This topic contains 10 replies, has 8 voices, and was last updated by  freddo 2 months, 1 week ago.

  • Author
    Posts
  • #3096

    goon
    Participant

    Novichok victim Dawn Sturgess has died. This has now become a murder investigation with all the implications that will have with the Russians. Bad news.

  • #3097

    neb
    Participant

    What implications? You imply legal implications. Be specific.

    To date no actual evidence has been given to the public linking either attack to the Russian government.

    There is not – and likely can not be – any chemical signature linking this nerve agent to production by the Russian state.

    There is published work by scientists from a different country who have also made some of this class of nerve agent. The idea that it *had* to be made by Russia is therefore a demonstrable nonsense.

    If there is any evidence directly linking this nerve agent used in the UK to production by the Russian state you can bet your life that the security services will not clear it for release to a trial that is a matter of public record.

    Only one thing is vaguely certain about this – we the public are subject to the mushroom principle. Keep ‘em in the dark and feed them shIt.

    All this “the Russians did it” is very dodgy ground without credible evidence. The comparison with polonium is no way valid. One is tracable, one isn’t.

    I wouldn’t trust any evidence the government present either. Their utter failure to seperate actual science and a scene ripped off from “The Rock” and a plagiarised thesis is why the government bent over backward to let Blair take is into JWB’s vendetta with Iraq.

    • #3098

      goon
      Participant

      There are only two credible explanations for the Salisbury attack. I) A State sponsored attempted assassination against a traitor to Russia. Given the death threats previously issued by Putin against traitors and the Russian State’s track record of assassinating people in foreign countries this is the more likely scenario; or 2) an assassination attempt by a maverick third party. If this is the case the Russian State is criminally responsible for loosing control of it’s own nerve angent, ad failing to warn the world that it had lost control. The Amesbury poisonings are a further example of the Russian State’s callously irresponsible attitude towards the handling of THEIR nerve agent.

      Why do you need to see the nail holes? The circumstantial evidence is overwhelming.

      • #3100

        neb
        Participant

        Why do you need to see the nail holes? The circumstantial evidence is overwhelming.

        Nail holes are about as useful in terms of evidence as shouting repeatedly that Russia must have done it.

        There’s circumstantial evidence. (Skripal was a former Russian spy. Someone tried to kill him. Russia has said some stuff). All of which I suggest fails the “beyond reasonable doubt” rest our law requires for a murder conviction.

        So I ask again – what legal consequences of this circumstantial evidence are you alluding to?

        Taking your option (2) above – you seem to be under the impression that only Russia can make this stuff. You are factually wrong. They were apparently the first to formulate it – but it doesn’t mean they are the only people to have made it. A lead scientist from the program now lives in the USA – do you think he got to move there for his cookie dough recipie? Who knows which less friendly counties also have former scientists from the program in them. The genie is well and truly out of the bottle.

        To be clear I think Russia is an incredibly dangerous state that is literally getting away with murder within and beyond its borders. None of this is any excuse for us to ignorantly insist only Russia could be behind this particular set of poisonings.

        You can talks about the circumstantial evidence all you want and I won’t argue or necessarily disagree – but to keep insisting it must be them because of the class of nerve agent used is scientifically/factually wrong and is the sort of dumb crowd think the Russian tactics thrive on in other circumstances.

        • #3102

          goon
          Participant

          I was alluding to the fact that our Government has already taken sanctions against Russia for what they described as an assassination attempt. We now have a murder investigation under way. What will be the diplomatic consequences with Russia to this latest development, if any?

        • #3103

          Jethro
          Participant

          @neb Yes the evidence is circumstantial, but it fits a pattern: Choosing a means of killing that is designed to induce fear in the intended audience, a terror attack in its truest meaning. Novichok just is this year’s Polonium. It makes the authorship extremely clear, without actually proving anything. I assume, though, that the current two cases are “collateral damage”.

  • #3099

    damon
    Participant

    You’re overstating the case. Novichok became public knowledge in 1992. It has been synthesised outside of Russia.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novichok_agent

    In 2016, Iranian chemists synthesised five Novichok agents for analysis and produced detailed mass spectral data which was added to the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons Central Analytical Database.[14][15] Previously there had been no detailed descriptions of their spectral properties in open scientific literature.[14][16] A small amount of agent A-230 was also claimed to have been synthesised in the Czech Republic in 2017 for the purpose of obtaining analytical data to help defend against these novel toxic compounds.[17]

    It’s inconceivable that NATO states haven’t synthesised Novichok to research contermeasures.

  • #3101

    Keith
    Participant

    Compare the strength of the evidence (at least that which would make it to court) in this case and the Litvinenko case. It seems likely to me the death of someone already beneath the contempt of this government will not change the already dire diplomatic situation. Trump’s blundering will pose the next major challenge if we still have a functioning government in a couple of weeks.

  • #3104

    Steve
    Participant

    What will be the diplomatic consequences with Russia to this latest development, if any?

    Whatever we want them to be, irrespective of evidence. It may also depend on how much of a distraction the government thinks it might need in order to survive.

  • #3107

    Aly
    Participant

    My problem with blaming the Russians is I fail to see any motive ?

    • #3108

      freddo
      Participant

      The Russian attitude to treachery has been well established, it is viewed as the one unforgivable sin, they also have a proven record of assassinating/executing those guilty of it regardless of where and possible collateral damage – Litvinenko (some one I know had trace Polonium poisoning from being in the restaurant) , Litvinenko’s crime was blowing the whistle on what he had been ordered to do by Vladimir Putin whilst an officer of the FSB and fleeing to the west. Following the death/murder of Boris Berezovsky he made it very clear that he suspected Russian state involvement and was poisoned to shut him up.
      Don’t forget that Vladimir Putin was a product of the KGB he served for over 12 years before moving into politics following the demise of the Soviet Union in the early 90’s, this is an organisation that had used assassination as means of silencing dissidents or outspoken critics.
      Viktor Suvarov a former GRU officer who defected during the Cold war describes how during his induction into the GRU (Russian Military Intelligence) they were all shown a film of a traitor being fed feet first into a furnace, you have a regime that would stop at nothing but was rigidly centrally controlled, the only difference now is that the central control has weakened and there is more devolved power to act.

      Novichok is an agent that the nation state of Russia developed it was designed to get around the restrictions of the CWC it isn’t something you can cook up in a bedroom, no other country produces Novichok apart from very limited quantities for analysis purposes by a very small group of nations who have the capability where it is very closely controlled. Are you suggesting that the British government or the US targeted someone who would still have been a source of information to them or that as 28 different governments around the world have decided that it most likely originated in Russia on the orders of someone in the government.

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.