Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Salisbury nerve agent attack a false flag/decoy operation?

Options
12357…10

Comments

  • Options
    #122
    Chrongen
    Registered Users Posts: 1,304 ✭✭✭Chrongen


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    Why would they kill her cousin?

    1. She's clearly on the same side as the Kremlin trying to get Yulia back to Russia
    2. She thinks they were poisoned by fish (among other changeable theories)
    3. It would make no political sense whatsoever to "off" Viktoria

    Anyway, Yulia has made her stance pretty clear, Viktoria will fade (has already faded) into the background

    How is she "clearly" on the same side as the Kremlin? Can you "clear" this up? I don't see how she is clearly on the side of anybody. What do you know that you would like to impart?


  • Options
    #123
    Chrongen
    Registered Users Posts: 1,304 ✭✭✭Chrongen


    And why has the Fentanyl report been scrubbed from the record?

    http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/49324.htm

    I'm asking people to just check the veracity of the sources within the article rather than to just lazily scoff at the article.

    I scoff at Wikipedia but it is because sources cannot be verified. I will read a Daily Mail or Fox News article without dismissing it until such time as it becomes patently obvious that the meat of the article is peppered with conjecture, vague language, innuendo and unnamed "sources".

    The Skripal case ought to continue to be front and centre and the contradictions and inconsistencies ought to be scrutinised and hammered out. Not allowed to fade from view.

    Donald Rumsfeld stated on camera that "we have FOUND the WMD's" only it was a lie. A lie that was allowed to wither and die on the vine because people don't want to persevere with uncovering nasty truths. It's easier to forget it, to wish it away and just stick to the original bullsh1t myth.


  • Options
    #124
    Chrongen
    Registered Users Posts: 1,304 ✭✭✭Chrongen


    And on top of things we have the UK media blackout on this entire abyssmal affair.

    http://tass.com/politics/1002502

    Zakharova is a brilliant woman, educated, focused, methodical, intelligent and most importantly she doesn't suffer bull****ters. She DEMANDS facts unlike the saps in Whitehall and the clownish statements from Teresa May and that national embarrassment, Boris Johnson.

    I can just imagine the idiots who are trying to sell this crap attempting to fob it off to someone like Roy Keane.
    I can just imagine the squints and the "what the fcuk are you talking about? You expect me to believe dat sh1t? Is that your story?"

    :pac:


  • Options
    #125
    Chrongen
    Registered Users Posts: 1,304 ✭✭✭Chrongen


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    "LAW and INTERNATIONAL PROTOCOL." as you put it is not important to Putin.



    Probably a few. We don't know the contents of the private dossier so I can't comment on it. I have to use words like "probably" to indicate that. It's typical of people with no valid counter-argument to engage in wordplay and semantics



    It is how the world works, they can kick out diplomats. They can make the decision based on intelligence. They don't require validation from internet posters.

    Well let's examine what you have just spat out.

    1, It's acceptable to bypass International Protocol because someone else, as you claim, does so or might have done so.

    2. This International Protocol can be ignored on a whim.

    3. Anybody who questions the random scrapping of International Law is a Russian spy.

    4. The UK can expel foreign diplomats on the grounds of suspicion?

    5. That is an exemplary example of the breach of ALL international protocol and if that is too complex for you to absorb, then I'm quite sorry for your deficit of what one would call "a grasp on reality, and independent thinking"

    6. I will bring this all the way down to the kindergarten level. If you were caught stealing biscuits or berries or a few coins from your Dad's jacket.....AND were accused [even though you ate those biscuits or spent those coins] and you were punished, found guilty, vilified, exposed as a scoundrel.......and the punishment was delivered and nobody believed your story...


    Why would you continue to protest and defend your innocence?
    If you were guilty wouldn't you just say "Fcuk it, caught" and if you were not guilty wouldn't you fight for redress?


