:Novochok so simple many labs could do it"

EXCL: CORNELL CHEMISTRY PROFESSOR: “NOVICHOK SO SIMPLE MANY LABS COULD DO IT”

Swawkbox,

5 April, 2018,

5 EXCL: CORNELL CHEMISTRY PROFESSOR: “NOVICHOK SO SIMPLE MANY LABS COULD DO IT”

05/04/2018 · by SKWAWKBOX · in Uncategorized. ·

Cornell University Professor of Organic Chemistry David Collum

Boris Johnson is on a hook of his own making after he was exposed as making a false claim in an interview that Porton Down chemical weapons facility had ‘categorically’ told him there was no doubt that Russia was the source of the poison used in the Salisbury attack. Porton Down’s CEO yesterday told Sky News that the facility had not identified the source.

Johnson’s embarrassment has been compounded by the revelation that the Foreign Office (FCO) – which initially dismissed Johnson’s falsehood by saying he ‘misspoke – had also tweeted the claim. The FCO deleted that tweet yesterday when Porton Down’s admission was garnering attention.

The PR/diversion exercise

The Establishment machine has kicked in to try to exonerate Johnson, with the BBC editing video to make Johnson’s lie less obvious and claiming that it can’t find footage it has only just shown.

The front page of the Times even ludicrously claimed that ‘Ministers and security officials” were suddenly able to identify not only the country of manufacture but the very laboratory it was made in.

Given the complete lack of substance provided before now – and the fact that the OPCW won’t even confirm what the substance is before next week – this sudden, extreme claim looks likely to be little more than a desperate reference to the “secret Novichok assassination programme” to which former ambassador Craig Murray referred during a video interview with Sky News on Wednesday.

The other key thrust of the PR exercise has been to ignore the fact of Johnson’s ‘fake news’ in favour of claiming that it must be Russia, as only a ‘state actor‘ could possibly manufacture a Novichok agent.

The chemistry professor

Cornell University is one of America’s ‘Ivy League’ educational institutions. As of 2017, it could claim fifty-six Nobel laureates and four Turing Award winners in its history.

So a claim by Cornell’s variously-published Professor of Organic Chemistry, David Collum, carries considerable weight.

And a week ago, Mr Cornell pre-emptively kicked the legs out from under the Establishment’s attempt to mask or excuse Johnson’s dishonesty.

The bombshell

Professor Collum’s dismissal of the ‘must be Russia’ line could not be more emphatic – but he was prepared to go even further when the SKWAWKBOX asked him to provide further information on what level of laboratory set-up would be required to manufacture a ‘Novichok or related agent’ – the description provided by the UK’s Porton Down facility.

He told us:

The compounds are simple as hell to make. Doing so without killing yourself would be more challenging but within the capabilities of many laboratories.

‘Simple as hell’.

Not only is it possible that a non-state facility could manufacture – many non-state laboratories could do it safely.

Contrary to the claims of the government and its apologists, even just among ‘state actors’ Russia is far from the only known manufacturer of Novichok compounds. The following countries have produced them, are on record as having purchased/received them, or are linked to them by academic texts:

Academic texts:

• Iran
• Iraq
• Syria
• Czech
• Russia
• Cuba
• Uzbekistan

Manufacturers:

• Uzbekistan 
• Iran
• Russia
• Czech

Purchasers/receivers:

• Iraq
• Cuba 
• Syria

But Professor Collum’s expert statement on the simplicity of fabricating Novichoks and the relative ease of manufacturing them safely blows the field of possible sources wide open.

The hastily-erected ring-fence of PR and false assertions around Boris Johnson lies in small pieces around him. His – and the government’s – dishonesty and intentional misleading of the UK’s people are as naked as a newborn.

He – and his boss – have no place in office.

VIDEO: FOREIGN OFFICE CAUGHT DOCTORING NOVICHOK STATEMENT TRANSCRIPT?

The Establishment has gone into overdrive over the last few days to cover for Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson, since the emergence of video footage showing Johnson claiming the Porton Down chemical weapons facility had been ‘absolutely categorical’ in telling him ‘there is no doubt’ that the source of the Salisbury toxin was Russia – and a bombshell admission by Porton Down’s CEO that they have not identified a source.

The Foreign Office (FCO) has deleted a tweet in which it had also claimed Porton Down had confirmed the Russian origin of the poison – while the BBC was caught, by this blog, obscuring the question Johnson was asked by the Deutsche Welle broadcaster in order to support a claim that his claim had been ‘equivocal’ or about the type, rather than a direct answer about the source of the toxin.

But those may not be the only examples of the Establishment’s attempts to muddy the waters about the FCO’s and its boss’ emphatic – and now disproven – claims.

On 22 March, the UK’s ambassador to Russia, Dr Laurie Bristow, made a speech to brief “the international diplomatic community in Moscow on the UK government’s response to the Salisbury attack”, according to the FCO (archived here).

The FCO helpfully provided a transcript of his speech under the bold claim:

But it wasn’t, quite.

The transcript of the speech omits a small word that completely changes the meaning of the passage from which it has disappeared:

‘[No] doubt that Novichok was produced in Russia‘ – the Russians deny even this is true, but this reads as a general claim that Russia at some point produced the toxin said to have been used in Salisbury.

But video of the ambassador’s speech shows conclusively that this is not ‘exactly as it was delivered’:

There is no doubt that the Novichok was was produced in Russia by the Russian state.

This makes the claim specific – that the Novichok used in Salisbury was made in Russia – and by the Russian state.

If this was an attempt by the FCO to fudge an initial claim of absolute certainty, they missed a bit – because further down the transcript we find:

If this was an attempt to whitewash the original claim, it was a bit ‘half-arsed’.

But then, given the government’s and Johnson’s handling of this issue so far, a half-arsed attempt at ‘tidying up’ in the wake of Johnson’s calamitous dishonesty would surprise very few people.

And the missing ‘the’ is far from the only obfuscation in the statement that poor Laurie Bristow was no doubted ordered to deliver from a script – he’s clearly reading it out – to the assembled international officials.

The statement also claims – as has every government mouthpiece from Westminster or the media – that:

Whereas, in fact, the expert organic chemistry professor David Collum of Cornell, one of the world’s leading universities, told the SKWAWKBOX:

Half-arsed cover-up – or an accidental omission in the middle of a ‘dog’s breakfast’ attempt to ‘sex up’ claims to justify action the government wanted to take for whatever political reason?

Neither inspires any confidence in a government that looks morally bankrupt and completely out of its depth.

Not to mention ever more terrified of a Labour leader who has lookedstatesmanlike, competent and composed in the teeth of fierce opposition and scurrilous attack – and in spite of every Establishment attempt to mock, undermine, ridicule or smear him.

And has been proven on the right side of a thorny issue yet again in his call for caution, respect for international law and evidence-based decisions.

The FCO was asked why the transcript did not reflect the actual speech but did not respond by the deadline for publication.