Like many, my first thought at the interview of Boshirov and Petrov – which apparently are indeed their names – is that they were very unconvincing. The interview itself seemed to be set up around a cramped table with a poor camera and lighting, and the interviewer seemed pretty hopeless at asking probing questions that would shed any real light.
I had in fact decided that their story was highly improbable, until I started seeing the storm of twitter posting, much of it from mainstream media journalists, which stated that individual things were impossible which were, in fact, not impossible at all.
The first and most obvious regards the weather on 3 and 4 March. It is in fact absolutely true that, if the two had gone down to Salisbury on 3 March with the intention of going to Stonehenge, they would have been unable to get there because of the snow. It is therefore perfectly possible that they went back the next day to try again; and public transport out of Salisbury was still severely disrupted, and many roads closed, on 4 March. Proof of this is not at all difficult to find.
This image is from the Salisbury Journal’s liveblog on 4 March.
Those mocking the idea that the pair were blocked by snow from visiting Stonehenge have pointed to the CCTV footage of central Salisbury not showing snow on the afternoon of 4 March. Well, that is central Salisbury, it had of course been salted and cleared. Outside there were drifts.
So that part of their story in fact turns out not to be implausible as social media is making out; in fact it fits precisely with the actual facts.
The second part of their story that has brought ridicule is the notion that two Russians would fly to the UK for the weekend and try to visit Salisbury. This ridicule has been very strange to me. Weekend breaks – arrive on Friday and return on Sunday – are a standard part of the holiday industry. Why is it apparently unthinkable that Russians fly on weekend breaks as well as British people?
Even more strange is the idea that it is wildly improbable for Russian visitors to wish to visit Salisbury cathedral and Stonehenge. Salisbury Cathedral is one of the most breathtaking achievements of Norman architecture, one of the great cathedrals of Europe. It attracts a great many foreign visitors. Stonehenge is world famous and a world heritage site. I went on holiday this year and visited Wurzburg to see the Bishop’s Palace, and then the winery cooperative at Sommerach. Because somebody does not choose to spend their leisure time on a beach in Benidorm does not make them a killer. Lots of people go to Salisbury Cathedral.
There seems to be a racist motif here – Russians cannot possibly have intellectual or historical interests, or afford weekend breaks.
The final meme which has worried me is “if they went to see the cathedral, why did they visit the Skripal house?” Well, no evidence at all has been presented that they visited the Skripal house. They were captured on CCTV walking past a petrol station 500 yards away – that is the closest they have been placed to the Skripal house.
The greater mystery about these two is, if they did visit the Skripal House and paint Novichok on the doorknob, why did they afterwards walk straight past the railway station again and head into Salisbury city centre, where they were caught window shopping in a coin and souvenir shop with apparently not a care in the world, before eventually returning to the train station? It seems a very strange attitude to a getaway after an attempted murder. In truth their demeanour throughout the photographs is consistent with their tourism story.
The Russians have so far presented this pair in a very unconvincing light. But on investigation, the elements of their story which are claimed to be wildly improbable are not inconsistent with the facts.
There remains the much larger question of the timing.
The Metropolitan Police state that Boshirov and Petrov did not arrive in Salisbury until 11.48 on the day of the poisoning. That means that they could not have applied a nerve agent to the Skripals’ doorknob before noon at the earliest. But there has never been any indication that the Skripals returned to their home after noon on Sunday 4 March. If they did so, they and/or their car somehow avoided all CCTV cameras. Remember they were caught by three CCTV cameras on leaving, and Borishov and Petrov were caught frequently on CCTV on arriving.
The Skripals were next seen on CCTV at 13.30, driving down Devizes road. After that their movements were clearly witnessed or recorded until their admission to hospital.
So even if the Skripals made an “invisible” trip home before being seen on Devizes Road, that means the very latest they could have touched the doorknob is 13.15. The longest possible gap between the novichok being placed on the doorknob and the Skripals touching it would have been one hour and 15 minutes. Do you recall all those “experts” leaping in to tell us that the “ten times deadlier than VX” nerve agent was not fatal because it had degraded overnight on the doorknob? Well that cannot be true. The time between application and contact was between a minute and (at most) just over an hour on this new timeline.
In general it is worth observing that the Skripals, and poor Dawn Sturgess and Charlie Rowley, all managed to achieve almost complete CCTV invisibility in their widespread movements around Salisbury at the key times, while in contrast “Petrov and Boshirov” managed to be frequently caught in high quality all the time during their brief visit.
This is especially remarkable in the case of the Skripals’ location around noon on 4 March. The government can only maintain that they returned home at this time, as they insist they got the nerve agent from the doorknob. But why was their car so frequently caught on CCTV leaving, but not at all returning? It appears very much more probable that they came into contact with the nerve agent somewhere else, while they were out.
I shall write a further post on these timing questions shortly.
Oooh I feel sorry for them.
I also think they’re gay.
It was interesting how they almost never needed to look at each other to check what the other one was thinking or about to say. Like a very close couple. Not like mates.
Probably dealing in semi-legal body-building substances.
A gay clientele?
Some not very kosher contacts for their import/export ventures?
They like their little jaunts abroad in countries where it’s safe to cruise.
They’re cultured like gay men often are, and really wanted to see Salisbury Cathedral.
I’m French and always wanted to visit Salisbury Cathedral.
My visit didn’t coincide with the attempted murder of a swap spy. And I don’t come from an “enemy” country. Lucky me.
I hope their lives recover after this ordeal.
These guys were gay and went away for a weekend to be together. Hence sharing a double bed in the hotel.
They are more like Peter Tachell, you can tell how they present themselves.
Russian intelligence, military and police are all macho. These guys would not pass the entrance exaim.
The government allegations and lies are not stacking up. The public servants we see cannot lie it will be the kiss of death for there career. What they will be is economical with the truth.
Look at this like, within it is a diagram explaining all the players.
http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/index2655.htm
Theresa May will be out by Christmas.
Craig knows how the game is played, he played until him and Jack Straw fell out.
There never are such reports circulating in the Kremlin Security Council today …this site is just as notorious as british intelligence investigating Skripals…..
I watched the FULL interview. I think the edited versions are misleading. Their story to me is completely believable.
And the fact that the UK hasn’t released any evidence at all that showing them doing anything nefarious is telling. They have been framed without any evidence and they’re scared shitless.
I don’t think they realise the extent to which their lives are now changed and they haven’t accepted that their lives are going to be irrevocably different from now on. They’ll need to do more interviews. And they’re going to be getting harassed by the media. May as well accept it and meet it head on. I feel for them.
FSB will will gut them out, and russian media too.
im expecting a lot of details in few days.
They should come to this blog.
