featured, latest, Russia, Skripal case, UK

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?

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, 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


  1. 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.

  2. 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:
    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).
    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.
    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.

    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’
    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/


    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 says

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

      • 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.

    • 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.

      • 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 says

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

          • 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 says

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

    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!)


    • Shahna says

      “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.

  4. 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.

  5. 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


    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.”

  6. Brup says

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

    • MICHAEL LEIGH says

      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 ?

  7. MichaelK says

    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 says

      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.

    • 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 says

        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

  8. 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
    Nerve toxin used on ex-spy ‘was planted in daughter’s suitcase’
    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 says

      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.

      • 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 says

          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 says

            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.

            • 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?:


              • Mikalina says

                Information pollution

                = infobesity = analysis paralysis = cognitive dissonance = continuous partial attention

                = bystander syndrome

            • Jen says

              @ 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:

              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.

  9. 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
    Former Deputy Industry and Energy Minister Andrei Dementyev
    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


    Any help appreciated in finding out who his parents are!

  10. 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?


  11. Vera says

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

    • 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 says

      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?

      • 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.

  12. P.E. Ace says

    Interesting and disturbing, I guess: I searched Justice Williams’s judgement on “related” and in addition to “related” being used to the chemical involved, the word pops up in the following sentence:

    14 2) e) iv): Any publicity related to the outcome of the OPCW evaluation will be limited in particular having regard to what is already in the public domain.

    This seems part of text that deal with interests of the Skripals, but given this argument was put forward by lawyers representing the secretary of state, it can and should be interpreted as ominous.


  13. Drone17 says

    In light of this news, it is worth re-reading this article: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/novichok-effects-nerve-agent-russian-spy-attack-salisbury-sergei-skripal-if-survive-live-body-a8253976.html

    In it a UK chemical weapon scientist explains that should a Novichok or similar substance have been used it would be detected and traced to the origin. The fact that Porton Down experts were unable to do it despite having plenty of time speaks for itself.

  14. Francis Lee says

    Slightly off track perhaps, The great Russian collapse of the 1990s was overseen (if this is the right word) by the west’s man, Boris Yeltsin. Ostensibly in charge of affairs, Russia in fact was at that time beset by multiple turf wars particularly in the large urban centres. Then Russian constitutional crisis of 1993 began in earnest on September 21, when Yeltsin dissolved the country’s parliament, which was increasingly obstructing Yeltsin’s attempts to consolidate sweeping powers in the president’s hands and embark on widely unpopular neoliberal reforms. He was not allowed to do this under the then-functioning constitution, so he simply enacted a new constitution.
    Parliament deemed Yeltsin’s presidency unconstitutional and openly rebelled against of the Yeltsin regime, it appointed its own acting president. On October 2-October 3, a mass uprising against Boris Yeltsin erupted in Moscow in support of parliament. Russia was on the brink of civil war. Tensions built quickly, and the representatives barricaded themselves in the parliament building, the “Russian White House.” After ten days, Yeltsin fell back on his support in the army which bombarded the Parliamentary building seized the Russian White House by force. The “second October Revolution” was crushed.
    Dozens of people had been killed and hundreds had been wounded after the most deadly street fighting in Moscow since the Bolshevik Revolution in October 1917. Significantly enough no substantive peep came from the western establishment. One wonders what the reaction would have been if Putin had ordered the army to bombard the Russian Parliament.
    Moreover, this was a period when the oligarchs were running amok being the chief beneficiaries of the ‘shock and awe’ policies imported from the west. One of the key figures in this period was Boris Berezovsky an alpha oligarch who enjoyed intimate access to the Yeltsin family. This is a story told by the Russian-American author Paul Klebnikov whose biography of Berezovsky ‘Godfather of the Kremlin’ enjoyed wide circulation but unfortunately got him assassinated by unknown assailants in 2004.
    But never mind, God was in his heaven, Yeltsin was back in power (thanks to US meddling), and all was right with the world. The turf wars continued to devour their children; unprepossessing characters like Nemtsov being one who was gunned down only yards from the Kremlin, hmmm, what makes me think that this was a false flag operation.
    The real point, however, that despite all the carnage and corruption in Russia during the 1990s, no protest came from western sources who simply regarded the whole episode as a good opportunity to kick Russia whilst she was prostrate.

    Why am I surprised at the double-standards involved?

    • No, you are not off track at all. The money that Russia haemorrhaged to the oligarchs and their management, like Browder, is key to this. His various Magnitsky laws are in part a global protection racket for pirated assets …and part ideological revenge on Vladimir Putin. Even the Russophobia is fake and ideo-culturally weaponised. They’d love Russia with another Mobfather like Yeltsin in charge and they could return to their scavenger ways?

  15. Big B says

    The Skripal psyop is set to move having received too much close scrutiny in the rinse and spin news cycle. The EU response was muted: so I noticed the traitorous mug of Bill Browder on the local news goading Surrey Police into re-examining the ‘mysterious’ death of his one time associate (and probable co-conspirator) Alexander Perepilichnyy …he who was ‘poisoned’ by the rare plant toxin gelsemium elegans; laced through his sorrel soup.

