russia poisioning

[PapofGlencoe]

Just now, phart said:

Said before in the thread, follow international protocols for the incident. Share the sample immediately with the OPCW, get independent verification and then present the evidence. Not say Russia did it and then try and get the evidence to fit.

It was wandering off from established protocols that makes it suspicious.

the protocols will show it cannot be proved.  Just let it happen then?

[phart]

On 3/20/2018 at 3:20 PM, phart said:

I don't trust Boris Johnson to analyse chemical data, so what he says is irrelevant. We're waiting on the substance being identified, what politicians say is meaningless this is a scientific question not a political on.

Yes I want the OPCW to inspect it. Same as i was against Iraq war cause despite what Blair and Bush were saying the independent experts were saying his nuclear capabilities were zilch and his chemical not far behind.

I've found my method of evaluating data has served me well over the years when it comes to the "Truth" of a situation.

Here's what i said 2 weeks ago.

[phart]

Just now, PapofGlencoe said:

the protocols will show it cannot be proved.  Just let it happen then?

Not sure how you got to this conclusion.

If OPCW confirms the substance and they had been quiet and it comes back novichok (which isn;t a concrete scientific definition if you listen to organic chemists) then they could go onto collaborating evidence, for example the government claim to have obtained a copy of KGB standard practices of assassination, which included smearing of substances. Plus set up whatever other evidence they have as well.

Instead they said it was Russia before any evidence.

[phart]

On 3/20/2018 at 12:53 PM, phart said:

The problem is the push to prosecute by press.

Loads of bullshit being spread about the poison all designed to implicate Russia before any testing.

If everyone is so sure, then get the evidence and then so do something substantial about it.

Again my point on what should have happened.

[ParisInAKilt]

35 minutes ago, PapofGlencoe said:

it's surprising that the test facility chose to speak publicly.   Although i'm not sure they're alledging that the Russian's didn't do it.  All he's saying is it's novochok and added to intelligence he hasn't seen the UK Government believe it to be the Russians.

I don't think you can really play diplomacy by saying you're fairly sure about something when it's of this type.  The Russians aren't going to admit to it and gaining beyond any doubt is always going to be difficult.  The UK Government and the UN should have allowed independent testing however it's understandable why they are reticent.  They will be concerned the committee will almost certainly return a not proven verdict which would make them look very foolish.

It's a bit like when everybody in the court knows the accused did it but have to let them off with it.  But this isn't a court of law, the UK has a right to say what it believes to be the case and clearly its allies agree.  Do we just fail to react to clear breaches of international conduct simply because the perpetrator has been clever about it?  Hardly.  I understand where people are coming from but you have to decide what is the best approach to deal with a complex issue.  How would those complaining deal with it knowing it was probably the Russians?

The UK government and the UN are confirmed liars. This isn’t all a wee mistake. There’s a coordinated effort to make Russia the enemy. NATO needs an enemy and Russia ticks all the boxes. 

Not that I’m saying Russia / Putin is good because they appear to be anti NATO. 

[phart]

15 minutes ago, Mindimoo said:

The plot thickens.  From irreparable damage to health to this.  I'm still not convinced the two were ever in any danger at all.  Something smells iffy.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-43652574

 

Not sure the start of it sounds a bit contrived, hard to tell. Russia has been releasing embarrassing political phone calls for a while, the most obvious case being Victoria Nulands calls during the Ukraine crisis.

[ParisInAKilt]

Russia invaded Ukraine 

Russia bad guys in Syria 

trump and Russia 

etc 

absolute garbage 

[PapofGlencoe]

11 minutes ago, phart said:

Not sure how you got to this conclusion.

If OPCW confirms the substance and they had been quiet and it comes back novichok (which isn;t a concrete scientific definition if you listen to organic chemists) then they could go onto collaborating evidence, for example the government claim to have obtained a copy of KGB standard practices of assassination, which included smearing of substances. Plus set up whatever other evidence they have as well.

Instead they said it was Russia before any evidence.

i'm surmising and giving you the credit you may be correct that the evidence does not prove beyond doubt...therefore an independent body cannot / (under pressure will not?) declare blame on another state.

If that's considered the likely outcome of an investigation, just let it happen yeah?  No response.  You have an intelligence paper saying we're very sure it's them but because the OPCW won't commit we will just have to lump it? 

I'm not saying I agree with it or that i'm right.  I'm assessing how a Government would act outside of the international norm if the protocols are unable, possibly quite rightly, to properly state blame. 

So I ask again what you would do under those circumstances?

 

Edited April 5, 2018 by PapofGlencoe

[TDYER63]

49 minutes ago, PapofGlencoe said:

it's surprising that the test facility chose to speak publicly.   Although i'm not sure they're alledging that the Russian's didn't do it.  All he's saying is it's novochok and added to intelligence he hasn't seen the UK Government believe it to be the Russians.