I’d ask them if they carried smartphones during their visit.
yes, they carried, why not?
“yes, they carried, why not?”
If it is an Android phone and they have a gmail account configured for it then the GPS data would be recorded, so it would show if they did or did not walk up to the front door of the Skripal house.
Ditto if it is an iPhone and they have an iCloud account.
You don’t get it cause you bought it.
Enjoy your purchase, and be happy! 🙂
Did you just try to impersonate me?
It feels like a lot of the commenters are trying to muddy the waters.
ditto bjs comment…
Yep. The “jman” at 23:31 clearly attempts to impersonate jman at 23:02.
Сирийцы показали детей, которых Белые Каски выдавали за жертвы хим . атаки. Дети живы и здоровы, воздействию отравляющих веществ не подвергались. И что? А вы о смартфоне говорите. Мей скажет , что их смартфон отдельно гулял, сам по себе.
Boris Krylov
September 14 2018, 6:11am
The Syrians showed the children whom the White Helmets passed off as victims of the chemicals attack. Children are alive and well, they were not exposed to toxic substances. So what? And you’re talking about a smartphone. Are you saying that their smartphone walked separately, by itself?
The full interview:
Full Skripal case interview with the UK’s suspects — RT
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ku8OQNyI2i0
Note the comments under the youtube video. Basically, no one believes they did it!
Quite so – the full interview, and the final 10 minutes – makes plenty of sense. NB Mr. Murray – the video interview you currently have embedded on your site is incomplete – here’s the full 25:25 which should be in its stead. In the full interview it’s discussed that the pair walked through the very same gate at Gatwick – not separate gates – which was subject on an earlier post by you – see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QcoEjwQ-jQg
then explain the exact same time stamp to the second? rather, i would like the uk officials who released the pics to explain that… it is a fabricated pic, or time stamp.. take yer pick…
Yes. The photos show two different gates with their open barriers at different angles and different stickers on the walls, and lens blemishes and picture angles confirm that the two photos came from different cameras.
I find it weird that they stressed that they always use the same gate.
Now, assuming I was a spook checking the passports of two Russian men, with corresponding numbers, would I make sure these two are followed and watched 24/7?
Or are we clasping at a massive raspberry?
This whole affair was well planed and these two were playing their part. I suspect that we will face more diversion news, the ball will keep rolling.
Dont think those two will survive this interview for long.
QT tonight. Unbearable. Unwatchable. Off.
After the introductions, Dimblebore went round the fivesome for answers to some planted question about the panel recommending a day trip to Salisbury. Firstly Ms Shaheen, then Hartley Brewer, then Chris Leslie and Rory Stewart all produced instantaneous demonization of Russia and President Putin. Like parrots.
I looked up Rory Stewart (v spooky!) and Chris Leslie. Both are members of their party’s Friends of Israel lobby groups. Lovely.
Who the fuck is Leslie?
A comment on the TLN says it:
‘A lot of viewers for this programme I would guess – I only watched the Russians dunnit question with utter disgust and astonishment – there was not one voice on the panel or in the audience to denounce the UK le Carré skripal special. The usual lies about Litvinenko, Crimea, Ukraine, Syria and MH17 ( I think) were pulled out of the smear bag – all of which can be proved to be propaganda specials from the makers and developers of White Helmets and WMD. Do these people even know about the admitted lies over Iraq and Libya?
Dimbleshit and the panel seemed to go out of their way to make it clear to everyone that only an idiot would believe the Russians – and only one audience member was allowed a voice and guess what he agreed with the panel!
This was the last time I will ever watch QT no matter how instructive it is to see the opinions of the opposition.’
Sharp Ears
I deliberately refrained from watching it because I knew exactly what to expect – and clearly I was right. I don’t suffer from high blood pressure but my doctor would have serious concerns if he took my blood pressure when I’m watching that biased rubbish.
Please see my earlier (p.3) reply to your ‘link’.
Many thanks
@Borncynical
Sorry. I should have said p.4 (i.e. the previous page)
I don’t know what to think about this except for this: if they are gay, Boshirov is bottom and Petrov is top. I called it. :p
boshirov is mental leader is this couple…but petrov’s speech and mimics looks a way more credible.
Obviously they are not gay. They said they were straight, they have according to their answers families. They may have shared rooms together (in Switzerland) to save on expense (I shared with a man on the Big Ride for Palestine this year). My wife would I suspect be horrified to think either of us was a “shirt-lifter”. The thought absolutely appals me. I would not wittingly stick my finger in shit let alone stick in a more intimate part of my anatomy. For those that do it is not for me to criticise. In the modern world we have to be tolerant because otherwise we become label-stock (a papermaking term).
Your freudian slip is showing.
Perhaps certain phrases are best left in the C20th, don’t you think?
why is it obvious john? because they said so? do you have a clear idea what it means to say you are gay in russia? the fact they said they have families? gays are often found to have families and lead a double life… so, why is it so obvious according to you?
“do you have a clear idea what it means to say you are gay in russia?”
It used to mean that you were a sailor in the Russian navy, where it was compulsory.
Do not forget that when the UK was sending men to prison for homosexuality, right up until the late ‘swinging sixties,’ and national heroes like Alan Turin were being chemically castrated, homosexuality was not a crime in Russia.
…and when they say they “have families” as far as I can recall it wasn’t said in a context where they necessarily meant wives and children. I think they referred to the effects of the publicity on their families which I interpreted as parents, brothers, sisters etc. Because of the expansiveness of the country many Russians live in conservative, parochial societies where everyone knows everyone else…and where it is probably a stigma to be gay, that being another reason why they might not wish to publicise their sexuality.
John Goss, I think you should consider that more acts of anal sex are performed heterosexually than homosexually. As for shit, someone must have changed your nappy many times when you were an infant, and owners clear up after their dogs.
Boshirov and Petrov make the only salient point that really matters to the observers of this and other social news sites: release ALL the cctv video material in possession of the UK bobbies. Let informed people decide where the story is faulted or substantiated by revealing all the images with date stamps and all that technical paraphernalia intact.
Open society is a safe society and where a court proceeding is indicated: an open proceeding is vital.
Where is the autopsy up to for Dawn Sturgess? Has any public defender sought habeas corpus for Yulia or Sergei?
There are serious consequences for the UK state apparatus to continue spinning this crap so let’s see the goods.
if you released footage where boshirov is spraying scripals doorknob in the middle of the day, and birds around are singing, it couldn’t be disputed of course,
Sub judice didn’t apply in the six month period between the events in Salisbury and when the arrest warrants were issued and the two men were charged.
It does, however, apply now, and Theresa May prejudiced a possible future trial by what her office said this afternoon in response to the interview, namely that their account was one of “lies and blatant fabrications”. It’s not easy to get a fair trial in a country in which the prime minister has called you a liar for saying you’re innocent.