    I’m sure people know by now: Browder IS the Cold War. It has been his personal anti-Putin agenda since 2009. He started the sanctions ball rolling with his Magnitsky List (researched by Fusion GPS); which he pushed to be the Magnitsky Act (2012) through Senators Ben Cardin and John McCain; not content with the US, the scope of the act became global under Obama (Global Magnitsky Act 2016. Canada, Estonia, Lithuania have similar laws or proposals now.); he then went trans-Atlantic bringing his xenophobia here: he got a cross-party Magnitsky ammendment added to the Criminal Justice Act 2017; Ian Austin introduced a private members ‘Magnitsky Law’ under the ‘ten minute rule’; using the Skripals as leverage, Thornberry and Corbyn have furthered the concession of Treason May to add another Magnitsky Ammendment to the Sanctions Anti-Money Laundering Bill: and now, leveraging Perepilichnyy – he will push the ’14 deaths’ dodgy dossier, IMO.

    Let me be clear: this has nothing to do with human rights, money laundering, or sanctions – this is all about the agenda. The laws are codified xenophobia: based on the delusional lies of one man (though there is the suggestion that he is the figurehead of an MI6 psyop – as ‘Agent Solomon’. His buddy Navalny being ‘Agent Freedom’? [LiveLeaks]). What is apparent and undeniable is that he has recently been pushing his agenda through Parliament using Labour as a vehicle.

    “We welcome the Prime Minister today clearly committing to support the Magnitsky amendments and implementing them as soon as possible, as Labour has long pushed for.

    Yesterday Nikolai Glushkov, a Russian exile who was close friends with the late oligarch Boris Berezovsky, was found dead in his London home. What reassurances can the Prime Minister give to citizens of Russian origin living in Britain that they are safe here?”*

    (Jeremy Corbyn in reply to May’s second update on the Skripal incident. [Hansard])

    With Glushkov and Perepilichnyy: this agenda will continue to be rolled out to the lasting detriment of Anglo-Russian relations. This is a very Anglo-Zionist coup of which Russia, and Putin personally, is the target, not the perpetrator. The perpetraitor in chief is Browder: he needs to be exposed as such. Whether he is MI6 or not matters little (though it does tie in with Steele, Miller, Skripal and a coterie of ex-spooks {including Luke!} that seem to be at the very rotten core of this). If Corbyn is the man we all hoped he would be, his chance to redeem himself will be in denouncing Browder and his delusional lies. Then perhaps we can apologise and make our peace with Russia?

    • BigB
      I wish I could be as confident in Jeremy Corbyn, but he has been making concessions in all the wrong places just to keep his own team behind him(ie. Emily Thornberry etc)and his premiership intact against the daily onslought of right wing fed Blairite and Tory smear campaigns. I’m fast losing faith in his ability to take on the world!

      • Big B says

        Susan: to deconstruct Corbyn’s predicament is to realise he is caught in an authoritarian stranglehold. The Labour front bench have had the same intelligence briefings as the Government. To stand up in the House and say the Cabinet Office and Intelligence services are wrong is impossible; as we have seen.

        But we also know that the Intelligence services CAN be wrong: e.g. Iraq – as Seumas Milne has pointed out (to much derision). Former GCHQ analyst, Alex Thomson, has gone as far as he can (within the Official Secrets Act) to tell us HOW intel can be “nobbled” – by ideologically corrupted individuals that can be “highly winsome among their colleagues”. He has gone as far as naming the possible corrupting agency – RUSI – and even naming one of their Fellows – Igor Sutyagin. He coincidentally, was involved in the same spy swap as Skripal. Now he seems to be an expert in hybrid informational warfare for the pro-EU private think tank. Craig Murray, with his FCO contacts, has independently corroborated Thomson’s view – that Porton Down did not sign off on the intel from the start. Someone ‘upstairs’ (in the Cabinet Office?) did it for them …a “closely related agent”; “of a type developed by Russia liars”.


        So, GIGO. If the intel has been ideologically corrupted, as seems almost certain, you are in between a rock and a hard place whether you believe it or not.

        And then there are the circling piranhas, tasting blood and working themselves into a feeding frenzy. That is his enemies on both sides of the House: and in the extended blood tide of the commentariat. Anyone who is even perceived to attempt to swim against this ideological red tide will be eaten alive.

        Then there are Browder’s lies. It is easy for me to say that: but from a position of authority: these uncontested claims about Magnitsky are incorporated into the body politic of the US, the EU, Canada, and now the UK. To break ranks and call them out as lies is career suicide (and very possible actual ‘suicide’). [Putin has allegedly called Browder a ‘serial killer’ for those who die around him]

        So not only do we have a UK cross-party collusion based on one mans fabricated highly leveraged xenophobic lies: an idiotocracy of national unity, if you will …we also have a growing international coalition of willing liars.

        This is beyond Corbyn: whatever his position, he is one man (even McDonnell has gone to the dark side). This is a trans-national, supra-ideological, cross-cultural pandemic of Russophobia – and the vector of contagion, the ‘Typhoid Mary’, is ‘Xenophobe Bill’.