  • Options
    #126
    Chrongen
    Registered Users Posts: 1,304 ✭✭✭Chrongen


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    Why would they kill her cousin?

    1. She's clearly on the same side as the Kremlin trying to get Yulia back to Russia
    2. She thinks they were poisoned by fish (among other changeable theories)
    3. It would make no political sense whatsoever to "off" Viktoria

    Anyway, Yulia has made her stance pretty clear, Viktoria will fade (has already faded) into the background


    Why would they kill her father?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #127
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,815 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Chrongen wrote: »
    And just to follow up on your "red flag" over my expression of doubt...why WOULDN'T I have some doubts?

    It's simple mathematics. Growing up I was told that 6 million Jews died in the Holocaust. There were plaques at Auschwitz stating that 4 million died there. Then in 1989 this figure was downgraded to between 1.1 and 1.5 million. That's almost 3 million LESS yet the official figure still stands at 6 million.

    I'm as much a hater of white-supremacist troglodytes as anyone with a brain can be so please don't accuse me of buying into their filth but objectively looking at these numerical adjustments why would I be wrong in my skepticism?

    6 million minus 3 million is still 6 million?

    It seems that a child could question this without being accused of anti-Semitism yet you and others are so terrified of the label that you will flatly refuse to consider the anomaly for fear of being "offensive" or indeed being accused of being a "Holocaust denier", a label that was quite quickly attributed to me and indeed condoned by yourself.

    Do you question e.g. the number of Soviet POW deaths during the Holocaust, or do you just single out the Jewish figures?


  • Options
    #128
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,815 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Chrongen wrote: »
    Why would they kill her father?



    He was a double agent. He outed over 300 Russian intelligence officers. He was continuing to give intelligence to the UK and other nations. Putin has spoken very frankly about how he views "betrayal".

    In 2006 they basically granted themselves legal permission to kill "extremists", several months later they poisoned Litvinenko (another spy) with Polonium. It's not like this hasn't happened before.


  • Options
    #129
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,815 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Chrongen wrote: »

    5. That is an exemplary example of the breach of ALL international protocol and if that is too complex for you to absorb, then I'm quite sorry for your deficit of what one would call "a grasp on reality, and independent thinking"

    Putin repeatedly ignores and flouts international rules and laws. This is the main issue currently. Countries are getting tired of it. For example, the UK recently stated they will start going on the offensive re cyber-security, why? because being defensive is achieving nothing

    These leaders are not going to sit by while Putin conducts "hybrid warfare" and attempts to have people murdered with chemical weapons on their soil just so he can appease the nationalists domestically

    They are pushing back, and the sanctions and expulsions are a part of it. It's perfectly legal and well within their rights to do so.


  • Options
    #130
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,229 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Chrongen wrote: »
    And just to follow up on your "red flag" over my expression of doubt...why WOULDN'T I have some doubts?

    It's simple mathematics. Growing up I was told that 6 million Jews died in the Holocaust. There were plaques at Auschwitz stating that 4 million died there. Then in 1989 this figure was downgraded to between 1.1 and 1.5 million. That's almost 3 million LESS yet the official figure still stands at 6 million.

    I'm as much a hater of white-supremacist troglodytes as anyone with a brain can be so please don't accuse me of buying into their filth but objectively looking at these numerical adjustments why would I be wrong in my skepticism?

    6 million minus 3 million is still 6 million?

    It seems that a child could question this without being accused of anti-Semitism yet you and others are so terrified of the label that you will flatly refuse to consider the anomaly for fear of being "offensive" or indeed being accused of being a "Holocaust denier", a label that was quite quickly attributed to me and indeed condoned by yourself.
    You say that you don't buy into the narrative of racists and holocaust deniers.
    But then you parrot exactly one of their canards.

    Have you ever tried to look into the origin of those various numbers at all?
    Or did you stop at the youtube video that claimed them?

    This kind of "questioning" - parroting factoids that deny the reality of the holocaust- is holocaust denial.
    Yours might be a lesser form than those who say the whole thing is faked, but it's in the same neighbourhood.


