This month the Coroners' Court announced the indefinite suspension of the inquest into the death of Dawn Sturgess. Ms. Sturgess was allegedly poisoned by deadly "developed-in-Russia" Novichok nerve agent carelessly discarded by Russian assassins intent on murdering Sergei Skripal and his daughter in the quiet English cathedral city of Salisbury.
Sergei Skripal was a Russian double agent, convicted of treason and jailed in Russia before being pardoned and released under a spy swap agreement.
Skripal's daughter, Yulia, was so far as the public has been informed, an innocent Russian citizen who happened to be visiting with her father when evil Putin's assassins arrived in England to dispatch him with Russian trade-marked nerve toxin.
Dawn Sturgess was the live-in friend of Charley Rowley, a scavenger who fished a perfume spray bottle containing Novichok that had been discarded in a public waste bin by Putin's assassins (so it is claimed by the ever trustworthy British authorities). Charley gave the deadly spray bottle to Ms. Sturgess who promptly sprayed herself to death, albeit unintentionally.
The official story of the death of Ms. Sturgess has always seemed questionable as we have discussed at length in a number of earlier posts. The indefinite suspension of the inquest into her death, raises the question of whether, in fact, Dawn Sturgess actually died.
Rather, it seems that the official account of the Skripal poisonings was a farrago of nonsense intended to smear Russia at the time that Russia was hosting the World Cup soccer tournament. In that case, Dawn Sturgess was most likely an actor in a idiotically badly planned false-flag event.
And if that were so, Dawn Sturgess was not a sad victim of Russian villainy, but a participant in a fraud on the public and a gratuitous assault on the reputation of the Russian Government. Further, it would mean that Dawn Sturgess is almost certainly now living under a different name, with the benefit of a face-lift and a new hair-do, all at the expense of a deceived British public.
Showing posts with label Skripal. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Skripal. Show all posts
Thursday, October 17, 2019
Tuesday, July 23, 2019
Were the Skripal Poisonings a British Intelligence Service Hoax?
In an interview conducted in the Kremlin on June 19, this year, Vladimir Putin answered questions from American film director, Oliver Stone. The discussion turned to the case of Sergei Skripal, the pardoned Russian traitor, resident in Salisbury, England where he and his daughter, Yulia, were reported by British authorities to have been poisoned by Russian security service operatives who painted the deadly nerve agent Novichok on the knob of the front door of Sergei Skripal's house.
Concerning that incident, Stone's conversation with Putin included the following:
Putin is certainly not acknowledging Russian responsibility for the Skripal poisonings, yet he said the Brits weren't responsible either. So the Russia position seems to be that the poisonings were a hoax to smear Russia, and that no one was actually poisoned with the deadly nerve agent, Novichok.
As far as we know, Dawn Sturgess did die, and if the circumstances of here death are as reported by British authorities, her death was certainly tragic.
But if the incident was part of a propaganda exercise, then Ms. Sturgess may still be alive and living at public expense under another name?
But if Dawn Sturgess is still alive, then she must have been one of the actors in a British operation to discredit Russia, a possibility suggested by the surveillance camera image of a women who might well have been Dawn Stugess accompanied by a man who might well have been Pablo Miller, Segei Skripals MI6 handler.
The CCTV image, taken at around the time of the alleged poisonings, is from a camera in the lane connecting Zizzi's restaurant in Salisbury, where the Skripals had just eaten, with the park where they are supposed to have been poisoned.
The woman in the photograph is carrying a red bag, which is interesting in view of the report of a witness at the scene of the poisoning who said, referring to Yulia Skripal:
| Stone: What has happened to Skripal? Where is he? Vladimir Putin: I have no idea. He is a spy, after all. He is always in hiding. Oliver Stone: Who poisoned him? They say English secret services did not want Sergei Skripal to come back to Russia? Vladimir Putin: To be honest, I do not quite believe this. Oliver Stone: Makes sense. You do not agree with me? Vladimir Putin: If they had wanted to poison him, they would have done so. Oliver Stone: Who did then? Vladimir Putin: After all, this is not a hard thing to do in today’s world. In fact, a fraction of a milligram would have been enough to do the job. And if they had him in their hands, there was nothing complicated about it. No, this does not make sense. Maybe they just wanted to provoke a scandal. |
Putin is certainly not acknowledging Russian responsibility for the Skripal poisonings, yet he said the Brits weren't responsible either. So the Russia position seems to be that the poisonings were a hoax to smear Russia, and that no one was actually poisoned with the deadly nerve agent, Novichok.
But if that were the case, why? Why would the British Government engage in such charade? Presumably as part of the UK–US deep state project to to create an obstacle to a US/Russian rapprochement.
But if so, surely there would have been a pretext. And if there were a pretext, it must have been the visit to Salisbury of the alleged Russian security service operatives, Petrov and Boshirov, immediately prior to the poisoning of the Skripals with the deadly, "developed-in-Russia," nerve agent that proved curiously undeadly, at least in the case of the Skripals.
According to British authorities, Petrov and Boshirov were in Salisbury to paint Novichok on the knob of Sergei Skripal's front door. But what if they were there for some entirely different clandestine purpose? Then a faked poisoning might have been judged by the UK as a good means of retaliation, since it could be blamed on Russia, by virtue of the presence of the Russian agents.
But there was also the case of Charlie Rowley and Dawn Sturgess, reported by British authorities to have been poisoned with Novichok contained in a perfume bottle that they found in a rubbish bin in Salisbury.
Apparently Dawn Sturgess died as a consequence of applying the contents of the bottle, which she took to be perfume, which if true is inconsistent with the idea that the Novichok poisonings were simply a piece of theatre intended to sway public opinion. But then perhaps it was precisely to create such an apparent inconsistency that Dawn Sturgess had to "die."
 |
Is thatDawn Sturgess carrying a red
bag and accompanied by and Pablo
Miller, Sergei Skripal's MI6 handler?
Image source. |
But if the incident was part of a propaganda exercise, then Ms. Sturgess may still be alive and living at public expense under another name?
But if Dawn Sturgess is still alive, then she must have been one of the actors in a British operation to discredit Russia, a possibility suggested by the surveillance camera image of a women who might well have been Dawn Stugess accompanied by a man who might well have been Pablo Miller, Segei Skripals MI6 handler.
The CCTV image, taken at around the time of the alleged poisonings, is from a camera in the lane connecting Zizzi's restaurant in Salisbury, where the Skripals had just eaten, with the park where they are supposed to have been poisoned.
The woman in the photograph is carrying a red bag, which is interesting in view of the report of a witness at the scene of the poisoning who said, referring to Yulia Skripal:
She had a red bag at her feet.So perhaps we need no longer mourn for Dawn Sturgess, who may yet be living comfortably at public expense, albeit under a different name.
Wednesday, July 3, 2019
Did Vladimir Putin Just Admit Russian Responsibility for the Novichok Poisonings in England's Green and Pleasant Land?
As anyone visiting here on a more or less regular basis will know, we have written a number of posts about the Novichok poisonings in England of the Russian traitor, Sergei Skripal, and his daughter Julia, and also the British citizens, Charlie Rowley and Dawn Sturgess.
Throughout, we have been skeptical of the British position that the poisonings were perpetrated by the Russian state, roused to seek vengeance against Skripal, despite having formerly pardoned him in connection with a spy swap. Rather, it seemed to us more probable that the poisonings were a charade undertaken by British security services as means to stoke public antipathy toward Russia.
Our assessment has now to be questioned in light of Vladimir Putin's remarks on the case that were addressed to former UK Prime Minister Teresa May during the recent G20 summit.
Specifically, Putin said:
Sounds pretty much like a confession of Russian responsibility to me, which in itself, makes the statement remarkable. But if it is a confession, it raises the question: for what was Sergei Skripal being punished? Not presumably, for the treasonous acts for which he was formerly convicted, jailed and subsequently pardoned.
The Russian State English Language broadcaster, RT, puts some spin on Putin's comment, stating:
Which, does not, it seems to me, settle the matter. Putin has exceptional skill in the diplomatic use of words, and RT's spin does little negate what seems the most plausible interpretation of his comment.
However, it is possible that Putin's statement was, in fact, a taunt, a taunt based on the knowledge, shared with Theresa May to whom his remark was addressed, that Sergei Skripal was a triple agent, who, having moved to England, ostensibly to continue in the service of the British to whom he had betrayed Russia, was in fact, acting in the service of Russia.
It might well then have been that his allegiance to Russia, having been discovered by the Brits, became the justification for a British charade intended to demonize Russia. That would explain the look of disgust, or is it despair, on Theresa May's face, during her interaction with Putin at the G20 Tokyo summit.
One hopes that Rob Slane, former UK Ambassador Craig Murray, and others who have been skeptical of the official British narrative of this peculiar case will offer their perspective on Putin's comment.
Throughout, we have been skeptical of the British position that the poisonings were perpetrated by the Russian state, roused to seek vengeance against Skripal, despite having formerly pardoned him in connection with a spy swap. Rather, it seemed to us more probable that the poisonings were a charade undertaken by British security services as means to stoke public antipathy toward Russia.
Our assessment has now to be questioned in light of Vladimir Putin's remarks on the case that were addressed to former UK Prime Minister Teresa May during the recent G20 summit.