        Other than with truth; it is difficult to see how this can be resisted, The overclass of the US/UK have united themselves around the post-truth Cold War doctrine of Russophobia – with the unsuccessful and demonstrably false Russiagate 1.0 (Mueller, etc); and as that was being wound up in its failure – now we have another evidence free fantasy Russiagate 2.0 (Skripalgate). And the entire trans-atlantic idiotocracy have endorsed it as their truth. With a very few lukewarmists among them, including Corbyn. But mild dissent is not denunciation, nor can it be. The lunatics are running the asylum: both sides of the Atlantic – and it’s going to take more than holding one mans feet to the fire to change that.

        • Big B says

          I might add: without the detailed knowledge of Murray and Thomson, the subtleties of this case would pass me by. Another indication of ‘nobbled’ intelligence was the Saturday ‘action on’ to clear Bojo to appear on Marr with new revelations:

          “The Foreign Secretary revealed this morning that we have information indicating that within the last decade, Russia has investigated ways of delivering nerve agents likely for assassination. And part of this programme has involved producing and stockpiling quantities of novichok. This is a violation of the Chemical Weapons Convention.”

          As Murray points out, this was a highly unusual in itself – to ‘action on’ on a Friday night, for new intel to be delivered from Marr’s sofa …NOT to Parliament. It also contains more semantic trickery and sleight of mouth …”within the last decade” is a weaponised phrase.


          If this is not an indication that person or persons unknown are ideologically corrupting information, I do not know what is. Again, this subtle inference points to a very Anglo-Zionist coup, operating from within. We do not need to look East to see the enemy: he comes from the corrupt heart of the West?

      • mark says

        Thornberry is obviously being groomed as Corbyn’s replacement. She has been going overboard in her grovelling to the Zionist mafia, even outdoing Theresa “Je Suis Juif” May and Boris “I am a fervent Zionist” Johnson.

  16. What about the claim from Viktoria Skripal and her friend Tamara, that it was her boyfriend’s mother who “planted” the nerve agent in a bottle(perfume/vodka/other spirits) or sealed can of something (sausages/herring/caviar) which was then opened by the Skripals and resulted in their poisoning on the park bench (cold day, let’s have a slug of X that your future mother-in-law kindly sent over from Moscow…glug, glug, ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh)

    It was a big claim by the Skripal family in Russia made initially on mashtv, but now they have shut their mouths or have had their mouths shut.
    and what pathetic investigative reporting, we don’t even know Julia Skripal’s mysterious boyfriend’s name (supposedly a member of Russian security services) nor his mother’s (who works high up in the “structure”) and no further attempt has been made to investigate Viktoria Skripal or Tamara’s claims. since they were published 10 days ago. WTF?
    Sources for Viktoria Skripal’s claims originally on mashtv:
    Google “Viktoria Skripal mother in law”

  17. What about the claim from Viktoria Skripal and her friend Tamara, that it was her boyfriend’s mother who “planted” the nerve agent in a bottle(perfume/vodka/other spirits) or sealed can of something (sausages/herring/caviar) which was then opened by the Skripals and resulted in their poisoning on the park bench (cold day, let’s have a slug of X that your future mother-in-law kindly sent over from Moscow…glug, glug, ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh)

    It was a big claim by the Skripal family in Russia made initially on mashtv, but now they have shut their mouths or have had their mouths shut.

    and what pathetic investigative reporting, we don’t even know Julia Skripal’s mysterious boyfriend’s name (supposedly a member of Russian security services) nor his mother’s (who works high up in the “structure”) and no further attempt has been made to investigate Viktoria Skripal or Tamara’s claims. since they were published 10 days ago. WTF?

  18. Kath Shaw says

    Enjoyed reading this article. Seems very rational, unlike the hype coming out of UK Govt.

  19. Jennifer Hor says

    Dear Off-Guardian,

    If you check Pt 17 (Section FF) of Justice Williams’ judgement in that document linked to, you will see that he states the Secretary of State of the Home Department (Amber Rudd?) has not contacted any Skripal family members. One assumes by that statement that neither the Russian embassy nor the Russian foreign ministry has ever been informed of Julia Skripal’s condition since 4 March. This in spite of the Russian foreign ministry’s attempts to find out what has been going on as per its “aide de memoire” (pt 6) which you posted on 21 March.

  20. https://s9.postimg.org/jpgphnldb/skripal-baltic.jpg

    What did i tell you? 🙂


    Hehe, the spectacle develops strictly according to plan.

    What’s next?

    Well, it seems now OPCW is working with a “substance”. IF they’re REALLY working with this “substance”…
    Any reasons to 100% trust OPCW? I don’t know. This organization makes a dual impression.

    From one side – a respected international organization. Yes, they confirmed, in particular, that both Russia & Syria destroyed all their chemical weapons.
    That’s good.
    But they – OPCW – themselves defamed their reputation.
    A turning point was “Khan-Sheikhun incident” in Syria (April 2017).

