It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Salisbury toxin results in - NOT Novichok, NOT Russian

page: 9
52
<< 6  7  8    10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 18 2018 @ 02:39 PM
link   
Can everyone keep this on Salisbury whataboutism rather than Douma whataboutism?

Moving back on topic, is the reason that the OPCW called this a new chemical weapon because the RF failed to declare the Novichock program that the USSR started?




posted on Apr, 18 2018 @ 02:56 PM
link   
a reply to: RexKramerPRT

Russia never submitted Novichok to OPCW. That said, in 2015 Iranian scientists produced samples of five different Novichok variants and submitted them to the OPCW for cataloging.

That said, at least according to OPCW records, this would be the first time Novichok has been used as as a weapon. So maybe that could be what they're referring to but it's a stretch.
edit on 4/18/2018 by Xcalibur254 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 18 2018 @ 03:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcalibur254

I'm going to go ahead and say I was wrong earlier when I was saying this is not novichok. I think the wording was weird and something still smells fishy, but I'm pretty sure I was wrong on that point now.





This is from one of the developers of Novichok in 2009:



and the same man in 2018 from a vice interview after the poisoning.



three takeaways:

1)He thinks Russia is responsible, and feels himself partially to blame
2)He gave out the formula for novichok long ago
3)It takes a very advanced set of protocols to make Novichok though the formula is simple.

I'm going down a Novichok rabbit hole.. Some claim it's easier to make than VX gas. Iran is one country that can make it, Russia, and presumably western nations as well.. I'm looking more into it.
edit on 18-4-2018 by Reverbs because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 19 2018 @ 02:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: PublicOpinion
And I'm not entirely sure that OPCW's policy of secrecy isn't part of the problem.


The OPCW is not a public body. Because they are dealing with some of the nastiest substances known to man, and because they are dealing with national secrecy, they are by nature "secret". That said, if you investigate their website the investigations that they have carried out in Syria are public.



posted on Apr, 19 2018 @ 05:58 AM
link   
a reply to: paraphi

No. It is a public body filled with public representatives, leave me alone with your national security Bollocks. Agreed to disagree.

 


This is an excellent example on how things should be done:


[...]
We take it very seriously that the results of the analysis done by the Technical Secretariat confirm the findings of the investigation undertaken by the United Kingdom. Slovakia joins other countries in their call towards the Russian Federation to answer the questions raised by the United Kingdom and the international community and to provide immediate, full and complete disclosure of its “Novichok” programme to the OPCW.
Violations of the Convention are unacceptable and the full compliance of all State Parties with the CWC must be restored without any delay to avoid further threats to our collective security. Strict implementation of the Convention by all State Parties is the only way to answer the challenges of the current complex situation and to stop the threat of the erosion of the chemical weapons prohibition regime.
Slovakia reiterates that any use of chemical weapons or toxic chemicals as weapon by anybody, anywhere and under any circumstances is absolutely unacceptable and is a violation of international law and has to be condemned in the strongest terms possible by all. Those responsible - be it state or non-state actors - must be held accountable and brought to justice.
[...]

Slovakia: Statement by H.E. Mr. Roman Bužek, Permanent Representative of the Slovak Republic to the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons at the 59th Meeting of the OPCW Executive Council, 18 April 2018

This new and very potent Uber-Novichok could've been produced everywhere (potential non-state actors?). And when Russia really is innocent (what I tend to believe), then it should be no problem to cooperate in order to find the real culprit.
I want to repeat the fact, that Ambassador Kostov of Bulgaria was the person to spill some beans with regards to this "new and potent family". It wasn't The Resa May, who surprised us with some transparency. And there you have the reason why I think that the UK might be behind this attack.
edit on 19-4-2018 by PublicOpinion because: (no reason given)

edit on 19-4-2018 by PublicOpinion because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 19 2018 @ 07:38 AM
link   
a reply to: PublicOpinion


The bit you quote entirely supports the UK's position and calls on Russia to answer the UK's questions and you get from that that Russia is innocent and that the UK did it?



posted on Apr, 19 2018 @ 09:21 AM
link   
a reply to: oldcarpy

Well. It certainly looks that way, doesn't it?



and you get from that that Russia is innocent and that the UK did it?


Not from that alone, no. My posting-history is there for my worldwide audience to see as well.

This is just my briefing for the Int. Syrussian Trollbrigade, on how to annoy the good sheeple with conspiracy theories that matter. It explains why the Europeans are our friends in this, if just temporarily, because they were the only ones to use the term "new family of toxins". Freudian Slip or not, we can use this to counter the hegemonial disinfo from the Empire of Chaos an all MSM channels, and criticize them for their lack of transparency.
The disenfranchised ones will stumble upon similar thoughts in their heads, and united we fall upwards.

You have a good day now!




posted on Apr, 19 2018 @ 09:27 AM
link   
a reply to: PublicOpinion


I will. the sun is out and it's in the high twenties. Soon be Beer o'clock.




posted on Apr, 19 2018 @ 09:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: PublicOpinion
No. It is a public body filled with public representatives, leave me alone with your national security Bollocks. Agreed to disagree.


