The Skripals-the obvious lies of the UK gov-what really happened?

[Steve_uk]

     So what exactly did happen to the Skripals? What do we know?
     Whatever the substance was that caused their hospitilisation, it overcame them simultaneously. Their behaviour on the bench as described by witnesses does not describe Novichok exposure symptoms. It does describe fentanyl exposure and other substances, but not Novichok. This would also explain why Salisbury Hospital initially treated them for fentanyl exposure.
     Whatever overcame them was applied at the bench. Common sense and Occam's razor tells you this. It is not plausible that two people of different ages, sex, weight etc. were exposed to Novichok some 3-4 hours previously(UK gov timeline is vague) and then ate, drank and were both overcome with symptoms that weren't indicative of Novichok at precisely the same time. It seems obvious that they were both exposed to some substance with near instant effects at the bench.
     Given the treatment at Salisbury hospital it is clear that the witness accounts of their behaviour more closely resemble symptoms of fentanyl exposure.
     The most likely candidate for the agent the Skripals were exposed to is BZ. There is evidence available that lends credence to that theory. BZ is fast acting, causes the symptoms displayed by the Skripals and was in the samples sent to the OPCW by the UK. We know this because it was leaked, via the Russians, but nonetheless not denied and in fact acknowledged as true. Not much you can do when the other side "has the goods". A nonsensical story was put out by the UK gov claiming the BZ was part of some control sample(obvious horseshit).
     The UK government lack of transparency and failure to call for, demand even, an independent investigation into these incidents demonstrates their lack of confidence in any of it standing up to any questions whatsoever.
     Look up the symptoms of BZ and Novichok, or how long it takes for the effects of each to occur. It is impossible to argue credibly that Novichok is the likely cause of the Skripals symptoms. None of Porton Down or the OPCW have alleged Novichok use. All you really have is a lot of propaganda pieces disseminated through media. There is zero evidence of Novichok use nor any "serious" accusation of its use.

More likely they went for a walk in the park and staggered onto the bench. Are you seriously suggesting that the Skripals were drug addicts? Far more likely Russian agents were up to their tricks again. https://edition.cnn.com/2020/12/21/europe/russia-navalny-poisoning-underpants-ward/index.html

It seems the Skripals have relocated. https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1574320/sergei-skripal-yulia-skripal-salisbury-novichok-poisoning-russian-sky-spt

[David1819]

The BZ idea comes from Lavrovs backside. The same guy who said Russia wouldn't attack Ukraine and that Hitler was Jewish 

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/may/03/russia-propaganda-war-skripal-poisoning-embassy-london

[gringo]

More likely they went for a walk in the park and staggered onto the bench. Are you seriously suggesting that the Skripals were drug addicts? Far more likely Russian agents were up to their tricks again. https://edition.cnn.com/2020/12/21/europe/russia-navalny-poisoning-underpants-ward/index.html

It seems the Skripals have relocated. https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1574320/sergei-skripal-yulia-skripal-salisbury-novichok-poisoning-russian-sky-spt

    Where did I suggest that the Skripals were drug addicts? I think it more likely that they were attacked with BZ at the bench, which I stated clearly. The "Russian Tourists " cannot have done this, hence the concocted and nonsensical door handle story. The simultaneous succumbing by both Skripals suggests that whatever overcame them it, more or less, acted instantaneously.
    It is a fact that Salisbury Hospital treated them for fentanyl poisoning for the first 24 hours or so. This was stated by hospital doctors. It isn't in dispute, Steve.
     If the Russians didn't attack them with any agent at the bench then who did? It may be significant that the first person to attend the Skripals and administer first aid was Colonel Alison McCourt, the most senior nurse in the British Army who had just finished the UK Toxic Dagger exercise preparing for Chemical/Biological attacks?. The odds on that? The Head Nurse of the British Army just passing at that exact time.
    It is more likely that UK agents, caught on the hop by something, disabled the Skripals to prevent some sort of exchange to take place. Whoever did disable them did so at the bench or it's vicinity, this is the obvious inference from the evidence we do have.
    The novichok door handle nonsense is too fantastical to take seriously. I'm staggered that anyone does take it seriously.

[Roch]

The BZ idea comes from Lavrovs backside. The same guy who said Russia wouldn't attack Ukraine and that Hitler was Jewish 

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/may/03/russia-propaganda-war-skripal-poisoning-embassy-london

He looks shocking. Has aged loads.

[gringo]

The BZ idea comes from Lavrovs backside.