    Then, a year ago, OPCW suddenly behaved themselves really strangely. Instead of going to Shayrat airfield to get samples & analyse it, they stubbornly refused to visit the place. Many weeks and months they refused to go. Unbelievable. It was this fact that undermined the credibility of this organization. Unfortunately.
    Why they refused to do their work? Well, it seems they knew perfectly well they will find nothing there, so Western anti-Assad alliance will have nothing to blame Assad. The lack of evidence of “Assad’s guilt” would also have exposed the United States in a very unattractive position – in fact, it would mean that US is the aggressor who attacked innocent side “just like that” (I remind, on April 7, 2017 US launched almost 60 Tomahawks on Shayrat airfield in Syria).

    The Russian Foreign Minister S.Lavrov then spoke of the bias of this organization and the non-transparency of its work. He said who heads this organization, what is the composition of its leadership. OPCW’s work is guided by… who would you think?… – two representatives of UK.
    It was a year ago. I don’t know what about now, but I can assume that nothing has changed. It’s “highly likely” that UK still rule in OPCW.

    So now OPCW is working with a “substance” in UK. Let’s not forget that they started their work NOT right after the “incident”, but ~10 days (or even longer?) later. All this time UK stubbornly refused to “add/allow” OPCW to investigation, though Russia insisted on it. But then suddenly they said “Yes, OK, you can come & check the substance”. What happened? Now everything is “properly ready” to show it to the OPCW’ staff?

    So what will we see next in this spectacle?

    I think that it is very much possible (a.k.a. “highly likely”) that the conclusions of the OPCW commission not directly, but by somehow indirectly will “confirm” the version of the British authorities.
    I don’t know whether they will be misled, or “correct evidence” will be fabricated, or they will be intimidated etc… Or maybe all this is foolish invention. I don’t know.
    I just can’t imagine that after “investigation” OPCW will say – all you (means UK) said was a lie, there’s no evidence it was Russia. A bid is too high for UK authorities. A “culprit” has already been appointed. The “crime tool” (“Novichok”) has already been “clearly identified”. Punitive measures against “culprit” have already been taken. European partners have already expressed solidarity and even a willingness to take their own punitive measures against “culprit”.
    Everything is already done.
    T. May & Co simply physically can not allow OPCW to pass the “wrong verdict”. Cuz, as i said, a bid is too high.
    For T. May her entire political career is essentially dependent now on the verdict of the OPCW.

    I think they – OPCW – will not say (though, who knows!) that it’s “100% the Russia-made poison”, cuz the World community will ask them then – “hey guys, wait a second, it was you who confirmed that Russia has no CW! But now it turns out they still have it? Looks like you guys are dilettantes and you failed your work, confirming the complete destruction of Russian CW”.
    So i think they will indirectly (evasively) “confirm” the version of the British authorities. I think we will see the wordings “probably”, “perhaps”, “possibly”, “very likely”, “potentially” etc.

    Btw, a couple days ago ‘UK in Russia’ posted a nice twitt:


    Oh, so nice. Sounds like this: “We (British experts) were working in our own (British) chemical laboratory testing the substance, so we (British experts) can confirm what our (British) government was saying all this time”. Wow, the main thing is “surprise” of conclusion. Bravo. 😀

    • MinutebisMitternacht says

      After all the lies, I can’t see them coming out of this alive, if they are indeed where we are being told they are. How come ziomedia hasn’t published any photos of them in a “coma” like they did a with that other chap a few years ago? You bet your life that if they have had any evidence the story will still be on our tv and radio every half an hour.

      • Jen says

        100% secure? In a coma? You mean as in those MK ULTRA experiments the CIA carried out decades ago where people were drugged and deprived of all sensory input?

        Ah Jen, don’t go there …

  21. Regarding the ambiguity of some phrases in the High Court judgment, I submitted this comment on Craig Murray’s blog but since it directly pertains to the discussion here I am re-posting. I have found in my profession that in reading legal documents, one should always opt for the WEAKEST reading possible if there is ANY ambiguity in the language. Hence the following.

    There are two non-identical sentences describing the Skripals’ test results in the high court judgment. How should we read them, individually and in combination? Here is my guess:

    I think the truth behind the first sentence is that the Skripals tested positive not for “a nerve agent,” but for a “related compound.” (Otherwise this latter phrase would not have been included at all.) This could mean EITHER that they tested possible for everyday chemicals that in certain combinations could be used to produce a nerve agent, but in this case were not, OR that they tested possible for a poison that is not a nerve agent at all, but a “related compound”–i.e. a “compound” (and not a simple element) that causes effects “related” to (but not identical with) those of nerve agents.

    The second sentence is designed to undermine my skeptical reading of the first sentence without actually doing so–i.e. without actually stating a lie, under conditions of plausible deniability. The second sentence states that they tested positive for “a Novichok class nerve agent” OR “a closely related agent.” The key to understanding the second sentence is that the adjective “nerve” need not be taken to modify the second use of the word “agent,” even though that is the most natural and plausible way to read the sentence for a native English speaker. Rather, a “closely related agent” could refer to a non-nerve agent–a different kind of poison–that is “closely related” to a “Novichok class nerve agent” in precisely the way that the “related compound” is related to “nerve agent” in the first sentence: i.e. it is an agent that produces or is intended to produce “closely related” (in the relevant sense) effects–sickness, poisoning, etc–to those of a nerve agent (Novichok class or otherwise).

