Donate SIGN UP

Novichok

Avatar Image
Quizmonster | 07:33 Wed 04th Apr 2018 | News
27 Answers
In a previous response https://www.theanswerbank.co.uk/News/Question1599825-2.html about Novichok at 16.33 on March 29th, I wrote the following sentence:
“I feel sure that Russia is very far from being the only country capable of producing it, despite apparent support for the Maybot.”
Now, we learn that the scientists at Porton Down, who verified the poison, are saying the same thing!
See https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/apr/03/porton-down-experts-unable-to-verify-precise-source-of-novichok as a link.
And, in that link-material, there is the priceless statement by (quote) ‘a government spokesman’,
“It is our assessment that Russia was responsible for this brazen and reckless act and, as the international community agrees, there is no other plausible explanation.”
I’m sure that was the same basic response as the one used by the leaders of any of history’s lynch-mobs! Or is this just an illustration of Tory logic?
Gravatar

Answers

1 to 20 of 27rss feed

1 2 Next Last

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by Quizmonster. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Yes, and for once I had the same skepticism as you.
//“It is our assessment that Russia was responsible for this brazen and reckless act and, as the international community agrees, there is no other plausible explanation.//
This assessment was based on the findings of Porton -Down and also information from the intelligence community.You, nor I, don't know what this intelligence was therefore not qualified to comment on it IMO






.







What possible reason could there be for any other country, organisation or individual to carry out the attack?
....and Labour logic! only agent COB didn't back the government QM, wonder why. Whilst I agree that we should not automatically assume the obvious, in this case it overwhelmingly points to the Russians. No I have not personally seen the evidence but our people have, as have major countries in the civilised world and I tend to favour the obvious rather than silly conspiracy theories.
I think that Russians (Government or Mafia) probably did it.
But it is also possible other players could have done it.

Until there is a fingerprint or DNA, CCTV, or german sample conclusively proving responsibility, then it is wrong to blame any country, even if we want to.
I'm pretty much with you there Gromit.
Wonder why you aren't backing the government, Agent YMB? :)
jim, you should know by now that I have a real problem with trial by media with little or no evidence. I am not like some labourites who will back a party for the sake of it, I am more than willing to critisise if I see fit.

Give me evidence and I will back anyone to the hilt. As yet I have none.
Question Author
Scenario: Wild West town outside Sheriff's office, Sheriff on the sidewalk there and excited townsfolk gathered on the street below.
Sheriff: We on this raised platform believe that the man in the cell inside should be summarily hanged for his obvious crimes. Clearly no one else was involved.
Crowd: Hang him! Hang him! Hang him!
Sheriff: Most of you clearly agree that his execution is thoroughly deserved, so here are the keys!
The crowd surges to the door.

Isn't there even a solitary Tory Gary Cooper here today?
I agree that some Russian agency, government or otherwise, is probably resposible, but majority condemnation should never be allowed to rule the roost in legal matters.
The concept of "Innocent until proven guilty" is a theme that should never, ever, be discarded and certainly not as lightly as it has been in this matter.
In response to Scooping's query, let's not forget that Skripal was a "double" agent...ie a Russian spy who converted to being a British spy. Perhaps OUR security organisations have as much reason to wish his 'departure' as the Russians might! They, after all, had him in prison for years...so why not simply 'disappear' him there?
I believe the Maybot has seized on this as eagerly as Thatcher welcomed the Falklands conflict in 1982 to show how 'strong' she is against our apparent foes. Never forget the motto: Strong and stable!"
I wasn't being serious YMB, don't worry.
Sorry jim, but I do get a bit annoyed with this trial by media in all circles.
Question Author
Since I started this thread, I am clearly entitled to divert it temporarily if I so choose, so YMB, what about this quote of yours earlier here...
"Give me evidence and I will back anyone to the hilt. As yet I have none."
Please, therefore, tell me what evidence exists that Jeremy Corbin was anyone's "agent" during the Cold War?
No such evidence exists, so why aren't you backing him to the hilt in that matter?
(I was just about to award you the Tory Gary Cooper Award, too!)
QM, your hang em high analogy implies there is no evidence, there is. Ok they cannot pin down the origin of the substance but that's not the only area of evidence is it? I do take on board the concerns of trial by media etc but I also think that ours and other governments have a lot more than they can share with us.
As a matter of pragmatism it stands to reason that the British Government should be seen as (far) more trustworthy than the Russian Government on -- well, just about everything, really. That's not quite the same as saying that I think the Russians did it -- I've seen no hard evidence for that myself -- but they have the motive and the capabilities, and previous form to boot.

No harm in healthy scepticism, as YMB is demonstrating, but I think it's a bit too big a step from being sceptical in the face of no publicly-available evidence to concocting a conspiracy orchestrated by May et al to, I don't know, frame the Russians to make herself look tough.
The scientists at Porton Down have, not unreasonably, given a scientific assessment. They can't (unfortunately, it would have been nice) find a geographical fingerprint within the chemical make-up of the material. That is not all that surprising. However, they also said that effectively only state military resources could have manufactured such a weapon. There IS no other plausible explanation for what happened, other than that the Russian state, which has a history of trying to kill people by "signature" methods, committed this act.
I am quite sure, by the way, that they did not use the term "Maybot".
So the OP should be a little humbler, I feel.
// Until there is a fingerprint or DNA, CCTV, or german sample conclusively proving responsibility, then it is wrong to blame any country, even if we want to.//

That won't stop the conspiracy theorists. Nothing ever does.
Question Author
I'll use whatever terms I like, Ichkeria, and have no need of your advice to be humbler. Think rather of applying it to yourself.
I think 'The Maybot' is a far more accurate description of the Tory leader, who provides evidence of her robotic qualities on a virtually daily basis, than 'Agent COB' - a piece of nomenclature the accuracy of which lacks even a shred of evidence - is of the leader of the Labour party.
I shall continue using it to my heart's content.
It’s a bit like those prosecutors introducing DNA evidence and saying there’s only a one in a million chance it could come from anyone but the defendant. To which the response must be: oh, it could be any of 60 other people in the country, then?

Most people want the Russians to have done this. Unfortunately, the evidence doesn’t seem to say that.
jno.// Unfortunately, the evidence doesn’t seem to say that.//.
How do you know what the evidence is? None of the evidence presented has been published.
I think there is far more to the evidence than has been made public. I don't see that more than 20 countries would take action based on the balance of probabilities ...

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/03/26/europe/full-list-of-russian-diplomats-expelled-over-s-intl/index.html

... especially when those countries include the likes of Estonia, Ukraine and Hungary.

1 to 20 of 27rss feed

1 2 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

Novichok

Answer Question >>