I don't think you can really play diplomacy by saying you're fairly sure about something when it's of this type.  The Russians aren't going to admit to it and gaining beyond any doubt is always going to be difficult.  The UK Government and the UN should have allowed independent testing however it's understandable why they are reticent.  They will be concerned the committee will almost certainly return a not proven verdict which would make them look very foolish.

It's a bit like when everybody in the court knows the accused did it but have to let them off with it.  But this isn't a court of law, the UK has a right to say what it believes to be the case and clearly its allies agree.  Do we just fail to react to clear breaches of international conduct simply because the perpetrator has been clever about it?  Hardly.  I understand where people are coming from but you have to decide what is the best approach to deal with a complex issue.  How would those complaining deal with it knowing it was probably the Russians?

I agree the Government are in a bit of a difficult situation, but I am not convinced Britain has the support it thinks it has . 

At the meeting yesterday that called for a joint enquiry into the poisoning , Russia were outvoted 15-6, but there were 17 abstentions. I know that a vote on a joint enquiry with Russia  is not the same as a vote on ‘ do you think the Russians did it ‘ , but I think the abstentions show there is some uncertainty out there.

Also, a German official has come out saying Britain needs to show proof that Russia was behind the poisoning given Porton Down could not confirm the nerve agent was produced in Russia and also since the secret service reports are not known publicly the whole thing is not transparent. 

[phart]

19 minutes ago, PapofGlencoe said:

i'm surmising and giving you the credit you may be correct that the evidence does not prove beyond doubt...therefore an independent body cannot / (under pressure will not?) declare blame on another state.

If that's considered the likely outcome of an investigation, just let it happen yeah?  No response.  You have an intelligence paper saying we're very sure it's them but because the OPCW won't commit we will just have to lump it? 

I'm not saying I agree with it or that i'm right.  I'm assessing how a Government would act outside of the international norm if the protocols are unable, possibly quite rightly, to properly state blame. 

So I ask again what you would do under those circumstances?

 

As i said

"The problem is the push to prosecute by press.

Loads of bullshit being spread about the poison all designed to implicate Russia before any testing.

If everyone is so sure, then get the evidence and then so do something substantial about it."

The OPCW hasn't finished their investigation yet so we don't know what they'll be saying.

Go to the UN and get some sort of sanctions put on Russia.

 

So you're asking if i couldn't prove something but i 100% believed it actually did something, what would I do? Well, my question would be why if you can't prove something do you believe it 100%?

Also this isn't in a vacuum the very fact Skirpal exists as a double agent shows you how murky this shit is.

Anyway I genuinely have to head off my gran is 90 today and organizing her surprise party, got folk coming in from all over, so need to get everyone to the venue and keep my gran from finding out.

[Orraloon]

That's now a full month since the incident took place and they are still not telling us what the actual compound was. I wonder why?

[phart]

Met police just released a statement ostensibly from the daughter. Not long after the Russians put the phone call out there.

CRaig Murray saying an omission in the translation as well, right got ot go.

[TDYER63]

7 minutes ago, phart said:

As i said

"The problem is the push to prosecute by press.

Loads of bullshit being spread about the poison all designed to implicate Russia before any testing.

If everyone is so sure, then get the evidence and then so do something substantial about it."

The OPCW hasn't finished their investigation yet so we don't know what they'll be saying.

Go to the UN and get some sort of sanctions put on Russia.

 

So you're asking if i couldn't prove something but i 100% believed it actually did something, what would I do? Well, my question would be why if you can't prove something do you believe it 100%?

Also this isn't in a vacuum the very fact Skirpal exists as a double agent shows you how murky this shit is.

Anyway I genuinely have to head off my gran is 90 today and organizing her surprise party, got folk coming in from all over, so need to get everyone to the venue and keep my gran from finding out.

Hope your gran has a great day. 🎂🍺🍸

I am sure a guy with your super sleuth skills will pull it off 🙂

[macy37]

I actually don’t think anything actually happened and it’s all been staged. 

[Mindimoo]

9 hours ago, macy37 said:

I actually don’t think anything actually happened and it’s all been staged. 

Ditto

[PapofGlencoe]

21 hours ago, phart said:

As i said

"The problem is the push to prosecute by press.

Loads of bullshit being spread about the poison all designed to implicate Russia before any testing.

If everyone is so sure, then get the evidence and then so do something substantial about it."

The UK consider they have the evidence.. and have done something substantial about it.

 

So you're asking if i couldn't prove something but i 100% believed it actually did something, what would I do? Well, my question would be why if you can't prove something do you believe it 100%?

We don't live in a world where you cannot or shouldn't make judgments unless you're 100% sure about the issue and I suspect you know that.  You called me naive earlier in this thread.  I still think you haven't really answered the question.  I think given the circumstances it's very easy to see why the UK would not "get the evidence oot!" to Joe Bloggs and it's easy to criticise rather than say what you would do.

