131

Skripal case: “closely related agent” claim closely examined

The “Approved Judgement” issued yesterday by Mr Justice Williams ruling in the case of the Skripals in the High Court contains a disturbing admission of deception on the part of the May government

As Craig Murray has already observed, the wording in the Approved Judgement issued by Mr Justice May on March 22, makes it clear the UK government’s claim, first made on March 8, to have conclusively identified the alleged “nerve agent” as being an indicator of Russian state involvement, is a lie. This is what the Judgement says:

i) CC: Porton Down Chemical and Biological Analyst Blood samples from Sergei Skripal and Yulia Skripal were analysed and the findings indicated exposure to a nerve agent or related compound. The samples tested positive for the presence of a Novichok class nerve agent or closely related agent.

Murray correctly points out that the emphasised words (his emphasis) categorically show the UK has, at best, made only a very general identification of the agent involved as being “related” to what it terms “novichok.”

This sworn Court evidence direct from Porton Down is utterly incompatible with what Boris Johnson has been saying. The truth is that Porton Down have not even positively identified this as a “Novichok”, as opposed to “a closely related agent”. Even if it were a “Novichok” that would not prove manufacture in Russia, and a “closely related agent” could be manufactured by literally scores of state and non-state actors.
This constitutes irrefutable evidence that the government have been straight out lying – to Parliament, to the EU, to NATO, to the United Nations, and above all to the people – about their degree of certainty of the origin of the attack….As the government has sought to whip up jingoistic hysteria in advance of forthcoming local elections, the scale of the lie has daily increased.

This is absolutely true, as we’ll show below.

What do the words “closely related agent” actually mean?

Organophosphates?
In theory the words “closely related agent” could mean as little as the fact they have identified an organophosphate type of nerve agent, of which the alleged “novichoks” are a – heretofore theoretical – class.
The two main organophosphate nerve agents in common use, Sarin and VX and their cousins, are what is known as the “G-series

the G-series of organophosphate nerve agents, developed in Germany


and V-series

The V-series of organophosphate nerve agents developed in the UK


None of these are “novichoks”. They were NOT developed in Russia, but in Germany and the UK respectively.
The presence of G-series or V-series organophosphate nerve agents in the Skripals’ bodies would have zero implications of Russian involvement. In fact, given that Russia’s “declared chemical weapon stockpiles” were certified to have been eliminated by the OPCW in 2017, they should probably be seen as one of the less likely sources for a known nerve agent, behind countries such as the United States, who, unlike Russia, still have officially recognised stocks of organophosphate nerve agents.
If the words “closely related agent” refer merely to the presence of an organophosphate nerve agent in the Skripals’ bodies this is distortion of a truly criminal nature.
The only non-dishonest usage of the words “closely related agent” in this context would mean they have isolated some form of hitherto unknown compound that has a chemical structure more similar to “novichoks” than to Sarin, VX or their close relatives. But would even this truly point exclusively to Russia in the way claimed by Boris Johnson?
novichoks?
Novichoks, or the “N-series” are a “new” class of organophosphate nerve agents. Unlike the G-series and V-series, they were developed by the Soviet Union in the middle 20th century. Until they were synthesised by Iran in 2016 (under OPCW observation) these so-called “N-series” poisons were known as only as a theory and widely regarded as unpromising for future research.
Let’s assume the highly non-specific wording in the High Court ruling to indicate that “N-series” (novichok) type substances have been detected in the Skripals’ bodies.
This still does in no way determine Russian involvement. Since their alleged original development in the Soviet Union last century, the theoretical structure of these “novichoks” has been freely available information, obtainable through Amazon, and it’s therefore more than possible they have been synthesised in any number of facilities around the world beside Iran.
Some undeclared “marker”?
Even if we go one step further in the benefit of the doubt and accept there is some undeclared marker that permits scientists at Porton Down, at incredibly short notice, to perfectly identify this agent as being of Russian manufacture, even that unlikely eventuality would fall short of the kind of proof of Russian state involvement that Boris Johnson and others in the UK government have been proclaiming. Before being justified in accusing a sovereign government of direct involvement one would have to rule out the possibility that such an agent had been illegally acquired by non-state agencies. This would be a lengthy process involving the OPCW and other international bodies.
As we all know, the UK made no attempt to do even this basic amount of investigation, and certainly couldn’t have conducted and concluded such an investigation in less than four days.
In short, the ruling cited above, even if read in the most improbably forgiving way possible, shows the UK government does not have the information to warrant any of the claims it has so far made about Russian state involvement in the alleged poisoning of the Skripals. It shows the UK government is currently guilty of lying to Parliament, to the British people, and to the world.
And that isn’t even taking into consideration the statement of Stephen Davies, the Salisbury Hospital consultant who claimed in a letter to the Times that “no patients have experienced symptoms of nerve agent poisoning in Salisbury.” If those words are literally true and not a result of careless writing, the lie is astronomically greater than anyone is yet suggesting


avatar
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
jeff
Reader
jeff

thanks for the post http://mybkexperience.info/

economicreform
Reader

The unseemly rush to judgement by May’s government and her supporters in the mainstream media, and all of the hullabaloo that has flowed from that, indicates a sinister motive and strategy at work. Make no mistake that their hysterical drive to drum up anti-Russia sentiment within the UK and around the world has a clear purpose. And any dispassionate analysis of the course of events will reveal a UK government storyline that is full of holes, inconsistencies and outright lies.

capsch
Reader
capsch

I see the excellent and thorough @JohnDelacour has picked up the investigation:
http://bd8.com/russia/skripal/

Richard Compton
Reader

That was a good read, can’t wait for the next installment!

Richard Compton
Reader

Here is a summary of certain evidence that has emerged through investigations:
That Novichok type nerve agents were developed at Edgewood in the USA and any mention of it (or the book “State Secrets”) was censored as far as possible by the UK and USA via Cablegate/Wikileaks:
https://search.wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/06PRAGUE319_a.html
https://search.wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/09STATE32931_a.html
We have evidence that the USA had a deception program running for 24 years or more involving Cassady to convince the USSR that the USA had developed a new nerve agent and waste resources on trying to develop it via Cassidy’s Run: The Secret Spy War Over Nerve Gas By David Wise (searchable on Google Books).
https://www.c-span.org/video/?156370-1/cassidys-run-secret-spy-war-nerve-gas&start=164
We have evidence via Uglev, Rink and others that the USSR succeeded in developing a whole family of nerve agents (100 plus compounds) based on the original disinformation campaign, each one with different toxicity. via War of Nerves. Chemical Warfare from World War I to Al-Qaeda by Jonathan B. Tucker (Published 2006) https://archive.org/details/B-001-000-016
We have further evidence that these compounds were used to murder a banker in 1995 and were sold by Rink to criminal gangs after the break up of the USSR.
https://meduza.io/en/news/2018/03/20/one-of-the-russian-inventors-of-novichok-says-russia-isn-t-to-blame-also-he-may-have-sold-poisons-from-his-garage-in-the-1990s
It is believed that Rink continued to work on this program as he received a one year suspended sentence and then disappeared from the public eye until recently he emerged ‘echoing” Kremlin arguments.
https://www.kommersant.ru/doc/758071 (Chrome Right Click, translate to English)
We have allegations from two individuals (Victoria and Tamara) in Russia that Julia Skripal’s boyfriend worked for Russian Intelligence in some capacity and that his mother “high up in the structure” was intent on stopping their forthcoming marriage and paid a criminal gang of ex-KGB officers to poison her.by tampering with some item in her suitcase:
“Yulia Skripal’s cousin Victoria Skripal told Russian television she believed the attack was revenge against Yulia by a vengeful prospective mother-in-law. Victoria Skripal said Yulia, 33, had argued with her unnamed boyfriend’s mother after the boyfriend had announced to his family they wanted to have children,The Skripals believe the prospective mother-in-law, who is a highly ranked Russian security agent, was angry that her son was serious about Yulia because she was the daughter of a double agent who had betrayed scores of Russian agents. Victoria, 45, from Yaroslavl, told the Mash Telegram TV channel: “My opinion is that it was done not against Uncle Sergei, but against his daughter. “The mother didn’t accept Yulia and thought that, if she was a traitor’s daughter, then she herself would betray her country.
https://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/poisoned-russians-cousin-claims-yulia-skripal-was-target-of-vengeful-potential-motherinlaw/news-story/2018fb0f6d848bf19704813421160f71
https://meaww.com/read/news/sergei-skripals-niece-claims-that-his-daughter-was-the-real-target-of-the-nerve-agent-attack
This suitcase theory was also initially alleged by “intelligence sources” via the Telegraph 14 days ago
Nerve toxin used on ex-spy ‘was planted in daughter’s suitcase’
https://www.smh.com.au/world/europe/nerve-toxin-used-on-ex-spy-was-planted-in-daughter-s-suitcase-20180316-p4z4nn.html
We now have the name of the boyfriend and photographs of him with Julia despite her previous attempts to delete all photographs of him form her social media profiles. (Denis Dementyev, who works at Nike in Moscow), Photographs of him taken with Julia Skripal can be seen here: http://valet.ru/user/95338/
Conjecture:
Given the widespread dispersal of the nerve agent in several different locations in Salisbury (BMW, Graveyard, Door, House, Suitcase, Zizzis, Pub, etc) and the delayed reaction time of the Skripals to the agent, tt is believed that an item of clothing was involved as the carrier which had been contaminated with a generally undetectable nerve agent (without specialist equipment)
We are awaiting confirmation of his parents current positions in the Russian government and evidence of possible links between his mother and Leonard Rink and a criminal gang of ex-KGB officers
Call me Sherlock effing Poirot, but I think I’ve nearly cracked this case, mateys!

