Brexit, for once some facts.

[oldtom]

This is now approaching the Cuban crisis in terms of seriousness. I think it important to observe the events to come so that we know who changed the game from a battle of words to a major international war, should it pan out that way.

We can impart our knowledge and experience then to our children and grandchildren in the hope that such a tragedy does not befall the world again. Maybe the next war will be known as the war to end all wars......oh, hang on! I think that's already been said by someone.......about twice a century in more recent times, if I remember correctly.

If I have to be enrolled in the Home Guard, I'm not playing unless I'm at least a Lieutenant Colonel!

Tom

 

[oldgroaner]

It was novichok of a very pure nature. Fact.

No, it wasn't was it, it was described as "Toxic chemical" of a very pure nature

 

[oldgroaner]

I,ve never said it must have come from Russia. Neither has OPCW, neither has Porton Down. BJ Macron,May etc etc etc have arrived at that conclusion taking into account lots of other evidence.
Please forward that link. I,d be interested in reading "your" version"..
OPCW are merely stating Porton Down were correct in their identifying the nerve agent.( which you,d decided was ??femytol or something)
It was novichok of a very pure nature. Fact.

And BTW being able to identify a Purdy shotgun does not mean you are capable or have desire to build one.

I have forwarded the link, I thought you said you hadn't been sleeping?

 

[Zlatan]

I have forwarded the link, I thought you said you hadn't been sleeping?

What post number.?

 

[oldgroaner]

What post number.?

Here it is again
https://www.opcw.org/fileadmin/OPCW/S_series/2018/en/s-1612-2018_e_.pdf

The word Novichoc doesn't seem to appear anywhere rather oddly unless I missed it they simply refer to a "Toxic Chemical"
That is odd

 

[Zlatan]

Here it is again
https://www.opcw.org/fileadmin/OPCW/S_series/2018/en/s-1612-2018_e_.pdf

The word Novichoc doesn't seem to appear anywhere rather oddly unless I missed it they simply refer to a "Toxic Chemical"
That is odd

Thankyou... I think you quoted from it ( post 29700 last time)
We have same summaries but read them rather differently. ( 10, 11, 12 are IMO telling)

 

[flecc]

Here it is again
https://www.opcw.org/fileadmin/OPCW/S_series/2018/en/s-1612-2018_e_.pdf

The word Novichoc doesn't seem to appear anywhere rather oddly unless I missed it they simply refer to a "Toxic Chemical"
That is odd

That's correct, the OPCW did not say it was Novichok. They say they agreed with the UK's findings but avoided repeating what those findings were.

As evidence the OPCW report is useless.
.

 

[oldgroaner]

Thankyou... I think you quoted from it ( post 29700 last time)
We have same summaries but read them rather differently. ( 10, 11, 12 are IMO telling)

Well at least we can agree on that!

 

[Zlatan]

That's correct, the OPCW did not say it was Novichok. They say they agreed with the UK's findings but avoided repeating what those findings were.

As evidence the OPCW report is useless.
.

I think that's called being diplomatic flecc. You read other things into it.
Had they not found it to be novichok they would have had to disagree with UK's findings.
Unless you see the word "agree" differently. ???

The published article is to my mind not a report. Its a simple press release saying they agree with UK. ( Is that a diplomatic way of saying Russians are guilty without actually doing so ??)
Backing the Russians into a corner even further could have dire consequences.
What will rest of world do if they turned around and said" yes, it was us, what you going to do about it"? Well actually nothing ? Russia denying it is probably best option, even if guilty?

 

[Danidl]

How else could the material be extracted that is traceable to the victim? vomit or Sputum would hardly fit the bill, but blood samples would be available for days after the event.
and of course there is actual evidence
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/mar/22/salisbury-attack-medical-staff-contacted-police-when-antidotes-failed-to-work
Judge gives permission for blood samples to be taken from the Skripals
Chemical weapons expert can carry out tests on blood from pair who both remain in a coma

Thank you.