You are quite right that an arrangement could be made for them to be tried extraterritorially – as it could have been for a trial of Boris Berezovsky.
Don’t worry, I think we all get the irony of it.
As far as I know, Interpol has not issued any red notice on these guys yet. Moreover, even though not all red notices are published on Interpol’s website, there are currently NO Russian nationals sought after by the UK among the published list of notices.
On top of what FobosDeimos said, I doubt there’s a European Arrest Warrant issued simply because the UK would have to supply a ton of information [1] to the suspect if they are actually arrested in an EU country before they could be brought to the UK and the “information” provided by the UK could be challenged on merits (that’s an express provision of that Directive.
1. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1450448411428&uri=CELEX:32012L0013
@Anders – They have been charged: Independent, Guardian, Telegraph, Time, etc. I couldn’t find the BBC saying they have been charged (they only say they have been “named as suspects” and that the CPS say there is “enough evidence” to charge them), so for a while I had a niggling suspicion that perhaps you were right. But the Met said on 5 Sep that they were charged on that day. (“Today marks (..) the charging…”)
The domestic and European arrest warrants that have been issued (source: the Met) are enough to mean that legal proceedings are active in the sense that a future trial can be prejudiced by remarks that are published now, even if the case is not literally under a judge. Public officials are not supposed to go around saying to the media that someone is lying, as Theresa May has done.
What’s your source for saying the EAW hasn’t been issued for a specific offence? It’s a condition of an EAW that the person must be accused of an offence carrying a prison sentence of at least a year. I thought they had to be specific.
It will be quite spectacular if Boshirov and Petrov contact the British embassy and say they are willing to be interviewed by the British police in a Russian police station where the British have no power of arrest.
The stills and video that have been published would be admissible in court so long as their provenance can be proven, which surely wouldn’t be a problem, and in any case I doubt the defence would contest it, but in itself these don’t suggest any wrongdoing. Many in the British population seem to think there’s a strong case against these two guys, when all that’s been published is material indicating they’re two fairly burly-looking Russian blokes who travelled twice by train to Salisbury and walked around a bit.
The supposed separation between executive (not the legislature – this came from 10 Downing Street) and judiciary was precisely my point.
If a trial were on now, Theresa May and the media organs that have reported her words would be in big trouble. And since the case is already legally active (because of charges and arrest warrants), at least some of the same law that is intended to prevent prejudice already applies.
ut: “Boshirov and Petrov make the only salient point that really matters to the observers of this and other social news sites: release ALL the cctv video material in possession of the UK bobbies.”
an: “You cannot release all evidence, putting all evidence in the public domain would invalidate any trial that this pair of clowns may want to turn up to.”
Straw man. uncle tungsten wasn’t asking for the release of “all evidence”. He was asking for the release of “all the CCTV video”.
Doing that does not “invalidate” anything, nor prejudice any future criminal proceedings.
No charges have been laid against these two individuals in ANY British court, or haven’t you noticed?
UK bobbies.
You mean Dixon of Dock Green ?
My you have been collecting those souvenir tea-towels. The man in charge of this is Neil Basu, Asst Comm who is of Indian extraction…..
Ferrari had Regev and Hassassian in the studio this morning for a face to face discussion.
https://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/nick-ferrari/israel-and-palestine-ambassadors-live-on-lbc-watch/
Needless to say and predictably, Regev introduced the matter of the wreath-laying by Corbyn. Any smear will do for him.
I’ve just finished watching the full interview, or at least what may be the fullest version available. So they do say they went shopping in Oxford Street on Saturday 3 March after returning from Salisbury.
If they went to Waterloo on 2 March between Victoria and Bow, checking what the position was regarding trains to Salisbury, given the weather, could be a reasonable explanation.
From their answers and their demeanour when asked and answering certain questions they appear to be gay.
One possibility is that at least one of them AND at least one of the Skripals were couriers and that the target was Nikolai Glushkov. Glushkov, a man of 68 who has been described as the last survivor of Boris Berezovsky’s inner circle, was in a civil partnership with Denis Trushin, aged 27. (Whether they were friends of “Prince” Charles I don’t know.) Trushin is a “luxury goods entrepreneur” and together with Natalia, Glushkov’s daughter, he set up a luxury “men’s lifestyle boutique” called Vault Privé in Baku. Someone called Denis Trushin (I’m not sure it’s the same one) is involved with a company called Svital (in Belarus).
The question I am leading up to is whether Trushin has or has had any connection with the “fitness industry”.
Principally 4 possibilities have to be taken into consideration:
a.) Petrov´s and Boshirov´s visit in England and their stay in Salisbury in fact has nothing to do with th Skripal affair – pure coincidence.
b.) They are in fact GRU-agents and worked in mission of the Russian government.
c.) They were hired by a third party – perhaps without knowing exactly what they were commissioned to do (and now became scared of the ordering party (mafia etc.)
d.) Somebody who knew about their visit (e.g. British authorities) organized the Skripal poisoning exactly in the time of their stay in Salisbury in order to put the blame on Russia.
I think the interview indicates most likly to possibility c.)
they really look(speech, gestures) like village mafia, nothing close to gru officers.
I had a look earlier to see what MSM was saying.The Daily Mail had hired “a body language” expert to analyse the Russians behaviour during the interview.. The overall result she said was they were ” regurgitating ” a script . She said they were stressed and tense and also that their facial signals and body language indicated they were lying to the interviewer. Go f.igure
in russia also a lot of behavior experts estimated their behavior. yes they are lying. but sometimes. essentially when they are speaking about the purpose of Salisbury visit…but if they gave photos of local landmarks they visited, it would play on their side.
But if they also took photos during their alleged orgy in the London hotel room, they might not want to show them. People would ask about the missing photos revealed by the filename sequences.
The way they both threw a direct question back – Boshirov asked Simonyan whether she knew where Skripal’s house was, and Petrov asked her whether she was GRU (*) – suggested a deliberate technique for gaining time so as not to show so much stress.
[*] Surely she’s FSB 🙂
Well Luke Harding, Frank Gardner, Mark Urban are MI6 and I presume Con Coughlin is fed drinking money from one of the “Boxes” to write his Horatio Bottomley pieces
If they were carrying something, they may have been induced otherwise than being “hired”.
I’d go for (c) as well.
I’ve just watched the whole video (I’d previously only seen extracts) and I now find it more convincing than I did at first. They don’t look at each other much for cues but at no point do they contradict each other. I don’t think they are gay because, if they were, they would look at each other more.
