U.K. Prime Minister, Thereason May, referred to the British government’s
knowledge that Russia has previously produced this agent (i.e., novichok, the agent said to have poisoned Russian spy Sergei Skripal in Salisbury, England) and would still be capable of doing so”
Either this was a direct act by the Russian State against our country. Or the Russian government lost control of this potentially catastrophically damaging nerve agent and allowed it to get into the hands of others.Which raises the question: how stupid does she take the public to be?
Very, apparently, and probably correctly.
But for the sake of any of the no doubt intelligent people who come here, but have not yet bothered to figure out Brexit-burial, Thereason May's nerve-gas-attack lies, let's take a look at the logic.
Premise 1:
Russia has previously produced the nerve agent used in Britain last week.
Premise 2:
Russia is still capable of producing the nerve agent used in Britain last week.
Therefore:
1. Russia produced this agent.
or
2. Russia either used the agent that it had produced in the attack on Sergei Skripal in Salisbury, England, or allowed someone else to do so.
If those conclusions don't seem obviously stupid to you, consider the following entirely analogous argument:
Premise a:
Britain has previously produced poisonous gases
Premise b.
Britain is still capable of producing poisonous gases
Therefore:
a. Britain produced the poisonous gas used in Britain last week.
or
b. Britain either used the poisonous gas that it had produced in the attack on Sergei Skripal in Salisbury, England, or allowed someone else to do so.
Doesn't really make any sense, does it. Yet it's an precise analogy to May's claim.
The West really is going down the tubes if this silly woman, Thereason May, is the best liar we can come up with.
Related:
Zero Hedge: Kremlin calls Boris Johnson's accusation of Putin shocking and unforgivable diplomatic misconduct
Sputnik: Four Mysterious Deaths in the UK Authorities Probably Won't Be Reinvestigating
Russia Insider: ‘Fantasy Politics’: France Accuses May of Going After Russia Without Evidence
Moon of Alabama: Governments Decree 'Truth' About Skripal - Dissenters Will Be Punished
Principia Scientific: SHOCK: ‘Russia’ Spy Attack 8 Miles From Top UK Chem Weapons Base – Inside Job?
Almost as bad as Tony Blair and Saddam's WMDs David Kelly paid the price and a very useful painkiller was taken off the market. It takes 20 coproxamol to kill yourself. Mainly because of the depression of breathing. Not the paracetamol component. Yet they removed it. Why? because most doctors know that it is highly unlikely that the co proxamol killed him. We were taught about this in medical school about coproxamol overdoses. You can take 28 30 mg of codeine and not die. It might knock you out for a day but you won't die... And you'll be constipated. If you take alcohol with it then its more likely but 8 coproxamol in one go will not kill you.
ReplyDeleteThe more they say the same lines over and over again makes me more and more suspicious that it is a rehearsed lie.
Yes, I think 9/11 convinced the elite that they could fool the people about anything, while it convinced the people that the elite would lie about anything. How that fundamental contradiction will work itself out in the long run remains to be seen.
DeleteBut the big question is what is the point. If, in fact, the Russians attempted to assassinate a Russian in England, that would be obnoxious but hardly a matter for the great commotion we have witnessed. Therefore, it would seem that whether the Russians attempted to assassinate one of their own on British soil or someone else attempted to assassinate a Russian in British soil (or perhaps faked an attempt to assassinate a Russian in British soil), the implication seems to be that the event was designed as a trigger for intensified Western antagonism toward Russia. And if that is the case, the important question then is: to what end? Where does this lead? More economic sanctions on Russia seem possible, including perhaps, steps to terminate the NordStream pipeline intended to carry Russian natural gas to Germany and elsewhere in Western Europe. Who could possibly benefit from that? The US, obviously, in desperate need for an outlet for a surplus of natural gas, and which American producers want to sell liquified form to Europe at about three times the price of Russian pipeline gas.
DeleteOr perhaps the objective is simply the demonization of Russia prior to a war on Iran that would almost certainly bring the US/UK up against Russia with the risk of uncontrollable escalation.