I think I've given a fair assessment of reasons why 'playing by the book' is not actually real life politics.  Is the OPCW really going to rule against a world power on a subject like this?  Is the UK really going to present all its evidence in an open forum?  The answer probably being no to both doesn't mean you just let the offending party away with it. You called me naive earlier in this thread.

Also this isn't in a vacuum the very fact Skirpal exists as a double agent shows you how murky this shit is.

Correct. I have no idea who did this and it could be true the UK have it all wrong or have a conspiracy against Russia for unknown reasons.  But there's equally a version that can be made that the UK believe with all the evidence they have gathered that Russia are to blame for committing an attempted assassination on British soil.  Given this is all murky shiit as  you put it, it's conceivable the UK have put all the evidence they are willing to put out in the public domain.

 

Anyway I genuinely have to head off my gran is 90 today and organizing her surprise party, got folk coming in from all over, so need to get everyone to the venue and keep my gran from finding out.

Fantastic.  All the best to her.  Hope you've got sair heid.

 

Edited April 6, 2018 by PapofGlencoe

[aaid]

 

1 hour ago, PapofGlencoe said:

We don't live in a world where you cannot or shouldn't make judgments unless you're 100% sure about the issue and I suspect you know that.  You called me naive earlier in this thread.  I still think you haven't really answered the question.  I think given the circumstances it's very easy to see why the UK would not "get the evidence oot!" to Joe Bloggs and it's easy to criticise rather than say what you would do.

I think I've given a fair assessment of reasons why 'playing by the book' is not actually real life politics.  Is the OPCW really going to rule against a world power on a subject like this?  Is the UK really going to present all its evidence in an open forum?  The answer probably being no to both doesn't mean you just let the offending party away with it. You called me naive earlier in this thread

 

1 hour ago, PapofGlencoe said:

Correct. I have no idea who did this and it could be true the UK have it all wrong or have a conspiracy against Russia for unknown reasons.  But there's equally a version that can be made that the UK believe with all the evidence they have gathered that Russia are to blame for committing an attempted assassination on British soil.  Given this is all murky shiit as  you put it, it's conceivable the UK have put all the evidence they are willing to put out in the public domain.

 

I don't think anyone seriously thinks that the only source the UK government has for linking this to Russia is Porton Down, nor do people think that all intelligence-based evidence should be put in the public domain, not least where that may compromise the source or means of gathering that intelligence.   

However, there is a big, big problem insofar as blindly trusting the UK government when it comes to intelligence led evidence pointing at other countries and it's called Iraq.

Which is why someone like Boris Johnson going "off-piste" and basically telling lies to make the story sound more believable is such a big problem for the UK government.   By doing - or more accurately being caught doing - that he actually makes his own case less believable and gives credence to the Russian denials.

[Eisegerwind]

It's the 'certainty and no other likely possibilities other than Russian government' line that the Government  keeps pushing. This guy was a spy, a double agent. He betrayed not only his country and his countrymen but his colleauges his friends and his family. His actions may well have led to the deaths and or imprisonment of his countrymen and colleagues. To suggest that his actions haven't led to a queue of prospective assasins, not neccesarily backed the government, whose lives have been harmed by his traitorous actions is just wrong.

[FuNsTeR]

 this is looking mega embarrassing for the UK and Teresa May .... the phone call they ridiculed has now been verified as true and Skripal all of a sudden has made a miraculous recovery ... so much for the deadly military grade chemical weapons .... more dodgy by the day

[Hertsscot]

On 04/04/2018 at 10:11 PM, Toepoke said:

I see Yulias cousin has been denied a visa.  I can't help feeling that May, Johnson and the media would be fuming if this was the way a UK citizen was being treated by a foreign power. British values, eh? One rule for us and a completely different one for Johnny foreigner.

 

 

[phart]

"The Home Office have rejected a visa application by Viktoria Skripal - cousin of Yulia, who was poisoned in the Salisbury attack.

The poisoned Russia's cousin will not be allowed to visit Britain after it was reported that she was deliberately being coached by Moscow to discredit Yulia.

A Home Office spokesman said: "We have refused a visitor visa application from Viktoria Skripal on the grounds that her application did not comply with the Immigration Rules."

 

[Hertsscot]

3 hours ago, Hertsscot said:

 

Apologies to Toepoke.  I somehow managed to get my words disguised as a quote from your good self!

[Toepoke]

Poor pussy  

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/apr/06/sergei-skripal-cat-guinea-pigs-die-police-sealed-house-salisbury-spy

 

[Toepoke]

13 minutes ago, Hertsscot said:

Apologies to Toepoke.  I somehow managed to get my words disguised as a quote from your good self!

Couldn't have put it better myself  

[ParisInAKilt]

https://www.globalresearch.ca/skripal-incident-theresa-mays-big-lie-is-dying-a-slow-death/5634963