Former Russian double agent seriously ill in Salisbury.

That's odd, I thought the Ukraine's president was toppled when he decided to stop his country having closer ties with the EU and instead cosyed up with Russia.
I wonder what prompted his change of mind?
Same chap who had his own palace and zoo. No corruption there, no way.

Don't know much about the new chap, but Nazi sounds like tabloid hyperbole - got any kind of corroboration for the claims?

Funny how previous political rivals ended up in Jail or poisoned.
 
Washout said:
That's odd, I thought the Ukraine's president was toppled when he decided to stop his country having closer ties with the EU and instead cosyed up with Russia.
I wonder what prompted his change of mind?
Same chap who had his own palace and zoo. No corruption there, no way.

Don't know much about the new chap, but Nazi sounds like tabloid hyperbole - got any kind of corroboration for the claims?

Funny how previous political rivals ended up in Jail or poisoned.
Click to expand...

Actually he is called a Nazi far right sympathizer from the EU report in December of the previous year, with conclusion not to be funded because of his views.
Three months later EU supported him to topple the elected president and indirectly funded him with 5bn euro.

As for the palace and zoo....... is the same palace and "zoo" the current "our" president enjoys so the previous before the last also.
 
I won't go into Ukraine too much, but if this is anything to go by, it's blatantly obvious what's happened in Ukraine, quite frankly if we can accept Turkey murdering Kurds for "potential" association to their "terrorists", it's not too hard to connect the dots with the revolution in Ukraine and where the money from the EU fell into, accidentally no doubt.

Regardless, it's not the purpose of this thread, though i'm sure Ukraine will be back in the news at some point if a flash-point occurs for real.
 
/sigh it's always sad when a person storms into a thread spouting stuff they have Googled with no regard to if it was all addressed/debunked years ago...


stopper said:
Putin couldn't have annexed Crimea as it was never actually a part of the Ukraine.
Click to expand...
Wrong, it was transferred from Russia to Ukraine in 1954.


stopper said:
Ukraine granted them autonomous status (ability to self govern) in 1992, following a referendum in 1991
Click to expand...
Wrong, the referendum in 1991 was on converting Crimea from an Oblast (sort of like a UK county) into an Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic (sort of like a US state but not as independent) that then happened in 1991. The event you are referring too in 1992 was the dissolution of the Soviet Union, which saw the Soviet Socialist Republic of Ukraine transform back into the country of Ukraine, and the Autonomous Soviet Republic of Crimea which was part of it convert into the Autonomous Republic of Crimea (a region of Ukraine with limited self governance).


stopper said:
The Republic of Crimea was already an independent nation when the Russians went in to protect it.
Click to expand...
Wrong, it was an internationally recognised part of Ukraine (including recognition by the Russian Federation and Crimea).


stopper said:
The Russians have a military base in Crimea, and a natural gas pipeline running through it, they were simply protecting what was already theirs.
Click to expand...
Protecting it from what? Were they worried that the impeachment of the Ukrainian president would result in the election of a more liberal/left wing successor would cause issues? Of course they weren't because if the collapse of the USSR didn't then that wouldn't either.


stopper said:
The Crimean government gave the public a referendum to join Russia, and they went for it.
Click to expand...
Contextually wrong, after Russia took control of Crimea the Crimean government was replaced by a Russian puppet one which then gave the public an illegal referendum to join Russia, and they went for it (I'm actually not opposed to, people should be able to decide their own fate).


stopper said:
Western media (state backed) deliberately don't report this because our government need you to believe what Russia did was wrong, and they know the majority of us won't do any more research than BBC or Sky news.
Click to expand...
Western media reported pretty much all of it even the stuff dating back to the 80's (the stuff that happened, not some of the fake stuff you posted).

Now that's done with can we get back on topic? If you want to show us more nonsense about Ukraine you have Googled from "non mainstream" news sites there is actually a main thread for it.
 
39420547570_be689c275e_b.jpg
l
 
dowie said:
How is a factually incorrect post "we'll said"???

I realise it perhaps fits your anti-western world view
Click to expand...

Your view is what today?
That of the UK Foreign Office which came out today stating that they never blamed Russia for the nerve agent, and Boris never said that Russia was behind it?
Even if they admitted that they deleted weeks old announcements even tweets blaming Russia for the nerve agent?

And you blame me for anti-western world view, because I do not blindly follow the government propaganda?

So tell me what's today your opinion of this. Is Russia behind it or not? Because up to yesterday you were following May & Boris down the anti-Russian warpath.......
 
Perhaps Boris is doing this to better understand how Russia spreads misinformation and so we can investigate how they act on a state level?





*This conspiracy BS works both ways you know.
 
so as usual it was more crap from our politicians who were pushing their anti russian agenda but wait the russians must still be the bad guys
 
Panos said:
LOL.....

But you do not answer my question.....

You still believe the UK rhetoric on everything?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...g-novichok-spy-poisoning-latest-a8288216.html
Click to expand...

You cannot delete 'Hansard' which is the definitive record of house business, nor is it restricted to soundbite lengths for twits.

The statement on percieved responsibility is below. Bold emphasis by me.

"This morning, I chaired a meeting of the National Security Council in which we considered the information available so far. As is normal, the council was updated on the assessment and intelligence picture, as well as on the state of the investigation. It is now clear that Mr Skripal and his daughter were poisoned with a military-grade nerve agent of a type developed by Russia. It is part of a group of nerve agents known as Novichok.