Specifically, Putin said:
| “Treason is the gravest crime possible and traitors must be punished. I am not saying the Salisbury incident is the way to do it, but traitors must be punished.” |
The Russian State English Language broadcaster, RT, puts some spin on Putin's comment, stating:
| At the same time, [Putin] made it clear that the poisoning of the former double agent Sergei Skirpal and his daughter Yulia, which took place in the British town of Salisbury back in March 2018 and was blamed on Russia by London, is definitely “not the way to do it.” The president explained that the former Russian intelligence colonel already received his punishment under Russian law as he served his time in prison and was therefore “off the radar.” He reiterated that this whole affair had little to do with Russia, while maintaining that London has failed to present any sufficient proof of Moscow’s alleged guilt to the public till this day. |
However, it is possible that Putin's statement was, in fact, a taunt, a taunt based on the knowledge, shared with Theresa May to whom his remark was addressed, that Sergei Skripal was a triple agent, who, having moved to England, ostensibly to continue in the service of the British to whom he had betrayed Russia, was in fact, acting in the service of Russia.
It might well then have been that his allegiance to Russia, having been discovered by the Brits, became the justification for a British charade intended to demonize Russia. That would explain the look of disgust, or is it despair, on Theresa May's face, during her interaction with Putin at the G20 Tokyo summit.
One hopes that Rob Slane, former UK Ambassador Craig Murray, and others who have been skeptical of the official British narrative of this peculiar case will offer their perspective on Putin's comment.
Thursday, September 6, 2018
Theresa May's New Statement on Russia's Nerve Agent Attack in England's Green and Pleasant Land Drives Intelligence Irregulars to Renewed Effort on the Novichok File
Theresa May's latest Parliamentary statement concerning the depraved, hooliganist, gangsterism of Vlad the Poisoner Putin has given Internet sleuths and secret agents a second wind in their investigation of the alleged, bungled, Russian-state-authorized WMD attack on the now missing Russian traitor, Segei Skripal, in carried out in the heart of England's normally peaceful cathedral town of Salisbury.
Recognizing the fertility of imagination and intellectual heft of many among this groups of investigators, not to mention the literally thousands of individuals who have commented on their work, suffice it here to provide links to the state of the investigation as viewed by among the best and brightest of the intelligence irregulars.
Related:
George Galloway:
RT: RT editor-in-chief’s exclusive interview with Skripal case suspects Petrov & Boshirov (TRANSCRIPT)
Sky News: Salisbury novichok poisoning: Russian 'spies' filmed window shopping after attack
Daily Caller: RUSSIANS ACCUSED OF POISONING EX-SPY IN BRITAIN CLAIM THEY WERE JUST TOURISTS
CBC: Putin says Russia identified suspects in Novichok poisoning
Strategic Culture Foundation: Britain Should Be in the Dock Over Skripal Saga, Not Russia
Rob Slane: Petrov, Boshirov and the Missing 42 Minutes
Craig Murray: Skripals – The Mystery Deepens
Digital Journal: U.K. authorities name suspects in the Skripal poisoning caseRelated:
George Galloway:
RT: RT editor-in-chief’s exclusive interview with Skripal case suspects Petrov & Boshirov (TRANSCRIPT)
Sky News: Salisbury novichok poisoning: Russian 'spies' filmed window shopping after attack
Daily Caller: RUSSIANS ACCUSED OF POISONING EX-SPY IN BRITAIN CLAIM THEY WERE JUST TOURISTS
CBC: Putin says Russia identified suspects in Novichok poisoning
Strategic Culture Foundation: Britain Should Be in the Dock Over Skripal Saga, Not Russia
Rob Slane: Petrov, Boshirov and the Missing 42 Minutes
Craig Murray: Skripals – The Mystery Deepens
George Galloway: Salisbury is far from a Novichok Slam-Dunk
Moon of Alabama: The Strange Timestamp In The New Novichok 'Evidence' - UPDATED
Friday, July 27, 2018
Britain's Novichok Poisonings: An Opportunistic Anti-Russian Propaganda Operation?
What follows is a hypothesis to explain the reported Novichok poisonings of the Russian double agent, Sergei Skripal, his daughter Yulia, and the Amesbury couple, Charlie Rowley and the late Dawn Sturgess.
In formulating this hypothesis I have drawn on information and ideas provided by some of those commenting on Ambassador Craig Murrray's blog, and on what is known of the physiological action of nerve agents and opiates.
In considering this hypothesis, readers should be aware that what I am proposing is stark contradiction of the May Government's position and the claims attributed by British media to police and Security Service sources. However, such police and Security Services statements quoted thus far have a high degree of deniability in the event that evidence to emerge in the future renders the narrative they promote inoperative, to use the immortal terminology of Richard Nixon's press secretary, Ron Ziegler.
Who are those two people? The Amesbury poisoning victims, Charlie Rowley and Dawn Sturgess? So it has been suggested.
And what about the red bag, the blonde woman is carrying? Is it the red bag found beside the bench where the Skripals were stricken?
Could the bag have delivered the poison?
In 2015, Charlie Rowley was jailed for eight weeks for:
So was Charlie supplying heroin to Sergei Skripal? And if so, was the drug cut with fentanyl, creating a combination that has proved deadly to tens of thousands?
In formulating this hypothesis I have drawn on information and ideas provided by some of those commenting on Ambassador Craig Murrray's blog, and on what is known of the physiological action of nerve agents and opiates.
In considering this hypothesis, readers should be aware that what I am proposing is stark contradiction of the May Government's position and the claims attributed by British media to police and Security Service sources. However, such police and Security Services statements quoted thus far have a high degree of deniability in the event that evidence to emerge in the future renders the narrative they promote inoperative, to use the immortal terminology of Richard Nixon's press secretary, Ron Ziegler.
Thus for example, on July 19, the Guardian reported the Press Association "quoting a source with knowledge of the Skripal case as saying:"
So if you find compelling the Guardian's report of the Press Association quoting what someone said to have knowledge of the case is said to have said, then read no further.
| Investigators believe they have identified the suspected perpetrators of the novichok attack through CCTV and have cross-checked this with records of people who entered the country around that time. They [the investigators] are sure they [the suspects] are Russian. |
Equally, you may find reassuring the July 20, report in the Telegraph that:
| Russian agents responsible for the Novichok poisonings in Salisbury sent a coded message to Moscow which included the phrase, "The package has been delivered" |
That no indication is provided as to how it was determined either that the senders of the message were "Russian agents responsible for the Novichok poisonings in Salisbury" or that the wording "the package has been received" had anything to do with the use of a chemical weapon of mass destruction in Salisbury, England (rather than, say, the delivery of a pair of pants from the dry cleaners), may for some detract from the force of the Telegraph's story. Also questionable, is the provenance of the information, the attribution being simply to:
| A British intelligence listening station based in Cyprus, [that] allegedly picked up [the] message shortly after former Russian double agent, Sergei Skripal, and his daughter, Yulia, were attacked in March. |
Alleged by whom, we are not to be informed.
So, yes, why not consider an alternative account.
In the immediate aftermath of the Skripal poisonings, the British media speculated on the possibility of fentanyl as the poison, on the assumption that the Skripals were opioid drug users poisoned by heroin cut with fentanyl. Thus the Telegraph reported on March 6:
| Early reports suggested that colonel Skripal and the unnamed woman may have been exposed to the synthetic drug, Fentanyl, which is up to 10,000 times more powerful than heroin and has been linked to scores of deaths in the UK. |
Which is consistent with the March 16, letter to the Times from Salisbury Trust Hospital's consultant in Emergency Medicine, Dr. Stephen Davies, who wrote:
| “Sir, Further to your report (“Poison Exposure Leaves Almost 40 Needing Treatment”, Mar 14), may I clarify that no patients have experienced symptoms of nerve-agent poisoning in Salisbury and there have only ever been three patients with significant poisoning... Source |
Which suggests an interpretation of the CCTV images below, which, according to the Guardian, shows: "two people walking near the spot where a former Russian spy and his daughter were found slumped on a bench in Salisbury."
Who are those two people? The Amesbury poisoning victims, Charlie Rowley and Dawn Sturgess? So it has been suggested.
And what about the red bag, the blonde woman is carrying? Is it the red bag found beside the bench where the Skripals were stricken?
Could the bag have delivered the poison?
In 2015, Charlie Rowley was jailed for eight weeks for:
| ... possession of eleven wraps of heroin and theft of £1,700 from Matthew Rowley. He was already serving a suspended sentence for driving while banned... Source |
So was Charlie supplying heroin to Sergei Skripal? And if so, was the drug cut with fentanyl, creating a combination that has proved deadly to tens of thousands?
And if that's what happened, is it not possible that Charlie and his partner Dawn Sturgess, known drug users, fell victim to the same potentially lethal drug cocktail?
But if so, whence the Novichok?
One explanation, which I outlined here, is that both the Skripals, and Rowley and Burgess were not poisoned with the nerve agent Novichok but treated with Novichok as an antidote to poisoning with an the opioid respiratory inhibitor, fentanyl.
At lethal concentrations, nerve poisons such as BZ, botulinum toxin (the latter much more poisonous that Novichok), or fentanyl inhibit the release of acetyl choline at the neuromuscular junction, resulting in respiratory arrest and death by suffocation.
The organo-phosphorus nerve agents, of which Novichok is one, have the opposite effect: they inhibit the activity of the enzyme acetyl choline esterase, thereby preventing breakdown of acetyl choline released at the neuromuscular junction. The result is convulsive muscular contraction causing death due to asphyxiation. Novichok thus has potential to serve as an antidote to fentanyl.
Was Novichok administered to the Skripals, and to Rowley and Burgess as an antidote to fentanyl poisoning?
That we do not know. But we do know that staff at Britain's chemical and biological weapons research establishment at Porton Down, just a few miles from where both alleged Novichok poisonings occured, were consulted on treatment of the Skripals.
What advice did they give?
