ChatterBank1 min ago
Novichok
27 Answers
In a previous response https:/
“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:/
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?
“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:/
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?
Answers
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.
//“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
.
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
.
....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.
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!"
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!"
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!)
"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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Most people want the Russians to have done this. Unfortunately, the evidence doesn’t seem to say that.
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:/
... especially when those countries include the likes of Estonia, Ukraine and Hungary.
https:/
... especially when those countries include the likes of Estonia, Ukraine and Hungary.
Latest Posts
ChatterBank2 mins ago
News3 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles10 mins ago
ChatterBank12 mins ago
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|