Based on the positive identification of this chemical agent by world-leading experts at the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory at Porton Down, our knowledge that Russia has previously produced this agent and would still be capable of doing so, Russia’s record of conducting state-sponsored assassinations and our assessment that Russia views some defectors as legitimate targets for assassinations, the Government have concluded that it is highly likely that Russia was responsible for the act against Sergei and Yulia Skripal. There are, therefore, only two plausible explanations for what happened in Salisbury on 4 March: either this was a direct act by the Russian state against our country; or the Russian Government lost control of their potentially catastrophically damaging nerve agent and allowed it to get into the hands of others.

This afternoon, my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary has summoned the Russian ambassador to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and asked him to explain which of the two possibilities it is and to account for how this Russian-produced nerve agent could have been deployed in Salisbury against Mr Skripal and his daughter. My right hon. Friend has stated to the ambassador that the Russian Federation must immediately provide full and complete disclosure of the Novichok programme to the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, and he has requested the Russian Government’s response by the end of tomorrow."

As far as I know, Russia has just been asked to explain itself. There is obviously significant circumstantial evidence against Russia for such a large reaction across countries to take place.
 
nkata said:
As far as I know, Russia has just been asked to explain itself. There is obviously significant circumstantial evidence against Russia for such a large reaction across countries to take place.
Click to expand...

Makes you wonder why they have let media sources run with little more than circumstantial evidence, knowing full well the level of hysteria this will create. This is not the first time we have done this as we have famously been reminded from the events before and after the Iraq invasion, despite "expert" analysis contrary to the political/media based hysteria.

Maybe they should be sitting around a table before dragging this through the media circus. If they can prove it was made in Russia can they prove when it was made? Was it Soviet made or Russian made for example, if Soviet made is it possible it was obtained during the break up of the Soviet Union by a 3rd party rather than being State sponsored? Can it be re-produced by anyone other than Russia and can they prove it was actually used by Russia?

The way that this has been handled by us stinks of ulterior motive. But then again like most of us I don't really know that much.
 
nkata said:
As far as I know, Russia has just been asked to explain itself. There is obviously significant circumstantial evidence against Russia for such a large reaction across countries to take place.
Click to expand...

Russia raised 14 questions to the British government to answer (and 10 to the French government), and both brushed them under the carpet ignoring pretty logical and viable questions.
Russia have nothing to explain themselves for something they haven't done.

When you have professors stating that their best students can make such stuff in they bedrooms, is enough to have a humongous list of potential makers especially better funded like the Russian Mafia or states that have interest on a conflict between West and Russia (aka Ukraine).


Also here the British government did the complete mile.
Threatened everyone who didn't followed their rhetoric as enemy of the state, ridiculed politicians who asked for more evidence, blamed Russia to the point that they attacked with chemical weapons British soil and we should even go to war, and you forgot the defense minister demanding from Russia to shut up and much more.

This rhetoric makes Gold War even at the worst period (late 70s - 80s) look like a child play in the park.
 
Got some links to credible chemists about making this stuff in bedrooms?

All i’ve seen is though you could probably make this stuff with a bit of knowledge, you would almost certainly kill yourself in the process.
 
Lets be honest, if a 17 year old kid can make a nuclear device in his shed in the States, i don't think "a bit of knowledge" is going to stop people.
 
Jokester said:
Got some links to credible chemists about making this stuff in bedrooms?

All i’ve seen is though you could probably make this stuff with a bit of knowledge, you would almost certainly kill yourself in the process.
Click to expand...

Found the original comment by the Professor, not the "reports".

https://twitter.com/DavidBCollum/status/978435092103254016

He even posts the molecular structure of the compound. Reads some answers...

https://twitter.com/DavidBCollum/status/978604230956208128


Is just molecular chemistry, and that specific agent is simple, anyone can cook it.
And given it's formula can be found in Amazon books, it only takes someone with organic chemistry knowledge to make it.

Also don't forget is dual compound one. It is not active or dangerous until you mix the two compounds, at the moment of deployment. Not before.
 
Last edited:
^^ That isn't something you'd be cooking up at home in your bedroom in the most literal sense and someone with a reasonable home lab wouldn't be making that without a lot of risk - unfortunately these days I've forgotten most of anything I ever knew about chemistry but looks like a fair chance amongst other things of inadvertently producing an explosive mixture of Nitrogen trichloride not to mention the Nitrogen Dioxide.

Panos said:
Also don't forget is dual compound one. It is not active or dangerous until you mix the two compounds, at the moment of deployment. Not before.
Click to expand...

Two aspects - making the precursors isn't without significant risks of their own - you are working with a lot of Nitrogen, Oxygen and so on but also likely why it hasn't resulted in multiple fatalities in this case as mixing it "in the field" is relatively easy to result in less than an optimal product.

EDIT: Unbelievable how much I've forgotten - 20 years ago I'd have had no problem getting my head around that chemistry - now I barely understand it.
 
Last edited:
Logically it cannot be true that its so easy to make at home
People would be dropping down dead everywhere if so

You dont think ISIS would be all over that if true? Afghan insurgents can knock up plenty of chemical based explosives,
Even in Syria where actual chemical weapon attacks have happened its only been Sarin
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom