Nicola Barley wrote:Wow indeed…
Firstly I would kindly request that you do not misquote, deliberately or accidentally, what I said about Corbyn.
Firstly, I'll apologise for the misquote, it certainly wasn't deliberate. I was a little confused by the point you were trying to make. (It was the "where else!" that threw me). Seemingly you are suggesting a link between two suicides. I find that a little ironic given your insistence on hard evidence, of which I would suggest you have none.
Moving on, you state that it is obvious that both the UK and US have the ability to produce Novichok. That is again an enormous assumption on your part. It simply is not the case that knowing the molecular structure of a compound automatically means you can recreate it, or would even want to. You, however, have decided that we must possess Novichok, otherwise your theory falls apart.
Next, you insist Russia are "certainly not denying Novichok was invented in the USSR".
https://www.yahoo.com/news/moscow-warns-retaliation-against-britains-measures-over-spy-110703775.html
But deputy foreign minister Sergei Ryabkov said Moscow never had any such programme.
"I want to state with all possible certainty that the Soviet Union or Russia had no programmes to develop a toxic agent called Novichok," he told Interfax news agency.
Seems pretty clear to me. What is important here is that your argument for believing we possess Novichok is based upon the testimony (and book) of Mil Mirzayanov, the director of a program the Russians deny existed. Either they are lying, or Mirzayanov is a fraud (which he isn't).
You swiftly brush aside the numerous cases of Russian aggression, and blatant lying, and try to justify the invasion of a neighbour because they couldn't have a referendum. Simply astonishing, but of course if you don't want to see the obvious pattern emerging here.
So yes, I do think you are defending the indefensible. You wilfully ignore the fact that Russia had the motive and the means the launch this attack, indeed they are probably the only country who could. And let's not forget they have form for this kind of thing. However, some people will continue to ignore what is staring them in the face, and instead try to create increasingly far-fetched scenarios in order to shift the blame away from Putin and onto the someone else, namely the UK and US. Why? Because this incident blows an enormous hole in Jeremy Corbin's national security strategy. And seemingly getting Jeremy into number 10 trumps all other considerations.