There appears to be no public information on that. But since fentanyl poisoning can be deadly, why would they not have proposed an organophosphorus nerve agent, such as Novichok as an antidote, even if such treatment was untested and potentially harmful?
Splendidly, from the point of view of those seeking to demonize Putin's Russia, use of Novichok as an antidote to whatever the victims were poisoned with, whether it be botulinum toxin in a seafood salad lunch, a dose of BZ administered by means unknown, or fentanyl-laced heroin, it provided a basis for accusing Russia of an atrocity on British soil.
The evidence? Why the name of the poison, of course. Novichok. With a name like that, it's got to be from Putin's Russia.
But on what evidence was use of Novichok claimed?
Well none at all really, except the word of Porton Down, and, in the case of the Skripals, the Organization for the Prevention of Chemical Warfare, which had samples of blood from the Skripals analyzed and found them to contain Novichok.
And that, according to the above hypothesis, Porton Down would have known without need of testing, since they themselves had supplied the Novichok and supervised its use under the carefully controlled, and therefore relatively safe, conditions of the Salisbury Trust Hospital.
Perhaps Theresa May's or her subordinates will someday offer more conclusive evidence of Russian responsibility for the Novichok "poisonings," but don't hold your breath.
Friday, July 13, 2018
Novichok on a Door Knob: An Official Conspiracy Theory
As promised, UK Ambassador Craig Murray has followed up his blog post on the Amesbury poisonings with an analysis of the Official Metropolitan Police/UK Government account of how Dawn Sturgess and Charlie Rowley came to be poisoned with a deadly, as-developed-in-Russia, nerve agent, while rifling though garbage cans or gathering cigarette butts in a park in Salisbury, England.
The analysis confirms the faith that British authorities have in the capacity of the British public to swallow any lie provided it emanates from a sufficiently authoritative source, the Prime Minister, for example, or the Foreign Secretary and is then repeated endlessly with a multiplicity of trivial elaborations and distractions by the BBC and the commercial media.
Among other key points, Murray takes aim at the claim that the original "Russian" Novichok poisoning in Britain, namely that of the Russian double agent, Sergei Skripal, and his daughter, Yulia, was carried out by Russian agents specially trained to apply Novichok nerve agents to door knobs. Thus, Murray writes:
A ludicrous theory indeed.
But read the whole piece: Craig Murray: Holes in the Official Skripal Story
Related:
CanSpeccy The Novichok File (17)
The analysis confirms the faith that British authorities have in the capacity of the British public to swallow any lie provided it emanates from a sufficiently authoritative source, the Prime Minister, for example, or the Foreign Secretary and is then repeated endlessly with a multiplicity of trivial elaborations and distractions by the BBC and the commercial media.
Among other key points, Murray takes aim at the claim that the original "Russian" Novichok poisoning in Britain, namely that of the Russian double agent, Sergei Skripal, and his daughter, Yulia, was carried out by Russian agents specially trained to apply Novichok nerve agents to door knobs. Thus, Murray writes:
Why did nobody see them painting the doorknob? This must have involved wearing protective gear, which would look out of place in a Salisbury suburb. With Skripal being resettled by MI6, and a former intelligence officer himself, it beggars belief that MI6 did not fit, as standard, some basic security including a security camera on his house.
Why did they both touch the outside doorknob in exiting and closing the door? Why did the novichok act so very slowly, with evidently no feeling of ill health for at least five hours, and then how did it strike both down absolutely simultaneously, so that neither can call for help, despite their being different sexes, weights, ages, metabolisms and receiving random completely uncontrolled doses. The odds of that happening are virtually nil. And why was the nerve agent ultimately ineffective?
Why was the Detective Sergeant affected and nobody else who attended the house, or the scene where the Skripals were found? Why was Bailey only lightly affected by this extremely deadly substance, of which a tiny amount can kill?
|
A ludicrous theory indeed.
But read the whole piece: Craig Murray: Holes in the Official Skripal Story
Related:
CanSpeccy The Novichok File (17)
Thursday, July 12, 2018
Skripal Tripal, No. 39: Where the Skripals Crossed Paths With the "Amesbury Poisonings" Couple
Thus far, not much about the official account of the Skripal poisonings has made sense. Now, Rob Lane of the Blogmire Blog reveals a huge hole in the account of the affair as provided by the London Metropolitan police, the agency supposed, one might assume, to be investigating not obfuscating, what happened.
According to the Metropolitan police, Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia fed the ducks in the Avon Playground, where they were soon afterwards found near death due to what was claimed to be Novichok poisoning.
However, it now emerges that the Skripals went to a different park, the Queen Elizabeth Gardens, not the Avon Playground, to feed ducks after they had been poisoned, a fact confirmed by a report in the Sun newspaper published more than three weeks after the alleged poisonings.
I say "alleged poisonings," since if nothing much else about this tale bears scrutiny, it is only rational to question the central fact of the case, namely the reported poisoning of the now disappeared Skripals from whom we have heard nothing other than a video statement of questionable authenticity from the "recovered" Yulia Skripal.
What this new fact that Rob Lane has brought to light reveals is not only that the original published reports about the movement of the Skripals the day they were poisoned were false, but that immediately before their collapse, the Skripals had been to the Queen Elizabeth Gardens where Charlie Rowley and the now deceased Dawn Sturgess, of the "Amesbury Poisonings" are believed to have been poisoned.
In other words, the media have thus far managed to avoid mentioning what was very likely the critical location at which the paths of the poisoned Skripals, and the poisoned Amesbury couple crossed.
Make what you like of it, but based on their performance on the Novichok file thus far, I wouldn't trust the London Metropolitan Police to investigate the theft of a bicycle, let alone acts of murder leading to an international crisis.
Indeed, it is clear that the performance of the Met in this case is sad evidence of a catastrophic decline in the competence and integrity of British institutions. My late uncle, a man of both intelligence and integrity, was a CID Inspector with the London Met back in the 60's and there's no way I could see him having been involved in such a ridiculous farrago of nonsense as the Skripal investigation.
Related:
Sputnik: UK Police Says Found Source of Deadly Substance Used in Amesbury Incident
ARD Mediathek: The Skripal Case: Berlin has until today no evidence from London
Translation via John_a at Craig Murray's blog:
Until today the German Federal Government has been waiting in vain: As RBB Radio has learned from government circles, until today the British Government has presented absolutely no evidence to the Federal Government that would prove that Russia is responsible for the poison attack on the double-agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter. The Federal Government reported this yesterday to the Parliamentary Control Committee of the German Federal Parliament in a closed session. Up till now it has simply been learned that the poison concerned was Novichok, a chemical weapon that was produced in the Soviet Union. Beyond this the British Government has so far presented absolutely no evidence. It could neither prove that the poison used came from Russia, nor that the Kremlin was responsible for the attack, it was reported.
According to RBB information, the German intelligence services also have no information from their own sources that would permit such conclusions.
After Yulia Skripal, her father Sergei has also now left the hospital. In recent days, Yulia Skripal made a brief statement before the cameras in Great Britain.[A SHORT EXCERPT IN RUSSIAN IS HEARD.] She said that she still found it hard to believe that she and her father were attacked in this way, and that their recovery had been slow and painful. The doctors in the hospital in Salisbury said that the Skripals’ recovery bordered on a miracle; it had really been assumed that they would not survive.
The Skripal case led to a dramatic deterioration in diplomatic relations between Russia and numerous western countries. After the British Government had declared that it was convinced that Russia was responsible for the poison attack on Skripal and his daughter, over 140 Russian diplomats were expelled from a total of 26 European countries, the USA and NATO, an event that was unique in its scale. Germany also participated, and expelled four Russian diplomats. In return, Russia expelled the same number of diplomats from the countries concerned.
NDR, WDR, Süddeutsche Zeitung and Die Zeit had reported that in the 1990s a Russian scientist had offered a sample of Novichok to the [German] Federal Intelligence Service [BND]. Since then it is known that the nerve poison was exported from Russia, at least to the West. It is not clear where else it might possibly have found its way to.
The conduct of the British Government is increasingly putting the German Federal Government in a position where it is difficult to explain itself. Beyond the fact that the poison has been identified as Novichok, there is no trail that leads to Russia, let alone to the Kremlin. The decision to participate in the expulsion of Russian diplomats therefore appears more than questionable.
According to the Metropolitan police, Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia fed the ducks in the Avon Playground, where they were soon afterwards found near death due to what was claimed to be Novichok poisoning.
However, it now emerges that the Skripals went to a different park, the Queen Elizabeth Gardens, not the Avon Playground, to feed ducks after they had been poisoned, a fact confirmed by a report in the Sun newspaper published more than three weeks after the alleged poisonings.
I say "alleged poisonings," since if nothing much else about this tale bears scrutiny, it is only rational to question the central fact of the case, namely the reported poisoning of the now disappeared Skripals from whom we have heard nothing other than a video statement of questionable authenticity from the "recovered" Yulia Skripal.
What this new fact that Rob Lane has brought to light reveals is not only that the original published reports about the movement of the Skripals the day they were poisoned were false, but that immediately before their collapse, the Skripals had been to the Queen Elizabeth Gardens where Charlie Rowley and the now deceased Dawn Sturgess, of the "Amesbury Poisonings" are believed to have been poisoned.
In other words, the media have thus far managed to avoid mentioning what was very likely the critical location at which the paths of the poisoned Skripals, and the poisoned Amesbury couple crossed.
Make what you like of it, but based on their performance on the Novichok file thus far, I wouldn't trust the London Metropolitan Police to investigate the theft of a bicycle, let alone acts of murder leading to an international crisis.