Jennifer Hor
Reader
Jennifer Hor

I’d hardly put my trust in sources like Meduza, Rupert Murdoch’s The Australian and the Fairfax-owned Sydney Morning Herald.

Richard Compton
Reader

That’s quite a stupid and annoying comment. as I’m just trying to help English readers to see the evidence which was published on Russian media and reported in western press.
Would you to see the original the Russian sources then?
search Виктория Скрипаль on Google and do a bit of research yourself
Try searching for Leonard Rink’s and Uglev’s names in Russian, you will find the original stories
Use Google Chrome and right click Translate to English, it’s understandable:
If you have any intelligent comments on the actual content, please share.

JudyJ
Reader

Intriguing background info. Clearly none of us who are not privy to investigations – and even those privy to them, I believe – have any idea at this stage who the perpetrators were. So, far be it from me to dispute your scenario. However the only point I would take issue with is the statement “Given the widespread dispersal of the nerve agent…”. In spite of the rush to dramatic activity in all the locations you mention I have my doubts as to whether any residue of nerve agent has been found at any of those locations. You will recall that the supposedly (visually) highly contaminated table used by the Skripals at Zizzis was strangely destroyed with undue haste, if such accounts are to be believed; a rather odd thing to do during any ongoing investigation. Perhaps it was subsequently discovered to be icing sugar and destruction of the evidence avoided the need to admit this! So far as I know there has been no confirmation that nerve agent has been found anywhere else. To be frank if there was confirmation I personally wouldn’t be inclined to believe it anyway.

Richard Compton
Reader

Yes, I agree, just conjecture based on what we have been told, but given the sudden simultaneous collapse of the Skripals on the park bench and the fact that it was reported that a package was taken away for analysis, it seems more likely that the poison was in a package that was opened on the park bench (if all the stories about nerve agent being found elsewhere are false, that is) so that leaves, chocolates, vodka, cocaine, cigar, e cigarette, marijuana, cigarette, or some hermetically sealed gift that once opened dispersed the poison. Nothing more has been said about the mysterious package as far as I know.

Mikalina
Reader
Mikalina

Infobesity.

Richard Compton
Reader

Mikalina, obviously given your penchant for one word comments, you must be suffering from info-anorexia

Mikalina
Reader
Mikalina

No, Richard. It’s called succinct – the opposite to verbal diarrhoea…

Richard Compton
Reader

verbal diarrhoea? Are you referring to the voices in your head?
Please clarify your ideas so that those of us who suffer from “infobesity” can decipher your succint allusions or perhaps, delusions?

Shahna
Reader
Shahna

The valet dot ru link doesn’t appear to work..
And ta muchlee for the post – very interesting indeed.

vierotchka
Reader

Published on Thursday 6th of May 2004 – a MUST read (that was before the Guardian turned rogue)
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2004/may/06/science.research

vierotchka
Reader

I found that Guardian article after watching this video:

alaffcreator
Reader

I translated the episode from Russian TV (aired on March 25, 2018) where the Head of the Chemical and Analytical Laboratory of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation speaks about the “Skripal case”, providing previously unknown information and documents.