Another possibility is that as part of the Salisbury hoax, HMG then set about finding two patsies to carry the can. Getting them to the UK on false business pretences via a fake fitness and wellness corporation. They have had to lie about amongst other things their relationship and the shortness of their stay after they returned to Russia and then had been shown video of their overnight activities at the City Stay Hotel.
Maybe HMG commissioned a search of everyone within a certain age range travelling from Moscow to the UK on a Russian passport in the days before the Skripal incident. People satisfying that criterion were then traced to see how long they stayed and where they went. These two arrived at the right time and visited Salisbury – bingo, they made the short list. Their movements, and the movements of any other contenders, were examined for best fit and Bob’s your uncle. Guilty.
That would explain why it took the security services so long to come up with this gruesome twosome.
The PM is making the most of the new legal arrangement of “guilty until proved innocent”.
These chaps are evading and hiding, but I suspect more out of embarrassment than for nefarious reasons. I also suspect that they could be in the business of performance enhancing substances, or other contraband pharmaceuticals, which would explain why they preferred to keep a low profile until now.
I am not convinced by the excuse of being “drenched up to the knees” as the reason to curtail their visit, seems to be an exaggeration and over-reaction to a bit of snow and slush.
Ah but have you been to Old Sarum?
@ N_ September 13, 2018 at 23:43
Yes, indeed. Old Sarum, you’ve hit it on the head.
They were forward recce checking out a Spetnatz infiltration via Old Sarum airfield (closed at night).
By golly, our guys are really on the ball! They foiled their ‘cunning plan’.
I’m sure Baldrick can come up with another one….
I meant Old Sarum the Iron Age hillfort that had the first Salisbury Cathedral among other buildings. This is on the other side of the road from the airfield and you wouldn’t want to be climbing up the bank wearing ordinary footwear when there was a lot of snow on the ground. It’s about a mile from the centre of town. If this was their first intended port of call, it’s not hard to imagine them walking part of the way, perhaps getting to the bottom of the bank, and then deciding they didn’t want to continue. You could easily get wet up to your knees if you weren’t wearing proper clothing. They mention Old Sarum three times in the interview if memory serves.
“‘These chaps are evading and hiding, but I suspect more out of embarrassment than for nefarious reasons.”
Or fear, perhaps. They are being accused of attempted murder, after all.
As others have hinted, there may be a bit of “Brokeback Mountain” going on. They seem very defensive about their relationship, justifying the double room, and suggesting that straight men don’t carry women’s perfume. Buying women’s perfume in a duty free for a girlfriend/wife is very common.
I would advise folks to look at what’s going on in Syria, right at this moment.
For those interested here’s the other side of the story…
https://www.sana.sy/en/
It’s propaganda, of course, but it pales into the shade when set against the BBC, CNN, MSNBC, and all the other CIA controlled media.
@ RobG September 13, 2018 at 23:38
‘..It’s propaganda, of course..’
Oh yeh? What exactly draws you to that conclusion? Why on earth should the Syrians and Russians tell the TRUTH? Most sensible people will know that the Western NATO warmongers are lying, trying still to arrange ‘Regime Change’, or at least splitting off part of Syria.
Think about it – they don’t need to lie, or propagandise – that is the task of the ‘Perps’.
All the Syrians and Russians have to do is ‘tell the truth’, and there is sweet FA evidence of their not doing so in the present Idlib business.
– “What exactly draws you to that conclusion?”
We all propagandise. It’s how our brains are wired, as confirmed by countless psychological experiments. We deceive ourselves, and believe the things that appeal to us. That’s why reason and the scientific method had to be developed.
You’ve got it ars about tip again. it is not up to anyone to clear their name in court. It is up to the prosecution to prove their guilt ‘beyond reasonable doubt’. All May and the baying media have done so far is smear them without providing any genuine evidence. And the way May and the media have behaved, it is unlikely they would get a fair trial in any case.
Wouldn’t those two guys have had to wear top of the range hazmat suits in order to stay safe while painting the doorknob? Painting the doorknob LMAO. Sounds similar to phrases like “spanking the monkey” or “choking the chicken”. Those suits make you look a bit like Mr Blobby, yet no one saw them and there’s no CCTV footage of them wearing those suits. Also, where did they collect the suits (maybe they smuggled them through customs. Customs officer: “And what are these for?” The Ruskies: “Those are traditional Russian costumes.” Customs officer (who has just returned from an inclusivity and cultural awareness course: “Oh, I’m terribly sorry. I didn’t mean to insult your wonderful Russian sense of dress. Please forgive me, Ivan and Igor. And by way of apology please accept this small gift.” (hands them a jar of novichok)
@ Anders Novichok September 14, 2018 at 00:07
‘…Ask the OPCW.’
Why on earth ask the totally compromised OPCW? Why not ask Anders Novichok instead?
Hamish de Bretton What not described the substance as an ‘oily, gloopy liquid’. He would know of course.
Q. Where is he at the moment? LOL
Maybe they were set up by MI5/MI6. They sell illegal enhancing drugs. They were supposed to meet some one that contacted them, maybe Skripal on order from MI6 posed as a buyer, but he didn’t show up, they were just supposed to be there in Salisbury, for this whole humbug. This is why Skripal and his daughter have been kidnapped and are not allowed to talk freely
@ Pam September 14, 2018 at 00:04
I have raised that possibility/probability before.
Re Sergei and Yulia Skripal, the silly-born HMG angle is in deep doo-doo. Sergei’s 90-odd year mother has asked for a visa to visit the UK and meet her son before she dies. Catch 22.
there is a list of banned steroids and drugs in russia, and not dealers only, but consumers too, could easy spend some part of their life behind bars. that’s why this business in russia is quite “gray”.
there are legal and illegal steroids, if you are selling or buying illegal – you are under risk at least.
I’m a supporter of yourself, but you are struggling here trying to explain the two Russians’ visit to Salisbury as tourism. A more likely explanation is that they were there to meet either the Skripals or some other persons. Whether it was to try to kill the Skripals or not is something we are very unlikely to ever know.
But the narrative appearing from Russia and building up on Social Media vis a vis the weather, difficulties with trains, and TV camera viewings of the suspects appears to decry the British Government’s statements.
If these guys are just completely innocent tourists, then the UK narrative in its construction is dependent upon their completely innocent turning up in Salisbury at the appropriate time.
What’s the probability of finding Russian visitors to fit the UK’s Skripal narrative, just where and when you need them.
And they’d had to have reverse-engineered their completely innocent visit into the UK narrative.
It would have to be a choice of any of the, how many Russian visitors to Salisbury at the appropriate time.
I think the UK and the Russians are playing games with eachother and with us.
Hybrid war.