 

[flecc]

I think that's called being diplomatic flecc. You read other things into it.
Had they not found it to be novichok they would have had to disagree with UK's findings.
Unless you see the word "agree" differently. ???

I see the difference being "of a type". It was Theresa May who said it was Novichok, and I doubt the OPCW meant they were agreeing with her snap judgement.

Refusing to go further, our Porton Down lab reluctantly agreed with the "of a type" statement. The OPCW's finding of what is was has been kept under wraps for no good reason, other than to keep others in the dark.
.

 

[oldgroaner]

I think that's called being diplomatic flecc. You read other things into it.
Had they not found it to be novichok they would have had to disagree with UK's findings.
Unless you see the word "agree" differently. ???

Porton Down didn't say it was Novichoc, they said it was of a type, all the report does is agree with that, and how could it do otherwise if they don't know any differently?

 

[flecc]

Backing the Russians into a corner even further could have dire consequences.

The poisoning is already a dead story, conveniently being dropped to concentrate on Syria. There the blame is being increasingly put on Syria with mention of Russia being involved carefully avoided.

Following Trump and May backpedalling, Russia has now followed suit by saying there will have to be careful consideration of the Syrian situation, stressing they don't want confrontation.

Seems peace is breaking out. Maybe Putin will get a Nobel Peace Prize?

After all, Yasser Arafat and Zionist terrorist Shimon Perez shared one
.

 

[Woosh]

I copied the text here for your convenience:

CS-2018-0991(E) distributed 12/04/2018 *CS-2018-0991.E*
OPCW Technical Secretariat
S/1612/2018
12 April 2018
Original: ENGLISH
NOTE BY THE TECHNICAL SECRETARIAT SUMMARY OF THE REPORT ON ACTIVITIES CARRIED OUT IN SUPPORT OF A REQUEST FOR TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE BY THE UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND (TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE VISIT TAV/02/18)

1. The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland requested technical assistance from the OPCW Technical Secretariat (hereinafter “the Secretariat”) under subparagraph 38(e) of Article VIII of the Chemical Weapons Convention in relation to an incident in Salisbury on 4 March 2018 involving a toxic chemical—allegedly a nerve agent—and the poisoning and hospitalisation of three individuals. The Director-General decided to dispatch a team to the United Kingdom for a technical
assistance visit (TAV).
2. The TAV team deployed to the United Kingdom on 19 March for a pre-deployment and from 21 March to 23 March for a full deployment.
3. The team received information on the medical conditions of the affected individuals, Mr Sergej Skripal, Ms Yulia Skripal, and Mr Nicholas Bailey. This included information on their acetylcholinesterase status since hospitalisation, as well as information on the treatment regime.
4. The team was able to collect blood samples from the three affected individuals under full chain of custody for delivery to the OPCW Laboratory and subsequent analysis by OPCW designated laboratories, and conducted identification of the three individuals against official photo-ID documents.
5. The team was able to conduct on-site sampling of environmental samples under full chain of custody at sites identified as possible hot-spots of residual contamination.
Samples were returned to the OPCW Laboratory for subsequent analysis by OPCW designated laboratories.
6. The team requested and received splits of samples taken by British authorities for delivery to the OPCW Laboratory in Rijswijk, the Netherlands, and subsequent analysis by OPCW designated laboratories. This was done for comparative purposes and to verify the analysis of the United Kingdom.
7. The team was briefed on the identity of the toxic chemical identified by the United Kingdom and was able to review analytical results and data from chemical analysis of biomedical samples collected by the British authorities from the affected individuals, as well as from environmental samples collected on site.
8. The results of analysis of biomedical samples conducted by OPCW designated laboratories demonstrate the exposure of the three hospitalised individuals to this toxic chemical.
9. The results of analysis of the environmental samples conducted by OPCW designated laboratories demonstrate the presence of this toxic chemical in the samples.
10. The results of analysis by the OPCW designated laboratories of environmental and biomedical samples collected by the OPCW team confirm the findings of the United Kingdom relating to the identity of the toxic chemical that was used in Salisbury and severely injured three people.
11. The TAV team notes that the toxic chemical was of high purity. The latter is concluded from the almost complete absence of impurities.
12. The name and structure of the identified toxic chemical are contained in the full classified report of the Secretariat, available to States Parties.
- - - o - - -

 

[flecc]

available to States Parties.

