Russian poisoning

[BugMeister]

meanwhile Trump is causing great concern within the NATO alliance:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5b8U-i6FN6g

- coincidence?

[radcapricorn]

The UK is accusing Russia of delivering and implementing a weapon against civilians on the sovereign soil of another state, while they themselves are complicit of the very same thing, and on a much larger scale.

eh?

Eh? Syria. Rebels. NATO. Weapons. Tens of thousands dead. UK is part of NATO, is it not?

Anyway, your entire Porton Down yarn is just that, a yarn. Firstly as for the proximity to Porton Down, what does that actually have to do with anything? Nothing is the answer, it's entirely irrelevant.

Secondly there is nothing strange about Porton Down being able to identify such a substance, seeing as they obtained samples at the end of the Cold War and had the production intelligence shared by the creator who defected to the US.

And that would mean that Porton Down would've had a sample even before the poisoning, stored at the site. Yet somehow Russian spook flying or sailing with it all the way form Russia is "highly likely", but someone bringing it from a facility just a few km away is unbelievable? Even after a second incident in the same vicinity? Nothing, irrelevant? I feel like I'm saying the same thing over and over again...

Third the OPCW confirmed the UK's findings that it was Novichok.

Yes it has, since. Reread those two posts, we're talking different timeframes.

Back to your Occam's Razor....

Indeed, see above.

It's very beneficial, at least for Putin. It doesn't appear that Putin is concerned in the least by straining foreign relations, diplomatic blackouts, or the message that was sent on the eve of his re-election.

OMG. How is it beneficial??? It's not like this "let's get together and blame Russia for everything" started yesterday. What should he be doing, eating his own tie? Of course he'd put up a stronger-than-thou act. He's a president of a state being accused of an atrocity for chrissakes. There's nothing else for him to do but to keep his cool.

Your possible explanation ignores the identity of the victims. A former double-agent, now living in the UK, gets poisoned by a chemical agent that is uniquely Russian and you're saying that this is just coincidence? Actually, you're not addressing that at all, which is more worrying.

Was I so subtle? I thought I addressed the Skripal relevance multiple times already. Okay then:

- Skripal was pardoned and released. Ergo, he was already useless at that point, to Russia at least. Letting him go just to kill later is plain dumb,
- killing him while implicating yourself is even more dumb
- OTOH, killing him by any means implicates Russia anyway,
- the guy lived, but the damage was done anyway.

Whoever did the deed wanted this implication. Y'all suggesting that it was what, a macabre publicity stunt, or that Russian spooks are dumb as dumb can be? It seems the demonization of Russian state does indeed work after all.
The horse is being put before the cart, as usual, but everybody goes along with it anyway. And looking at the way things are going, no one actually needs any proof, most seem comfortable with an automatic assumption that evil Russians do evil things because they're evil. And as usual, ten years later everyone will be talking about this "Russian poisoning" as a fact.
Nothing is proven other than the type of agent. UK themselves stated multiple times how they didn't want to jump to conclusions, yet what did they do?

[RegisterMe]

Eh? Syria. Rebels. NATO. Weapons. Tens of thousands dead. UK is part of NATO, is it not?

NATO has been responsible for some (indeed, unfortunately likely to number in the thousands) civilian deaths in Syra, but to suggest that it is even comparable with the number of civilian deaths caused by the Assad regime and the Russian airforce is simply grotesque.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualtie ... _Civil_War

And that would mean that Porton Down would've had a sample even before the poisoning, stored at the site. Yet somehow Russian spook flying or sailing with it all the way form Russia is "highly likely", but someone bringing it from a facility just a few km away is unbelievable? Even after a second incident in the same vicinity? Nothing, irrelevant? I feel like I'm saying the same thing over and over again...

No, it means that Porton down would have had to have had a sample before the poising (different tense), or it had to know how to identify it. Neither of those possibilities require the presence of active Novichok agent in quanties sufficient to actually use in an assasination attempt, the means to employ it, or any motive.

Third the OPCW confirmed the UK's findings that it was Novichok.

Yes it has, since. Reread those two posts, we're talking different timeframes.

We agree there . The fact remains that the OPCW findings agreed with those of the UK government. The fact that they occurred after is not a point of note - they weren't called in until the UK had determined that a nerve agent had been used.

EDIT: Minor edit to clean up a quote I fluffed.

[radcapricorn]

NATO has been responsible for some (indeed, unfortunately likely to number in the thousands) civilian deaths in Syra, but to suggest that it is even comparable with the number of civilian deaths caused by the Assad regime and the Russian airforce is simply grotesque.