Hundreds of police officers sifting through thousands of hours CCTV and six months after the incident this is all the evidence they have produced? I think their visit could easily be coincidence, and it took that amount of time for the police to find a suitable Russian patsy and then an opportune moment for the ‘evidence’ to be released by the government along with completely bogus claims that they are a Kremlin dispatched GRU death squad. The only thing that links these people to Novichok is the nonsense about their hotel room found to be contaminated two months after they stayed there – ridiculous, it wouldn’t stand up in court.
Well not one of the England football fans has turned up on CCTV as an MI6 spy in Russia – so it appears the UK is now playing the old Soviet games
I was once in London and wanted to visit Peckham, as a massive fan of Rodney, Trigger and Del Boy. I sat on a buss to Peckham (a double decker that was), but it ran into a huge traffic jam, so no cars were budging for a half an hour or something. So I decided to disembark and walk back to the central London, which I did.
Does this make me a criminal?
It’s ridiculous to ridicule people for their decision making during a traffic congestion. Their story sounds quite plausible to me, there is nothing that indicates they ain’t telling the truth.
You miss my point.
I’m wondering, you see, how they so accommodated themselves to the UK narrative.
What’s the process whereby these completely innocent visitors to Salisbury are incorporated into the UK narrative.
If we assume that the UK is lying about them, then the UK must just have picked them from all the Russian visitors in Salisbury at the time, to fit their narrative.
And that really ain’t that likely.
Or, is it.
Happy to listen to any critique of my reasoning on this.
@Herbie – “If we assume that the UK is lying about them, then the UK must just have picked them from all the Russian visitors in Salisbury at the time, to fit their narrative.”
Just take 0.01% of the value of the contracts involved in increasing British military spending by 50% and think of what kind of preparation that kind of money can buy.
“What’s the process whereby these completely innocent visitors to Salisbury are incorporated into the UK narrative.”
The process is that they were photographed numerous times at London airports and at Salisbury rail station and streets. The idea that this cannot be a coincidence relies on the “UK narrative” which claims a door lever was painted with nerve agent, a claim which is speculative at best. The descriptions of events strongly suggest the physical poisoning of the Skripals to have occurred sometime around 4PM, well after these men had left town. Even with the limited evidence available, the door handle theory is absurd and contradicted by most of the other information.
Herbie
Linking in with N_’s comment at 02.36, it would be interesting to know what they might have said on their visa application several weeks, if not months, beforehand – might it have mentioned plans for a brief visit to Salisbury? Did their plans for a trip to Salisbury actually dictate the planned timing of the Skripal incident? If so perhaps the weeks spent trawling through CCTV footage were to find two people that the authorities already knew they were looking for to pin the blame on…and bingo. If they had changed their plans and not gone to Salisbury that weekend that wouldn’t have been a problem…the UK authorities would have just claimed they hadn’t identified anyone from CCTV. I’m sure people are being paid a lot of money to contrive situations like this in British intelligence, maybe with help from foreign ‘allies’.
Hi Mittag,
I am sorry to disappoint you, but the TV series Only Fools and Horses was actually filmed in Bristol (in the SouthWest of UK). Not Peckham at all and the exterior scenes look quite strange for anyone familiar with Peckham. So you would have been rather confused and disappointed if you actually got there.
“Filming locations
The original “Nelson Mandela House” in the titles was Harlech Tower, Park Road East, Acton, London, and since 1988, was filmed at Whitemead House, Duckmoor Road, Ashton, Bristol. The tower block sits directly behind the site of the original Bristol City football ground.[92]” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Only_Fools_and_Horses
A bit of light relief in a grim thread. “Cushty!” as Del Boy would no doubt say.
I am utterly amazed at the number of people that think these guys can be anything but what they say. I speak Russian fluently. I’ve watched the entire interview. It is logical only from one perspective: these two are close friends, maybe more. They are fitness trainers. They probably started a side business in fitness drinks and market that to their customers. They love to travel. They are a bit naive about Western intentions and politics and they are not very into thinking through the extent of how serious the western intel services are taking this new cold war. In general, they are like most Russians in that Russians are 2 to 3 times more likely to want to visit European castles, cathedrals, old architecture – they get a spiritual kick from that more than we can understand. These guys are caught in the web of either (1) a premeditated strike by the British services or more likely (2) a combination of a UK-Russian mob person attacking Skripal, and the intel services creating a full web to attack Russia with it. In either case, these guys are not any part of it. The doctored photos, commented on in all innocence, show how these guys have been set up.
Dude, you come off rather uncultured—I, personally, visited many places and despite having a camera on my phone never took pictures because I went there for the experience of the place not to tell my “friends” on facebook/instagram “look where I’ve been” so they feel envious; the thought of “let’s take a snap” never even crossed my mind—you just don’t go there to generate evidence of doing something—you go there to enjoy! It’s the same old: “do you have an alibi?”—“No, but had I known I would need one, I would’ve made sure I had one!” nonsense.
I also randomly drive to a few towns around the city where I live just for random walks because I like the surrounds and a walk along the shoreline—even when the drive sometimes takes longer than I spend there—it’s worth it. Sometimes when I don’t check the tides table ahead of the time I can’t cross to another place that I like to visit, so I turn and go somewhere else. When there are circumstance beyond your control, like the weather, you make the most of a bad situation, you don’t engage the grumpy-old-git mode and just whine about something that cannot be changed. It’s entirely normal, although, I accept might be alien to someone who hasn’t seen past their computer screen.
Igor – well said. I agree entirely.
@Josh
September 14, 2018 at 00:18
Well said! Thank you!
@ Josh September 14, 2018 at 00:18
Doctored pictures is the only ‘rock steady’ evidence we have. IF the Brit ‘Security Services’ were playing a straight bat, why dont we see the original CCTV pics, with their correct time and other info, such as camera number, on them?
I have viewed the whole Skripal affair from the outset as relating to another upcoming CW False-Flag attack/hoax by the headchoppers and their PR outfit, the White Helmets.
I watched most of the interview on RT; the interviewer was not great to be honest, but what I found most distracting was that I couldn’t read a lot of the translated text beneath the interview because it blurred into the actual pictures. Very unprofessional – RT blew it badly on this occasion in my opinion. I’m no expert on the tech side of TV, but surely they could have put the translations against a different coloured background in a band at the bottom of the screen?. As for the two guys, they sure didn’t look like agents to me. I didn’t find their story convincing or unconvincing – I was as wise after watching it as before. However after reading CM’s informed analysis here I’m absolutely convinced that they are innocent.
here’s a transcribed version: https://www.rt.com/news/438356-rt-petrov-boshirov-full-interview/
She is not a professional interviewer, she’s the editor-in-chief of RT—entirely different skill-set. They reached out to her via Instagram (if I recall correctly) and said they won’t come to a studio and they’d only meet her and a camera-man.
