ingliz wrote:It gets sillier.
According to Leonid Rink, the Soviet chemist who purportedly invented the poison, 100g of Novichok nerve agent would have killed Skripal and the entire town he lives in.
The Guardian articles show why the UK dropped from the 18th to the 40th position in the press freedom index. Another year of T. May's government and the UK will be at 3rd World level.
‘In an interview with the New York Times, Üzümcü said he had been told that about 50-100g of the nerve agent was thought to have been used in the attack in Salisbury.’
And
‘He said: “For research activities or protection you would need, for instance, five to 10 grams or so, but even in Salisbury it looks like they may have used more than that, without knowing the exact quantity, I am told it may be 50, 100 grams or so, which goes beyond research activities for protection.”’
In other words, the OPCW chief relates
what he has been told (by the British?). The Guardian, however, makes this sound as if it is his own assessment.
“One thing, perhaps, which is important to note is that the nerve agent seems to bevery persistent,” Üzümcü said. “It’s not affected by weather conditions. That explains, actually, that they were able to identify it after a considerable time lapse. We understand it was also of high purity.”
He is speculating about what "seems to be," hence he doesn't know a thing. Moreover, it is in direct contradictions to the claims of Vil Mirzayanov, who is considered in the West to be the "inventor" of the Novichoks. Mirzayanov said that the Novichoks are very volatile and are easily washed off by rain, "only an idiot would use Novichoks in the humid weather of the UK."
The MSM has again changed its story to explain away inconsistencies in the story.
In the former dictatorships in Eastern Europe, people became very skillful at
reading between the lines because they knew that the official media were lying. Authors learned how to write texts that would pass censorship while
conveying the real message between the lines. In the West we now have to learn that skill too.
A close reading of the Guardian article shows the contradictions in the article. Perhaps the Guardian journalists have already started to convey their meaning between the lines because they are not allow to write the truth.
PS: Even 100g of a substance isn't a chemical weapon. It's a laboratory sample. Chemical weapons are produced by the ton to fill munitions with for battle field use. From social media comments, they obviously realized the contradiction in their previous story that a laboratory sample is not a chemical weapon. Now they are trying to tweak their story, but only manage to get entangled in further lies. How the hell does one smear 100 ml of a liquid onto a single door knob?