  • Options
    #131
    Cheerful Spring
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    He was a double agent. He outed over 300 Russian intelligence officers. He was continuing to give intelligence to the UK and other nations. Putin has spoken very frankly about how he views "betrayal".

    In 2006 they basically granted themselves legal permission to kill "extremists", several months later they poisoned Litvinenko (another spy) with Polonium. It's not like this hasn't happened before.

    Dohnjoe continues to ignore the other incident before Litvinenko got poisoned. There was another person poisoned before Litvinenko met the former KGB agents.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #132
    Cheerful Spring
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    He was a double agent. He outed over 300 Russian intelligence officers. He was continuing to give intelligence to the UK and other nations. Putin has spoken very frankly about how he views "betrayal".

    In 2006 they basically granted themselves legal permission to kill "extremists", several months later they poisoned Litvinenko (another spy) with Polonium. It's not like this hasn't happened before.

    And yet Putin denied Russia did this 4 times already.

    Skipral was in prison in Russia for 5 years. If Russia wanted him dead why they do not kill him then. Oh they hatched this secret plan to get him later:confused:


  • Options
    #133
    Chrongen
    Registered Users Posts: 1,304 ✭✭✭Chrongen


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    Do you question e.g. the number of Soviet POW deaths during the Holocaust, or do you just single out the Jewish figures?

    I might do.

    What has your question got to do with my skepticism regarding the numbers who were murdered in the Holocaust?

    I'd like to know why you are completely changing the subject.

    This discussion is about the Salisbury case. The Holocaust was brought up. I expressed that I had doubts about the numbers killed and then insisted that the conversation go BACK to the Salisbury affair.

    Since then I have been accused of being a Holocaust denier by King Mob and this accusation has been tacitly tolerated by you.

    And you're ONLINE King Mob, I see the little green light, you just hide rather than man up to your disgusting accusations.


  • Options
    #134
    Chrongen
    Registered Users Posts: 1,304 ✭✭✭Chrongen


    King Mob wrote: »
    You say that you don't buy into the narrative of racists and holocaust deniers.
    But then you parrot exactly one of their canards.

    Have you ever tried to look into the origin of those various numbers at all?
    Or did you stop at the youtube video that claimed them?

    This kind of "questioning" - parroting factoids that deny the reality of the holocaust- is holocaust denial.
    Yours might be a lesser form than those who say the whole thing is faked, but it's in the same neighbourhood.

    I already advised you to choose your words VERY carefully and it seems you haven't taken that advice on board.

    You are consistently attempting to insinuate that I am a Holocaust denier.

    I will ask this very simple question, and I have made it known to moderators, ARE you calling me a Holocaust denier?


  • Options
    #135
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,229 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    I'm sorry, I thought I was clear

    What you are doing is a form of holocaust denial.
    You are not "questioning". You are repeating tired arguments from holocaust deniers without critical thought.
    For example your argument about the numbers from Auschwitz is easily debunked by looking up where those numbers come from.
    It is obvious you have not done this and instead subscribe to the nonsense conspiracy that all historians are complicit in inflating the number of people who died.
    This is holocaust denial in my eyes and in the eyes of historians and in the law.

    So yea, you're a holocaust denier whether you like that label or not.

    If you don't like that label, don't claim parts of the holocaust didn't happen based on crap you heard in a YouTube video or read in a David Irving book.


  • Options
    #136
    mcmoustache
    Registered Users Posts: 7,236 ✭✭✭mcmoustache


    Chrongen wrote: »
    mcmoustache,

    Would you like to wade in here an tell people that this is a discussion about Salisbury?

    You were quick to say so a few posts ago.

    Now?

    I haven't looked at this trainwreck in a few days but I still stand by what I said - this holocaust stuff should have its own thread.