You failed to grasp one thing from that story- Simonyan pushed back during that interview because her interviewer had one motive- paint her in a bad light—like you never come across one-track-agenda in the British interviews; it’s actually a rarity to have the interviewer let the interviewee answer when the answer is breaking the narrative. Just dig up the Channel 4 (I think) interview with Jordan B Petersen—he’s not a professional interviewer and he really pushed back on his interviewer and his pushback was way more than that of Simonyan’s.
“She is not a professional interviewer, she’s the editor-in-chief of RT—entirely different skill-set”
LOL.
You’d imagine an editor-in-chief of a major national media organisation would be privy to how that nation saw things going forward.
I’d have been more impressed had they been interviewed by your ordinary flunkie hack.
LOL at you- they said they don’t want to meet anyone but her and didn’t want to travel to a studio. I wonder what you’d do had, say the US, accused you of international chemical weapons terrorism with no evidence but a few pictures of you in the area… Would you be hiding somewhere or be on a plane to GitMo with the help of the local Plods?
Incidentally, when was the last time you saw BBC’s editor-in-chief interview someone?!
PS: get rid of your delusions of grandeur—nobody set out to impress “you!”
You’re not dealing with my point.
What’s the process whereby their completely innocent visit to Salisbury is incorporated into the UK narrative.
The UK just picked them because they were the only Russian visitors in the right place at the right time?
Is that likely.
I don’t think so, is all I’m sayin.
And yeah, I’d expect the BBC bosses are as close to their elites as the RT boss is to hers.
@Herbie,
I dealt with your point. You make a new one- yes, I entirely suspect the police simply did facial recognition match on people who entered the UK around the time and people who visited Salisbury, et voila! Why on earth else is the police so overtly and expressly asking people to come forward with any information about these two AT THIS STAGE so late and only after the “suspects” are announced?!
OK.
It’s black and white then.
They’re completely innocent tourists.
The UK just choose them from all the Russian tourists in Salisbury that day to cobble together an anti-Russian narrative.
Is that what you’re saying.
I don’t buy it.
This UK and Russia are playing with eachother and with us.
They’re really fighting about things that cannot easily be discussed in public political language.
So, it’s a proxy war, Hybrid.
Thanks Igor M.
The authorities still claim to know their ” real” identities. I wonder who they believe they are?
From the first week after this story broke in early March it’s had the feel a cover-up of some sort, perhaps covering-up an operation that went wrong. I now get the feeling that both UK and Russia know what went on here on March 4th, but it’s too complex for either of them to reveal, so they’re both trying to create a simple narrative for both domestic and international audiences.
Neither the UK version of the story, nor the Russian version of the story make much sense. They’ve both got holes and contradictions in their respective stories. I’m guessing it was a Spy vs. Spy story that crashed. Det Sgt Nick Bailey was sent in to deal with the situation when the Skripals were taken ill. Charlie Rowley and Dawn Sturgess were innocent victims who happened to find a discarded bottle of the toxic substance . . . . whatever it was, because the OPCW has never confirmed the name of the toxic chemical. Not sure about Julia Skripal. Her refusal of Russian Embassyhelp was a bit suspicious.
So we’ve never had independent confirmation of the toxin.
It was only the UK that claimed it was a ‘newcomer’ chemical.
We’ve never been told how Sergei Skripal spent his time since arriving in the UK in 2010.
We’ve never been told how Sergei Skripal bought a house outright in Salisbury after leaving prison.
We’ve never been told why France was brought into the investigation at an early stage.
It’s never made sense why the UK always tried to give Russia impossible timescales to respond.
My guess is Sergei Skripal was involved in an operation for MI6 or for France, possibly acting as a courier and getting chemical to Syria. (Russia is currently accusing MI6 of involvement in a false-flag chemical operation in Syria). Perhaps Russia rumbled the Skripal operation and set up some counter-operation to foil his activities. Who knows? I doubt the archive documents will be released under the 30 year rule for this one.
Where and how was France bought into the investigation an early stage? I must have missed that.
It was in the early stages of the Salisbury incident when it was being reported. No explanation was ever given as far as I know. It was quite baffling why France should be brought into the investigation so quickly. See questions 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, from the Russian Foreign Ministry.
http://www.mid.ru/en/foreign_policy/news/-/asset_publisher/cKNonkJE02Bw/content/id/3150129
Martyn
Indeed. That was very strange and never explained to the UK public or the Russian Embassy. Unfortunately I can’t remember where I read or heard it, but I recall that French laboratories were involved very early on in ‘confirming’ the Porton Down analysis of the nerve agent traces found. And this liaison was well before the UK felt obliged to call upon the services of the OPCW. Quite why the UK felt the need to do this at all, and not follow the formal OPCW procedure immediately in such circumstances, has never been explained. As you will recall the UK tried desperately, and inexplicably, to avoid bringing in the OPCW until they felt compelled to – and I suspect that was only after they had been given legal advice that if Russia asked the OPCW to investigate it would be Russia who would have overall control of what the OPCW would look for and any report produced by the OPCW.
This looks like a cover up for a botched operation by one or more security services.
Two Russian spies were apprehended in th the Netherlands, intent on breaking in at Spiez laboratory in Switzerland.
Original link in Dutch
https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2018/09/13/twee-russische-spionnen-op-weg-naar-zwitsers-gifgaslab-gepakt-in-den-haag-a1616475
Link through Google Translate
https://translate.google.nl/translate?sl=nl&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=nl&ie=UTF-8&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nrc.nl%2Fnieuws%2F2018%2F09%2F13%2Ftwee-russische-spionnen-op-weg-naar-zwitsers-gifgaslab-gepakt-in-den-haag-a1616475&edit-text=
Interesting, isn’t it? Edmond V.O. Katusz
Isn’t it interesting how the spies are not named and this story didn’t surface until now despite the Spiez lab “business” happening what, in Spring? I call BS on that “story.”
old but useful
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-43523923
” According to Mr Timoshkov, Mr Skripal did not see himself as a “traitor” because the “oath he had sworn was to his socialist Motherland, the Soviet Union, not Russia”.
He regretted being “a double agent” because his life had become “all messed up”, his friend claimed.
He also asked to be allowed to return to Russia because he wanted to see his mother, brother and other relatives. “
Did anyone notice the brief reference to Dmitry Gudkov in the video? What, if anything, is his connection to the matter?
no. gudkov is just a russian politician of social-democratic agenda. couple of pages ago he was discussed.
See the transcript:
SIMONYAN: So, you fear that the UK secret service will kill you or what?
BOSHIROV: We just don’t know.
PETROV: Simply read what even the Russian media is writing. They are offering a reward.
SIMONYAN: What do you mean? There’s a bounty on your head?