    Considering the amount of times that you have referred to this incident in other threads and your certainty of Russian culpability, you are remarkably ignorant about the facts surrounding it. The BZ idea that according to you comes from Lavrov's backside is not in dispute.
    There was a leak of the "confidential contents" of the report. The UK couldn't deny that BZ was detected in the samples and claimed that the leaked information related to "control samples".
     The UK admitted- they couldn't deny- that BZ was detected. The UK gov "control sample" story is what was pulled out of someone's arse.
     It is a fact that BZ has definitely been detected in samples collected by the UK gov. There is zero evidence of Novichok being there. You believe the UK gov, despite the evidence, because you want to. If you had a convincing rebuttal you would be able to articulate it, but instead you post pictures and gifs. Your initial claim that Novichok was named by the OPCW has been shown to be untrue. Your opinion isn't based on facts, it will never change no matter the evidence. You have demonstrated this.   
     

[gringo]

     The only nerve agent confirmed to be in the samples collected by the UK and sent to the OPCW for testing and confirmation is BZ. This is an un-contestable fact. Other information, which would clear up the matter once and for all, is confidential at the behest of the UK government.

[David1819]

https://twitter.com/SpiezLab/status/985243574123057152

[David1819]

He looks shocking. Has aged loads.

[David1819]

"The use of a nerve agent of the Novichok class, as confirmed by the OPCW, is extremely
worrying. As nerve agents of the Novichok family have reportedly been developed and
produced in the former Soviet Union, Switzerland believes that the Russian Federation has
legitimate questions to answer and must contribute to the clarification of fact. "

https://www.opcw.org/sites/default/files/documents/EC/M-59/en/ecm59nat02_e_.pdf

[David1819]

Now that I have produced yet another OPCW publication this time mentioning Novichok class verbatim in the Fifty-Ninth Meeting of the OPCW. Lets see Gringo double down and make a bigger idiot of himself.

Who needs Lavrov when we have our very own Lavrov Esq clown show on this very forum.

[gringo]

"The use of a nerve agent of the Novichok class, as confirmed by the OPCW, is extremely
worrying. As nerve agents of the Novichok family have reportedly been developed and
produced in the former Soviet Union, Switzerland believes that the Russian Federation has
legitimate questions to answer and must contribute to the clarification of fact. "

https://www.opcw.org/sites/default/files/documents/EC/M-59/en/ecm59nat02_e_.pdf

     The claim that you highlighted is the Swiss representative at the OPCW. The claim being made is not all it seems either. You are easily misled by deliberately unclear statements. You infer what isn't there and would do yourself a favour if you learnt how to parse official statements a little better. You wouldn't be so easily misled if you learnt this vital skill, especially vital when dealing with official statements.

     The Swiss representative, not the official OPCW position, statement is qualified in ways that pass you by. First of all-the unnatural and clunky phrasing; 
    "The use of a nerve agent of the Novichok class, as confirmed by the OPCW, is extremely worrying."

    If you have been paying any attention whatsoever, David, you will remember(because you posted it) that the OPCW actually only named "cholerestinase inhibitors" as being present in the samples of Navalny. You posted the Navalny results having failed to find any mention of Novichok in the OPCW reports relating to Salisbury, as you had previously claimed.

    As I stated earlier, it is absurd that the OPCW would refer to a nerve agent as a Cholerestinase inhibitor. The language used by the OPCW and mis-represented by the Swiss rep, does not even suggest Novichok use. The Swiss rep is indulging in linguistic gymnastics designed to mislead.


Novichok is a nerve agent developed at the GosNIIOKHT state chemical-research institute in Russia. It belongs to a broad class of compounds called cholinesterase inhibitors, which are used in a wide range of medicines and poisons.

     Can you see what she did there, David. Smoke and mirrors. She is calling all Cholerestinase inhibitors , Novichoks. In simpler terms

   1) OPCW confirm presence of cholerestinase inhibitors
   2) Cholerestinase inhibitors are a broad class
   3) All novichoks are in broad class of cholerestinase inhibitors
   4) Not all, or even a significant percentage, of cholerestinase inhibitors are Novichoks.

    The OPCW have not, repeat not, ever alleged Novichok use. The UK representative makes statements at the OPCW, so does the Russian rep and every other nation represented there. Is the Russian reps statement an official OPCW position? China's? UK's? Obviously none of them would be. And neither is the Swiss Rep. You post stuff without having the ability to read it properly first yourself. You will not find a statement by the OPCW claiming Novichok use.
     Search for as long as you please. Post as many links that don't satisfy the criteria as you wish. OPCW have not alleged Novichok use in Salisbury or anywhere else.     

