is currently only permitted in relation to those suspected of terrorism.

And I have asked the Home Secretary to consider whether there is a need for new counter-espionage powers to clamp down on the full spectrum of hostile activities of foreign agents in our country.

Mr Speaker, as I set out on Monday we will also table a government amendment to the Sanctions Bill to strengthen our powers to impose sanctions in response to the violation of human rights.

In doing so, we will play our part in an international effort to punish those responsible for the sorts of abuses suffered by Sergey Magnitsky.

And I hope – as with all the measures I am setting out today – that this will command cross-party support.

Mr Speaker, we will also make full use of existing powers to enhance our efforts to monitor and track the intentions of those travelling to the UK who could be engaged in activity that threatens the security of the UK and of our allies.

So we will increase checks on private flights, customs and freight.

We will freeze Russian State assets wherever we have the evidence that they may be used to threaten the life or property of UK nationals or residents.

And led by the National Crime Agency, we will continue to bring all the capabilities of UK law enforcement to bear against serious criminals and corrupt elites. There is no place for these people – or their money - in our country.

Mr Speaker, let me be clear.

While our response must be robust it must also remain true to our values – as a liberal democracy that believes in the rule of law.

Many Russians have made this country their home, abide by our laws and make an important contribution to our country which we must continue to welcome.

But to those who seek to do us harm, my message is simple: you are not welcome here.
Mr Speaker, let me turn to our bi-lateral relationship.

As I said on Monday, we have had a very simple approach to Russia: engage but beware.
And I continue to believe it is not in our national interest to break off all dialogue between the United Kingdom and the Russian Federation.
But in the aftermath of this appalling act against our country, this relationship cannot be the same.

So we will suspend all planned high level bi-lateral contacts between the United Kingdom and the Russian Federation.

This includes revoking the invitation to Foreign Minister Lavrov to pay a reciprocal visit to the United Kingdom and confirming there will be no attendance by Ministers - or indeed Members of the Royal Family - at this Summer’s World Cup in Russia.

Finally, Mr Speaker, we will deploy a range of tools from across the full breadth of our National Security apparatus in order to counter the threats of Hostile State Activity.

While I have set out some of those measures today, Members on all sides will understand that there are some that cannot be shared publicly for reasons of National Security.

And, of course, there are other measures we stand ready to deploy at any time, should we face further Russian provocation.

Mr Speaker, none of the actions we take are intended to damage legitimate activity or prevent contacts between our populations.

We have no disagreement with the people of Russia who have been responsible for so many great achievements throughout their history.
Many of us looked at a post-Soviet Russia with hope. We wanted a better relationship and it is tragic that President Putin has chosen to act in this way.

But we will not tolerate the threat to life of British people and others on British soil from the Russian government. Nor will we tolerate such a flagrant breach of Russia’s international obligations.

Mr Speaker, as I set out on Monday, the United Kingdom does not stand alone in confronting Russian aggression. In the last twenty-four hours I have spoken to President Trump, Chancellor Merkel and President Macron. We have agreed to co-operate closely in responding to this barbaric act and to co-ordinate our efforts to stand up for the rules based international order which Russia seeks to undermine.

I will also speak to other allies and partners in the coming days. And I welcome the strong expressions of support from NATO and from partners across the European Union and beyond. Later today in New York, the UN Security Council will hold open consultations where we will be pushing for a robust international response.

We have also notified the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons about Russia’s use of this nerve agent. And we are working with the police to enable the OPCW to independently verify our analysis.

Mr Speaker, this was not just an act of attempted murder in Salisbury – nor just an act against UK.

It is an affront to the prohibition on the use of chemical weapons.

And it is an affront to the rules based system on which we and our international partners depend.

We will work with our allies and partners to confront such actions wherever they threaten our security, at home and abroad.

And I commend this Statement to the House."

Her Government statement goes much further:

1. Russia poisoned a UK citizen
2. Russia poisoned a Russian citizen
3. Russia conducts state sponsored terrorism
4. Russia was responsible for a reckless and despicable act

However this was all wrapped up in a "highly likely" caveat. Implying they, currently, have no proof or facts to support any claims.

She then continues with more unfounded accusations.