BOSHIROV: Dmitry Gudkov, if I am not mistaken, promised a trip to the UK for anybody who brings us to him. Do you think that’s okay? And you think we can feel just fine, walking around smiling, talking to people? Any sensible person would be afraid.
Dmitry Gudkov is a politician whose family is involved in debt-collecting.
For what it’s worth, I’ve seen the interview and find their reasons for going to Salisbury unconvincing. Their comments about the cathedral could have been lifted from Wikipedia – and probably were. At one point, near the beginning, one of them says that the trip was only for tourism, not business. But they weren’t asked. The comment was offered unprompted. Makes me think this was a business trip, in a not-entirely-legal business. The to-ing and fro-ing between London and Salisbury may have been related to the unreliability of a business contact.
Obviously none of the evidence provided by the police connects them with the Skripals in any way at all, but that is to be expected.
ya. the most credible version. because of bad weather(for example) their contact could not arrive that day to salisbury, because traveled by car.
then they tried next day. and or they contacted, or contact refused to meet at all. then they returned to moscow.
“Obviously none of the evidence provided by the police connects them with the Skripals in any way at all, but that is to be expected.”
So you travel on a bus where someone happens to be murdered, there’s evidence of the victim entering the bus, a stop later evidence of you entering the bus. All you get presented is that evidence and you get accused of murdering the victim. Are you saying that’s enough to convince people that’s you’re the murderer—because lack of evidence connecting you to the victim “is to be expected”?
I’m just saying that in this real-life case, none of the evidence provided by the police connects them with the Skripals in any way at all. Unless I’ve missed it of course, in which case perhaps you will kindly tell me what it is. Only in relation to this real-life case mind you. Forget about silly little bus journeys taking place in your head.
I don’t get what you’re saying then—are you saying that lack of evidence connecting the victims and perpetrators save for distant locality (recall: closest is about 500yds according to CM) and no temporal evidence (timeline really sucks as CM pointed) out, “is to be expected” in a “real life” case? Any defence Barrister would make an for no case to answer!
@MJ – Sceptical of your opinion that their comments about the cathedral could have been lifted from Wikipedia I took a look and what did I find, but the article begins “Salisbury Cathedral, formally known as the Cathedral Church of the Blessed Virgin Mary”, which is close to what Petrov calls it in the interview. But there’s nothing suspicious with a tourist picking up an appellation like that which an English person would be unlikely to use if they’ve ever even heard of it.
N_,
Also, it struck me that when listening to the voiceover translation of the interview the facts about the Cathedral were presented in a very stilted and formal way by the interpreter. But when you watched and listened to Boshirov saying it in Russian it came across much more naturally as if he was just trying (perhaps a little too hard, but understandably) to demonstrate they had a genuine interest in the Cathedral.
I’m sorry, “GRU assassins” do not approach the media and request interviews for broadcast on international media. To suggest otherwise is simply stupidity.
‘I’m sorry, “GRU assassins” do not approach the media and request interviews for broadcast on international media.’
——
Even if Vladimir Putin suggests just such a course of action?
Suggests? LOL. Since when did Putin turn into a wimp that “suggests”?
“I hope they will turn up themselves and tell everything. This would be best for everyone.
“There is nothing special there, nothing criminal, I assure you. We’ll see in the near future,” -Vladimir Putin
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/world-europe-45494627
yes, i know. That’s for public consumption, am sure you know. In reality they were primed and rehearsed and plonked there.
@Cynicus and @Observer
You clearly have an insight into everything ‘Putin and Russia’ based on what the UK Govt and media tell you to think. Must be nice to lead such a simple, gullible life and not have to think for yourselves.
If these guys are GRU, what does it say about the GRU? Can’t afford nice hotel rooms. Have their agents deliver supposedly the worst neurotoxin known to man in leaky bottles. No rented car. No bunny suits when painting the doorknob. No disguises so that they aren;t picked up on the CCTV cameras. No good plan for disposing of the most incriminating evidence. Sorry, boss. Could’t fulfill the mission cause the Skripals went on car trip where the train didn’t go. Maybe things have really gone downhill in spy land since the days of Bond.
obviously, it was an awkward interview, for which there could be a number of explanations. but nothing odd about visiting Salisbury (and potentially Stonehenge), as it’s a must-do trip for millions of tourists. the pair wondered why media coverage never mention the peculiar weather at the time, or the disruption to the train services, which are valid points:
3 Mar 2018: Salisbury Journal: Snow forces Amesbury couple to cancel wedding as Beast from the East hits
By Rebecca Hudson
http://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/news/salisbury/salisburynews/16062134.White_wedding_is_a_snow-go_as_big_freeze_takes_hold/
2 March: Get Surrey: South Western Railway forced to close at 8pm as Beast from the East freezes network
A statement from the company said: “We cannot guarantee to get you to your destination this evening”
SWR has already suspended service on the following lines: etc…
There is currently no service between the following stations:
•Basingstoke and Salisbury/Exeter….etc
https://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/surrey-news/south-western-railway-forced-close-14360233
Craig gets mentions in the comments, as does slush – one confirming:
13 Sept: Salisbury Journal: Suspects in nerve agent attack deny involvement and say they came to Salisbury to see the Cathedral
by Rebecca Hudson
http://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/news/16858268.suspects-in-nerve-agent-attack-deny-involvement-and-say-they-came-to-salisbury-to-see-the-cathedral/
a possible scenario: the pair were in London organising “black market” purchases related to their “fitness” program; visit to Salisbury was their cover story for the visit.
Because Rebecca Hudson can’t imagine just for a second that two blokes (who are quite plausibly in a relationship with each other) just wanted a weekend break, like CM said…
These two would have improved their case immeasurably if they had walking into that interview and then handed over a snap-happy camera to the interviewer. RT could then have released all the photos for people to examine in however much detail as they like.
Missed opportunity, that…..
Out of curiosity, do you often walk around taking photos just in case you need an alibi at a later date? Or are you saying just the Russians should do that?
holiday weekend photos would have cut no ice.with a little help from a technical expert, photos could readily have been added to their cellphone and appropriately dated long after these fellows had returned to Russia.
I thought they said they took photos and hoped they would emerge..I should!d I shine Russian authorities have ant memory stick with photos of their trip auditing it
sorry that should say – I imagine the Russian authorities have confiscated their memory sticks/camera and are auditing them
Well someone is enjoying a huge joke – but who?
The two in the interview bear some resemblance to the CCTV but that is all.
Perhaps the British Government was expecting the Russians to issue furious denials about it being them in the CCTV and the discussion to move onto GRU identity theft. If so they must be nonplussed about the tongue-in-cheek paens to Salisbury’s architectural glories.