At this point you're misrepresenting my point completely, and in fact pulling another "everyone knows Russia did that too" card. I get it, it's so very easy to do with a stacked deck.

No, it means that Porton down would have had to have had a sample before the poising (different tense).

Let us steer clear of the had had had had had, if you don't mind, please.

or it had to know how to identify it. Neither of those possibilities require the presence of active Novichok agent in quanties sufficient to actually use in an assasination attempt, the means to employ it, or any motive.

We've no idea what quantities are involved. So far we saw wild guesses ranging from syringes to powders to smears on door handles. Point remains that if Russia indeed no longer possesses any such material, the only sources would either be stored control samples or freshly manufactured batch, that is if we refrain from invoking wild conspiracies. Thing is, the accusations ignore that reasoning altogether, once again simply assuming that Russia lies about everything.

Russia declared and disposed of it's chemical weaponry arsenal. Last batch in 2017. During and after, Russian officials, Putin included, didn't shy away from pointing that fact out every chance they had. Lo and behold, not a year later Russia gets accused of using chemical weapons. Weapons which, by the way, seem to be the justification of choice for NATO actions lately. And you're saying that only Russia had a motive.

The fact remains that the OPCW findings agreed with those of the UK government. The fact that they occurred after is not a point of note - they weren't called in until the UK had determined that a nerve agent had been used.

Context. The blaming started long before they were brought in. Read the CWC. UK had no business on their own accusing Russia of anything in the first place, not until grounds for such accusations could be established. Which they weren't, not on March 12, not to this day.

[RegisterMe]

Ahh well, I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

[radcapricorn]

There's nothing to agree about. There hasn't been presented any shred of proof of Russian involvement, other than prejudiced assumptions. Until that changes, any definitive statements of guilt are just wind, and should be treated as such.

[Bishop149]

Context. The blaming started long before they were brought in. Read the CWC. UK had no business on their own accusing Russia of anything in the first place, not until grounds for such accusations could be established. Which they weren't, not on March 12, not to this day.

Incorrect, I (unlike you I suspect) used to work directly within this area and know the CWC is greater detail than I care to.

Any signatory state can issue a challenge inspection upon any other at any time if they suspect non-compliance. "grounds for such accusations" as you put it are encouraged but very much NOT explicitly required.
This is because it is pretty likely that in providing such details the accusing nations might very well compromise it's own intelligence operations.

Its also worth mentioning that Russia could have done this whilst neatly side stepping the CWC. It was not written with the use of chemical weapons to murder individuals in mind. The CWC defines a threshold amount of 100g of Class 1 agents (like Nerve agents) before most of it's reporting obligations kick in. In other words you could make enough nerve agent to kill a small number* of people without having to tell the OPCW squat. If you used it to murder people then you would still be in breach of the CWC but it would become A LOT harder to pin it on you. Whoever did this (the Russians) have found a loophole in the CWC that will need to be closed sharpish.

This is incidentally is also probably why the UK hasn't issued a challenge inspection but has rather asked OPCW to "investigate" in the incident in a more general sense. Issuing a challenge to a declared facility would be pointless because using such a facility for this would be a sure fire way of getting caught, they obviously don't think the Russians are that stupid.

*Actually in the case of something like VX, 100g is enough to kill 1000's of people if properly areosolized, I'm amazed it's sets so high and the fact it is tells you a lot about the intended purpose of the CWC.

[RegisterMe]

Thank you Bishop149.

[radcapricorn]

Alright, thanks for the update, I stand corrected on that one.

[Morkonan]

...Whoever did the deed wanted this implication. Y'all suggesting that it was what, a macabre publicity stunt, or that Russian spooks are dumb as dumb can be? It seems the demonization of Russian state does indeed work after all.
The horse is being put before the cart, as usual, but everybody goes along with it anyway. And looking at the way things are going, no one actually needs any proof, most seem comfortable with an automatic assumption that evil Russians do evil things because they're evil. And as usual, ten years later everyone will be talking about this "Russian poisoning" as a fact.
Nothing is proven other than the type of agent. UK themselves stated multiple times how they didn't want to jump to conclusions, yet what did they do?

First of all, this isn't about the "Russians." It's about Putin and his crew, not the Russian people. (Just like Trump complaints aren't, I hope, directed at all US citizens.)

Having this directly implicate Putin and his leadership without any truly direct proof is the perfect political, cautionary, scenario for anyone who may be thinking that they can become a turncoat and get away with it.