And here is the document that the specialist spoke about:comment image

Richard Compton
Reader

DO IT YOURSELF: PORTON DOWN
It is ‘highly likely’ that the novichok compound with which double agent Skripal was poisoned is from Russia, Theresa May has said. That is right: it is likely. But it is not certain. It can be concluded from the fact that the British laboratory in Porton Down, which is known to conduct its own research into nerve agents, was so quick to find out that a novichok was used, that Porton Down also had novichok in stock – or used to have. The pure substance is needed to be able to calibrate the analysis equipment.
Probably all major laboratories that conduct research on poison gas, such as ‘Porton Down’ in England, Edgewood in the US and the Dutch TNO, have already synthesized novichoks a long time ago.
„That is simply their business,” says an initiate. „The properties of all potential toxins are investigated.” A chemist like Julian Perry Robinson assumes this. „For years, it was only about two things: novichoks and peptides”, he said in an interview with this newspaper in 2014. In February 2006, the then chairman of the scientific advisory board of the OPCW, the Czech Jiri Matousek, said it plainly: in Edgewood, novichoks are being developed. It appears from ‘secret’ classified telegrams (WikiLeaks: Cablegate) that the Americans have made sure that he would not dare to say that again.
(cable links here: https://search.wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/06PRAGUE319_a.html and here: https://search.wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/09STATE32931_a.html noticed it is signed by CLINTON!)
https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2018/03/21/unknown-newcomer-novichok-was-long-known-a1596490

Shahna
Reader
Shahna

“It is ‘highly likely’ that the novichok compound with which double agent Skripal was poisoned is from Russia, Theresa May has said. That is right: it is likely. But it is not certain.”
Why is it even “likely” if a number of countries have it (even Porton Down a few miles down the road.)?
And …. why does NOBODY listen to the doctor?
What he said (paraphrased) was ….. Three patients were poisoned. No-one was poisoned with a nerve agent.

vierotchka
Reader

Published on 26 Mar 2018
The A-234 nerve agent — this particular substance is used in the Novichok system. For the last few weeks, London has been claiming that it was Russia that produced this substance. However, as you can see, anyone can purchase the detailed instructions for 28 dollars.

vexarb
Reader

Meanwhile, back in the real world, Online Science Library reveals that US developed Novichok agent — probably THE agent in this case. Post by Bundy with 4 links, on SyrPer 3min ago:
“The United States was developing the gas A-234, we have a document that confirms this – @mod_russia
https://sptnkne.ws/hdcv
Head of OPCW lab shows listing of Novichok A234 in the NIST Spectral Library 1998. Contributor: D.Rohrbaugh, US army Edgewood Research, Development & Engineering Center (ERDEC) in Maryland
A234 nerve agent allegedly used against Skripal was developed in the US – A Novichok was developed by the US chemical warfare division…… Interesting.”

alaffcreator
Reader

in case someone missed this important video:

Brup
Reader
Brup

This is the truth. Skripal case is another false flag of CIA and NATO.

MICHAEL LEIGH
Reader
MICHAEL LEIGH

Right on, BRUP the anteceedents of the alleged “Salisbury Poisoning Plot” are certainly of an USA origin. And only last week in Crete, I was in a bar conversation with two self-announced CIA operatives both on a weekend R & R , one of who I had early met on several monthly similar drunken bar conversations, and who had earler claimed he was based with and was stationed with the the mediterranean USA Southern Command HQ.
And, last week the conversation covered who choose then name for the CIA operation, because apparently a ” A former USA born Russian and now recently appointed millionare British Citizen ” was claiming: as the Principal ideologue of the aforementioned Salisbury CIA operation ” and it was he who suggested the formal code name NOVICHOKS and not the the ” mere Army Chemists at the Edgeworth USA chemical Plant ” ?
listening to drunken conversations can be most reveailing, sometimes ?

lucdevincke
Reader
lucdevincke

Some interesting (American/Canadian) official sites for those who want to know more about nerve agents and their treatment:
https://chemm.nlm.nih.gov/antidote_nerveagents.htm
https://chemm.nlm.nih.gov/na_prehospital_mmg.htm
http://wwwapps.tc.gc.ca/saf-sec-sur/3/erg-gmu/erg/criminal.aspx