But a side from a fleeting moment of comedy, I guess this is where the farce finally ends up at.
Case closed
old but useful
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-43523923
” According to Mr Timoshkov, Mr Skripal did not see himself as a “traitor” because the “oath he had sworn was to his socialist Motherland, the Soviet Union, not Russia”.
He regretted being “a double agent” because his life had become “all messed up”, his friend claimed.
He also asked to be allowed to return to Russia because he wanted to see his mother, brother and other relatives. “
Amusingly the bus operator from Salisbury to Stonehenge has confirmed that the tour buses were running normally on Sunday 4th March.
So the two were lying about not being able to make it to Stonehenge and yet another one of Mr Murray’s clutched straws has crumbled to dust.
1) Confirmation of your claim needed. Where does the bus operator say this? Bus service isn’t very good on a Sunday. I doubt they were running”normally”. The snow drifts were bad at the weekend.
2) Was Stonehenge open on the Sunday? It was closed on the Saturday as you can see from CM’s post.
1) See Tweet on Sunday morning from the bus company https://twitter.com/SalisburyReds/status/970222142200705024
2) Yes it was open
Any other questions?
Here’s the full transcript: https://www.rt.com/news/438356-rt-petrov-boshirov-full-interview/
now tell me where they say they couldn’t get to Stonehenge on 4th?
They said they originally planned only one day in Salisbury but when it got snowed off they cut their losses and went back to a London and went shopping in Oxford Street ,(which if true will be be on CCTV). Then they returned the next day and visited the cathedral. There probably wasn’t time to go to Stonehenge as well as they had to fly back to Moscow.
I believe they had an ulterior motive in visiting Salisbury:.Separate discussion what it was.There are lots of new CCTV cameras there so tracing their movements is easy. We need to tear up the door handle incident nonsense to make sense of their movements if they even did it.
The position with regard to what they did on the Sunday was explained clearly when Simonyan asked them to go through their timeline. They explained that after their curtailed trip on Saturday they decided to go back the next day as they:
“really wanted to see Old Sarum and the Cathedral”
Q: “And did you see it?”
A: “Yes. But again by lunchtime there was heavy sleet. For some reason nobody talks about this. So we left early.”
They clearly regarded Stonehenge as a lower priority than the other two sites, but by implication might have gone there in the afternoon had the weather not started to deteriorate again.
they slightly mentioned stonehenge when were speaking about 3rd march. not 4th
Well this is odd. You all say they wanted to see Salisbury Cathedral and Stonehenge. In fact they made a 3000km trip to see them. But it turns out they didn’t visit the Cathedral after all – instead they walked for a mile in the opposite direction towards Sergei Skripal’s house (they admit to this, in case you try to sew doubt about that). And it also turns out that they could have seen Stonehenge on Sunday but decided not to.
Da, da, dah!
(the Russians are totally taking the piss out of you all, and who can blame them).
I think we should declare war on Russia, and give Theresa May a tin hat and a rifle, and parachute her into Moscow, to give the Ruskies a good lesson. That’ll teach ’em, won’t it.
..wearing one of her special metal necklaces to ward off Putin’s evil influence.
Fillip should go with her as backup. He is good at “Putin out the bins’.
PS Treeza must know that the ‘silly season’ is finished.
So, if it is more likely that the Skripals were poisoned whilst out in the town centre then it makes it MORE likely that the Russians WERE involved, as that is where they were. And this is at approximately the same time as when the Skripals were in that area.
Then we have May’s assertion that the hotel room they stayed in ‘had traces of Novichok’ in it.
There is forensic evidence and also opportunity and, again according to May, motive ie they were members of GRU and Putin wanted Skripal gone after making speeches on Russian TV in the run-up to the election (which they say he rigged and therefore he doesn’t need to make himself appear string, does he?)
So, it DOES all fit together, kinda. They haven’t come out and said that they have abandoned previous timelines on when they were poisoned and where, but, if they did, they can make this work.
This is problematic however as they appear to be working backwards from a conclusion and finding evidence to back it, then reversing the ‘innocent until proved guilty’ rule to ask Russia to prove it’s innocence and the suspects to prove theirs. In a criminal investigation there wouldn’t be enough to get this to court, not even sure that the police would consider it enough to question them.
There is, I’m assuming, a lot of intel-led ‘evidence’ being used here. And reminding myself of the reliability of ‘humint’ I remember how useless I found it personally. Rumour, lies and hunches.
But this ISN’T a normal criminal case, Skripal wasn’t just your average man in the street either. Many people from many countries would be happy to see him dead, and perhaps even happier if someone else gets the blame, perhaps happy enough for that to be their entire motivation.
Truth is, we’ll never know. I believe that all sides are either lying, exaggerating, omitting or obfuscating in this. whoever did this is horribly inept and shouldn’t even be allowed to operate. But in this conspiratorial frame of mind I am beginning to think that this incompetence could also be deliberate too.
I am reminded of what a French Intelligence officer said about the polonium poisoning – that it was done by Russians in connivance with UK, US and French military intelligence in order to destabilise Putin at home. Those responsible (in Russia) are high enough up to make this happen but want Puttin gone. And going back to my earlier point, this WAS done just before the election. So, was the point of it to PREVENT him regaining office? Did the story about Russian election rigging put into the press after his win come as a result of UK thinking that the Skripal incident would prevent his re-election?
Putin is considered to be too politically astute to allow himself to be deliberately caught up in nonsense like this, and I’m inclined to believe this. Skripal was not of enough value to take this risk. Even if we believe he was trying to use old friendships to try and recruit current intelligence officers for UK, I don’t think he was considered a major threat.
Back when Litvinenko was murdered there was an outcry as to why it wasn’t being properly investigated. Cameron was happy to maintain friendship with Russia. There was a lot more evidence for that than there is here. Now we are being fed the line that Putin is bad, Russia is bad, Russia is dangerous etc etc.
Whoever is guilty we are certainly being fed a line to force us into a cold war frame of mind.
Personally I think it is due to gas being supplied by Russia to Germany and Ukraine (as soon as Ukraine looked back to Russia and away from EU their government was overthrown by ‘US friendly’ Neo Nazi group ‘Right Sector’ – not a coincidence. If Gas is NOT supplied by Russia to Ukraine or Germany then the US (and now the UK) can sell the gas they are (or going to in the case of UK) fracking at a loss (currently)
Ultimately it’s all about the money, gas pipelines, fuel supplies, fuel security and who cn make more money from milking major gas suppliers…
it’s about nothing. give names, photos, cctv footage, something meaningful, except of buzzwords.
As I said above when this “story” surfaced:
Isn’t it interesting how the spies are not named and this story didn’t surface until now despite the Spiez lab “business” happening what, in Spring? I call BS on that “story.”