This is the same message he has been sending out for years. And, it's not reserved for ex-spies, but anyone that complains too loudly or becomes a political opponent or voice that starts to carry further than Putin's.

If one is an opponent of Putin or raises too much of a fuss against him, one's life expectancy becomes dramatically shorter.

The key issue here isn't that this happened, it's that it is now spilling over to non-combatants and citizens of another country. If it was simply kept neat and clean, isolated to within Russia or, at the very least, only against Russian nationals, then while there would be concern and much handwringing, the UK probably wouldn't sqawk so loudly.

But, now it's gone beyond that and, IMO, that was purposeful, too. Putin demonstrating the UK's inability to protect its own citizens, which you mentioned... is the icing on the cake, here, for Putin. He successfully demonstrated his power leading up to the election and further solidified his nationalistic supporter base, who may have been entertained by such shenanigans.

And, what is the UK really going to do about it? Complain? Probably. And, if they had direct evidence, what would they do? Show it to the world? Maybe not. They might support further sanctions, but is Putin worried about that right now? Probably not.

It was, IMO, a win/win for Putin, all the way around, and not much will come of it unless the UK wishes to reveal proof. I don't think they will. It depends on how soon they're pushed and if Putin lays off of them for awhile, any momentum to release information will likely die down.

[radcapricorn]

I just don't get how your reasoning even works. First you write that "people" are people everywhere, then you say "this isn't about the Russians", but in the same message... nationalistic supporter base?!? His "supporter base" is grannies and grandpas, moms and peasants.

You know, I think I'm just going to get away from this thread for a while. The amount of blatant BS makes me ill.

[RegisterMe]

That's a shame. I find your interpretations credulous at best or disingenuous at worst, but I enjoy the dialogue, and the exchange of views.

[Observe]

That's a shame. I find your interpretations credulous at best or disingenuous at worst, but I enjoy the dialogue, and the exchange of views.

I agree. radcapricorn help balance the discussion.

[RegisterMe]

I forgot something, I also enjoy the challenge redcapricorn provides. In some senses just in terms of the dialogue / rhetoric, but also in terms of making me look, hard, at what I think, and why.

Although it may not be obvious some of my responses to redcapricorn have either been better researched on my part and / or been more nuanced in terms of how I expressed myself.

[Morkonan]

I just don't get how your reasoning even works. First you write that "people" are people everywhere, then you say "this isn't about the Russians", but in the same message... nationalistic supporter base?!? His "supporter base" is grannies and grandpas, moms and peasants.

I'm not sure I see the insult you're implying. It reads like grandstanding, to me. People are people, everywhere. Nationalism is on the rise all over the place, even in the US where it plays directly into Trump's hands, too. So, what's the problem? Did you just decide to find a way to prop up a righteous cause to use as an argument or what?

But, just because people "vote" for someone, it doesn't mean that they're responsible for what that person does. What that person does is that person's responsibility. In no way did I insinuate the "Russian people" were to blame for any of this. And, if I made a remark about Nationalism, where's the insult you're reacting to?

You know, I think I'm just going to get away from this thread for a while. The amount of blatant BS makes me ill.

If you want to look for it, if you're purposefully out to look for it,you'll find it. That doesn't mean it's really there.

[Bishop149]

First of all, this isn't about the "Russians." It's about Putin and his crew, not the Russian people. (Just like Trump complaints aren't, I hope, directed at all US citizens.)

Good point well made. I have been guilty of this, we must not conflate the actions of a government with that of the people. I don't do this with Trump and I kinda have with Russia, I will do better.

A link to popular support might be made but such support is never universal and mightn't be based on all the information (currently watching a documentary series about the war in Vietnam, which makes this latter point all too well.)

[RegisterMe]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-44883803

[Morkonan]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-44883803

Interesting...

By the way, on the more recent case, I saw a blurb scroll across the news screen the other day that they had found a container/bottle in the home that may have had residue in it. Is there anything on that? Curious to see if they have an origin point for that container.

[RegisterMe]

Yeah some kind of perfume bottle apparently. But if anything more has been released publicly I'm not aware of it.

[Morkonan]

Yeah some kind of perfume bottle apparently. But if anything more has been released publicly I'm not aware of it.

^--- This.

I am intensely interested in this in order to put an end to speculation on this and I'm sure several governments feel the same way.

We've got a thread with arguments that could be laid to rest if there is more information forthcoming about this. It may be that there is some sort of news "blackout" relating to this information, it being an investigation that is still ongoing. Or, it may have been a rumor or mistake. Either way, it needs to get cleared up and I wonder why, if the source was found, it wasn't announced more widely.