MichaelK
Reader
MichaelK

One of the things that strikes me about the Guardian’s coverage is how quickly and easily they fling out allegations about RT being ‘Russian propaganda’ without ever allowing the reader the opportunity to judge the truth of these statements for themselves by providing specific examples of precisely where RT sends ‘Russian’ or ‘Kremlin’ propaganda. Just trust us, we know best, is what they seem to be implying.
Arguably RT sends less propaganda than the BBC or the Guardian itself, because RT knows it’s being watched like a hawk by the rest of the UK media who’ll pounce on anything that looks like ‘Kremlin propaganda.’
What the Guardian really means is that RT gives a platform for ‘oppositional’ or ‘dissident’ views that question or criticize the ‘Guardian’s view’ or the Westminster/Washington liberal consensus. Is it a crime not to agree with the Gaurdian or the Washington Post’s vies of the world?
Finally, if RT was really guilty of sending blatant ‘Kremlin propaganda’ and one could prove this, wouldn’t OFCOM have shut it down long ago? Isn’t that part of OFCOM’s job description making sure that no sends ‘fake news’ and ‘propaganda’, and if one did their would be serious consequences? And that’s why RT is so careful, not to send propaganda because they are actually being held, on political grounds, to a higher standard than the rest of the UK bourgeois media?
Yet, the Guardian never addresses these obvious issues and how pathetic and lame their arguments really are, amounting to little more than a low smear campaign aimed at a rival news platform that they don’t approve of, similar to the way they turned on Assange and Wikileaks and on pretty much the same grounds.

avenir
Reader
avenir

With RT I’ve read many reports of RT not trying to put any editorial spin on it’s journalism, reporters are allowed to report as they see fit to the best of their ability. With this public service attitude what this does is put into sharp relief the propaganda tendencies of the UK media. So fair reporting is seen as aberant because it’s not on-message.

JudyJ
Reader

Until yesterday I used to post on the comments section of a popular daily newspaper to put forward the ‘alternative’ viewpoint to various disingenuous or fabricated reports in a vain attempt to make people think for themselves. Naturally, the mention of RT usually resulted in a torrent of abuse and ‘down’ arrows even if I was merely stating a fact. There were of course the usual fallacies given by such people to justify their reaction and to demonstrate their ignorance, the main one being that RT never features anyone critical of the Kremlin or Putin. Presumably these people – if they have ever watched it for themselves, which I very much doubt – have only dipped in to Larry King or the Stan Collymore Show or the (excellent) documentaries. In response I have gone to the trouble of giving dates and interviewees for numerous Worlds Apart broadcasts featuring critics of the current Russian establishment. But, of course, that just generated even more ‘down’ arrows and even the comment that Oksana Boyko ‘isn’t a fair interviewer because she tries to catch people out’. As I said in my response, that is more professional and admirable than the British msm tactic of asking leading questions and then not allowing someone to respond, or interrupting them when they do get manage to get a word in edgeways.

Nate
Reader
Nate

YEs good point Judy only yesterday RT were criticising the state for that awful fire business, hod often do you see objective criticism on the BBC, I always found RT to be VERY impartial

Richard Compton
Reader

Laugh all you like, but don’t ignore certain possibilities that have emerged::
Sergei Skripal’s niece claims that daughter Yulia was the real target of the nerve agent attack
https://meaww.com/read/news/sergei-skripals-niece-claims-that-his-daughter-was-the-real-target-of-the-nerve-agent-attack
Nerve toxin used on ex-spy ‘was planted in daughter’s suitcase’
https://www.smh.com.au/world/europe/nerve-toxin-used-on-ex-spy-was-planted-in-daughter-s-suitcase-20180316-p4z4nn.html
This would explain TM’s statements and the Russian Denials
Just trying to establish if claims are valid or not, would you like to help?

Jen
Reader
Jen

From the time Julia Skripal surrendered her luggage at the airport in Moscow (I don’t know which one, Sheremetevo or Domodedovo) to the time she collected it from the carousel in the airport in London (again, that could have been either Gatwick or Heathrow), her bags could have been subjected to tampering by customs officials in either Russia or the UK, and by staff on the plane she travelled on.
If the bags had had nerve toxin planted in them in advance, before Julia Skripal even reached the airport in Moscow, then all those people who subsequently handled them were also exposed to the toxin.
Also how would the prospective mother-in-law have been able to put something into Julia Skripal’s luggage, unless she got her son to give something to Julia to take to the UK, and thus putting his life in danger as well? The idea that the would-be mother-in-law would risk her son’s life or long-term health just to get rid of his fiancee seems far-fetched.

