Now being reported that the Swiss Lab (one of 4 sent samples) reported to the OPCW that the toxin used in Salisbury was BZ (3-Quinuclidinyl benzilate)
By whom ?
VB (not VX)
Lavrov. They have the full version of the OPCW report.
ftfy
1 Like
The summary, published the other day didn’t actually mention Novichok or BZ. The OPCW may have to explain why the report from the lab in Spiez (!) wasn’t referred to in the summary.
It would perhaps explain why no one died.
Ah. Would that be this Mr Lavrov ?
VB
Yes, the very same. He’s going to appear very foolish if the Swiss lab denies what he’s alleging.
They may also have to explain why this was posted on their website and is still there OPCW Issues Report on Technical Assistance Requested by the United Kingdom | OPCW (my bold)
The results of the analysis by the OPCW designated laboratories of environmental and biomedical samples collected by the OPCW team confirm the findings of the United Kingdom relating to the identity of the toxic chemical that was used in Salisbury and severely injured three people.
VB
The Swiss Lab is contracted to the OPCW and will, I presume, therefore say nothing in public. I don’t know how much the OPCW can say about the contents of the full (i.e. classified) report in public either.
VB
They may have to make some kind of statement if a member state with sight of the full report is disputing the content of the summary they published.
1 Like
3 Likes
Ffs, You got that drivel from RT News…
1 Like
“…The RAF confirmed it was a simple run, as they simply sent the cruise missiles to the same addresses as our exporters send their invoices…” 
4 Likes
Out of interest, which bastions of impartial journalistic integrity are you recommending I use?
Washington Post perhaps?
I genuinely hope they will. Surely the whole point of having the OPCW is that all the politicians are completely untrustworthy. I guess they are now trying to balance the embarrassment of staying silent against the fact that they will be locked out of Porton Down or the equivalent Russian plants if they start talking without the respective politicans’ agreement.
VB
1 Like
The haste of all this is what gives it away. It’s been one lie after another. They really didn’t want to have to wait until the OPCW had been to Douma.
1 Like
So there wasn’t a chemical attack in Douma?
If there was it was marginally more effective than the attack in Salisbury.
Personally, I don’t see what the issue is. The regime slaughters 200,000 and displaces millions, without us getting involved directly. Bullets, hunger, shells, thirst, disease, lack of medicine, bombing and rape all seem to be admissible, but we’re fussy about gassing. The dead are equally dead, and this intervention is likely to be as effective as the last.
What has this changed?
10 Likes
Indeed, what is the line that has been crossed? Do we really have a line where he can merrily kill hundreds of thousands, but if he uses some particular ways to do so to a few dozen, suddenly it’s bad?
2 Likes
Don’t start with red lines. They are bad enough with Brexit. 
1 Like