It really should be quite simple. If you are asserting that you know who the culprit is you should be prepared to give us the requisite evidence. All we've had so far is that a poison that's been around for 35 years was first made in Russia. We live in an era when almost anything can be easily copied or counterfeited, yet we're asked to accept that in 35 years no-one has yet managed it with this this stuff. Well maybe. We've had lots of people saying that what happened is typical of Russia so it must be Russia. We've had lots of people saying that a lot of countries who don't like Russia have said it must be Russia so it must be Russia. Well why wouldn't they. We've had people saying that we must trust the intelligence agencies (anyone for Saddam's WMDs?) and that it would be a Terrible Thing if those agencies were to tell us what secrets they have - bullshit! It doesn't make things any more true just because lots of people say they're true. Billions believe in a God that almost certainly isn't true. It seems to be almost a crime these days to demand actual evidence for things. Well not with me it isn't. I think there's a good chance that Russia dunnit but that's as far as it goes for me without further solid evidence. Just because people like Keith and bobad want it to have been Russia (do grow up), it doesn't make it any more likely that it was Russia.


Just sayin'...