BS: If Russia didn't do it..?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 11:44 AM

I also find it very odd that, if it is a secret only the Russians know, how come we know it's chemical composition? And, if we know it's chemical composition, who else does? And if other people know it...

Oh, I'm sure you get the gist.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 11:38 AM

I remember some days or was it weeks ago Porton Down distinctly avoided/evaded saying the mystery poison was novichok. The only thing we have been told about the OPCW analysis is that they agree with Porton Down.

This carries the argument no further forward. Various experts have said the synthesis of nerve agents is not difficult, it is dangerous.
Whether the analysis can determine contaminants sufficiently to fingerprint a specific lab to establish provenance is unknown.
This would of course dictate that an original sample is available for comparison. The continued stress on purity would suggest that such fingerprinting cannot be made and further that no provenance can be established because there is no archived sample for comparison.
The stress on purity could be merely a distraction also. All chemicals are available in two grades. General Purpose Reagent GPR and analytical grade Analar Sense would dictate the pure chemical would be used for a dangerous end product in order the step reactions give no unintended consequences caused by contaminants. Nerve agents are merely a step up from standard pest control chemicals.
What is omitted in the analysis is the lying and exaggerations of our weasel political class and their media fans. Bend It, Twist it, Shake it would seem to be the mantra of the political class.

It should be made part of their fitness routine when we put the bastards in uniform to go fight the war they are so anxious for.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jon Freeman
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 11:32 AM

I wonder Keith, how many of these nations also accepted Saddam had loads of WMD which could be deployed in a short time?

Whatever, I’d think the starting point in what you ask is one whereby these nations would like Russia to be responsible. Is it possible that they would have questioned further had the US been the suspect?

As it happens, I do believe it is probable that Russia were behind the attack but I do not accept your arguments as proof. You constantly and wilfully confuse where a chemical(s) was originally developed with where a particular batch may have been produced and I’m sorry but I do not share your blind faith in any of the word’s governments.

--
Btw on a different theme, does anyone know of any “consumer grade” nerve agents?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 11:29 AM

Not only that, unless Porton Down already has some samples of novichok, how can they assess what "grade" the Salisbury stuff is? What are they comparing it with? How do they know anything about novichok, its grade, its purity, etc., unless they have some? And is there such stuff as sub-military-grade novichok???

Suppose I lived on a desert island and had never seen a Brussels sprout. You arrive on the island and give me a sprout to taste. I say wow, what a superb sprout! I've never seen one (at this you raise an eyebrow...) but I can confirm that the one I've just eaten is an absolutely first-rate example of sprouthood! Top grade! So pure! Restaurant quality!

Yeah, right, you'd say...!

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 11:26 AM

Never mind, Steve. there are always those who follow the party line and those who think for themselves. Ne'er the twain shall meet.

On a much more interesting note, twice today the old thread name game came to mind. The first time was

The French Ambassadors
Concertinas

and the second, currently still there is you are quick

The French Ambassadors
Cover versions

Eeee, tha's got fert lowf

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 11:14 AM

It's very pure, it's weapons grade, it's novichukchuk so it was dem Ruskies. That's what we're told. I'm still waiting to be told how we KNOW that a substance used days earlier that we retrieved in extremely tiny amounts from a doorknob/park bench/somebody's poo-poo/a dead guinea-pig was "weapons grade" or whatever other important-sounding technical term (terms that are designed for us neither to understand nor question) is used. And even if it is that pure, how does that prove it had to be only made in Russia? Do other countries not have science labs and intelligent personages in white coats and goggles wielding pipettes? C'mon, Iains, we need to batter this stuff home into one or two rather dense cranial cavities around here!

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 11:12 AM

If Boris' claims were lies the opposition would call for his resignation.
They do not.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 11:10 AM

The head of Porton Down appears to have contradicted claims by Boris Johnson

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 11:10 AM

Dave,
The experts say they cannot confirm who manufactured and administered the agent

They can but have not the power to state it.
The Guardian article you quoted,
"The OPCW does not have the power to identify the source of the nerve agent, only to spell out its chemical properties. It is standard OPCW procedure not to identify the laboratories involved in testing the samples, but the organisation draws from a multilaterally agreed list of labs."

Even your Diane Abbott says it is "beyond reasonable doubt."