**tomcat** · 17-03-2018, 09:59 PM

Originally Posted by OhOh

Culpability generally implies that an act performed is wrong but does not involve any evil intent by the wrongdoer.

...after all, what could possibly be evil about nerve gassing folks?...

**OhOh** · 17-03-2018, 10:47 PM

^
What is more evil is performing evil acts without any facts to back up, currently, her accusations and besmirching a Government Leader and a country.

She admits it is only "highly likely". These are not the words of a person who has anything to back up their assertions. They are weasel words which when later proven as lies, as so many governments have been shown, to use, prior to engaging in causing millions of deaths.

**harrybarracuda** · 18-03-2018, 12:12 AM

Originally Posted by OhOh

^
What is more evil is performing evil acts without any facts to back up, currently, her accusations and besmirching a Government Leader and a country.

She admits it is only "highly likely". These are not the words of a person who has anything to back up their assertions. They are weasel words which when later proven as lies, as so many governments have been shown, to use, prior to engaging in causing millions of deaths.

You are being a bit of a numbskull HoHo.

That it is "highly likely" gives Russia an opportunity to come up with a reason why it was not them that used their nerve agent to kill their enemy.

However, their reply has been the standard indignant bluster of the Soviet era, back into which Putin is trying to drag Russia.

**tomcat** · 18-03-2018, 06:12 AM

Originally Posted by OhOh

as so many governments have been shown, to use, prior to engaging in causing millions of deaths.

...referring to the Stalin era then: good example of Soviet dissembling...

**misskit** · 18-03-2018, 06:18 AM

Russia expels 23 British diplomats as crisis over nerve toxin attack deepens

MOSCOW (Reuters) - Russia expelled 23 British diplomats on Saturday in a carefully calibrated retaliatory move against London, which has accused the Kremlin of orchestrating a nerve toxin attack on a former Russian double agent and his daughter in southern England.

Escalating a crisis in relations, Russia said it was also shutting down the activities of the British Council, which fosters cultural links between the two countries, and Britain’s consulate-general in St. Petersburg.

The Russian Foreign Ministry said the 23 British diplomats had one week to leave the country.

The move followed Britain’s decision on Wednesday to expel 23 Russian diplomats over the attack in the English city of Salisbury which left former Russian spy Sergei Skripal, 66, and his daughter Yulia Skripal, 33, critically ill in hospital.

Moscow announced the measures on the eve of a presidential election which incumbent Vladimir Putin should comfortably win. Putin has cast his country as a fortress besieged by hostile Western powers with him as its defender, and state media is likely to portray the anti-British move in that context.

The Foreign Ministry said Moscow’s measures were a response to what it called Britain’s “provocative actions and unsubstantiated accusations”. It warned London it stood ready to take further measures in the event of more “unfriendly steps”.

Relations between London and Moscow have crashed to a post-Cold War low over the Salisbury attack, the first known offensive use of a nerve agent in Europe since World War Two.

British Prime Minister Theresa May said Britain would consider its next steps with its allies in the coming days.

“We will never tolerate a threat to the life of British citizens and others on British soil from the Russian Government. We can be reassured by the strong support we have received from our friends and allies around the world,” May told her Conservative Party’s spring forum in London.

The Russian Foreign Ministry summoned the British ambassador, Laurie Bristow, to its headquarters on Saturday morning to inform him of the retaliatory measures.

Bristow told reporters afterwards that Britain had only expelled the Russian diplomats after Moscow had failed to explain how the nerve toxin had got to Salisbury.

Britain’s foreign ministry said it had anticipated Russia’s response and that its priority was to look after its staff in Russia and assist those returning home.

“Russia’s response doesn’t change the facts of the matter - the attempted assassination of two people on British soil, for which there is no alternative conclusion other than that the Russian State was culpable,” it said in a statement.

Britain’s National Security Council is due to meet early next week to consider London’s next steps.

WAR OF WORDS

Russia’s response was more robust than expected. The closure of the British Council’s Moscow office will sever cultural ties, while that of the consulate-general in St Petersburg will end Britain’s diplomatic presence in Russia’s second city.

Russian news agencies cited politicians in Russia’s upper house of parliament as welcoming the move to close the British Council, alleging it had been used as a cover by British spies.

The British Council said it was profoundly disappointed by Russia’s decision and remained committed to developing long-term people-to-people links with Russia despite the closure.

