GR, with BEagle on this. The more I see that chemical decontamination video the more false it seems.
When doused in an unknown chemical one's first reaction is to strip off your clothes and then douse with water. In the video was this a second wash down? Those doing the washing took no precautions against contamination. Now it should not be a case of untrained and unknowing civilians treating the casualties, chemical has supposedly been in use in the region for years. They should be aware of precautions. |
Originally Posted by ORAC
(Post 10115518)
Grauniad: “Military officials in all three capitals insisted the bomb had been dropped from one of two Syrian government helicopters that had taken off from the Dumayr airbase north of Douma 30 minutes earlier. Its flight path was mapped.“.....
Flight path on the map actually means nothing. As it already happened several times in the past, as soon as syrian jihaddists, being at the edge of survival, see any plane in the sky (Syrian, Russian), they blow up a barrel with chemicals on the ground and start shouting about "bombing". Then immediately arrives poorly staged "theatre" with clowns such as "white helmets" and the shout is being amplified. Some 40 tons of chemicals have been totally found on the territories that were freed from terrorists, but non of the "western criers" arrived to see them. And that particular recent case in the Douma city/village seems even more questionable. A question arises whether there was any barrel at all. |
Originally Posted by Pontius Navigator
(Post 10115590)
GR, with BEagle on this. The more I see that chemical decontamination video the more false it seems.
When doused in an unknown chemical one's first reaction is to strip off your clothes and then douse with water. In the video was this a second wash down? Those doing the washing took no precautions against contamination. Now it should not be a case of untrained and unknowing civilians treating the casualties, chemical has supposedly been in use in the region for years. They should be aware of precautions. TBH [and fair] WHAT CIVIL DEFENCE ORGANISATION is there to organise a response. I have a feeling that making the local population AWARE of the RISKS at PD has not been a priority for the Civil Service. Would be interesting to see what the actual POLICY is both at PD and the local authorities. Probably lain dormant for many years.....you know how it is, no need to upset people, we haven't the budget etc, etc. |
glad rag, any 'evidence' must be beyond any doubt whatsoever. That Novichok was used in Salisbury might have been confirmed by Porton Down specialists, but where is the smoking gun of state involvement?
Quite plausible that 'someone' obtained the substance without the knowledge of the Russian state, but why on earth Russia hasn't been allowed to become involved in the investigation? I listen to the bluster from that bag of wind who is allegedly our Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs with despair and haven't trusted a single utterance from him ever since his flawed propaganda at the time of the 2016 plebiscite. If someone uses something as a weapon, you need 100% proof before considering action. That's the same whether the weapon is stolen nerve agent, a barrel of bleach or whatever. If Mother MayDay denies MPs a vote after having presented whatever evidence she claims to have, she must face a vote of no confidence. |
The test in the criminal law is "the jury must be sure of guilt".
I am sure the Russian State was involved in the poisoning of the Skripals, just as i am sure it was involved in the murder of Litvinenko. Percentages do not come into it. Either one is sure or one is not. The tenor of your posts on this issue suggest you are not sure. |
Originally Posted by BEagle
(Post 10115636)
glad rag, any 'evidence' must be beyond any doubt whatsoever. That Novichok was used in Salisbury might have been confirmed by Porton Down specialists, but where is the smoking gun of state involvement?
Quite plausible that 'someone' obtained the substance without the knowledge of the Russian state, but why on earth Russia hasn't been allowed to become involved in the investigation? I listen to the bluster from that bag of wind who is allegedly our Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs with despair and haven't trusted a single utterance from him ever since his flawed propaganda at the time of the 2016 plebiscite. If someone uses something as a weapon, you need 100% proof before considering action. That's the same whether the weapon is stolen nerve agent, a barrel of bleach or whatever. If Mother MayDay denies MPs a vote after having presented whatever evidence she claims to have, she must face a vote of no confidence. Prove that the nerve agent was stolen then. |
Originally Posted by Heathrow Harry
(Post 10115408)
"“We have planes on the tarmac in Akrotiri,” a Whitehall source said. “We are ready.”...."
If I was Assad I 'd tell the Govt of Cyprus that any strike from Akrotiri would mean Syria would retaliate - and there might well be collateral casualties in the local population... Not only would it murder the tourist trade it would almost certainly stir up calls to close the bases........... and I don't think we really want that do we?? Then this conflict could spread and the end game could involve nuclear weapons. |
Originally Posted by glad rag
(Post 10115686)
Prove that the nerve agent was stolen then.
Motive? tick Means? tick Opportunity? tick Either Russia did the Novichok job, or allowed some other agency to do it. The creeping normalisation of such means must be stopped. Syria is yet another example. |
It appears that the Russian and US military are talking. Perhaps like the North Koreans, they do not want to call Trump's bluff.