    So the two sentences are designed to obfuscate the truth without stating an outright lie under conditions of plausible deniability. And the lawyerly way to read them is to read them in the weakest way possible: the Skripals tested positive for a non-nerve-agent poison.
    This reading would also seem to fit with the facts–about nerve agents, about the Skripals’ symptoms, about the timeline–as we now understand them. It also matches up with the much discussed Salisbury physician Davies’s letter to the editor, which differentiates “poison” from “nerve agent” in just this way.

  22. Gerrysea says

    On March 16 Steven Davies, “Consultant in Emergency Medicine” at Salisbury hospital, wrote the following letter to the Times in response to an article that had appeared there two days earlier.This is the text of the letter:

    “Sir, Further to your report (“Poison Exposure Leaves Almost 40 Needing Treatment”, Mar 14), may I clarify that no patients have experienced symptoms of nerve-agent poisoning in Salisbury and there have only ever been three patients with significant poisoning. Several people have attended the emergency department concerned that they may have been exposed. None had symptoms of poisoning and none has needed treatment. Any blood tests performed have shown no abnormality. No member of the public has been contaminated by the agent involved.

    STEPHEN DAVIES, Consultant in Emergency Medicine, Salisbury NHS Foundation Trust”

  23. bevin says

    Fromthe daily briefing of the MI 6 Bulletin (formerly known as The Graudian):
    “…A developer of Soviet-era nerve agents related to the one used against former spy Serrgei Skripal and his daughter Yulia has told the Guardian that a similar poison was used in the murder of a Russian businessman in the 1990s.

    ” The remarks by Vladimir Uglev, a Soviet chemical weapons scientist, contradict official Russian denials that the country had any chemical weapons programme tied to the name novichok, with the formal codename foliant. ”
    In other words another of MI6’s agents, working for those upstanding capitalists the oligarchs in exile refusing to pay taxes, confirms the Tory story.
    No doubt for the right kind of reward he will tell you that he personally taught Putin how to make Novichok out of toothpaste and Round Up and happened to notice him in Salisbury, skulking around a pub, in early March. That will be $100, ‘squire.

    • Mikalina says

      “Crime once exposed has no refuge but in audacity.”

    • Alasdair Cullen says

      There are Russian newspaper articles from the 1990s confirming a scientist died from Novichok. Are you suggesting the Guardian went back in time to plant them?

        • Jem says

          The article on the Guardian has this line underneath the photo of the newspaper clipping:

          “Story about Andrei Zheleznyakov from the now-defunct Russian newspaper Novoye Vremya. Photograph: Handout ”

          The article also states that the newspaper concerned is the defunct Novoye Vremya.

          “Circles appeared before my eyes: red and orange. A ringing in my ears, I caught my breath. And a sense of fear: like something was about to happen,” Andrei Zheleznyakov told the now-defunct newspaper Novoye Vremya, describing the 1987 weapons lab incident that exposed him to a nerve agent that would eventually kill him. “I sat down on a chair and told the guys: ‘It’s got me.”

          According to Wikipedia, that newspaper ceased operations in 1917. Yet the article was supposedly published in 1992.

          “Novoye Vremya (Russian: Но́вое вре́мя, IPA: [ˈnovəjə ˈvrʲemʲə]) was a Russian newspaper published in St. Petersburg from 1868 to 1917.”


          Wikipedia could be wrong of course.

            • Jem says

              Yes, it’s possible. It could be sloppy journalism from the Guardian. Although the photo looks like newsprint, rather a magazine page don’t you think?

              Archives on the magazine site only date back to 2007 and my searches haven’t found anything elsewhere as yet.

              • meric says

                I thought it looked like newsprint originally, but the layout white space and large drop cap suggests a mag, especially given the date. You’re probably right that it’s a sloppy Guardian sub.

      • bevin says

        Why would one have to suggest that The Guardian went back in time to plant articles in Russian newspapers which you interpret as meaning that a scientist died from ‘Novichok’?

        I am simply saying that The Guardian is probably employing a liar to prop up the crumbling story that it, the state and the Blairites are promulgating to the effect that the Russian state was responsible for attempted assassinations in Salisbury.

        I am saying that there is not a scintilla of evidence to support this outlandish charge. And that the allegation is designed to facilitate the smearing of the leader of the Labour Party which has been the constant employment of The Guardian for most of the past three years.

        The Guardian, the government and the Blairite Fifth Column within the Labour Party are very likely themselves to be more closely connected with those who attacked the Skripals than anyone employed by or working for President Putin. After all, the attack story, before it collapsed in a welter of contradictions, served the purposes of the imperialists and annoyed and insulted the Russian President on the eve of an election campaign and the Russian people under constant attack from warmongers in the west, including Poles.

        • Big B says

          Re: the Guardian and the Blairite Fifth Column. These are the exact infiltration vectors of the contagion of William Browder, IMO. This is a very Anglo-Zionist coup spread through Dominic Raab (CFI) and Ian Austin (LFI): but it has now infected both major parties to the very top. Corbyn and Thornberry have used their platform to get May to adopt Magnitsky style sanctions. The key to this poisoning is the Skripal-Miller-Orbis nexus: but that leads down a rabbit hole of shady ex-MI6 connections (the original Magnitsky list and Trump dossier are both Fusion GPS creations.) But Browder is the real and highly visible key to this: he is a one man Cold War – and Labour are his vehicle in Parliament. One might ask why they are pushing the Deep State agenda for the billionaire class: but that would only upset the die hard Corbynistas who still believe he is the hope of the working class.