Richard Compton
Reader

It was originally suggested that the poison was in a perfume bottle which would be hermetically sealed of course and only opened in England at her father;s house. So, I think that answers your first objection.
and the second objection you raised:
it was alleged that son bought a going away present for girlfriend, and mother then swapped it for the contaminated one. Another theory was that it was done by a criminal gang who swapped or tampered with the original present at some point in Moscow.
I agree it seems a tad far fetched, but given two specific claims, by her cousin Viktoria Skripal and a close friend, Tamara, it seems worth investigating.
I have discovered the name of Julia’s boyfriend (never published by the press) and I hope to find out his mother and father;s names shortly.

Jen
Reader
Jen

Even if hermetically sealed, the perfume bottle may still come under the scrutiny of customs officials in either Moscow or London, or wherever Julia Skripal disembarked when she arrived in the UK, depending on its size, weight and how zealously individual customs officials checked her baggage.
You also need to know if the perfume bottle was made of glass or plastic: a glass bottle risks breakage during transport which would then give rise to the question of whether J took the bottle on board as part of her hand luggage. If she did, would she have had to declare it to the UK customs officials? Would they be looking out for containers containing liquids of any kind (even drinks)?
Given the already high level of Russophobia in Britain before the Skripal poisoning, UK customs officials could already be scrutinising passengers from Moscow more carefully than others and going through their luggage more thoroughly. At this point, a toxin could be planted into her bags.

sarmis2018
Reader
sarmis2018

I may be wrong but Novichock type on nerve agent, if this is the case, is a binary poison meaning that it takes two components to be mixed to produce an active poison. Ii is very difficult, if not impossible, to have this mellange in a parfume bottle witout endengering the perpetrator and everybody around; luggage handler, customs officers, etc. In my opinion if it was a poison in the perfume bottle it was not Novichock but a different type.

Richard Compton
Reader

Thanks, Jen and Sarmis2018, well, it’s quite normal for a bottle of perfume to be put in checked in luggage especially inside a gift box, why would anyone need to open it at customs, that’s quite unusual unless they are looking for people smuggling liquid E or something. Anyway, given that nerve agents may act within 30 minutes at most according to some, it may have been in, wait for it….a bottle of some special drink they uncorked, a famous Russian aperitif perhaps, in the Zizi restaurant?
Is anyone familiar with this wine bottle (the name is blurred) in this photograph of the Skripals having a meal together?:comment image
Ta……something

Mikalina
Reader
Mikalina

Information pollution
= infobesity = analysis paralysis = cognitive dissonance = continuous partial attention
= bystander syndrome

Richard Compton
Reader

I think you are right about that, Mikalina

Jen
Reader
Jen

@ Sarmis2018: From what I have been able to find on the Internet, you appear to be right: most Novichok-type agents are binary poisons made from non-toxic compounds. Mixing them together is dangerous so one presumes the Novichok (if it really were Novichok) had to be introduced already made and in a bottle into Julia Skripal’s luggage. This could have been done just as readily in the UK (as in Russia) when she was collecting her bags and passing through customs.
@ Richard Compton: We would need to know if Zizzi restaurants in the UK allow customers to bring their own wine.
I think the photo most interesting to you – because apparently it was taken on the same day the Skripals were poisoned and you can the reflection of someone photographing them – is this one at this link:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/03/15/suitcase-spy-poisoning-plot-nerve-agent-planted-luggage-sergei/
Putting Novichok in something that contains water degrades and renders it harmless which is why authorities hosed down the area where the Skripals were found unconscious on the park bench.

Richard Compton
Reader

Surely there are some winos on this forum who can identify the bottle. Zizzi’s staff have been told to keep their mouths shut but their wine policy might be on the internet somewhere.? I can only see beer in the photo you linked.

Jen
Reader
Jen

Wine list for Zizzi restaurants in the UK:
https://www.zizzi.co.uk/drinks

Richard Compton
Reader

Thanks, I checked that, but couldn’t see a similar wine on offer and I couldn’t see their take in wine policy either, in the meantime you may care to read this very interesting analysis by a Dutch expert: https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2018/03/21/unknown-newcomer-novichok-was-long-known-a1596490

vierotchka
Reader

But was the photo in question taken in Zizzi? Somehow, I don’t think so.