  • Options
    #137
    mcmoustache
    Registered Users Posts: 7,236 ✭✭✭mcmoustache


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    He was a double agent. He outed over 300 Russian intelligence officers. He was continuing to give intelligence to the UK and other nations. Putin has spoken very frankly about how he views "betrayal".

    In 2006 they basically granted themselves legal permission to kill "extremists", several months later they poisoned Litvinenko (another spy) with Polonium. It's not like this hasn't happened before.

    Some people will actually pretend that it never happened. I'm sure that there are even people out there who'll claim that Georgi Markov wasn't killed by the KGB.


  • Options
    #138
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,815 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Cheerful Spring wrote: »
    Skipral was in prison in Russia for 5 years. If Russia wanted him dead why they do not kill him then. Oh they hatched this secret plan to get him later:confused:

    Yup, when they had in their custody he wasn't giving UK and other countries intelligence. They also used him as collateral for a spy swap. Actually they didn't want to hand him over but the UK insisted

    Putin has no real opposition in Russia, a meek press, a sycophantic parliament - there are few mechanisms to hold Putin (and his cronies) to account, the biggest threat they face are spies, double agents and whistle-blowers (e.g.exposing the national doping)

    Killing a spy with Polonium or a specific Russian nerve agent sends a particular message - the Russian state can murder anyone, anywhere, leave a trademark and do it with impunity

    A pretty strong message. Anyone thinking of spilling secrets will think twice.


  • Options
    #139
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,815 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Chrongen wrote: »
    Holocaust denier.

    Few Holocaust "deniers" actually completely deny the event happened, most engage in selective revisionism (like Irving) whereby they focus only on the numbers of Jewish figures and try to "round them down" using various techniques

    However at no point in this equation are these types of people motivated by genuine confusion or a genuine interest in history. It's symptomatic of their views or beliefs.

    When it's "casually" mentioned in a thread as if it were nothing and then dismissed - yeah it's a red flag.


  • Options
    #140
    Cheerful Spring
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    Yup, when they had in their custody he wasn't giving UK and other countries intelligence. They also used him as collateral for a spy swap. Actually they didn't want to hand him over but the UK insisted

    Putin has no real opposition in Russia, a meek press, a sycophantic parliament - there are few mechanisms to hold Putin (and his cronies) to account, the biggest threat they face are spies, double agents and whistle-blowers (e.g.exposing the national doping)

    Killing a spy with Polonium or a specific Russian nerve agent sends a particular message - the Russian state can murder anyone, anywhere, leave a trademark and do it with impunity

    A pretty strong message. Anyone thinking of spilling secrets will think twice.

    Nobody sane believes Putin ordered this attempt on Skipral. Only far right and far left fanatics who think that. Russia only sane voice in the world left. We live in dangerous times when Russia is the voice of reasoning, rational thought and logic.


  • Options
    #141
    Cheerful Spring
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    Few Holocaust "deniers" actually completely deny the event happened, most engage in selective revisionism (like Irving) whereby they focus only on the numbers of Jewish figures and try to "round them down" using various techniques

    However at no point in this equation are these types of people motivated by genuine confusion or a genuine interest in history. It's symptomatic of their views or beliefs.

    When it's "casually" mentioned in a thread as if it were nothing and then dismissed - yeah it's a red flag.

    Sure mate according to you.There nothing wrong with questioning history. The 6 million figure is rubbish, for me only proves you believe everything you hear from sources you trust in. You kind of person who would get on very well in Nazi Germany. You buy into that propaganda without a thought given and not question it.

    Just a different face to today everyone who sees what happening in Syria ie west supporting jihadists scum is called a Russia bot is working for Russia, when they question the narrative.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #142
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,815 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Cheerful Spring wrote: »
    Russia only sane voice in the world left.
    The 6 million figure is rubbish

    Indeed..

