Everybody knows that Russia was behind the Salisbury attack except you. Where did the novichok come from? Do you think the assassins of Alexander Litvinenko bought polonium at B&Q? Why are you separating diplomatic law from international law, which Russia has clearly broken by invading Crimea.
I'll let members make their own minds up, thank you.
The Salisbury incident wasn't even a novichock attack and you would know this if you bothered to read the OPCW reports. Where novichock is mentioned is in UK govt. statements and briefings and then parroted by a compliant media. All informed people, those who have called out previous lies on Iraq, Libya, Syria and now Venezuala and Iran, understand full well that UK intelligence agencies are neck deep in the Salisbury theatre. Novichock use has not been confirmed and I challenge you to find a source confirming its use. An actual source, not a report of one. The, highly compromised, OPCW would not go so far and merely confirmed that the agent used was the same one that the UK govt. had asked them to confirm. This information was confidential and not released.
So to sum up, Steve. The UK govt. claimed that Russia had used chemical weapons, namely novichock, in Salisbury. After at first refusing to involve the OPCW they succumbed to pressure from other countries who were being asked to expel diplomats and impose other sanctions on Russia. However, rather than ask the OPCW to conduct a full FFM(fact finding mission), the UK govt. simply asked the OPCW to confirm that the agent used was the same as the agent that the UK govt. had asked them to confirm. The information of what the agent was is confidential between the OPCW and the UK govt.
The effects and symptons displayed by the victims rule out novichock as does their still being alive. The whereabouts of the supposed victims and the dmsa notices issued by the UK govt. should also alert those paying attention that something is badly amiss with the UK govt. narrative.
As for your diversions re international/diplomatic law and Crimea. Again I would invite you to open a thread if you want a serious discussion of these matters. The Crimeans themselves seem perfectly happy to be part of Russia and I fail to see why you would have issue with the self proclaimed will of the Crimeans. Do you think that the Crimeans want to be part of Ukraine? Do you not believe in self determination?
What does this have to do with Assange and the cavalier attitude of UK and US governments towards diplomatic premises and the Geneva conventions. You really should be more concerned about your own government's transgressions of international law which are many and dwarf those of your perceived bogey men. Diplomatic law is part of international law, Steve and I would confidently wager that your knowledge of both would comfortably fit on the back of a postage stamp and still leave room for the Lord's Prayer.
Expand your reading, Steve, or stick to commenting on things that you have at least a passing acquaintance with. You have so far demonstrated that you have a less than passing acquaintance with the Salisbury incident, Crimea, Litvinenko's poisoning and Swedish law not to mention the whole Assange affair which is what the thread is supposed to be about. That you have managed to display such a wide breadth of misunderstanding into less than a couple of handfuls of sentences is impressive but not in a good way.
Do you disagree that the charges put forward by US are a danger to journalists and publishers everywhere? If you do disagree then perhaps you would care to explain how every media outlet that publishes US govt. leaks would be different to Wikileaks and Assange. The use of the Espionage Act against Assange was discussed and dismissed by the Obama administration for this very reason. I don't believe that you understand the implications of Assange being extradited to the US or the UK complicity in this attack on journalism and free speech or the use of the Espionage Act. Others fortunately do hence the rowing back of many media outlets now that the extra charges have been made.
I doubt that any reply will address the questions raised but don't worry, I will be sure to remind you of them should you fail to do so.