[gringo]

[quote author=David1819 link=topic=11682.msg537827#msg537827 date=167795

Now that I have produced yet another OPCW publication this time mentioning Novichok class verbatim in the Fifty-Ninth Meeting of the OPCW. Lets see Gringo double down and make a bigger idiot of himself.

Who needs Lavrov when we have our very own Lavrov Esq clown show on this very forum.
[/quote]
The Swiss rep has used the term "a nerve agent of the Novichok class". Not a, "Novichok nerve agent" which would be the natural way to allege use of Novichok.
    The Swiss rep was responding to the leak from the Spiez laboratory that named BZ. Spiez is a Swiss lab. The Swiss rep in the same statement issued the following "denial" of the Russian claims. Spoiler alert-it isn't a denial at all!

Before I conclude, Mr Chairperson, my government wishes to express its incomprehension
about a statement by the Russian Federation regarding the Swiss designated laboratory at
Spiez. Whether or not Spiez Laboratory was one of the designated laboratories involved in
the analysis of the Salisbury samples, an analysis report of our designated laboratory would
not have been drafted in the way and contained the type of language alleged to be a quote
from a Spiez Laboratory report. I am referring to an English translation of a statement by the
Russian Foreign Minister available on the official website of the Ministry.
How such a statement could be made is incomprehensible to us. Such actions weaken the
credibility and integrity of this Organisation and are as such absolutely unacceptable. The
confidentiality agreements between the OPCW and its designated laboratories precisely exist
to ensure the impartiality of the analysis. In this context, we thank the Director-General and
the head of the OPCW laboratory for their clarifying remarks at the beginning of this session.

    Do you think the bolded part of the above statement is a denial of the "leaked" report?
    Why do you think that the Swiss rep didn't just say that the report quoted by Russia is a fake report?
    Because it is true. Read the "denial" with something more of a questioning mindset and you see that she is basically saying that the English translation posted by the Russian Foreign Ministry isn't "the type of language that they would use". OK?
    So is the report real?
    The English translation...bla bla.
    The report is real..
    We know this anyway because the UK admitted, were forced to, that the BZ was present and tried to claim that it was part of some, not further explained, control sample.
    You could search forever and you will not find the OPCW claiming Novichok use.

[gringo]

     The confidential, at the UK government behest, contents of the Spiez laboratory results were leaked/stolen and ended up in Russia's hands. It is not denied and they seem more angry at being caught. How breaching confidentiality agreements threaten some kind of "impartiality". Interesting language to use if the report is not real-breaches of confidentiality. How can a fake report breach confidentiality? Surely only a real one could do that! So we can reasonably infer that "confidentiality" was breached.
     Bullshit about poorly translated language confirms it.

[gringo]

     If you were interested in getting to the bottom of what occurred in Salisbury, you should be troubled by the fact that, despite the reporting and the involvement of OPCW and Porton Down scientists, there is not a single scientist or lab that has even suggested the use of Novichok.
     What should be a simple task, finding the OPCW source that alleges Novichok use, is an impossible task. Instead of frantically searching for any old statement/report that mentions Novichok and OPCW in any context, it should be occurring to you by now that it's absence fatally holes the UK government narrative. You would be questioning why this apparently simple task has proved impossible. Think about it, David.
     The whole premise of this charade is the alleged deployment of a nerve agent(specifically a Novichok agent) by Russian GRU agents. Despite all the noise and reports of this heinous war crime and alleged breach of the CWC, samples collected, involvement of OPCW and Porton Down-not one mention, officially, of Novichok. Your certainty in the use of Novichok should now be turned into doubt. That is if you were interested in getting to the truth of what occurred.
     Instead of recognising that a lot of what you thought you knew, is backed by nothing, you ignore the facts and double down on your Russia bad nonsense.
     Once you acknowledge, if you ever do, that there is zero evidence of a Novichok agent being deployed in Salisbury, or anywhere else, you would start asking the right questions. At the moment, you are only interested in propping up the UK government's conspiracy theory. Try and pick it apart-it's much easier.
     If the UK government were being honest, then the evidence I asked you to present at the start of this thread would have been the simplest of tasks for you to do. You claimed to have looked in the OPCW reports and "lo and behold...". I have given you an open goal-all you have to do is stick the ball in the net-only problem is, you can't find the ball. Maybe there is no ball?
       

[nugnug]

https://off-guardian.org/2023/03/04/the-skripal-case-5-years-on-bullsht-then-bullsht-now/