    "President Vladimir Putin spoke out against attempts to deny the Holocaust at the Jewish Museum and Tolerance Center in Moscow on Monday."

    https://themoscowtimes.com/news/putin-speaks-against-holocaust-denial-and-anti-semitism-60326


  • Options
    #143
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 82,083 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Cheerful Spring wrote: »
    Nobody sane believes Putin ordered this attempt on Skipral. Only far right and far left fanatics who think that. Russia only sane voice in the world left. We live in dangerous times when Russia is the voice of reasoning, rational thought and logic.

    Couple of logical fallacies there, I think everyone would agree.

    Please post more constructively: your post does nothing substantive to repudiate the notion that Putin may have ordered the attempt on Skipral. Whomever believes or thinks that is irrelevant: you've done nothing to establish that it isn't the case, and in turn have pulled some argumentum ad hominem in there, implying that anyone that should believe such a thing is insane, far right, or far left lunatics, and thus have damaged credibility. A more constructive way of getting the same message across, standing behind your own words and not cowering behind the bandwagon of so-implied sane moderates, would have been, "I don't believe that. /sips tea"

    (If you have any questions about this, hit up my inbox)


  • Options
    #144
    Chrongen
    Registered Users Posts: 1,304 ✭✭✭Chrongen


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    Yup, when they had in their custody he wasn't giving UK and other countries intelligence. They also used him as collateral for a spy swap. Actually they didn't want to hand him over but the UK insisted

    Putin has no real opposition in Russia, a meek press, a sycophantic parliament - there are few mechanisms to hold Putin (and his cronies) to account, the biggest threat they face are spies, double agents and whistle-blowers (e.g.exposing the national doping)

    Killing a spy with Polonium or a specific Russian nerve agent sends a particular message - the Russian state can murder anyone, anywhere, leave a trademark and do it with impunity

    A pretty strong message. Anyone thinking of spilling secrets will think twice.

    Dohnjoe, I would like you to step back for a moment and take a breath.


    If you had hundreds of billions at your disposal including an army the size or Dublin;s population AND methods which have put the first man and woman in space. If you had enough missiles to crack the planet in half (so we are led to believe) ... if you had all these things, would you use a crappy poison to "off" someone that had to be killed?

    I can understand the Mafia getting it wrong.....maybe the gun jams or the pizza delivery boy with the shabby bomb cracks up.

    The Russians botched a hit?

    Are you serious?

    The IRA had a better kill ratio with homemade explosives than the Russian apparently.


  • Options
    #145
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,815 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Chrongen wrote: »

    The Russians botched a hit?

    Yup, looks that way. They took several tries to murder Litvinenko, the suspects were clumsy as hell, and they left a trail of easy-to-trace Polonium everywhere

    With the Skripal attempt, the current theory is that the dosage was supposed to leave the assassins several hours to leave the country. Appears they have misjudged (although we don't know exactly what the permanent long term damage will be to Sergei and Yulia - others who have been exposed to Novichok have lived for over a year, but with deteriorating health which resulted in death, it's a particularly gruesome method of assassination)

    Perhaps that was the intention. It was most certainly the intention with Litvinenko


  • Options
    #146
    Cheerful Spring
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    Overheal wrote: »

    Couple of logical fallacies there, I think everyone would agree.

    Please post more constructively: your post does nothing substantive to repudiate the notion that Putin may have ordered the attempt on Skipral. Whomever believes or thinks that is irrelevant: you've done nothing to establish that it isn't the case, and in turn have pulled some argumentum ad hominem in there, implying that anyone that should believe such a thing is insane, far right, or far left lunatics, and thus have damaged credibility. A more constructive way of getting the same message across, standing behind your own words and not cowering behind the bandwagon of so-implied sane moderates, would have been, "I don't believe that. /sips tea"

    (If you have any questions about this, hit up my inbox)

    UK government was telling lies from the very beginning when they claimed Porton Down ( UK chemical military laboratory) had identified the source of the nerve agent was made in Russia. We later learned Porton Down did not make this claim, they were caught out in a big lie. Porton Down only identified the chemical structure of the nerve agent called Novitchok, they could identify the source. How can the UK identify a nerve agent in 48 hours when they claimed only Russia could make it, and they only had, contradictions everywhere.