But not the accused. Some justice.
.

 

[Zlatan]

Thanks Woosh...cant get on my PC...its about 1400 miles away !!!

 

[Danidl]

Feel free to leave your insults behind by all means, ask yourself this, if labs in 4 separate countries know what Novicheck is why can it only come from Russia?
And if it was so pure why wasn't it lethal?
This was the pdf I quoted
https://20years.opcw.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/s-1612-2018e.pdf
Extract here
"
4.The team was able to collect blood samples
from the three affected individuals under
full chain of custody for delivery to the OP
CW Laboratory and subsequent analysis
by OPCW designated laboratories, and
conducted identification of the three
individuals against offi cial photo-ID documents.
5. The team was able to conduct on-site samp
ling of environmental samples under full
chain of custody at sites identified as possible hot-spots of residual contamination.
Samples were returned to the OPCW Laboratory for subsequent analysis by OPCW
designated laboratories.
6. The team requested and received splits of samples taken by British authorities for
delivery to the OPCW Laboratory in Rijswijk, the Netherlands, and subsequent
analysis by OPCW designated laboratories This was done for comparative purposes
and to verify the analysis of the United Kingdom.
7. The team was briefed on the identity of the toxic chemical identified by the United
Kingdom and was able to review analytical results
and data from chemical analysis of biomedical samples collected by the British
authorities from the a ffected individuals,
as well as from environmental samples collected on site.

Care to explain the context of this?

The team was briefed on the identity of the toxic chemical identified by the United
Kingdom and was able to review analytical results.

Are we to assume they didn't know beforehand? why would they need to be briefed on something they should already know and are allegedly they are familiar with?

This suggests at the very least the reason it has been described as "of a type"
So their conclusion was to go along with Porton Down's findings?
Fair enough if this was the first time it had been encountered, but it sure as hell blows a hole in pinning the blame on a country (among others) because it "could" do this
There is "No alternative explanation" from all that than that we really don't know who made, it but what the hell we have made our minds up, and remarkably quickly too before any really conclusive tests were made.
Of a type, eh? just as Cow Pox is of a type with Smallpox but not so dangerous.

Thank you for supplying the address to the reports. By my readings , the OPCW team extracted not only the biological samples ...the blood samples but also samples from the environment, which by my reckoning were probably quite small. What is indicative of that was their reference to hot spots and the statement that the samples were pure.

 

[Zlatan]

But not the accused. Some justice.
.

Are they memmbers of OPCW ? If so they,ll get a copy...I,d assume. Not sure who consituent parties are in OPCW? Why isn't it public knowledge ? ( us getting report ???)
Might settle some arguments...

 

[Danidl]

Here it is again
https://www.opcw.org/fileadmin/OPCW/S_series/2018/en/s-1612-2018_e_.pdf

The word Novichoc doesn't seem to appear anywhere rather oddly unless I missed it they simply refer to a "Toxic Chemical"
That is odd

No OG, that is not odd... Unless the chemical formula of Novichoc has been patented and or copyrighted it would be wrong. As Woosh said in an earlier posting, and I will defer to his greater knowledge of Chemistry, there can be a huge variety of very similar chemical formulations particularly in organic chemistry.. I only had two years of university chemistry, and can recognise the truth in his posting .

 

[oldtom]

Did the daughter bring in the alleged 'Military-grade, deadly nerve agent' with a view to completing a mission on behalf of another party but mishandled the material, exposing both her and her dad to the toxin?

Tom