OPCW Head: Poison for Skripale could be produced anywhere in the world
From the conversation:
Premier: Good morning, dear CEO. How are you?
CEO: Very well, Mr. Prime Minister, how are you?
Premier: Thank you, well, but recent events can not but cause us extreme concern. In this regard, I call you. And I want to find out exactly what happened and I want to hear your opinion on the whole situation.
CEO: Of course you are interested in Syria?
Premier: Yes, the situation with Syria and poisoning in Salisbury, despite the fact that formally different things - are a link in one chain. We are firmly convinced that the organizers in Syria and in Salisbury should be punished at different levels, at the level of the organization of the OPCW and at the International Political.
CEO: I think that many Member States adhere to the same position, and I am pleased about that. Regarding the role of the OPCW, Mr. Prime Minister, the United Kingdom turned to us so that we could provide technical support, study samples and conduct analysis in our specially designated laboratories, which are very reliable. The work has been done and is currently complete. And the results, in fact, regarding the chemical that was used confirm the results that the British authorities had. We do not use the same name, but the chemical properties of the substance are completely identical from a chemical point of view. The formula is identical, etc. They call this substance “Novice”, we cannot call it also, since “Novice” is a term used by Western countries, it is not a universal name. And that is the only difference. This is similar to what water is called H2O. But our laboratory and experts did not have the mandate to determine the origin of this substance, its affiliation to any country, although Britain has its own position, because they may have additional information that we do not have. Our mandate was limited to determining the composition of the substance. But in any case, the analyzes showed no other substance in those samples that we studied and the results of which we have already stated. (...) In fact, our laboratory showed that the substance that we had was of a high degree of purity. This means that it could not have been done by terrorists or an organized group, or individuals. This means that it was made by real experts who have experience in this. This means that it could be done in a well-equipped laboratory. It could not be done anywhere else.
Premier: So you are not sure that it could be created by the state?
CEO: We cannot be sure, our experts cannot determine or disprove it, but they think it was made by real experts.
Premier: Ok. If this is a state, you understand, only Russia could have done this? If not only, do you have any opinion on what other countries could develop this substance? That is, theoretically, such opportunities exist both in Russia and in the UK, the USA, Ukraine and even Poland?
CEO: Mr Prime Minister, according to our experts, it can be produced in any country. This cannot be ruled out. Russia claims that the development of this substance was carried out somewhere else. This may also be true, but countries that can develop this substance could do it for the purpose of protection in order to create antidotes against this substance. In this case, the development of this substance is allowed (by our organization) and it is not necessary to notify them (OPCW). However, if these developments were carried out for industrial purposes and in order to use this substance against people in the form of chemical weapons, then of course you need to notify. But at the moment no one from the countries notified us that this substance was being developed by them.
Premier: That is, could be produced in any country?
CEO: Theoretically yes (...) Material for the production of this substance is available without any obstacles.
The full version of the conversation is presented on the YouTube channel of the Vovan222 pranker:
- http://www.globallookpress.com
Information