Richard Compton
Reader

I’m not sure about that photo, my interest was to see if it was a Russian wine that they liked to drink or what wine it was, and/or what wine if any they drank at Zizzi’s

vierotchka
Reader
Richard Compton
Reader

It seems that Julia Skripal’s boyfriend is Denis Dementyev, who works at Nike in Moscow but is alleged (by Victoria Skripal) to be also working for Russian Intelligence
It also looks like I am the first person to publish this new information 😉
Photographs of him taken with Julia Skripal can be seen here: http://valet.ru/user/95338/
one revealing Facebook comment by Denis Dementyev I found: ” but judging by the articles guardian and bbc several Yulia’s “friends” did not hesitate to haypanut the situation. How then it will be unclear to look into the eyes – like I gave interviews to the Guardians while my girlfriend was fighting for life in intensive care, so I’m done!”
If anyone can research his parents, it will save me some time, as It’s a long list of “Dementyev” high up in the “structure” and I’m assuming initially that if his mother is “high up in the structure” then his father probably is too.
My aim is to corroborate or disprove Viktoria Skripal’s allegations 10 days ago on mashtv in Russia that his mother was the person who planted a bottle of poisoned perfume or some other item in her suitcase (this was also claimed by intelligence officers to the Telegraph although they suggested the poison was intended for Mr. Skripal instead of his daughter) and reported in many newspapers a week ago,
Hope it’s not this Dementyev:
Deputy chief of Russia’s strategic air force killed in gangland shooting
Nov 1, 2004 – The General, Konstantin Dementyev, was killed by unknown assailants on the main road between Minsk and Moscow as he returned from holiday in Belarus. Both Dementyev and his driver were killed on the spot, while a second passenger was rushed to a Smolensk hospital. According to unspecified …
Could be: Sergey Gennadevich Dementyev appointed the Director general of JSC Aviastar
or
Former Deputy Industry and Energy Minister Andrei Dementyev
or
Lt. Gen. Valery Dementyev
Certainly couldn’t be this one (from a bizarre role play website called tf-aspis.com 😉
talk about bizarre coincidences when doing research:
“A document collected during yesterday’s raid on FSB Safehouse entails a transfer of a single canister of weaponized organophosphorus type VENOM AGENT X (VX).
The weapon is delivered by Russian General Dementyev, of the YAVPATORIA base in the military district center. Due to the strategic nature of the weapon, such employment is signed by President of the Russian Federation, Vladimir Putin.
A encrypted conversation between GRU forces and the joint-command of DNR / LNR paramilitaries indicate they intent to use this weapon in a false-flag operation on civillian populatin in the area of BARIGA, UKRAINE.”
posted by “J. Wilson” Joined: Jul 20, 2016
http://tf-aspis.com/forum_threads/2663984?post=13309384#forum_post_13309384
Any help appreciated in finding out who his parents are!

Greg Bacon
Reader

Since BoJo is going to be the next PM, it’s apparent that only buffoons with an IQ less than 100 can live at #10 Downing.
Who’s the world’s leader in assassinating people it doesn’t like? ISRAEL. The eight Russian oligarchs that looted hundreds of billions from Russia, seven were Jewish. Putin put a stop to their thieving and even prosecuted one or two, while the rest fled to the West and Israel.
Did the Mossad kill a Russian general for peddling deadly nerve agent to Syria?
https://www.timesofisrael.com/did-the-mossad-kill-a-russian-general-for-peddling-deadly-nerve-agent-to-syria/

Vera
Reader
Vera

Of course OffGuardian takes Moscow’s side and condones Putin’s cold-blooded attempted murder.

Admin
Reader

OffG has not condoned and would not condone the attempted murder of anyone, whoever was responsible. As to who the perpetrator was, we have made it pretty clear there is no evidence for that available at the moment, so your assumptions on that point are currently groundless

bevin
Reader
bevin

Perhaps, Vera, you could explain to us how you concluded that Putin is guilty of ‘cold blooded murder’?
Most of us have seen no evidence of this. Do you have secret informants? Or do you just take everything Mrs May and Mr Johnson say as self evidently true?

pliszkablog
Reader

In that mindset, it is a given that Putin killed someone in cold blood today, but only sometimes we have a clue who was it, as when Skripals were poisoned. So we compare a potential suspect “known” to be brutal and cold blooded with British Intelligence that hardly ever kills anyone, and when it does, it exhibits scruples, remorse etc. like civilized persons would. And we did not see any morose MI6 agents lately, did we. Case closed.

mohandeer
Reader

Reblogged this on Worldtruth.

John Gilberts
Reader
John Gilberts