Russia has complained that Britain has failed to provide any evidence of its involvement in the Salisbury attack and has said it is shocked and bemused by the allegations.

Britain has escalated a war of words with Russia over the incident in recent days. On Friday, British Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson said it was overwhelmingly likely that Russian President Putin himself had made the decision to use a military-grade nerve toxin to strike down Skripal.

Britain, the United States, Germany and France have jointly called on Russia to explain the attack and U.S. President Donald Trump has said it looks as if the Russians were behind it.

Russia has said is open to cooperation with Britain, but has refused Britain’s demands to explain how Novichok, a nerve agent developed by the Soviet military, was used against the Skripals.

Skripal, a former colonel in the GRU who betrayed dozens of Russian agents to British intelligence, and his daughter have been critically ill since March 4, when they were found unconscious on a bench.

A British policeman was also poisoned when he went to help them and remains in a serious but stable condition.

Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova told the Rossiya 24 TV channel on Saturday that the most likely source of the Novichok nerve toxin was Britain itself or the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Sweden or the United States.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-b...-idUSKCN1GT0BE

**misskit** · 18-03-2018, 06:25 AM

Swedish foreign minister rejects 'unacceptable and unfounded' Russia toxin claim

STOCKHOLM (Reuters) - Swedish Foreign Minister Margot Wallstrom rejected Russian claims on Saturday that the country could be the source of a nerve toxin used against a former Russian double agent and his daughter in Britain, calling them “unacceptable and unfounded”.

A Russian foreign ministry spokeswoman told the Rossiya 24 TV channel earlier on Saturday that the most likely source of the Novichok nerve agent was Britain itself or the Czech Republic, Slovakia, the United States or Sweden.

“Forcefully reject unacceptable and unfounded allegation by Russian MFA spokesperson that nerve agent used in Salisbury might originate in Sweden,” Wallstrom said in a tweet.

“Russia should answer UK questions instead.”

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-b...-idUSKCN1GT0N7

**misskit** · 18-03-2018, 06:27 AM

Czech foreign minister rejects Russia's nerve toxin origin claim

PRAGUE (Reuters) - Czech Foreign Minister Martin Stropnicky on Saturday denied Moscow’s accusation that the nerve toxin used against a former Russian double agent and his daughter in southern England came from the Czech Republic

Russian foreign ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova told the Rossiya 24 TV channel on Saturday that the most likely source of the Novichok nerve agent was Britain itself or the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Sweden or the United States.

Russia expelled 23 British diplomats on Saturday in a retaliatory move against London, which has accused the Kremlin of orchestrating the nerve toxin attack and has ordered the expulsion of the same number of Russian diplomats. [ID:nL8N1QZ0CT

“We object to these claims about the origin of (the toxin), which are not substantiated,” Stropnicky said on his official Twitter feed.

“This is a standard way of manipulating information in the public space through a highly speculative message being introduced which can not be proven.”

Czech Defense Minister Karla Slechtova, on her twitter feed, described the suggestion that the toxin could have come from the Czech Republic as “absurd”.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-b...-idUSKCN1GT0ML

**tomcat** · 18-03-2018, 07:04 AM

TD Minister of Silly Posts Rejects Nervy Toxic Posts Claim

THAILAND (Coconuts) - TD Minister of Silly Posts OhOh Vladimirovich denied accusations that TD is responsible for toxic thread-derailing posts: "They are weasel words which when later proven as lies, as so many forums have been shown, to use, prior to engaging in causing millions of reds."...he explained...

**OhOh** · 18-03-2018, 08:41 AM

My apologies for post #257. Poorly presented and argued. Too much beer last night.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

their reply has been the standard indignant bluster of the Soviet era

Here, allegedly, is the latest "indignant bluster":

https://www.rt.com/news/421602-skrip...no-legal-case/

"Russia’s Foreign Minister said.

“The fact, that they [UK officials] categorically rejects to file an official request and deliberately and arrogantly fan anti-Russian rhetoric in the public sphere bordering on hysteria, indicates that they clearly understand they have no formal pretext to go down a legal road,” Lavrov said on Friday, referring to the British authorities’ allegations that Russia, and, notably, President Vladimir Putin, were behind the plot to poison the former double agent and his daughter.