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 11:07 AM

The experts say they cannot confirm who manufactured and administered the agent. I am happy to believe them over a bunch of lying incompetents.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 11:05 AM

a bunch of lying incompetents.

You mean the governments of every EU nation, plus Canada, Australia and all the other well informed liberal democracies in the world.

Perhaps you think it is some vast global conspiracy of lies?
Perhaps you think you know more about it than all of them?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 10:55 AM

The experts say they cannot confirm who manufactured and administered the agent. I am happy to believe them over a bunch of lying incompetents.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 10:26 AM

Dave,
It seems to only be politicians that are so certain who it was. Maybe they are all taking lessons off Gove the viper and disregarding what experts say?

Or maybe they know more about it than you do.
It is not just British politicians, but the governments of every EU nation, plus Canada, Australia and all the other well informed liberal democracies in the world.

Perhaps you think it is some vast global conspiracy of lies?
Perhaps you think you know more about it than all of them?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 10:12 AM

Funny that. The scientists all say they cannot confirm who manufactured or administered the agent. It seems to only be politicians that are so certain who it was. Maybe they are all taking lessons off Gove the viper and disregarding what experts say?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 10:06 AM

Ians,
Nowhere does the report mention novichok by name.
A deliberate omission. I think not.

It was named and its chemistry described in the full report.
In the open report it said it confirmed all the British conclusions.

Guardian,
"The international chemical weapons watchdog has backed the UK’s findings on the identity of the chemical used to poison the former Russian spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia in Salisbury."

"The executive summary released by the OPCW does not mention novichok by name, but states: “The results of the analysis by the OPCW designated laboratories of environmental and biomedical samples collected by the OPCW team confirms the findings of the United Kingdom relating to the identity of the toxic chemical that was used in Salisbury and severely injured three people.” "
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/apr/12/novichok-used-in-spy-poisoning-chemical-weapons-watchdog-confirms-salisbury

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 09:20 AM

They're running scared, pulling out all the stops in fabricating their denials, that's what bullies do when they are stood up to.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 08:17 AM

WONDER IF THIS WAS ONE TOO!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 08:16 AM

Russia has just declared that the Chemical attack was a plot hatched by western security forces

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 07:19 AM

And while people play at point scoring on here the leaders of the worlds biggest nuclear powers square up to each other in a row that could result in global destruction. The alternative of a non violent solution seems to be be scorned by those intent on 'winning' their petty arguments on here. I really hope you do not get all you deserve as it will affect everyone else as well. Still, I suppose you can then say you won your point...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 06:33 AM

... and it seems we have to wonder which side Trump is is on...Russia or America...???

Effectively tipping off Syria and Russia of planned missile strikes,
giving them time in advance to move targeted Syrian aircraft and military/political asets
to safety in Russian defended sites and bunkers...?????

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 06:16 AM

"“We have the proof that last week chemical weapons were used – at least chlorine – and that they were used by the Assad regime,” Macron told a TV interviewer."

"According to the New York Times, Mattis appealed at the meeting for more time to gather evidence to prove the Assad regime was responsible for the attack. But the administration appeared determined to deliver on the president’s threat to punish the use of poison gas."

"The PM May."If this is the responsibility of Assad's regime in Syria then it's yet another example of the brutality and brazen disregard for their people that they show."

Below an example of hymns and arias performed in unison.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y0RDadPheNQ

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 06:11 AM

...or....

arch tory news presenter Nick Robinson badgers wishy washy Diane Abbott
into saying anything that vaguely agrees with his aggressively insistent leading question
that "Russia is the bigger threat to world peace than America".....

Summed up immediately after in a report by political correspondent Iain Watson

"So I think fair to say, not an entirely unequivocal condemnation of Russia there from Dianne Abbot..
But she did say that she feels Russia was a bigger threat at the moment to world peace than America..."


Hmmmm.... Now I wonder what kind of people might deliberately misconstrue and misrepresent what was actually said
for their own malign motivations...???

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 06:07 AM

"8 hours ago - France's President Emmanuel Macron says he has "proof" that the Syrian government attacked the town of Douma with chemical weapons last weekend"
Sounds like he ain't sharing the proof.
The boys badly need a new hymn book, the singing of canaries is muted and the choir is discordant!

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 05:58 AM

Interesting analysis of the language being used to explain the poisoning.
There are a couple of things jump out.
1)Experts claim it is not difficult to make just dangerous (just like TNT)
2)It is repeatedly stressed it is high purity.(AS an aside. Ore minerals contain a unique signature of impurities enabling their source to be determined with reasonable accuracy) To argue the same process can occur with the final product of an organic chemical synthesis that gives an extremely pure product is to stretch credulity. I would argue the lack of established provenance is the reason to stress high purity.
A red herring I would suggest.
3)Nowhere does the report mention novichok by name.
A deliberate omission. I think not.
4) Putting a security blanket over the full report does not do the government line any favours.
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2018/04/13/opcw-a13.html

O, what a tangled web we weave when first we practise to deceive!

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 03:59 AM

She also admitted that Russia is the biggest threat to world peace.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 03:56 AM

Diane Abbott said on R4 Today programme that it is "beyond reasonable doubt" Russia did it.

The dominant group here still refuse to accept it showing again how extreme and out of touch they are.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 02:58 PM

"o support this, Russia’s military strategy has evolved markedly over the last twenty-five years, embracing what some would call “unrestricted warfare.” This has been described as “warfare without rules” or “using all means, including armed force or non-armed force, military and nonmilitary, and lethal and non-lethal means to compel the enemy to accept one’s interests.” Other commentators have referred to this as “political warfare” or the act of fighting in the “gray zone.” It is important to understand here that the shift in the goal, from imposing one’s will by force to the acceptance of one’s interests by other means, fundamentally changes what it means to fight such impositions. Since many of these activities do not involve the use of violence, it is not always clear whether a military response is appropriate or not. Worse still, Western democracies largely reject this blurring of military and civilian tactics. Small wonder, then, that our government institutions, including the military, seem poorly equipped to provide an adequate response. Of course, this is precisely what Russia is banking on."

https://www.yahoo.com/news/obvious-does-russia-want-000500627.html


And for those who feel we can just let Russia have whatever it wants...
"While Putin’s Munich speech gave a clear indication as to Russia’s mutually supportive economic and geopolitical goals, his recent speech to the Russian parliament also gave us insight into some of the means whereby he intends to exert influence in the world. Reaffirming Russia’s national interests, Putin stated that Russia is prepared to go all the way to a nuclear confrontation with the United States in pursuit of these goals. The array of weapons that Putin presented included systems designed to preserve the nuclear deterrent, as well as systems that only make sense if viewed as “second tier” nuclear weapons: weapons that Russia could use locally, without precipitating an all-out nuclear exchange. More worryingly, it seems that these inherently destabilizing weapons are likely to be the ones to spearhead any military component of Russia’s overall plans."

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: robomatic
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 02:39 PM

How to argue in court:
You say my dog bit your son
BUT:
My dog was leashed on my property.
My dog was behind a fence.
My dog does not bite
My dog has no teeth.
And besides,
I have no dog.
And you have no son.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 02:20 PM

"On March 13, the day after Theresa May blamed Russia for Skripal's poisoning, Gerasimov announced that he had discovered a US plan to fake a chemical weapons attack against civilians in Eastern Ghouta and then blame Assad's army.
It was coincidentally also the day after US Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley blamed Russia for stalling a ceasefire in Syria.

Only the keenest and perhaps most cynical observer of Russian propaganda might have thought at the time that the general's prediction of a chemical attack would actually come to pass.
That same seasoned observer might now be concluding that back then in early March, Gerasimov was actually employing his own asymmetrical doctrine to the Skripal issue.
What has now become clear is the full horror of last weekend's chemical weapons attack, with children, women and men dead in the basements where they were hiding.
International condemnation of Bashar al-Assad and Russia has followed, with diplomats from the US, the UK, France, Australia and other countries clear in their minds that the Assad regime was responsible.
The debate at the UN has since been blocked by Russia, balking at the independence of an investigation that would find out exactly who was responsible.

The OPCW, so vital in the Skripal case, has since been drawn in to reviewing the Syria attack -- and almost all mention of Russia's culpability in Skripal's poisoning has disappeared from view.
In asymmetric terms, Gerasimov seems to have pulled off the impossible: diverting attention, albeit at huge potential cost.
Yet Russia's top general had another trick in his pocket back in March: he announced that if the US were to launch an attack on Syria, Russia would target the American missiles and the carriers firing them.
On Wednesday this week, within hours of Russia's Ambassador to Lebanon repeating Gerasimov's March statement about targeting US missiles and carriers, US President Donald Trump entered the fray with a Twitter fusillade, loud enough to drown out any talk of Skripal by the cacophony responding to Trump's apparent declaration of strikes.
Even Gerasimov may have been surprised at the way Russia has buried its British problem. But now, it appears Moscow may be left with a far bigger and more dangerous issue on its hands.
Yet Gerasimov may have a solution for that too: huge numbers of Russian troops and heavy armor have been sighted heading to Russia's border with Ukraine, where Russian-backed Ukrainian separatists are reportedly increasing artillery exchanges with Ukrainian forces.
With his asymmetrical doctrine, Gerasimov appears to be armed with an array of patches for any holes in Vladimir Putin's strategies."

https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/12/opinions/russian-objectives-in-syria-and-the-uk-robertson-opinion-intl/index.html?utm_source=feed

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 02:17 PM

Iains - yes, it is odd, but not altogether unpleasant, being mostly in accord with you this last few weeks...???

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 02:06 PM

PFR I hate having to agree with you but you leave me no alternative.

Some info. You have to feed it into google translate in small doses.
The translation comes out surprisingly well.

https://iz.ru/726202/aleksei-ramm-nikolai-surkov/pereputali-gaz-s-maziu

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 02:03 PM

Is that what you imagine the governments of every EU nation, Canada, Australia and all the other well informed liberal democracies are doing?

That is very silly PFR.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 01:41 PM

....it much be such a warm comforting intellectually numbed existence to give oneself over to absolute faith and belief.....?????

Something akin to habitually self medicating with opiates...?????????

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 01:05 PM

PFR,
Any truly intelligent observer would be sceptical of both Russia and the UK Govt...

So you do not regard as intelligent the governments of every EU nation, Canada, Australia and all the other well informed liberal democracies.

I do. They have seen the evidence and they know who to believe.

Steve,
So to sum up, what we've "found out" today is that novichok was used and that novichok was developed in Russia. Well blow me down!

Also that it was highly purified, and that the British were honest and accurate in their analysis.
What we "found out" is not the whole story anyway.

I'd really appreciate it if someone could tell me how I'm supposed to connect those two facts in my tiny brain.

You are not. There is evidence not released.
The real scientists are able to make that connection, and have.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 12:59 PM

My mrs is a qualified professional, most days her job involves arbitrating disputes between difficult quarrelsome 4 - 5 years olds...

Frequently she is convinced both parties brought before her for judgement
are maliciously over-exaggerating and lying to make their opponent seem an even worse miscreant than themselves...

If only there wsa a similar powerful authority on the world stage
to put Putin, Trump, Boris, and May, et al, in the 'naughty corner' and keep them in during playtime...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 12:40 PM

We are constantly being told (which should always arouse suspicions when it's politicians doing it) that the stuff found is very pure, weapons-grade real-deal tackle. We are supposed to infer from that that it could only have come from Russia. I'd really appreciate it if someone could tell me how I'm supposed to connect those two facts in my tiny brain. I mean, a couple of weeks ago we were told that it could only have come from Russia anyway, without any mention of what "grade" it was supposed to be. We'll be told next I suppose that it could only have come from Russia because it was found smeared on the innermost doll of a babushka set bearing Putin's fingerprints that was verifiably made from a spruce tree that had Vlad's initials carved on it.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 11:52 AM

A little background. warning article may contain untruths.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/mar/07/what-do-nerve-agents-do-and-how-hard-are-they-to-make-sergei-skripal

My take from this article is that for any suicide bomber the synthesis of nerve agents would present no problem. The only downside might be to meet Allah prematurely and forgo the 70 virgins.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 11:50 AM

So to sum up, what we've "found out" today is that novichok was used and that novichok was developed in Russia. Well blow me down!

Another thing we're constantly told is that some minute traces of stuff that were scraped off a doorknob after several elapsed days, or rescued from someone's bloodstream after a lot of metabolism ditto, or wherever they eventually scratched it up from, was "military grade"/"weapons grade"/"extremely pure", etc., therefore "must have been made in Russia" (classic non seq there, I'd say). We are all expected to swallow this bullshit hook, line and sinker because, well these important scientists mustn't be questioned. It's above our heads, innit, you see. Well I'm questioning it. What does "military grade" actually mean, how can you tell what "grade" (whatever that means - probably nothing, I'd say) something is after you've managed to get a titchy little bit of it after days, and has anyone ever found any novichok that was SUB-military grade? Accept nothing and question everything!

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 11:35 AM

As we are always being told: Look at the big picture.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 11:25 AM

... and Boris knows how to play closed minded prejudiced reactionaries...

Any truly intelligent observer would be sceptical of both Russia and the UK Govt...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 11:19 AM

One thing you have to hand to the Russians is that they sure know how to play to the saps.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 11:16 AM

btw.. how does the law stand on wiring our politicians to lie detectors whenever they appear on TV...???

[ 2 immediate problems.. how reliable are lie detectors...??? and politicians would become even more crafty exponents of 'plausible deniability'...]

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 11:11 AM

Russia or Boris...?????

The problem facing any genuinely intelligent neutral objective inquisitive British citizens is...

out of two known habitual liars, which one should we believe is more likely to be telling us the truth...!!!?????

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 11:00 AM

Nice one. Iains. Playing on Russia's version of 'Have I got (fake) news for you? :-)

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 10:56 AM

Comedy just reported Boris Johnson’s Russia LIES

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 10:55 AM

It is right and fair that someone should post Russia's side of the story, but remember no decent democratic government believes a word of it.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 10:47 AM

This piece of black Russian humour had been forwarded a lot around the net:

Skripal had been poisoned by a most powerful poison, 2 grams will kill half a country instantly! The Russians

- poisoned him in the restaurant

- no, on the bench

- no, in the car

- No, the door handle was smeared

- No, the suitcase was poisoned

- No, everything in the house was poisoned.

- Oh, and buckwheat was poisoned,

- but they did not die instantly, but walked around somewhere for four hours,

- but the policeman that discovered them almost died on the spot,

- but the poison was instantly identified,

- an antidote was instantly introduced, and Skripals and the policeman were saved;

- The policeman had been discharged next day!

- But they were in coma, and they will never recover!

- but no, the daughter had recovered fast!

- Oh, and dad is revived … a miracle!

- and they both are quickly recovering, your strongest poison is useless.

- the restaurant had been surrounded by police in spacesuits

- the park had been surrounded by police in spacesuits

- the house had surrounded by police in spacesuits

- they are in spacesuits, since the poison is deadly dangerous, but next to them are policemen without protection …

- The bench was cut down and removed: it’s such a terrible poison that the bench retained its toxic quality for two weeks;

- but the cat had survived in the poisoned house … the policeman had touched Skripal and nearly died, and the cat survived … and the guinea pigs would survive, but they were all forgotten, and died of hunger in the house;

- and their remains were immediately burned, as they are poisoned by the strongest poison;

- For two weeks they were poisoned by the strongest poison and survived, and now they had to be urgently cremated;

- Only guinea pigs died, the cat survived all this poison. It was stressful and hungry, so they killed it and cremated to make it certain nobody will find the secret etc etc.

The true hero of Skripal saga is the British ex-Ambassador Craig Murray, who followed the developments and unveiled many of its inconsistencies and outright lies. You may read his articles and twits to learn the details.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 10:47 AM

If he lied the Opposition can force his resignation.
They would if they could.
They can't.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 10:45 AM

Why are we so surprised that Boris Johnson lied

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 10:44 AM

Dave's Guardian report,
"The international chemical weapons watchdog has backed the UK’s findings on the identity of the chemical used to poison the former Russian spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia in Salisbury.
The findings by the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons will be a major relief to the UK, which has said novichok, a military-grade nerve agent developed by Russia, was used in the attack."

"The executive summary released by the OPCW does not mention novichok by name, but states: “The results of the analysis by the OPCW designated laboratories of environmental and biomedical samples collected by the OPCW team confirms the findings of the United Kingdom relating to the identity of the toxic chemical that was used in Salisbury and severely injured three people.”"

"....also notes in its summary that the chemical had an “almost complete absence” of impurities."
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/apr/12/novichok-used-in-spy-poisoning-chemical-weapons-watchdog-confirms-salisbury