Indeed, it is clear that the performance of the Met in this case is sad evidence of a catastrophic decline in the competence and integrity of British institutions. My late uncle, a man of both intelligence and integrity, was a CID Inspector with the London Met back in the 60's and there's no way I could see him having been involved in such a ridiculous farrago of nonsense as the Skripal investigation.
Related:
Sputnik: UK Police Says Found Source of Deadly Substance Used in Amesbury Incident
ARD Mediathek: The Skripal Case: Berlin has until today no evidence from London
Translation via John_a at Craig Murray's blog:
Until today the German Federal Government has been waiting in vain: As RBB Radio has learned from government circles, until today the British Government has presented absolutely no evidence to the Federal Government that would prove that Russia is responsible for the poison attack on the double-agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter. The Federal Government reported this yesterday to the Parliamentary Control Committee of the German Federal Parliament in a closed session. Up till now it has simply been learned that the poison concerned was Novichok, a chemical weapon that was produced in the Soviet Union. Beyond this the British Government has so far presented absolutely no evidence. It could neither prove that the poison used came from Russia, nor that the Kremlin was responsible for the attack, it was reported.
According to RBB information, the German intelligence services also have no information from their own sources that would permit such conclusions.
After Yulia Skripal, her father Sergei has also now left the hospital. In recent days, Yulia Skripal made a brief statement before the cameras in Great Britain.[A SHORT EXCERPT IN RUSSIAN IS HEARD.] She said that she still found it hard to believe that she and her father were attacked in this way, and that their recovery had been slow and painful. The doctors in the hospital in Salisbury said that the Skripals’ recovery bordered on a miracle; it had really been assumed that they would not survive.
The Skripal case led to a dramatic deterioration in diplomatic relations between Russia and numerous western countries. After the British Government had declared that it was convinced that Russia was responsible for the poison attack on Skripal and his daughter, over 140 Russian diplomats were expelled from a total of 26 European countries, the USA and NATO, an event that was unique in its scale. Germany also participated, and expelled four Russian diplomats. In return, Russia expelled the same number of diplomats from the countries concerned.
NDR, WDR, Süddeutsche Zeitung and Die Zeit had reported that in the 1990s a Russian scientist had offered a sample of Novichok to the [German] Federal Intelligence Service [BND]. Since then it is known that the nerve poison was exported from Russia, at least to the West. It is not clear where else it might possibly have found its way to.
The conduct of the British Government is increasingly putting the German Federal Government in a position where it is difficult to explain itself. Beyond the fact that the poison has been identified as Novichok, there is no trail that leads to Russia, let alone to the Kremlin. The decision to participate in the expulsion of Russian diplomats therefore appears more than questionable.
Monday, July 9, 2018
UK Ambassador, Craig Murray, Gears Up to Demolish the Lies About the Amesbury Poisonings From Thereason May's Law 'n Order minister, Savidge Javidge
| Russia has a decade long secret programme of producing and stockpiling novichok nerve agents. It also has been training agents in secret assassination techniques, and British intelligence has a copy of the Russian training manual, which includes instruction on painting nerve agent on doorknobs. The Russians chose to use this assassination programme to target Sergei Skripal, a double agent who had been released from jail in Russia some eight years previously. Only the Russians can make novichok and only the Russians had a motive to attack the Skripals. The Russians had been tapping the phone of Yulia Skripal. They decided to attack Sergei Skripal while his daughter was visiting from Moscow. Their trained assassin(s) painted a novichok on the doorknob of the Skripal house in the suburbs of Salisbury. Either before or after the attack, they entered a public place in the centre of Salisbury and left a sealed container of the novichok there. The Skripals both touched the doorknob and both functioned perfectly normally for at least five hours, even able to eat and drink heartily. Then they were simultaneously and instantaneously struck down by the nerve agent, at a spot in the city centre coincidentally close to where the assassins left a sealed container of the novichok lying around. Even though the nerve agent was eight times more deadly than Sarin or VX, it did not kill the Skripals because it had been on the doorknob and affected by rain. Detective Sergeant Bailey attended the Skripal house and was also poisoned by the doorknb, but more lightly. None of the other police who attended the house were affected. Four months later, Charlie Rowley and Dawn Sturgess were rooting about in public parks, possibly looking for cigarette butts, and accidentally came into contact with the sealed container of a novichok. They were poisoned and Dawn Sturgess subsequently died. Source |
[T]here is still the case of the suspicious couple [in the Skripals poisoning case] on CCTV back in march, that very much resemble [latest poisoning victims] Charlie and Dawn!
I summarised [the photo evidence] here. Feel free to spread.
Yes, its a convincing match.
Related:
CanSpeccy: Understanding Theresa May's Novichok Bollocks
Friday, June 15, 2018
The Skripal Poisonings: How? By Whom? With What? And Where Are The Skripals Now?
A post by Rob Slane of the Blogmire Blog offers some significant details concerning the alleged Russian poisoning of the pardoned Russian traitor and British agent, Sergei Skripal, and his daughter, Yulia, as they sat on a park bench in the quiet English cathedral city of Salisbury on the afternoon of March 4, this year.
Based on video evidence from the scene of the crime, Lane proposes a plausible theory of how, and by whom, the Skripal's were poisoned, a key question intensively obfuscated by the British media.
Lane also explains why the poison could not have been the deadly nerve agent, Novichok, as claimed by UK Prime Minister Theresa May, a claim endlessly repeated by the British media.
Instead, Lane suggests that the poison could have been, as we have also suggested, the widely available and much less deadly nerve agent BZ, which was initially reported to have been found in blood samples from the Skripal's, a fact that was later attributed to it having been added to the blood samples by the analytical laboratory for the purpose, so it was bizarrely claimed, of calibration.
In connection with the question of the identity of the poison, Lane constructs the following relevant time-line of events:
The last point, that the Skripals were assumed to have overdosed on fentanyl, would explain the letter by Stephen Davies, the Salisbury Hospital Resident in Emergency Medicine, stating that no one was treated at the hospital for nerve agent poisoning.
A question that Lane does not address is the video that was released showing Julia Skripal in an interview with Reuters following her release from hospital. This video is worthy of close examination.
There are at least two remarkable things to note. First, Yulia Skripal appears not only much slimmer, than before her poisoning ordeal, but distinctly younger too, which is an odd consequence of long drawn out struggle for life.
Second, Yulia, wears a dress with a high collar, but open at the front as if intended to focus attention on her deep tracheotomy scar. That seems strange. Would not most women with the misfortune to bear such a disfiguring scar have chosen a garment with a collar that concealed the scar? And if that is conceded, then it seems reasonable to assume that Yulia displayed her scar for a purpose, namely, to leave no doubt in the public mind that she had indeed been close to death and in need of surgical intervention as a result of her alleged Russian poisoning.
But if the video is a piece of theatre to reinforce the British Government narrative on the Skripal poisoning, it would seem wise to consider the possibility that the entire interview is fake. It would surely not be difficult, given the latest methods of film creation and modification, to take an old video of a slightly younger and slimmer Yulia in an unidentifiable location and dub it with a different script. How many British or American viewers would be any the wiser? Surely few indeed: she is after all, speaking Russian, not English. And to such a false presentation, the addition of a tracheotomy scar would surely not have been difficult.
Will we have a chance to learn more from Yulia in the coming months? Unlikely. The story about the Skripals has already caused the British Government enough embarrassment. More than a month ago the CIA offered to "protect" the Skripals by providing them with new identities in America. Presumably, therefore, the Skripals will by now have been taken care of, whether of their own volition or not.
What this story seems to show is that not only is the news fake, but that it is now faked at the direct instigation of the state.
Related Posts:
Based on video evidence from the scene of the crime, Lane proposes a plausible theory of how, and by whom, the Skripal's were poisoned, a key question intensively obfuscated by the British media.
Lane also explains why the poison could not have been the deadly nerve agent, Novichok, as claimed by UK Prime Minister Theresa May, a claim endlessly repeated by the British media.
Instead, Lane suggests that the poison could have been, as we have also suggested, the widely available and much less deadly nerve agent BZ, which was initially reported to have been found in blood samples from the Skripal's, a fact that was later attributed to it having been added to the blood samples by the analytical laboratory for the purpose, so it was bizarrely claimed, of calibration.
In connection with the question of the identity of the poison, Lane constructs the following relevant time-line of events:
| 15:35 – Sergei Skripal and Yulia leave Zizzis. They make their way to The Maltings, presumably along Market Walk (although strangely there is no CCTV footage of this), a walk of about two minutes or so. 15:37 – When they got to The Maltings, they appear not to have gone straight to the bench, but to the Avon Playground (approximately 50 yards from the bench), where they spent some time feeding ducks. They presumably then went over to the bench, a few minutes after this. 15:47 – The mysterious pair, one of whom is carrying a red bag, are seen on CCTV walking through Market Walk in the direction of The Maltings. 16:03 – One of the first witnesses to the scene, Freya Church, who was working in the nearby Snap Fitness, leaves work at 16:00 or thereabouts, and sees the Skripals on the bench at approximately 16:03. According to her account, they were already “out of it”, which suggests that they had been poisoned some minutes previously. She noted that there was a red bag on the floor next to Yulia’s feet. 16:15 – Emergency services are called and the pair are taken to Salisbury District Hospital, Yulia by helicopter and Sergei by ambulance. Upon admittance, the hospital believed that the pair had overdosed on Fentanyl, and treated this as an opioid poisoning for at least 24 hours after the incident. Later that evening – Police remove the red bag, and it has never been heard of or mentioned in connection with the story since. |
The last point, that the Skripals were assumed to have overdosed on fentanyl, would explain the letter by Stephen Davies, the Salisbury Hospital Resident in Emergency Medicine, stating that no one was treated at the hospital for nerve agent poisoning.