Instead, UK officials have tried to "move all this to the sphere of political rhetoric, to Russophobia in the hope that, as it was in many other cases, the West will align,” Lavrov said.

“So I think the right approach is to seek the evidence; to follow international treaties, particularly in relation to prohibited chemical weapons, because this was a chemical weapons attack, carried out on British soil,”

Polite and reserved, as a true Governent spokesman should be.

**OhOh** · 18-03-2018, 08:53 AM

Originally Posted by misskit

“Forcefully reject unacceptable and unfounded allegation by Russian MFA spokesperson that nerve agent used in Salisbury might originate in Sweden,” Wallstrom said in a tweet.

Originally Posted by misskit

“We object to these claims about the origin of (the toxin), which are not substantiated,” Stropnicky said on his official Twitter feed.

“This is a standard way of manipulating information in the public space through a highly speculative message being introduced which can not be proven.”

Oh dear, the use of "unsubstantiated claims" has been forcefully rejected/rejected by an European Government minister and ex Soviet satellite minister.

Whatever next.

Who have the audacity to suggest this type of behaviour is "unacceptable and unfounded" and “a standard way of manipulating information in the public space through a highly speculative message being introduced which can not be proven.”

Shades of echoing the Russian Foreign Minister. The dew on the spiders web of lies is evaporating in the morning sun.

**tomcat** · 18-03-2018, 08:55 AM

Originally Posted by OhOh

Polite and reserved, as a true Governent spokesman should be.

...also disingenuous and calculating in order to mislead...

**tomcat** · 18-03-2018, 08:56 AM

Originally Posted by OhOh

The dew on the spiders web of lies is evaporating in the morning sun.

...while the canister of Raid is wielded with threatening accuracy...

**OhOh** · 18-03-2018, 09:29 AM

Here is a tweet from a Professor of Organic Chemistry @ Cornell.

Dave Collum‏ @DavidBCollum Mar 15

"To all you fuckwitted nerve gas/geopolitical experts: the nerve agent attributed to the Rooskies is trivial to make. Stop saying it points to the Russians or it couldn't be easily characterized. Maybe they did it; maybe they didn't, but many would like it to look like Russia."

Now he could be a Russian spy or he could be, as he is employed by a western university of repute, an intelligent man of integrity.

Which demolishes the current UK accusation.

A link to an article which demolishes the UK claim that only Russia had access to the alleged CW, only Russia has the means and motive for this alleged crime.

https://www.peakprosperity.com/blog/113845/russia-did

**Neo** · 18-03-2018, 09:32 AM

Originally Posted by tomcat

...also disingenuous and calculating in order to mislead...

oh dear... she's been sniffing round this thread too long and caught harryitis

**bsnub** · 18-03-2018, 09:41 AM

Well I see the usual Putin nob gobblers are desperately trying to validate dodgy tin foil conspiracies even though strong evidence to the contrary has been posted here already. Brainwashed fools.

**OhOh** · 18-03-2018, 09:42 AM

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

You are being a bit of a numbskull HoHo.

That it is "highly likely" gives Russia an opportunity to come up with a reason why it was not them that used their nerve agent to kill their enemy.

You are, as usual, failing to refer to previous references. The Russian position has been clearly stated by their Government officer responsible for foreign affairs: Utilise the impartial OPCW to obtain samples, investigate and report on the incident. Which the UK has failed to do. Which leads to the suspicion, by some, that they are hiding the truth or are sexing up the alleged evidence which unfortunately many western governments have adopted in the past.

This image incorporates the attitude displayed very accurately. The combination of the ameristanis lies in the UNSC and the UK sexing up a report and twisting hearsay into their fabricated lie.

Are you really suggesting to follow these historic mistakes steps is an acceptable policy?

**OhOh** · 18-03-2018, 09:51 AM

Originally Posted by bsnub

even though strong evidence to the contrary has been posted here already

Opinions here are from us armchair experts only so far.

The accusers of acts of war, as I previously posted, have no facts to present and are merely whistling in the wind.

**tomcat** · 18-03-2018, 09:58 AM

Originally Posted by OhOh

whistling in the wind

...just put your lips together and blow:

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

Thread Tools

Display

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

Posting Permissions