General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsUK scientists unable to prove Russia made nerve agent
The head of the British military facility analysing the Novichok nerve agent used to poison former Russian spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter said Tuesday it has "not identified the precise source" of the substance.
Gary Aitkenhead, chief executive of the Porton Down defence laboratory, told Britain's Sky News that analysts had identified it as military-grade Novichok, but they had not proved it was made in Russia.
"We have not identified the precise source, but we have provided the scientific info to government who have then used a number of other sources to piece together the conclusions," he said.
"It is our job to provide the scientific evidence of what this particular nerve agent is. We identified that it is from this particular family and that it is a military grade, but it is not our job to say where it was manufactured."
Aitkenhead added that "extremely sophisticated methods" were needed to create the nerve agent, and that was "something only in the capabilities of a state actor".
http://www.france24.com/en/20180403-uk-skripal-salisbury-russia-nerve-agent-novichok-porton-down
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)FarCenter
(19,429 posts)By, for example, knowledge of contaminants or residues from the reactions used to create precursors, etc.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)muriel_volestrangler
(101,368 posts)It's not that surprising. Sometimes you can prove amazing things, thanks to, say, isotope analysis of teeth and bones that show the area a person whose skeleton has been found grew up in. But you can't guarantee that kind of finding. That kind of detail would probably need plenty of samples of what you're examining from several sources. With a substance that is not well documented, there was always a significant likelihood they couldn't track it down that precisely.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)was "something only in the capabilities of a state actor".
Wouldnt that be a better headline? Hmmmmmm.
muriel_volestrangler
(101,368 posts)The headline in a news story is the most significant new development.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)They literally say they never name a source, so whats new or news here? Not their job.
muriel_volestrangler
(101,368 posts)bettyellen
(47,209 posts)What the article says. They only provide the scientific evidence- and are not there to make conclusions. Thats the governments job to do.
blake2012
(1,294 posts)bettyellen
(47,209 posts)Aitkenhead added that "extremely sophisticated methods" were needed to create the nerve agent, and that was "something only in the capabilities of a state actor".
FarCenter
(19,429 posts)What is the benchmark for "capabilities of a state actor"?
Suppose a non-state actor has $1,000,000,000 to spend?
Raster
(20,998 posts)...and serve as billionaires at the pleasure and with the permission of the Russian head of state.
FarCenter
(19,429 posts)bettyellen
(47,209 posts)Yet you seem to be insisting it is? Yeah, this is twisted. Bad headline, when you read past it. And twisted OP.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)In the blink of an eye. This is like Putin pretending the troll farms are not state sponsored.
FarCenter
(19,429 posts)You have an overly simplistic view of power structures within and outside of autocratic states.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)samir.g
(835 posts)or djinn