          • Not all of us who helped Corbyn to victory view the world through rose tinted glasses. If he continues to betray the priciples upon which he was elected by the members, some of those members are going to do their best to replace him with a more worthy and principled leader. I’ll hang him out to dry if he fails to live up to his (what will be)empty promises.

            • Ultraviolet says

              If you are looking for a political leader who represents 100% of what you want, you are going to be sorely disappointed forever.

              Corbyn may not be perfect, but he is the nearest to perfect I have ever seen in my 50 years, and I don’t expect to see better any time soon.

            • mark says

              He is under tremendous pressure to conform and become an obedient servant of the Deep State. 80% plus of his party have tried to stab him in the back twice and failed. We have the manufactured anti semitic smears, which are continuing and given full vent in the MSM, which has been conducting and will continue to conduct a vitriolic campaign against him, like the Mail’s 14 page smear prior to the election. He has been targeted by MI5 in the past, like many other Left progressives. Powerful moneyed vested interests and the Deep State are terrified he will become the next P.M., and will literally stop at nothing to prevent this. Here too there is a very deep swamp that needs draining.

              Under the circumstances, it took some courage for Corbyn merely to ask for evidence that this alleged substance was produced in Russia, and he has been vilified as a result, not least by the loathsome Red Tory swamp creatures in his own party.

              This may change as the official narrative unravels.

        • Mulga Mumblebrain says

          Uglev is a renegade, a defector from and now enemy of his country. That is the MOST unreliable ‘authority’ imaginable.

        • mark says

          This is true. I think the main target of the Salisbury hoax was Corbyn. The Deep State, MI6/5, Chatham House, the MSM, and powerful vested interests are terrified Corbyn will become the next P.M. They look at Trump and Brexit and the failure of May in her snap election. May is the unpopular and uncharismatic leader of a weak minority government doing sordid deals with the Unionists at vast public expense to cling on to power. Corbyn was supposedly unelectable, like Trump. It didn’t work out that way. May is facing plots from her mutinous party.

          Now we have “Putin’s puppet” and “Kremlin stooge” Corbyn, while May can pose as a Thatcher clone seeing off evil Vlad and Johnny Russian instead of the Argies.
          The two revolts against Corbyn by Red Tory Blairites failed, as have MSM/ Daily Mail smear campaigns, and the anti semitic smears which are continuing. This falls into a pattern of spook shenanigans against left wing figures, Harold Wilson, trade unionists and the like going back decades.

          • lucdevincke says

            @ Mark – Do you remember the MI5 plot against WIlson?

            • mark says

              That’s what I was thinking of. Wilson was extensively bugged and smeared by MI5 in the 1960s and 70s. He was often dismissed as paranoid, but warned everyone around him to be careful about what was said in 10 Downing St. There were even coups being plotted involving retired army officers and establishment figures.

  24. Humanity owes a debt of gratitude to Mr. Craig Murray and others around the Earth whose efforts are providing sanity and calm in a time of apparent warmongering madness.

    • Ultraviolet says

      And what should we make of this?


      Royal Marines donned gas masks for three weeks as they tested Britain’s ability to fight in the event of a chemical – or, worse, nuclear – attack.

      Troops from 40 Commando, based at Norton Manor, near Taunton, joined the country’s leading experts in Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear warfare to make sure they could cope in a worst-case scenario.

      The three-week exercise included company-level attacks and various CBRN scenarios based on the latest threats for ultimate realism, such as a raid on a suspected chemical weapons lab.

      It climaxes with a full-scale exercise involving government and industry scientists and more than 300 military personnel, including the RAF Regiment and the RM Band Service – casualty treatment was a key part of the Salisbury Plain exercise.

      A chemical decontamination area was set up not merely to treat ‘polluted’ commandos, but also any wounded prisoners they may have brought in; once cleansed, casualties can be treated in field/regular hospitals.

      Purely by coincidence, there was a chemical weapons test going on in Salisbury at the time the Skripals were exposed to chemical weapons in Salisbury, and the two things are entirely unrelated?

        • Mikalina says

          I knew there was a mock drill going on for 9/11 but never heard about the 7/7 mock drill.

          Does anyone know what the next mock drill is?

          • Mulga Mumblebrain says

            There are ‘mock drills’ concerning attacks with Novichoks planned for New York-very soon.

      • Alasdair Cullen says

        Salisbury Plain is often used for military exercises. That Porton Down, nearby, might take part and therefore add a chemical weapons aspect, is hardly surprising is it?

        • Ultraviolet says

          Read the link. It is the Royal Navy website. This was an unprecedented full scale chemical weapons exercise, according to the Navy, not a normal exercise with a bit of chem thrown in because Porton Down was nearby.

        • Oh, look, a squirrel.

          It’s the timing that’s interesting here, in case you missed that bit.

          • meric says

            I posted this on Craig’s site just now, where people are making the same suggestion that the Skripals were poisoned at the same time as Toxic Dagger:

            A video from the last day of exercise Toxic Dagger was published on February 19:

            It was completed well before 6 March, and the RN article refers to it in the past tense.

            • Ultraviolet says

              And yet the Royal Navy article on 6th March gives a different impression.

              “The three-week exercise included company-level attacks and various CBRN scenarios based on the latest threats for ultimate realism, such as a raid on a suspected chemical weapons lab.

              “It climaxes with a full-scale exercise involving government and industry scientists and more than 300 military personnel, including the RAF Regiment and the RM Band Service – casualty treatment was a key part of the Salisbury Plain exercise.”

              So on 6th March, they published that it “climaxes” – present tense – with this full scale exercise. If you were right, I would have expected it to say that it “climaxed” – past tense.

              I also note that, contrary to other videos relating to the Royal Marines, which seem to attract numerous comments right from the off, this video, posted on 19th February, got its first comment five days ago.

              • meric says

                The same sentence switches to the past later on. Could the RN article originate in a press release in the present tense, incompletely edited to the past?
                The video I posted is not from the very popular Royal Marines, but the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory. Most DSTL videos get few views and no comments. This one has 1.2k views and 5 comments in a short time.

          • @Vaska. Not only the timing on the distraction front for the many failed policies, but also on another level entirely.
            If Yulia was returning home to Russia with evidence her father Sergai had regarding the nefarious activities MI5/6 with regard to the now debunked Steele Dossier, timing was crucial. Yulia was to return to Russia the next day and with her the possible means for Sergai to return to his homeland and family. Timing was crucial also for a search for that evidence to be conducted under valid circumstances and crucial that those circumstances would negate the rights of the Skripal’s to receive a visit from a Russian speaking Embassy staffer or worse still for the Tories, the CIA and British Intelligence, a Russian Diplomat of highest rank who would have security status to retrieve the evidence so feared by so many(British snakes).
            While TMay has most certainly benefited from this three ring circus she has created on so many levels it would be difficult & time consuming to list them, it also let her off the hook in her battle against her own detrators within the Tory Party, but gave her yet another opportunity to provide bullets for the 5th columnist Blairites and her bought and paid for MSM.
            What squirrel?

        • Chris says

          Alastair, the links to those 90s articles please?

      • Big B says

        Operation Toxic Dagger: keeping the homeland safe from all those jihadis (NB: the subtle inference here – they were moderate rebels abroad; but dangerous jihadis if they return) returning home with pockets full of sarin. One should also note the presence of scientists from Porton Down that took part in the exercise. Specially trained CBRN troops were the ones on hand to help “decontaminate” Salisbury. One might ask why the highly contaminated bench was only removed on Friday, I believe?
        [Daily Heil article contains graphic imagery from Syria. Please note: this photo was debunked – those were not his babies and they did not die in the sarin attack on Khan Sheikhoun …because there was no sarin attack. That sort of photo shoot is what £2.5bn of UK taxpayers money is going to fund.]

    • mark says

      He may well be the target of the next smear campaign.

  25. Michael Leigh says

    I can only agree BEVIN with you, that your foregoing arraignment of the current political leadership of the ‘ British Monarchy ‘ has proven to be lead by, a cabal of serial deceivers and they should face, no other than the current monarch for their gross mendacity upon the reputation of the State and the millions of it’s Peoples. !

  26. Thomas Prentice says

    Forget “London Calling.” It is “London LYING.”

  27. MichaelK says

    It’s still, and increasingly disturbing, how little real interest there is in the British media to ask the relevant questions raised by this incident and the government’s bizarre narrative. What kind of system can get so many, to think so alike, about so much? I could understand if someone was pointing a gun at their necks, but that’s unlikely. It must be a system, a culture, of extraordinary sophistication and power. Almost like they’ve succeeded in convincing the slaves on a plantation that slavery benefits them too and not just the masters up at the big house.

    • Mikalina says

      The British education system churns out little robots – one big sausage machine (to mix my metaphors).

    • Mulga Mumblebrain says

      At least forty years of sacking anyone guilty of any kind of Badthink, and increasing careful vetting before initial employment. And, once you’ve sold your soul to the Devil, there’s no going back.

    • milosevic says

      Why do you assume that elite “journalists” are more closely associated with the category of “slaves”, than with the category of “masters”?

      To continue with the same metaphor, you’re forgetting that the slavemasters had very little to do with the direct operations of the system over which they presided. There was another category of “overseers”, more numerous than masters, but much less numerous than slaves, who did most of the actual pointing of guns, and who must have believed that slavery benefited them too. Perhaps this answers your question.

      A similar system operated in mediaeval Poland and Ukraine. Interestingly, and probably not coincidentally, it turns out that the people who occupied the “overseer” category in that case, are very highly over-represented among western “journalists” today.


      • Mikalina says

        Fascinating site. Times all that by 1000 and you get Koch Brothers i360 as described and explained by Greg Pallast. Has total control of America.

  28. Louise says

    The only benefit of the doubt explanation for the “it was Russia” certainty is if there is other forensic evidence we’re not being told about at all or some other factor such as if Yulia Skipal is a UK spy and threats had been made. I can understand a government not publicising all they know but there seems to have been no attempt to suggest wider evidence and the precise wording of the scientists should have been emphasised promptly. Any clarification on the doctor’s letter to the Times?

  29. bill says

    The Saker understandably wouldnt even debate with clowns like Bojo
    and writes
    Skripal by nerve gas( “or related agent”)
    Litvinenko by polonium
    Kara-Murza poisoned not once, but TWICE, by an unknown poison, he survived!
    Markov poisoned by ricin and the Bulgarians with “speculated KGB assistance”
    Khattab by sarin or a sarin-derivative
    Yushchenko by dioxin
    Perepilichny by “a rare, toxic flower, gelsemium” (I kid you not, check the article!)
    Moskalenko by mercury
    Politkovskaya who was shot, but who once felt “ill after drinking some tea that she believed contained poison”

    The only possible conclusion from this list is this: there is some kind of secret lab in Russia where completely incompetent chemists try every poison known to man, not on rats or on mice, but on high profile AngloZionist-supported political activists, preferably before an important political event.


  30. Paul says

    The phrase they have been using to denote the finding made by Porton Down “of a type known to be developed in Russia” makes clear to me that they have not managed to identify the chemical structure but only have mass spectrocopic readings on fractions of the molecule. For mass spectroscopy the chemical is bombarded with electrons which produces electrically charged fragments. One (more?) of these fragments probably matches with the structure reported for A234 (the ‘novichok’agent they say was used in Salisbury). Thus the full identification of the chemical seems not to have succeeded. To demonstrate from which country the chemical originates would require an original sample known to be manufactured in that country. It is of course unknown whether a Russian sample of the latter kind even exists.

    The coming tests by the OPCW will most likely confirm what Porton Down has found. The level of evidence will then be completely unchanged (exact chemical structure unknown, molecule fragments matching reported structure of one of the chemicals denoted as ‘novichok’, country of origin of chemical unknown) but we can be sure that this will triumphantly be spun by the MSM as the final confirmation of Theresa May’s accusations against Russia. It’s all so damn easy when you have that Mighty Wurlitzer at your disposal….

    edited by Admin to correct omitted word

    • The only known examples of novichoks actually being made is in Iran 2016, so stands to reason they can’t have any samples of Russian-made novichoks to test against.

      • MichaelK says

        Agreed. But it perhaps indicates that they have their own British-made novichoks to test against, which would, of course, mean that the argument that they’re exclusively Russian in origin falls flat on its face. In fact, it’s hard to understand how they could identify the agent so quickly without having something at hand to compare it to. Otherwise it would have been like looking for a needle in a haystack.

        • Paul says

          I agree with you that Porton Down itself likely is in possession of their own samples of novichoks. When examining the Salibury samples this will have been most helpful.

          From the BBC-website (today): “The chief executive of Porton Down told Gary Aitkenhead said suggestions by Russia that the proximity of the labs to the incident Salisbury might be somehow suspicious were “frustrating” .

          He said the laboratory had the “highest levels” of controls and security.”

          Note that Aitkenhead does not say: we have no novichoks in our institute

          • Paul says

            Sorry, that should read: “Note that the chief executive does not say: we have no novichoks in our institute”

      • Shock horror: was Boris lying yet again when he said Porton Down had a sample:

        DW: You argue that the source of this nerve agent, Novichok, is Russia. How did you manage to find it out so quickly? Does Britain possess samples of it?

        Boris Johnson: Let me be clear with you … When I look at the evidence, I mean the people from Porton Down, the laboratory …

        DW: So they have the samples …

        Boris Johnson: They do. And they were absolutely categorical and I asked the guy myself, I said, “Are you sure?” And he said there’s no doubt.

        According to Mark Ames:

        This muddles the narrative a bit —”novichok” used in 1995 Moscow mafia poison hit on top mobster Ivan Kivelidi. So:
        1) novichok [is] in mob hands too

        If there was Novichok used in Salisbury: which seems highly unlikely …or if the Skripals test positive: which seems highly likely – Porton Down is surely implicated, not Russia.


    • lucdevincke says

      @Paul Is having the formula not enough to know if the product that has been used is the same of that of the formula? Why do you need “an original sample” ,

      • Paul says

        You need an original sample to compare the “footprint”, i.e . the distribution of impurities and traces. The impurity profile of the test sample is matched to that of the known source sample.

        So even if you do know the exact chemical structure of the agent in question you still have no information about who manufactured it. That is a separate question that needs extra investigation

        If you want further information, I found this: https://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/ac202340u

    • bevin says

      Paul, at this point in the movie the guy playing the mighty Wurlitzer turns around only to discover that the hall is close to being completely empty and that the last in the crowd are moving quickly as they head for the exits.
      They sense that the structure is about to collapse and the mighty Wurlitzer is probably contributing to the upcoming disaster.

  31. lucdevincke says

    As i said before, at the end they will have to admit it was simply Ziklon-B, so everyone will have to point fingers at Germany. Or Israel ? 🙂

  32. bevin says

    ” It shows the UK government is currently guilty of lying to Parliament, to the British people, and to the world.”
    Just another day in office then.

Comments are closed.