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.

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:

“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.”

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:

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.

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.

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)

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.

UK Ambassador, Craig Murray, Gears Up to Demolish the Lies About the Amesbury Poisonings From Thereason May's Law 'n Order minister, Savidge Javidge

Craig Murray, who was booted from the diplomatic service for objecting to Britain's use of intelligence obtained by boiling people to death in an Uzbek gaol, summarizes on his blog the British Government's position on the recent fatal poisoning of Dawn Sturgess in Amesbury, Wiltshire. Sturgess became ill following a visit with her "partner" Charlie Rowley to the scene of the Skripal poisonings in the nearby town of Salisbury. Rowley also became ill and remains under medical care:

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

Almost (but not quite) every sentence in the above statement, says Murray, is "very obviously untrue" for reasons he promises to set forth tomorrow.

PostScript:

To anyone who has followed the Novichok Saga in any detail, the following comment on Murray's blog is riveting:

Jack: 

[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

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 21,2018:WMD Attack in Salisbury, England: Nerve Agent, Russian Agent, Double 

April 23, 2018: British Intelligence: An Oxymoron

Agent, Triple Agent, Spiked Blood Sample, Silent Witnesses, and Propaganda

May 15, 2018: UK Academics Demolish Theresa May's Skripal Poisoning Lies

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 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 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

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:

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 ...

Read more

Will the UK Diplomat Booted By the Lying Blair Government Bring Down the Lying May Government?

Former UK Ambassador, Craig Murray, who called out UK Prime Minister Theresa May and Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson for lying about the poisoning, in Salisbury England, of former Russian spy, Sergei Skrypal, and his daughter Yulia, has returned to the attack with three new pieces posted at his blog:

April 3, 2018:
Breaking News: Porton Down to Make Public Statement

April 4, 2018:
Johnson and May Hide as their Lies Dissolve

April 4, 2018:
The Poison in our Body Politic

We may yet see a man dismissed from the service of the British Government by a lying Blair government, play a critical role in the dismissal of Theresa May's lying government from the service of the people.

Salisbury Terror Nerve Gas Attack: How We Know Putin Did It

Theresa May, House of Commons, March 12, 2017:

Re: The poisoning of Segei and Yulia Skirpal in Salisbury, England
Based on the positive identification of this chemical agent by world-leading experts at the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory at Porton Down; our knowledge that Russia has previously produced this agent and would still be capable of doing so; Russia's record of conducting state-sponsored assassinations*; and our assessment that Russia views some defectors as legitimate targets for assassinations; the Government has concluded that it is highly likely that Russia was responsible for the act against Sergei and Yulia Skripal.

Mr. Speaker, there are therefore only two plausible explanations for what happened in Salisbury on the 4th of March.

Either this was a direct act by the Russian state against our country.

Or the Russian government lost control of this potentially catastrophically damaging nerve agent and allowed it to get into the hands of others.

So folks, no actual evidence, but still it's best just to place your trust in the politicians who in your hearts you know do what’s absolutely best for you, like, for example, bringing on the next ME war, with potential for escalation to World War III.

The fact that the incident in Salisbury occurred days before the Russian Presidential election has of course nothing to do with it.

The fact that the incident in Salisbury occurred just a couple of months before Russia is to host the World cup has of course nothing to do with it.

The fact that the incident in Salisbury occurred in the months leading up to completion of the NordStream II gas line to deliver Russian natural gas to North Western Europe, a project that US interests still seek to block to the benefit of US exporters of liquefied natural gas, a surplus byproduct of oil fracking, has of course nothing to do with it.

The fact that Trump is gunning for a war on a Russia-backed Iran for which the incident in Salisbury may yet provide a pretext, is not to be thought of.

The fact that Putin has no reason to seek a war for which the incident in Salisbury could so readily serve as a pretext, at a time when Russia and China are still racing to surpass the US in arms both quantitatively and qualitatively, is of course irrelevant.

No, clearly, Putin decided that since now was the worst possible time to murder a Russian spy — a man already pardoned by the Russian state — using a terror weapon with Russia’s signature on it, on foreign soil, then this was, in fact, the best time since no one would believe the Russians to be that damn stupid. Trouble for Putin is that everyone is so damn stupid that they really do think the Russians are that damn stupid.

* May defends use of drones to kill British terrorists overseas

* Tracking US drone strikes and other covert actions in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Yemen and Somalia

Related:

The Star: Canada’s Russia policy raises many questions (such as why expel diplomats in the complete absence of evidence of wrongdoing? Because it's all bollocks, that's why.)