Er, no disrespect, but if OPCW was a public body then it would not be able to conduct its business. The report sent to nations on the Salisbury attack has not been made public for example, but it has been sent to the OPCWs members.



posted on Apr, 19 2018 @ 09:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: PublicOpinion


The bit you quote entirely supports the UK's position and calls on Russia to answer the UK's questions and you get from that that Russia is innocent and that the UK did it?


the quoted text above is about how Russia developed new chemical weapons after signing the deal saying no new chemical weapons would be developed and old stockpiles would be decommissioned over time. this was the early 90s.

That is not connected to answering about the assassination atempt. People have had the formulas for novichok since the early 90s.. Atleast certain variants of the 5 types.

anyone capable of making VX nerve agent can make novichok too..

sort of like USA invented nukes and if a nuke goes off now you can't just blame USA with no reason.

Russia should answer about its past where it used the cover of pesticides to store volumes of new chemical weapons after saying they would not, but lets not forget even the USA helped decomission Soviet chemical weapons factories/storage/testing grounds.. One such site was the testing ground for novichok. What Im saying is novichok, its chemical formula, and general lab procedures are no secret.. it wouldnt take 25 years since the formulas were known to figure out a process to go from a to b.

so it's really UK, Russia, USA, Iran even.. and many other countries Germany I imagine, though they would not get my vote as I bet they are super sensitive about chemical weapons.


motive is what looks fishy. Who benefits?



posted on Apr, 19 2018 @ 09:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: PublicOpinion
a reply to: Xcathdra

Another unconstitutional attack and (legit) security concerns from somebody with a mandate are 2 pair of shoes.

YMMV


The AUMF on terrorism allowed the attack
The Constitution allowed the attack
The war powers act of 1973 allowed the attack
The UN charter for humanitarian intervention allowed the attack.



posted on Apr, 19 2018 @ 09:44 AM
link   
a reply to: Reverbs


Here is our NSA's letter to NATO referring to intelligence such as Russia had a programme to train agents to assassinate by for example smearing nerve agent on door handles, etc.

Letter to NATO


Motive is that it sends a clear message to "traitors". They thought that they would get away with it, as they have before.



posted on Apr, 19 2018 @ 10:19 AM
link   
a reply to: paraphi

That's exactly the point. The report from Syria is public, innit? I really don't get the priorities there. Inconsistent at best, but obviously enough to recall diplomats. This incident has been used to promote politicized actionism, yes or no?

a reply to: Xcathdra

Well. Better don't read articles from The Atlantic then...

a reply to: oldcarpy




posted on Apr, 19 2018 @ 10:24 AM
link   
a reply to: PublicOpinion





Well. Better don't read articles from The Atlantic then...


Best not. They're about Trump and America. I am a Brit so I don't give much of a toss about what you chaps get up to in the Colonies.


edit on 19-4-2018 by oldcarpy because: (no reason given)

edit on 19-4-2018 by oldcarpy because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 19 2018 @ 10:34 AM
link   
a reply to: oldcarpy

Haus Sachsen-Coburg und Gotha is right around the corner. Back to the colonies you go!





#MagnaFrisia



posted on Apr, 19 2018 @ 10:38 AM
link   
a reply to: PublicOpinion

Yup.. the AUMF on terrorism was his constitutional authority.
The war powers act of 1973 was his authority.
Humanitarian intervention under the UN charter was his authorization.

If none of these are valid then Obama is fu**ed.
edit on 19-4-2018 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 19 2018 @ 10:38 AM
link   
a reply to: PublicOpinion


I like your posts. I have no idea what they are on about, but I do like them.



posted on Apr, 19 2018 @ 12:22 PM
link   
a reply to: oldcarpy

That was unexpected. You're good, SalisburyTzu. Very good. Maybe too good.



House Winsor is a b(r)it too krautish for my taste, that's what I was getting at.
Greetings from Magna Frisia, carpy! I like your posts as well, the ice seems to be crushed. For now. See ya in the pit!





posted on Apr, 20 2018 @ 03:50 AM
link   
a reply to: PublicOpinion


You're welcome.

Yes, the Windsors are a bit Germanic. Phillip is Greek and Princess Michael has always seemed a bit - Hitlery? - to me.

Latest news here in Salisbury is that some Govt advisor has said today that there may still be "pockets" of nerve agent around. Terrific. Salisbury is already very quiet with tourists staying away in droves so this is most unwelcome news.

Thanks, Putin.



posted on Apr, 20 2018 @ 05:03 AM
link   
a reply to: oldcarpy




Latest news here in Salisbury is that some Govt advisor has said today that there may still be "pockets" of nerve agent around. Terrific. Salisbury is already very quiet with tourists staying away in droves so this is most unwelcome news.


The agent was mixed in a gel which was smeared on a surface Skirpal would touch (doorknobs ??)

Not only was Skirpal poisoned, so was his daughter . A British police officer was also poisoned

Traces found in restaurant they visited . Lucky nobody else got contaminated

Putin was extremely reckless in doing this, but guess when evil dictator do this kind of stuff...



new topics

top topics



 
52
<< 6  7  8    10 >>

log in

join