Meanwhile the Telegraph posts Boris Johnson has said the the Kremlin “must give answers” after an international watchdog confirmed that Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia were poisoned with a "high purity" strain of Novichok nerve agent in Salisbury. The Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons said that it had been able to “confirm” the findings of British scientists about the nerve agent. It represents a significant boost to Theresa May, who has said that Russia was directly responsible for the attack. Mr Johnson said that only Russia has the “means, motive and record” to have carried out the attack. |
Originally Posted by roving
(Post 10115727)
It appears that the Russian and US military are talking. Perhaps like the North Koreans, they do not want to call Trump's bluff.
Meanwhile the Telegraph posts https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...chok-chemical/ Porton Down experts can't say anythingabout the origin of the nerve agent (if any) https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/apr/03/porton-down-experts-unable-to-verify-precise-source-of-novichok And who is that strange guy (the one that does not have a hair comb ) to make conclusions? A Nobel prize chemistry scientist? Just a populist. The same about the lady who studied geography at the university and then worked in the banking sector. Looks like they soon will start talking about jet fighters and missiles :-) |
This seems to fit the bill.
The duck test is a form of abductive reasoning. This is its usual expression: If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck. The test implies that a person can identify an unknown subject by observing that subject's habitual characteristics. It is sometimes used to counter abstruse, or even valid, arguments that something is not what it appears to be. |
Either Russia did the Novichok job, or allowed some other agency to do it. Meanwhile, Boris-the-bull$hitter has been uttering his usual Trump-level crass non-diplomatic nonsense. Mother MayDay's government really does us no favours at present. |
The UK government is facing the biggest crisis since WW2 in Brexit and what does it do - gets involved in the Middle East which is nothing to do with us.
As for moral high ground we were busy using chemical weapons before Putin was born. And as for the USA -remember agent orange in Vietnam, Not that I am cynical but..... |
Originally Posted by roving
(Post 10115680)
The test in the criminal law is "the jury must be sure of guilt".
I am sure the Russian State was involved in the poisoning of the Skripals, just as i am sure it was involved in the murder of Litvinenko. Percentages do not come into it. Either one is sure or one is not. The tenor of your posts on this issue suggest you are not sure. Even if there's 0.01% doubt then the accused must be acquitted. All of the burden of proof is on the prosecution, the defence is innocent by default and it's perfectly acceptable for them to remain silent, their silence can't be interpreted as guilt. A Judge once said to us that our [criminal] law is happy for criminals to slip through the net rather than send one innocent man to prison. |
Originally Posted by pax britanica
(Post 10115854)
The UK government is facing the biggest crisis since WW2 in Brexit and what does it do - gets involved in the Middle East which is nothing to do with us.
As for moral high ground we were busy using chemical weapons before Putin was born. And as for the USA -remember agent orange in Vietnam, Not that I am cynical but..... |
Originally Posted by gr4techie
(Post 10115888)
It's actually the prosecution must prove guilty beyond all doubt.
Even if there's 0.01% doubt then the accused must be acquitted. All of the burden of proof is on the prosecution, the defence is innocent by default and it's perfectly acceptable for them to remain silent, their silence can't be interpreted as guilt. A Judge once said to us that our [criminal] law is happy for criminals to slip through the net rather than send one innocent man to prison. then it would be a pretty open and shut case. |
Originally Posted by pax britanica
(Post 10115854)
The UK government is facing the biggest crisis since WW2 in Brexit and what does it do - gets involved in the Middle East which is nothing to do with us.
|
Originally Posted by gr4techie
(Post 10115888)
It's actually the prosecution must prove guilty beyond all doubt.
Even if there's 0.01% doubt then the accused must be acquitted. All of the burden of proof is on the prosecution, the defence is innocent by default and it's perfectly acceptable for them to remain silent, their silence can't be interpreted as guilt. A Judge once said to us that our [criminal] law is happy for criminals to slip through the net rather than send one innocent man to prison. Historically the test was ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ not ‘all doubt’ Also a jury may be invited to draw ‘proper inferences’ from the accused’s silence both in the Police interview and also at his Trial (Criminal Justice and Public Order Act SS 34&35) and, unsurprisingly, those inferences are invariably adverse. |
GR4 - surely the prosecution must only prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, not 100% doubt?
If the Russian state is innocent then why did they not rush to show solidarity and immediately offer assistance? Instead they resorted to playground comments, ad hominem attacks and deliberate misinformation. Not the actions of an innocent bystander. |
Those two stories are such obvious fakes, that today everybody, from France to US, has been beck-pedalling.
Strikes will happen... one day. But not tomorrow. And regarding UK and Teresa May, a big factor is not to let the British public realise that their country is following France, lagging behind in resolution to strike. A sort of competition, if you like. |
All times are GMT. The time now is 09:52. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.