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:

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.

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:

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.

The Skripal Poisonings: The Ducks That Didn't Die

Rob Slane continues to dog the lying British state on its phony investigation of the alleged WMD nerve agent poisoning of Russian traitor Sergei Skripal and his daughter, Yulia, midst England's green and pleasant land.

In the fifth, and most recent, of ten planned blog posts on holes in the official narrative of the Salisbury poisonings Slane raises the issue of the dead ducks, or rather their absence.

Well, actually, Slane says nothing much of the ducks, but speaks rather of the duck feeders, a bunch of boys who received duck-bread from the nerve-agent contaminated hands of the Skripals:

After parking the car, at 1:40 pm, the two of them [the Skripals] were seen near the Avon Playground, in The Maltings, feeding ducks with some local boys. This was at 1:45pm and has been confirmed to me by one of the boys’ mothers, who was shown the CCTV footage by the police, which she said was really clear. She also confirmed to me that Mr. Skripal was wearing jeans and a leather jacket, and that Yulia Skripal had a red bag. The Metropolitan Police apparently don’t think the duck feeding incident important enough to include in their timeline, and so after the parking of the car, we are treated to the vague statement that, “at some time after this, they go to the Bishops Mill Pub.” But it is incredibly important, for the following reason: it totally, completely and comprehensively debunks the idea that Mr Skripal was poisoned at his home, after his hand came into contact with a deadly nerve agent on the handle of his front door. Why? BECAUSE HE HANDED BREAD TO THE BOYS, AND NONE OF THEM BECAME CONTAMINATED, THAT’S WHY!

What's more, none of the ducks died, so far as we know, and we would surely have known of it if there had been a die off of ducks fed by the Skripals, further evidence of Russia's totally evil contempt not only for the British state, but the whole living world.

And if you think it far-fetched to suppose that by handing them duck bread the Skripals could have unintentionally poisoned the boys in the park, think again, for as Rob Slane elaborates:

... Zizzis [the restaurant where the Skripals had lunch] has remained shut since the incident, because it was apparently contaminated, and the table that the Skripals ate their meal at “had to be destroyed” because of the apparently high concentration of nerve agent there. Likewise, The Mill [the pub to which the Skripals repaired for an after-lunch tipple] has been closed ever since. And of course the bench [where the Skripals were found apparently incapacitated by Novichoks] too had to be destroyed, since it was apparently contaminated. But these were all places visited by the Skripals AFTER the feeding of the ducks. And so we are asked to believe the following preposterous notion: That Sergei and Yulia Skripal’s hands were contaminated with “military grade nerve agent” at the door of Mr. Skripal’s house, so much so that certain places they visited on that afternoon had to undergo months of decontamination, and certain items they touched had to be destroyed.

But if the Skripals were so contaminated with a deadly nerve agent that giving duck bread to the boys in the park should have poisoned them, what about the ducks that eat the bread that the Skripals gave to the boys in the park. Obviously they would have died. Right? Um, yes, well apparently, not. 

Well done Rob. Keep at it. 

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:

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. 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. 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? Detective Sergeant Bailey attended the Skripal house and was also poisoned by the doorknob, but more lightly. None of the other police who attended the house were affected. 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)

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.