Well there's a surprise, our wonderful Governments accidentally forgot to "realise" that the OPCW report (and the Swiss laboratory report) stated that the Salisbury nerve agent wasn't Novichok after all, it was BZ Toxin (aka 3-Quinuclidinyl benzilate aka QNB aka Agent 15 aka Substance 78 aka etc etc etc).

BZ Toxin is much more associated with the USA and Europe and is not known as a Russian chemical.

Now how did our Government manage to overlook that?

Next we will be finding out that the Syrian chemical attack was sherbet!

Could this government possibly be any more incompetent? I'm not a conspiracy theorist but I believe the Syrian attack was staged. Why would Assad need to use chemical weapons when he's well on the way to victory? It doesn't make sense.

Can you post a link to this information please DD?

I am not at all surprised at the deceit, and delighted to see the government's claims unravel.

The OPCW information I have read does not name any agent only ingredient agents it does not name Novichoc nor does it deny it was Novichoc as the full assessment is classified, it cannot prove the agent as Russian manufacture but said it is the most likely source.

I agree that you are right... every inch of the way.. from Skripals, to expelling Russian diplomats, to chemical attack paving the way for missile attacks , with the now threat of US being 'locked and loaded' .

That comment gives a open door opportunity for the rebels to stage another chemical attack, and the US will go in all guns blazing.
White Helmets, another outfit that is corrupt paid for by UK tax payers.
They also fake chemical attacks and the aftermath of such fake set ups and FSA threatened to use chemical attacks back in 2013 stating they had a supply, to eradicate Assad , there's video footage of that too.. The West are playing into the terrorists and rebels hands, and they know it and fund them !

White Helmets... NOT SUITABLE FOR THE SQEEMISH !

https://www.facebook.com/Syrianewsdaily/videos/810682652461471/

Probably moved away from the topic a bit , but to my mind the whole thing is connected, for one aim and one outcome. The Government simply can't tell lies quite so well as others can.

It was Reuters that reported it.

The Swiss laboratory’s report for OPCW was very clear. The OPCW final report didn’t name the agent but gave its chemical formula right at the end.

I’ll post up links when I’m on my computer.

The OPCW summary report said it agreed with the Porton Down scientists as to what it was. Yet in its full report it apparently says the opposite!

What on earth is going on?

I would expect the formula to be kept firmly under wraps in order to prevent some teenage lunatic in Neston cooking up a batch in his bedroom to see if it works. I don't know enough about chemical nomenclature to tell if 3-Quinuclidinyl benzilate is sufficient to define its molecular shape or not. Hopefully it isn't!

Unfortunately, RT is widely assumed in this country to be just a propaganda sheet, unlike those fine bastions of honest unbiased information like the Daily Mail, The Daily Express, The Daily Telegraph, Boris Johnson, Theresa May, etc. etc. So it won't be believed.

Ah, read between the lines, it said it agreed with the UK findings but we don't know what the UK said to them (they might have just said a nerve agent), the OPCW samples were collected at the same time as Porton Down's so at that point the finding were a nerve agent purley on guesswork from symptoms. Nor do OPCW give any indication of which UK department/source they were talking about.

The last paragraph then goes on to say .....

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

Which can only be read as they aren't prepared to state what chemical it is to the general public despite assurances from the UK Government that it was Novichok and that the UK Government wanted to be open on this.

I am very confused as to the section going on about purity, it would be almost impossible to asses purity from the main samples (bloods), the other samples were removed from various objects some time later which had to contain contamination?

Don't forget that Novichok is a group of drugs not one, the could have been less obtuse by saying Novichok without identifying which one.

Well, I find it as suspicious as you do. But without the actual words that it is not novachok the evidence is insufficient to build a case upon. What a pity the OPCW has not made it clear.

As to the purity, I imagine that is assessed by looking for by-products from the method of synthesis. It is possible that more than one reaction occurs and this will result in other compounds being formed which may or may not be removed. Probably, if it comes from a small-scale laboratory sample it will be pure. In larger scale industrial production, they may not bother with separating harmless byproducts.

This is only a guess though.

No point in engaging with the readership of such comics.

Well, unfortunately, there are many who believe every word written in them, and they have votes. Even more unfortunately, we have politicians who are happy to take advantage of their credulity too.

No, a Swiss lab hasn't suggested Britain could be behind the Salisbury attack



I'll mark the best bit in bold for the hard of thinking.


https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/no-swiss-lab-hasnt-cast-12367077

It will be interesting to see how this pans out. The Russians know there is something in the full OPCW report that the UK and/or others don’t want known. The document will leak out in the end.

May’s usual arrogance got the OPCW summary released. It written in such a way that it is bound to draw suspicion.

Now who would I trust more if I had a brain! Reuters or The Mirror?

Don't write off the Mirror, its well known they have no love for a Tory government.