A question that Lane does not address is the video that was released showing Julia Skripal in an interview with Reuters following her release from hospital. This video is worthy of close examination.
There are at least two remarkable things to note. First, Yulia Skripal appears not only much slimmer, than before her poisoning ordeal, but distinctly younger too, which is an odd consequence of long drawn out struggle for life.
Second, Yulia, wears a dress with a high collar, but open at the front as if intended to focus attention on her deep tracheotomy scar. That seems strange. Would not most women with the misfortune to bear such a disfiguring scar have chosen a garment with a collar that concealed the scar? And if that is conceded, then it seems reasonable to assume that Yulia displayed her scar for a purpose, namely, to leave no doubt in the public mind that she had indeed been close to death and in need of surgical intervention as a result of her alleged Russian poisoning.
But if the video is a piece of theatre to reinforce the British Government narrative on the Skripal poisoning, it would seem wise to consider the possibility that the entire interview is fake. It would surely not be difficult, given the latest methods of film creation and modification, to take an old video of a slightly younger and slimmer Yulia in an unidentifiable location and dub it with a different script. How many British or American viewers would be any the wiser? Surely few indeed: she is after all, speaking Russian, not English. And to such a false presentation, the addition of a tracheotomy scar would surely not have been difficult.
Will we have a chance to learn more from Yulia in the coming months? Unlikely. The story about the Skripals has already caused the British Government enough embarrassment. More than a month ago the CIA offered to "protect" the Skripals by providing them with new identities in America. Presumably, therefore, the Skripals will by now have been taken care of, whether of their own volition or not.
What this story seems to show is that not only is the news fake, but that it is now faked at the direct instigation of the state.
Related Posts:
Thursday, June 14, 2018
The Novichok File (30)
March 18,2018: Skripal Tripal
April 5, 2018: NoviJoke: To Russia With Hate
April 11, 2018: Are the Skripals in Mortal Danger From the British State?April12, 2018: Novichok: Russia's Antidote to Seafood Poisoning?
April 13, 2018: Why Yulia Skripal, Released From Hospital, Is Being Held in UK Police Custody
April 15, 2018: 3-Quinuclidinyl Benzilate: The Antidote to Novichok
April 16: The UK's Novichok Poisoning Cover-up
April 23, 2018: British Intelligence: An Oxymoron
June 15, 2018: The Skripal Poisonings: How? By Whom? With What? And Where Are the Skripals Now?
July 4, 2018: More Skripal Tripal From the Land of Thereason May
July 8, 2018: Theresa May's Tangled Web Of Toxic Nerve Agent Deception
July 4, 2018: More Skripal Tripal From the Land of Thereason May
July 8, 2018: Theresa May's Tangled Web Of Toxic Nerve Agent Deception
July 9, 2018: UK Ambassador, Craig Murray, Gears Up to Demolish the Lies About the Amesbury Poisonings From Thereason May's Law 'n Order minister, Savidge Javidge
July 12, 2018: Skripal Tripal, No. 39: Where the Skripals Crossed Paths With the "Amesbury Poisonings" Couple
July 12, 2018: Skripal Tripal, No. 39: Where the Skripals Crossed Paths With the "Amesbury Poisonings" Couple
July 13, 2018: Novichok on a Door Knob: An Official Conspiracy Theory
July 24, 2018: Understanding Theresa May's Novichok Bollocks
July 27, 2018: Britain's Novichok Poisonings: An Opportunistic Anti-Russian Propaganda Operation?
August 28, 2018: The ducks that didn't die
August 29, 2018: Ambassador Craig Murray Examines the British Deep State's Connection with the Skripal Nerve Agent Poisonings
September 6, 2018: Theresa May's New Statement on Russia's Nerve Agent Attack in England's Green and Pleasant Land Drives Intelligence Irregulars to Renewed Effort on the Novichok File
September 13, 2018: Ambassador Craig Murray Probes the Alibi of Petrov and Bashirov, the Alleged (by Theresa May) Skripal/Novichok Poisoners
April 16, 2019: MOON OF ALABAMA CIA Director Used Fake Skripal Incident Photos To Manipulate Trump
April 16, 2019: ROB SLANE: Trump in Dumps as Spook Picks Sick Kids’n’Dead Duck Trick Pics
April 18, 2019: CRAIG MURRAY, The Official Skripal Story is a Dead Duck
July 23, 2019:Were the Skripal Poisonings a British Intelligence Service Hoax?
October 17, 2019: Skripal Tripal Part 2: Well Wadderyerknow — the Conroner's Inquest Into the Death of Dawn Sturgess Has Been Adjourned indefinitely
March 7, 2020: Craig Murray - Pure: Ten Points I Just Can’t Believe About the Official Skripal Narrative
June 17, 2020: Craig Murray - The Miracle of Salisbury: The BBC Enters 'Propaganda Hall Of Fame' With Skripals Story
June 19, 2020: 5 Facts BBC’s “The Salisbury Poisonings” Forgot to Mention
July 30, 2020: Dances With Bears: AUSTRIA CONFIRMS OPCW REPORT ON SKRIPAL FAKING BY THE BRITISH – VIENNA EXPOSES FINANCIAL TIMES LIES AND COVER-UP
July 24, 2018: Understanding Theresa May's Novichok Bollocks
July 27, 2018: Britain's Novichok Poisonings: An Opportunistic Anti-Russian Propaganda Operation?
August 28, 2018: The ducks that didn't die
August 29, 2018: Ambassador Craig Murray Examines the British Deep State's Connection with the Skripal Nerve Agent Poisonings
September 6, 2018: Theresa May's New Statement on Russia's Nerve Agent Attack in England's Green and Pleasant Land Drives Intelligence Irregulars to Renewed Effort on the Novichok File
September 13, 2018: Ambassador Craig Murray Probes the Alibi of Petrov and Bashirov, the Alleged (by Theresa May) Skripal/Novichok Poisoners
April 16, 2019: MOON OF ALABAMA CIA Director Used Fake Skripal Incident Photos To Manipulate Trump
April 16, 2019: ROB SLANE: Trump in Dumps as Spook Picks Sick Kids’n’Dead Duck Trick Pics
April 18, 2019: CRAIG MURRAY, The Official Skripal Story is a Dead Duck
July 23, 2019:Were the Skripal Poisonings a British Intelligence Service Hoax?
October 17, 2019: Skripal Tripal Part 2: Well Wadderyerknow — the Conroner's Inquest Into the Death of Dawn Sturgess Has Been Adjourned indefinitely
March 7, 2020: Craig Murray - Pure: Ten Points I Just Can’t Believe About the Official Skripal Narrative
June 17, 2020: Craig Murray - The Miracle of Salisbury: The BBC Enters 'Propaganda Hall Of Fame' With Skripals Story
June 19, 2020: 5 Facts BBC’s “The Salisbury Poisonings” Forgot to Mention
July 30, 2020: Dances With Bears: AUSTRIA CONFIRMS OPCW REPORT ON SKRIPAL FAKING BY THE BRITISH – VIENNA EXPOSES FINANCIAL TIMES LIES AND COVER-UP
Saturday, April 14, 2018
3-Quinuclidinyl Benzilate: The Antidote to Novichok
 |
| Buzz. Source |
...the substance used on Sergei Skripal was an agent called BZ, according to Swiss state Spiez lab.... The toxin was never produced in Russia, but was in service in the US, UK, and other NATO states.BZ, or Buzz, is a common name for 3-Quinuclidinyl Benzilate, a white, odorless, water soluble, crystalline solid, with a molecular mass of 337.419 and a melting point of 164 C.
Like botulinum toxin, BZ can kill through paralysis, and hence asphyxiation, although the modes of action of the substances differ.
Botulinum toxin inhibits the release of acetylcholine at the neuromuscular junction, whereas BZ binds to the acetylcholine receptors at the neuromuscular junction without activating them. In either case, the result of a sufficiently large dose is paralysis, and in either case, the effect is countered by any agent that inhibits the enzymic breakdown of acetyl choline at the neuromuscular junction (for example the "as developed in Russia" nerve agent, Novichok).
The toxicity of BZ is quite low, with an estimated LD50 (dose required to create a 50% chance of death) of about one tenth of a gram, or about one millionth the toxicity of botulinum toxin. Symptoms of BZ toxicity include delirium, hallucination and general mental incapacity.
BZ is a recognized antimuscarinic pharmacological agent available for purchase from Sigma-Aldrich and more than a dozen other commercial sources. So if BZ was the only chemical to which the Skripals were exposed, it indicates that the decision to tear-down Sergei Skripal's house, and the restaurant and pub where Sergei Skripal and his daughter obtained refreshment the day they were poisoned is either totally insane, or part of a theatrical production entitled: THE SKRIPALS: A Russian, Horror, WMD Terror-Attack Midst England's Green and Pleasant Land.
BZ is a recognized antimuscarinic pharmacological agent available for purchase from Sigma-Aldrich and more than a dozen other commercial sources. So if BZ was the only chemical to which the Skripals were exposed, it indicates that the decision to tear-down Sergei Skripal's house, and the restaurant and pub where Sergei Skripal and his daughter obtained refreshment the day they were poisoned is either totally insane, or part of a theatrical production entitled: THE SKRIPALS: A Russian, Horror, WMD Terror-Attack Midst England's Green and Pleasant Land.
 |
| The Spiez Laboratory of the Swiss Federal Office for Civil Protection |
If the Spiez Laboratory of the Swiss Federal Office for Civil Protection are correct in their analysis of the samples supplied to them, either by the UK or the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (which organization is too coy to reveal what it found through multiple analyses by independent laboratories of the blood samples supplied to them by the UK Government), it could explain several features of the Skripal poisoning narrative.
First, if BZ was the agent that caused the Skripals to be hospitalized, it would explain the long delay between the time of ingestion of the poison, whether at home in the buckwheat cereal that Yulia Skripals friend had brought for the Skripals from Moscow, or at lunch with their seafood salad. Second, it would explain Sergei Skipal's loud and angry Russian-language rant about the slow service at the restaurant where they lunched as the result of BZ-induced delirium or hallucination.
First, if BZ was the agent that caused the Skripals to be hospitalized, it would explain the long delay between the time of ingestion of the poison, whether at home in the buckwheat cereal that Yulia Skripals friend had brought for the Skripals from Moscow, or at lunch with their seafood salad. Second, it would explain Sergei Skipal's loud and angry Russian-language rant about the slow service at the restaurant where they lunched as the result of BZ-induced delirium or hallucination.
What the finding of BZ poisoning refutes, if BZ was indeed the poison and not the therapeutically administered antidote to a different poison, is the evidence of a woman reported to be a doctor who attended on the Skripals in the park where they were said to have been found incapacitated. As we have already suggested, that hearsay evidence of an alleged doctor, who requested that her identity not be revealed, is highly questionable.
Furthermore, if the poisoning of the Skripals was due to BZ, then the "doctor" of undisclosed identity was surely a plant whose job it was to provide false circumstantial evidence of Novichok poisoning: specifically, her claim to reporters that the Skipals were vomiting and convulsing — symptoms quite the opposite of the physical paralysis induced by severe BZ poisoning.
Furthermore, if the poisoning of the Skripals was due to BZ, then the "doctor" of undisclosed identity was surely a plant whose job it was to provide false circumstantial evidence of Novichok poisoning: specifically, her claim to reporters that the Skipals were vomiting and convulsing — symptoms quite the opposite of the physical paralysis induced by severe BZ poisoning.
Previously, we argued that Novichok might have been administered to the Skripals as an antidote to botulinum toxin in their seafood lunch. The revelation that the Skripals may have been poisoned with BZ, not botulinum toxin, does not negate our original hypothesis, since Novichok is a choline esterase inhibitor and, therefore, a recognized antidote to any anticholinergic poison such as BZ. The use of Novichok as an antidote to BZ poisoning would have been a surprising medical choice, but highly effective in creating false evidence of an assassination attempt with Novichok.
Questions that remain for the British Government include the following:
Why did Dr. Davies, the Resident for Emergency Medicine at the Salisbury Trust Hospital, say that no one had been treated for nerve agent poisoning?Unless, at this late stage, the government of Theresa May produces convincing evidence to the contrary, it must be concluded that the Skripal poisoning saga is simply a ridiculous charade written and carried out by buffoons with little relevant knowledge other than of how to so shape the lips, tongue and larynx as to emit a cloud of lies potentially culminating in a nuclear conflagration.
If as claimed the Skripals were admitted to the Salisbury Trust Hospital with symptoms of nerve agent poisoning, what analyses of blood and vomit were conducted on the orders of the attending physicians and with what results?
Postscript
An anonymous commenter has kindly drawns our attention to the following statement on Russia's UK Embassy website:Embassy Press Officer comments on the findings of the Swiss experts regarding the Salisbury incidentSo the Russians are suggesting that the blood samples supplied to the OPCW were spiked with Novichok, aka A234.
According to information from the Swiss Federal Institute for NBC-protection in Spiez, its experts received samples collected in Salisbury by the OPCW specialists and finished testing them on 27 March.
The experts of the Institute discovered traces of toxic chemical called “BZ” and its precursors. It is a Schedule 2 substance under the Chemical Weapons Convention.
“BZ” is a chemical agent, which is used to temporary incapacitate people. The desired psychotoxic effect is reached in 30-60 minutes after application of the agent and lasts up to four days. According to the information the Russian Federation possesses, this agent was used in the armed forces of the USA, United Kingdom and several others NATO member states. No stocks of such substance ever existed either in the Soviet Union or in the Russian Federation.
In addition, the Swiss specialists discovered strong concentration of traces of the nerve agent of A-234 type in its initial states as well as its decomposition products.
In view of the experts, such concentration of the A-234 agent would result in inevitable fatal outcome of its administration. Moreover, considering its high volatility, the detection of this substance in its initial state (pure form and high concentration) is extremely suspicious as the samples have been taken several weeks since the poisoning.
It looks highly likely that the “BZ” nerve agent was used in Salisbury. The fact that Yulia Skripal and Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey have already been discharged from hospital, and Sergei Skripal is on his way to recovery, only supports such conclusion.
All this information was not mentioned in the final OPCW report at all.
Considering the above, we have numerous serious questions to all interested parties, including the OPCW.
The presence of both a choline esterase inhibitor (the Novichok A234) and a paralytic agent (BZ) confirms our prediction that the blood samples would contain both: one the poison; the other the antidote.
Ignoring the suspiciously high concentration of Novichok, which raises the possibility of the samples being spiked, the question then is which of the two nerve agents discovered was the poison and which the antidote. If the Novichok was the antidote, that might explain its suspiciously high concentration, since it would have been given in small doses for some time after the initial poisoning.
It now appears that the debate about what happened will end without definite conclusion unless witnesses in the UK come forward, e.g., medical staff at the Salisbury Trust Hospital. Presumably such witnesses are currently under great pressure to keep their mouths shut.
Post Postscript
As reported by Ambassador Craig Murray, in his recent review of the Skripal Poisionings, Ten Points I Just Can’t Believe About the Official Skripal Narrative the "'doctor' of undisclosed identity" who happened to be on hand at the moment that the Skripals were simultaneously subject to convulsions, turns out to have been none other than the Chief Nurse of the British Army. Thus, Murray writes:
The very first person to discover the Skripals ill on a park bench in Salisbury just happened to be the Chief Nurse of the British Army, who chanced to be walking past them on her way back from a birthday party. How lucky was that? The odds are about the same as the chance of my vacuum cleaner breaking down just before James Dyson knocks at my door to ask for directions. There are very few people indeed in the UK trained to give nursing care to victims of chemical weapon attack, and of all the people who might have walked past, it just happened to be the most senior of them!
|
CanSpeccy: The UK's Novichok Poisoning Cover-up
Moon of Alabama: Were the Skripals 'Buzzed', 'Novi-shocked' Or Neither? - May Has Some 'Splaining' To Do
Craig Murray: The British Government’s Legal Justification for Bombing is Entirely False and Without Merit
CanSpeccy: Novichok: Russia's Antidote to Seafood Poisoning
CanSpeccy: Novijoke: To Russia With Hate
Friday, April 13, 2018
Why Yulia Skripal, Released From Hospital, Is Being Held in UK Police Custody
Having reworked and extended my earlier post Novichok: Russia's Antidote to Seafood Poisoning I am more inclined than before to believe it possible that the Skripals were treated with Novichok as an antidote to botulinum toxin, it being the case that the one nerve agent, because of a difference in mode of action, could be an effective antidote to the other nerve agent, as explained in my earlier post.
To be credible, the theory must presume orchestration of the entire sequence of events. Thus, the botulinum toxin must have been deliberately administered as a sub-lethal dose in the seafood lunch that the Skripals consumed several hours before they were taken ill. (Although botulinum toxin can occur in seafood, it does not occur in fresh seafood — as opposed to canned food, since Clostridium botulinum only produces the toxin under anoxic conditions.)
But if the affair was orchestrated, the Skripals were surely participants rather than victims in the operation, a plausible assumption since Sergei Skripal is known to have worked for MI6 and may have resumed his service to them on release from Russian gaol.
So how was it worked?
I suggest that there was a small dose of botulinum toxin added to their seafood lunch, which caused illness several hours later, but not the vomiting and convulsions as reported by the doctor who attended on them and asked that her name not be released to the public. Rather the illness would have been manifest as the paralysis characteristic of botulism. If that assumption is correct, then we must assume that the attending, unidentified doctor who described the Skripals' symptons as those of poisoning by a nerve agent of the Novichok type (i.e., a convulsant), is an agent of MI6 and that she deliberately misled the media.
Once received at the Salisbury Trust Hospital, experts in nerve agent poisoning at the nearby British Chemical and Biological Weapons research establishment would likely have been consulted, which would have created the opportunity for them to supply the hospital with British-made Novichok (a nerve agent developed by the Soviet Union) as an antidote to botulinum toxin, the mechanism whereby one nerve agent counteracts another being described in my previous post. The identity of this antidote may well not have been disclosed to the Hospital staff.
After that, the Skripals may have been kept in a more or less comotose state with, perhaps repeated small doses of botulinum toxin, which would have necessitated continual infusions of Novichok to prevent paralysis and death by asphyxiation. That would explain why, weeks after the initial poisoning, blood samples of the "victims" still contained detectable quantities of Novichok, as established by independent testing of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW). It would also explain why Yulia Skripal, though released from hospital, is in UK police custody.
The objective now, if the above scenario is a more or less accurate representation of actual events, must be to keep the Skripals out of the hands of the Russian state, where they could be forced to disclose their complicity in a psyop. perpetrated to undermine the credibility and moral standing of the Russian government. That would explain the offer by the CIA to give the Skripals new identities.
Related:
Sergei Lavrov: UK staged the Syrian chemical weapons attack
Craig Murray: Just Who’s Pulling the Strings?
To be credible, the theory must presume orchestration of the entire sequence of events. Thus, the botulinum toxin must have been deliberately administered as a sub-lethal dose in the seafood lunch that the Skripals consumed several hours before they were taken ill. (Although botulinum toxin can occur in seafood, it does not occur in fresh seafood — as opposed to canned food, since Clostridium botulinum only produces the toxin under anoxic conditions.)
But if the affair was orchestrated, the Skripals were surely participants rather than victims in the operation, a plausible assumption since Sergei Skripal is known to have worked for MI6 and may have resumed his service to them on release from Russian gaol.
So how was it worked?
I suggest that there was a small dose of botulinum toxin added to their seafood lunch, which caused illness several hours later, but not the vomiting and convulsions as reported by the doctor who attended on them and asked that her name not be released to the public. Rather the illness would have been manifest as the paralysis characteristic of botulism. If that assumption is correct, then we must assume that the attending, unidentified doctor who described the Skripals' symptons as those of poisoning by a nerve agent of the Novichok type (i.e., a convulsant), is an agent of MI6 and that she deliberately misled the media.
Once received at the Salisbury Trust Hospital, experts in nerve agent poisoning at the nearby British Chemical and Biological Weapons research establishment would likely have been consulted, which would have created the opportunity for them to supply the hospital with British-made Novichok (a nerve agent developed by the Soviet Union) as an antidote to botulinum toxin, the mechanism whereby one nerve agent counteracts another being described in my previous post. The identity of this antidote may well not have been disclosed to the Hospital staff.
After that, the Skripals may have been kept in a more or less comotose state with, perhaps repeated small doses of botulinum toxin, which would have necessitated continual infusions of Novichok to prevent paralysis and death by asphyxiation. That would explain why, weeks after the initial poisoning, blood samples of the "victims" still contained detectable quantities of Novichok, as established by independent testing of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW). It would also explain why Yulia Skripal, though released from hospital, is in UK police custody.
The objective now, if the above scenario is a more or less accurate representation of actual events, must be to keep the Skripals out of the hands of the Russian state, where they could be forced to disclose their complicity in a psyop. perpetrated to undermine the credibility and moral standing of the Russian government. That would explain the offer by the CIA to give the Skripals new identities.
Related:
Sergei Lavrov: UK staged the Syrian chemical weapons attack
Craig Murray: Just Who’s Pulling the Strings?
Thursday, April 12, 2018
Novichok: Russia's Antidote to Seafood Poisoning?
UK PM, Theresa May, already in a state of Russophobic arousal because of the alleged nerve-agent poisoning of a retired Russian spy on British Soil, is now ready to follow Tony Bliar by entering into an Anglo-American war of aggression against a small middle-Eastern power, based on a pack of lies: specifically, the allegation by the usual head-chopping suspects that Syrian President Assad is killing his own people with chemical weapons. Examination of the published evidence, however, reveals a total lack of substance.
For example, US Secretary of Defense, General Mattis, a few hours ago told Congress that "he believes" that there was a chemical attack in Syria, but added that "the United States wants inspectors on the ground soon since the job of collecting evidence becomes more difficult as time passed."
So what Mattis knows about events in Douma at the time of the alleged chlorine gas attack is, apparently, nothing. But for the sake of the pro-war narrative, Mattis "believes" what there is no evidence for believing.
As for Britain's celebrated nerve agent attack on the former Russian Spy, Sergei Skripal, and his daughter, Yulia, it is interesting to note that the Skripals became ill several hours after a seafood lunch.
That is interesting because the time of onset of symptoms of poisoning relative to the time of their midday meal, i.e., an interval of several hours, is consistent with seafood poisoning, not nerve agent poisoning, which takes effect within seconds of contact.
Seafood poisoning can be due to the presence many different toxins,* including botulinum toxin, which inhibits release of acetylcholine at the neuromuscular junction, thereby causing paralysis and, in severe cases, death by asphyxiation.
 |
| Image source |
 |
By inhibiting the action of acetylcholinesterase a nerve agent such
as Novichok increases the persistence of acetyl choline in the cleft
of the neuromuscular junction, thereby countering the inhibition of
acetyl choline release caused by botulinum toxin. Image source.
|
Note:
Clearly the account of the Skripals' poisoning offered here is speculative, but it centers on a theory as to how the blood samples from the Skripals could have contained traces of Novichok in a way consistent with the letter to the Times from the Salisbury Trust Hospital's Resident in Emergency Medicine, Stephen Davies. In that letter, Davies said "no patients have experienced nerve agent poisoning in Salisbury:" a true statement if the Skripals were treated with, not poisoned by, Novichok. Botulinum toxin, it is true, is also a nerve agent, but considered, in the present context, not as a nerve agent but a form of food poisoning.
————
* Seafoods may contain many kinds of toxin, mostly of a type known as nerve agents, aka WMD's. The various toxins are produced by different microorganisms. Some toxins act as sodium-channel blockers, thereby preventing the spreading wave of electrical depolarization of nerve cell membranes that constitutes a nerve impulse.
A common microbial contaminant of seafood is Clostridium botulinum, which in one survey was found in about one quarter of all fish and shellfish samples tested. In the absence of oxygen, for example in canned fish that has been incompletely sterilized, Clostridium botulinum produces botulinum toxin, the deadliest poison known, ten billionths of a gram being sufficient to cause death.
As an inhibitor of acetylcholine release at the neuromuscular junction, botulinum toxin causes paralysis. The effect of botulinum toxin should thus be countered by nerve agents such as Novichok an inhibitor acetylcholine esterase, which causes tetany, or intense muscle contraction, by preventing break-down of whatever acetylcholine is released at the neuromuscular juction.
* Seafoods may contain many kinds of toxin, mostly of a type known as nerve agents, aka WMD's. The various toxins are produced by different microorganisms. Some toxins act as sodium-channel blockers, thereby preventing the spreading wave of electrical depolarization of nerve cell membranes that constitutes a nerve impulse.
A common microbial contaminant of seafood is Clostridium botulinum, which in one survey was found in about one quarter of all fish and shellfish samples tested. In the absence of oxygen, for example in canned fish that has been incompletely sterilized, Clostridium botulinum produces botulinum toxin, the deadliest poison known, ten billionths of a gram being sufficient to cause death.
As an inhibitor of acetylcholine release at the neuromuscular junction, botulinum toxin causes paralysis. The effect of botulinum toxin should thus be countered by nerve agents such as Novichok an inhibitor acetylcholine esterase, which causes tetany, or intense muscle contraction, by preventing break-down of whatever acetylcholine is released at the neuromuscular juction.
** According to Cornell University Chemistry Professor, Dave Collum, Novichok is a simple compound that could be prepared by his third year organic chemistry students. It is almost certain, therefore, that the Porton Down lab would have a supply of Novichok on hand.
*** Zakhari, J.S. et al. 2011. Formulating a new basis for the treatment against botulinum neurotoxin intoxication: 3,4-Diaminopyridine prodrug design and characterization Bioorg. Med. Chem. 9(21):6203-9.
Related:
Craig Murray:Yulia Skripal Is Plainly Under Duress
Moon of Alabama: Yulia Skripal released from Hospital: held in UK police custody.
*** Zakhari, J.S. et al. 2011. Formulating a new basis for the treatment against botulinum neurotoxin intoxication: 3,4-Diaminopyridine prodrug design and characterization Bioorg. Med. Chem. 9(21):6203-9.
Related:
Craig Murray:Yulia Skripal Is Plainly Under Duress
Moon of Alabama: Yulia Skripal released from Hospital: held in UK police custody.
Wednesday, April 11, 2018
Are the Skripals in Mortal Danger From the British State?
British Prime Minister, Theresa May, claims that the Russian spy turned British double agent, Sergei Skripal, and his daughter, Yulia, were the victims of an attempted nerve-agent assassination conducted on British soil on the direct orders of President Putin.
However, the evidence presented by the British state to substantiate its extraordinary allegation is, as we discussed, here, (and here, and here) essentially non-existent. Rather it appears from the circumstances that the incident was staged by the British state to stoke Russophobia. That would explain the timing, in advance of this week's almost certainly fake chemical weapons attack on civilians in Syria by, so Western media assert without evidence or question, Russia's ally, the Government of Syria.
Consistent with that inference is that the two incidents have been acclaimed with joy by warmongers in both London and Washington, DC as justification for NATO intervention in support of ISIS head-choppers in Syria against the Russian-backed Syrian Government.
Who then constitutes the greatest threat to the well-being of the Skripals? Is it the British state that apparently mounted either a fake or a failed nerve agent attack on them, an attack it then vociferously blamed on the Russians? Or is it the Russians who pardoned Sergei Skripal and released him from gaol years ago?
As long as one or both of the Skripals lives, whether under their own name or another, they represent a risk to the government of British Prime Minister, Theresa May, since they might reveal what actually happened in Salisbury when they were, according to the unsubstantiated claim of the British Government, exposed to the deadliest known nerve agent on the direct orders of President Putin.
In that context, the British Government, with assistance from the CIA is offering the Skripals the opportunity to depart the scene for new lives in the US or elsewhere under new identities.
For the Skripals, the opportunity can hardly be appealing. Not only must they sever all ties with family and friends in Russia and elsewhere, but the offer entails obvious personal risk.
Having induced them to depart the scene in name, why would the British state or their friends in America, not have them depart the scene in body and spirit also. Their identities already erased, supposedly for their own good, who would know, or even think to ask, whether they had also been silenced permanently by the hand of a British or American state assassin?
To the Russians, however, the Skripals are more valuable alive than dead as witnesses to a British operation designed to stoke Western Russophobia as a prelude to war. That they are of potential value to the Russians, is of course, the reason why the appear to be at great risk as long as they remain in the hands of the British state.
Related:
MofA: Trump Asks Russia To Roll Over - It Won't
Craig Murray: Yulia Skripal Is Plainly Under Duress
Peter Ford, Former UK Ambassador to Syria: At the Edge of Armageddon:
RT: Russia accuses US of plan to destroy evidence of fake chemical weapons attack in Syria
Stephen Lendman: The Nerve Agent Saga: Are the Skripals Being Held Against Their Will in Britain?
However, the evidence presented by the British state to substantiate its extraordinary allegation is, as we discussed, here, (and here, and here) essentially non-existent. Rather it appears from the circumstances that the incident was staged by the British state to stoke Russophobia. That would explain the timing, in advance of this week's almost certainly fake chemical weapons attack on civilians in Syria by, so Western media assert without evidence or question, Russia's ally, the Government of Syria.
Consistent with that inference is that the two incidents have been acclaimed with joy by warmongers in both London and Washington, DC as justification for NATO intervention in support of ISIS head-choppers in Syria against the Russian-backed Syrian Government.
Who then constitutes the greatest threat to the well-being of the Skripals? Is it the British state that apparently mounted either a fake or a failed nerve agent attack on them, an attack it then vociferously blamed on the Russians? Or is it the Russians who pardoned Sergei Skripal and released him from gaol years ago?
As long as one or both of the Skripals lives, whether under their own name or another, they represent a risk to the government of British Prime Minister, Theresa May, since they might reveal what actually happened in Salisbury when they were, according to the unsubstantiated claim of the British Government, exposed to the deadliest known nerve agent on the direct orders of President Putin.
In that context, the British Government, with assistance from the CIA is offering the Skripals the opportunity to depart the scene for new lives in the US or elsewhere under new identities.
For the Skripals, the opportunity can hardly be appealing. Not only must they sever all ties with family and friends in Russia and elsewhere, but the offer entails obvious personal risk.
Having induced them to depart the scene in name, why would the British state or their friends in America, not have them depart the scene in body and spirit also. Their identities already erased, supposedly for their own good, who would know, or even think to ask, whether they had also been silenced permanently by the hand of a British or American state assassin?
To the Russians, however, the Skripals are more valuable alive than dead as witnesses to a British operation designed to stoke Western Russophobia as a prelude to war. That they are of potential value to the Russians, is of course, the reason why the appear to be at great risk as long as they remain in the hands of the British state.
Related:
MofA: Trump Asks Russia To Roll Over - It Won't
Craig Murray: Yulia Skripal Is Plainly Under Duress
Peter Ford, Former UK Ambassador to Syria: At the Edge of Armageddon:
RT: Russia accuses US of plan to destroy evidence of fake chemical weapons attack in Syria
Stephen Lendman: The Nerve Agent Saga: Are the Skripals Being Held Against Their Will in Britain?
By Finian Cunningham: Skripal Poison Case Becoming British Hostage Scenario
Thursday, April 5, 2018
NoviJoke: To Russia With Hate
Former British Ambassador, Craig Murray, has made a compelling case that Boris Johnson, Britain's Foreign Secretary, lied in claiming that the poisoning of Russian traitor Sergei Skripal and his daughter, Yulia, in Salisbury, England, was with a nerve agent, Novichok, "made in Russia."
Johnson's additional claim that the attack was ordered, personally, by Russian President Putin is almost certainly, therefore, as baseless. That such "mad and horrible" allegations against Russia, as they have been described by Russia's Foreign Minister, Sergei Lavrov, are being made by the British Government suggests the existence of a propaganda campaign in preparation for war. For that reason, the Skripal poisoning story deserves close public examination.
Johnson's additional claim that the attack was ordered, personally, by Russian President Putin is almost certainly, therefore, as baseless. That such "mad and horrible" allegations against Russia, as they have been described by Russia's Foreign Minister, Sergei Lavrov, are being made by the British Government suggests the existence of a propaganda campaign in preparation for war. For that reason, the Skripal poisoning story deserves close public examination.
Wednesday, April 4, 2018
UK Backs off Russia Guilty of Nerve Agent Poisoning
Metro, April 4, 2018: The Foreign Office has deleted a tweet blaming Russia for the Salisbury attack after UK scientists announced they had not verified the source of the nerve agent used. The Government had posted a message online that stated the Kremlin was responsible. It said: ‘Analysis by world-leading experts at the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory at Porton Down made clear that this was a military-grade Novichok nerve agent produced in Russia.’ But yesterday Gary Aitkenhead, from the Government’s Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (DSTL) at Porton Down, said the role of his lab was not to work out where the agent came from. He added the Government’s conclusion that it was highly likely to be Russian was based on ‘a number of other sources.’ The Foreign Office confirmed it had taken the tweet down because it had been an inaccurate summary of comments made by the UK’s ambassador to Russia.
Read more
Independent, April 4, 2018:
The inability of Porton Down to ascribe blame to Russia means that intelligence is now the key factor in the accusation against the Kremlin. And such overwhelming dependence on intelligence, most of it unknown to the public, has inevitably led to comparison with the fake intelligence which was used to justify the Iraq invasion.
It is also perhaps inevitable that Mr Johnson would be in the centre of the controversy. In an interview two weeks ago he had stated that Porton Down scientists were “absolutely categorical” that the novichok came from Russia: “I asked the guy myself, I said ‘are you sure?’ And he said ‘there’s no doubt’.”
But “the guy”, Gary Aitkenhead, the chief executive of the DSTL (Defence Science and Technology Laboratory) at Porton Down, was pretty clear that although the scientists had ascertained the agent was novichok, “we haven’t identified the precise source”.
The foreign secretary’s aides are insisting that he was misunderstood and his words have been taken out of context. But at the same time, the Russian embassy gleefully pointed out, the Foreign Office deleted a tweet from last month saying that Porton Down had established that the novichok used in the attack definitely came from Russia
Read more
It's Not The Crime, It's The Cover-Up:
Moon of Alabama, April 4, 2018: When a scandal breaks, the discovery of an attempt to cover up is often regarded as even more reprehensible than the original deeds.
The British government is trying to cover-up the lies it made with its false allegations against Russia. The cover-up necessitates new lies some of which we expose below.
Yesterday the head of the British chemical weapon laboratory in Porton Down stated that the laboratory can not establish that the poison used in the alleged 'Novichok' attack in Salisbury was produced by Russia. This was a severe blow to the British government allegations of Russian involvement in the poisoning of Sergej and Yulia Skripal.
Now the British government tries to hide that it said that the poison used in the Salisbury was 'produced in Russia' and that Porton down had proved that to be the case. The government aligned media are helping to stuff the government lies down the memory hole.
We all need to make sure that the new lies get exposed and that the attempts to change the record fail.
Yesterday the British Foreign Office deleted this from its Twitter account:
The March 22 tweet was part of a now interrupted thread which summarized a briefing on the UK government's response to the Salisbury incident given by the British Ambassador to Russia, Dr Laurie Bristow, to the international diplomatic community in Moscow.
After the silent scrubbing of the record was publicly questioned the Foreign Office admittedthat it deleted the tweet:
Read more
Independent, April 4, 2018:
The inability of Porton Down to ascribe blame to Russia means that intelligence is now the key factor in the accusation against the Kremlin. And such overwhelming dependence on intelligence, most of it unknown to the public, has inevitably led to comparison with the fake intelligence which was used to justify the Iraq invasion.
It is also perhaps inevitable that Mr Johnson would be in the centre of the controversy. In an interview two weeks ago he had stated that Porton Down scientists were “absolutely categorical” that the novichok came from Russia: “I asked the guy myself, I said ‘are you sure?’ And he said ‘there’s no doubt’.”
But “the guy”, Gary Aitkenhead, the chief executive of the DSTL (Defence Science and Technology Laboratory) at Porton Down, was pretty clear that although the scientists had ascertained the agent was novichok, “we haven’t identified the precise source”.
The foreign secretary’s aides are insisting that he was misunderstood and his words have been taken out of context. But at the same time, the Russian embassy gleefully pointed out, the Foreign Office deleted a tweet from last month saying that Porton Down had established that the novichok used in the attack definitely came from Russia
Read more
It's Not The Crime, It's The Cover-Up:
Moon of Alabama, April 4, 2018: When a scandal breaks, the discovery of an attempt to cover up is often regarded as even more reprehensible than the original deeds.
The British government is trying to cover-up the lies it made with its false allegations against Russia. The cover-up necessitates new lies some of which we expose below.
Yesterday the head of the British chemical weapon laboratory in Porton Down stated that the laboratory can not establish that the poison used in the alleged 'Novichok' attack in Salisbury was produced by Russia. This was a severe blow to the British government allegations of Russian involvement in the poisoning of Sergej and Yulia Skripal.
Now the British government tries to hide that it said that the poison used in the Salisbury was 'produced in Russia' and that Porton down had proved that to be the case. The government aligned media are helping to stuff the government lies down the memory hole.
We all need to make sure that the new lies get exposed and that the attempts to change the record fail.
Yesterday the British Foreign Office deleted this from its Twitter account:
The March 22 tweet was part of a now interrupted thread which summarized a briefing on the UK government's response to the Salisbury incident given by the British Ambassador to Russia, Dr Laurie Bristow, to the international diplomatic community in Moscow.
After the silent scrubbing of the record was publicly questioned the Foreign Office admittedthat it deleted the tweet:
After it emerged on Wednesday that the tweet had been deleted, the Foreign Office said the post was removed because it "did not accurately report" the words of Laurie Bristow, the UK's ambassador to Russia, which the tweet was supposed to be quoting.Hmm - fool me once ...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)