    Russians had him in custody for years he was irrelevant by the time they gave him back to the UK in 2010. He lived in the UK for 8 years. Russia would have carried out this operation quieter to avoid detection and avoid the big media circus, in my view whoever did this wanted to blame Russia. Russia would not use a nerve agent that can so easily be blamed on them.The timing is also is suspicious just before Russian presidential election and the world cup held in Russia.

    Skipral was working for MI6 who are well known to double cross spies in the field. This very same MI6 according to UVF commander tried to get them to murder our Taoiseach Charles Haughey and he refused.MI6 experience in Northern Ireland should tell all you need to know about this group. When international relations between the UK and Russia are all-time low over Ukraine and Syria, double dealings and false flags are going to be common place.


  • Options
    #147
    Cheerful Spring
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    Yup, looks that way. They took several tries to murder Litvinenko, the suspects were clumsy as hell, and they left a trail of easy-to-trace Polonium everywhere

    With the Skripal attempt, the current theory is that the dosage was supposed to leave the assassins several hours to leave the country. Appears they have misjudged (although we don't know exactly what the permanent long term damage will be to Sergei and Yulia - others who have been exposed to Novichok have lived for over a year, but with deteriorating health which resulted in death, it's a particularly gruesome method of assassination)

    Perhaps that was the intention. It was most certainly the intention with Litvinenko

    Several attempts what the source of that information?

    You ignoring a huge flaw in the case against the former Russia KGB agents. Litvinenko met with Mario Scaramella before he met the Russians and he too was poisoned with Polonium 210. Not possible they could have poisoned him when they were on another side of London staying at a hotel. Mario Scaramella also arrived in London from the same airport days before meeting Litvinenko. Mario has ties to the CIA.


  • Options
    #148
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,815 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Cheerful Spring wrote: »
    UK government was telling lies from the very beginning when they claimed Porton Down ( UK chemical military laboratory) had identified the source of the nerve agent was made in Russia.

    The UK government generally used the term "highly likely"

    In one interview Boris Johnson didn't
    We later learned Porton Down did not make this claim, they were caught out in a big lie.

    So this is false
    How can the UK identify a nerve agent in 48 hours when they claimed only Russia could make it, and they only had, contradictions everywhere.

    No contradictions. And their findings were backed up by the OPCW.

    The timing is also is suspicious just before Russian presidential election

    Didn't affect Putin in the slightest - in fact he got his highest result to date
    When international relations between the UK and Russia are all-time low over Ukraine and Syria, double dealings and false flags are going to be common place.

    Random guesswork and personal assumptions


  • Options
    #149
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,815 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Cheerful Spring wrote: »
    Several attempts what the source of that information?

    The investigation into the case - poisoned on the third attempt
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jan/21/key-findings-who-killed-alexander-litvinenko-how-and-why


  • Options
    #150
    jimmycrackcorm
    Registered Users Posts: 14,331 ✭✭✭✭jimmycrackcorm


    Cheerful Spring wrote:
    UK government was telling lies from the very beginning when they claimed Porton Down ( UK chemical military laboratory) had identified the source .


    Your attempts to twist the facts just make the anti western agenda all the more transparent.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #151
    Cheerful Spring
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    The UK government generally used the term "highly likely"

    In one interview Boris Johnson didn't



    So this is false



    No contradictions. And their findings were backed up by the OPCW.


    Didn't affect Putin in the slightest - in fact he got his highest result to date



    Random guesswork and personal assumptions

    Rubbish the only country the UK claimed did was Russia when events unfolded. Later, the UK foreign office embarrassed deleted a tweet blaming Russia because they knew how silly it now looked. OPCW only confirmed the nerve agent, not who did it.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement