boards.ie Mobile
Page 54 of 54
« First < 444525354
After Hours>Two more victims of "unknown substance" in U.K.
Cheerful Spring 22:17 12-10-2018
Originally Posted by mbur:
That is exactly what you are doing, repeatedly so.

Here is a good round-up of the situation as I and others see it.

1) how do we know a deadly nerve agent was used?
2) if it was used, we have no idea who by.
3) god only knows what killed Sturgess.
4) why would anyone use nerve agents to kill (as opposed to other methods) when they’re clearly unreliable and awkward to work with?
5) where are the Skripals and why are they being detained incommunicado?
6) does anyone regard British security and intelligence services as honest and reliable sources?

You'll find that comment and plenty more here with the latest from Craig Murray



You're welcome.
Chepiga name was listed on a Russian military website. That pretty much confirms Bellingcat information is reliable. Russia denied a person of this name received a military award. Russia has themselves confirmed the allegations are true by denying Chepiga exists.

It was a botched operation. Who knows if was sanctioned by Putin? It was amateurish how they did it but maybe the GRU is not what used to be? Maybe they underfunded to carry out operations?
[Quote] [Thank]
mbur 22:36 12-10-2018
Originally Posted by Dohnjoe:

Another blog. Craig Murray is not a valid source.
LOL Who is?

Originally Posted by Dohnjoe:

I answered your questions, here are mine

1. If you are so sure it wasn't Novichok, what was it?

2. What killed Dawn Sturgess and poisoned Charlie Rowley?

and if you don't believe they were poisoned by GRU agents with Novichok, then care to explain what really happened?.
I'm very flattered that you are so interested in my opinions and I am familiar with the official narrative thank you.

1. There are several candidates. I'm not in a position to pick one.

2. Something in the sealed bottle that he opened maybe?

I'm not a hard believer in any particular theory including the GRU one.
Hate to sound like a killjoy but lets see where the evidence takes us.

I came into this discussion because I wanted to share my amazement that so many outlets were taking the Bellincat revelations so seriously. I am glad to see that Scotland Yard seem to share my opinion that the so called revelations are only speculation.

The "unreliable" mr Murray does smell a rat you maybe interested in.
Originally Posted by :
It is now a near certainty that Boshirov and Petrov are indeed fake identities. If the two were real people, it is inconceivable that by now their identities would not have been fully established with details of their history, lives, family and milieu. I do not apologise for exercising all due caution, rather than enthusiasm, about a narrative promoted to increase international tension with Russia, but am now convinced Petrov and Boshirov were not who they claimed.
Very fair I thought. I just hope we are not creating two more victims.
[Quote] [Thank]
Dohnjoe 22:49 12-10-2018
Originally Posted by mbur:
LOL Who is?
A blogger on the internet is not a strong a source as e.g. the consensus between Porton Down lab and OPCW, both of which are experts on nerve agents

They had access to the evidence, blood samples, Craig Murray did not

PD and OPCW are separate sources which independently corroborated each other. Craig Murray is one person

Do you genuinely not see the difference between these sources?


Originally Posted by :
I'm very flattered that you are so interested in my opinions and I am familiar with the official narrative thank you.

1. There are several candidates. I'm not in a position to pick one.
Which are?

Originally Posted by :
2. Something in the sealed bottle that he opened maybe?
If it wasn't Novichok then what was it?

If you don't have any evidence of anything, then what is the basis of your belief that it was something else?

Originally Posted by :
I came into this discussion because I wanted to share my amazement that so many outlets were taking the Bellincat revelations so seriously.
Bellingcat is an investigative organisation which has to date produced some strong cases with credible results, which are backed up by evidence

It's rated as having a "high factual reporting"
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/bellingcat/
[Quote] [Thank]
mbur 00:29 13-10-2018
This is interesting. It's the OPCW report on the Skripal case.

https://www.opcw.org/sites/default/f...12-2018_e_.pdf

It says that the toxic chemical is "allegedly a nerve agent" You'd think they would know.

It also says "the toxic chemical was of a high purity". Odd that there aren't more dead people.

But the kicker is section 12.

"The name and structure of the identified toxic chemical are contained in the full classified report of the Secretariat, available to States Parties."

No mention of any Novichok. So it appears that neither Porton Down nor the OPCW has publicly confirmed that the poison was Novichok. The only source of the Novichok claim is the House of Commons.

Here is the Amesbury report.

https://www.opcw.org/sites/default/files/documents/2018/09/s-1671-2018%28e%29_0.pdf


Same chemical 97%-98% purity but maybe not the same batch.

Least dangerous “military grade” nerve agent ever and no evidence of where it came from..
[Quote] [Thank]
Dohnjoe 00:40 13-10-2018
Originally Posted by mbur:
It says that the toxic chemical is "allegedly a nerve agent" You'd think they would know.
They do know, they confirmed the findings of Porton Down

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...irms-salisbury

They also confirmed that a "Novichok-type agent" was what affected Sturgess and Rowley

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-b...-idUSKCN1LK2I7

Originally Posted by :
It also says "the toxic chemical was of a high purity". Odd that there aren't more dead people.
Depends on dosage. You can have extremely high purity Novichok that you can drink in a glass of water and be fine. Dosage is key.

Why are you avoiding the questions?

By the way we've been through all this in the thread, it's all in here
[Quote] [Thank]
mbur 01:30 13-10-2018
Originally Posted by Dohnjoe:
They do know, they confirmed the findings of Porton Down

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...irms-salisbury

They also confirmed that a "Novichok-type agent" was what affected Sturgess and Rowley

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-b...-idUSKCN1LK2I7


Depends on dosage. You can have extremely high purity Novichok that you can drink in a glass of water and be fine. Dosage is key.

Why are you avoiding the questions?

By the way we've been through all this in the thread, it's all in here
If you are nice I'm sure we will get to answer all your question in time.

Don't be so impatient.

Did you read the articles you quoted or just the misleading headlines?

There is nothing in either article that contradicts what I have stated in my post above.
The only source of the Novichok claim is the House of Commons.

Oh and about the OPCW's "alleged nerve agent" statement. If they knew it was a nerve agent they would not have used that language. How do you know that they know when they clearly say that they don't?
[Quote] [Thank]
Dohnjoe 02:14 13-10-2018
Originally Posted by mbur:
The only source of the Novichok claim is the House of Commons.
The source was the Porton Down lab, which determined that a nerve agent was used, and that it came from the Novichok family. The OPCW independently confirmed those findings. This was further corroborated when the other pair were exposed to the same substance (one of whom died), and again the OPCW confirmed that the nerve agent was used in both cases. Yulia Skripal has made a statement about this, the poisoning and the use of the nerve agent.

To date no evidence has emerged that it was any other type of nerve agent (e.g. VX, Sarin) or any other type of poison

You claimed there are "several candidates" for the poisonings, which ones? and what evidence is there for each?

What was in the perfume bottle that killed Sturgess? She sprayed it on her skin and died shortly after, there aren't many substances that do that. The OPCW sent samples of it to 2 labs which confirmed it was the same substance that poisoned the Skripals, what information do you have that is contrary to that?
[Quote] [Thank]
Cheerful Spring 00:00 14-10-2018
Originally Posted by mbur:
If you are nice I'm sure we will get to answer all your question in time.

Don't be so impatient.

Did you read the articles you quoted or just the misleading headlines?

There is nothing in either article that contradicts what I have stated in my post above.
The only source of the Novichok claim is the House of Commons.

Oh and about the OPCW's "alleged nerve agent" statement. If they knew it was a nerve agent they would not have used that language. How do you know that they know when they clearly say that they don't?
Your correct but they identified the chemical structure that is alleged to be a formula for Novitchok.

I would not get too hung up on pet names for nerve agents. It was identified as a nerve agent and really doesn't matter if it was Novitchok or not they still got attacked.
[Quote] [Thank]
cnocbui 13:08 14-10-2018 (1 Thanks)
Originally Posted by mbur:
If you are nice I'm sure we will get to answer all your question in time.

Don't be so impatient.

Did you read the articles you quoted or just the misleading headlines?

There is nothing in either article that contradicts what I have stated in my post above.
The only source of the Novichok claim is the House of Commons.

Oh and about the OPCW's "alleged nerve agent" statement. If they knew it was a nerve agent they would not have used that language. How do you know that they know when they clearly say that they don't?
The 'source' of the Novichok analysis was Porton Down, not parliament. Novichok is a term used to describe a class of chemically related compounds, hence the 'type-agent' so that phrasing does not indicate doubt. The OPCW don't 'allege' they clearly state, on the basis of confirmatory analyses conducted by several independent laboratories.
[Quote] [Thank]
Elmer Blooker 14:58 17-10-2018
Originally Posted by Cheerful Spring:
There are some details not yet confirmed. What time did Skipral return home? This would clear up what time Skipral touched the door. It one thing that still not fully answered yet.
Originally Posted by :
There still some doubts if the attack took place at Skipral home or in the town of Salisbury itself?
Confused or what?
[Quote] [Thank]
Gatling 17:34 17-10-2018 (1 Thanks)
Originally Posted by Elmer Blooker:
Confused or what?
If boards asked if today was Wednesday people on here would be confused about the answer
[Quote] [Thank]
Dohnjoe 13:18 18-10-2018 (1 Thanks)
Originally Posted by Gatling:
If boards asked if today was Wednesday people on here would be confused about the answer
Actually you'd be more likely to get some twat arguing that it was Thursday in New Zealand and that the "Western imperialist" calendar was a tool of oppression stolen from another race or some nonsense :pac:
[Quote] [Thank]
Page 54 of 54
« First < 444525354


Back to Forum
Google Analytics

Share Tweet