Guardian Watch, latest, Russia, Skripal case
Comments 38

MI6 Will Be So Proud: Urban & Harding Continue The Ludicrous Skripal Narrative

Bay Kurley, DailyShocker.news

c

Mark Urban is releasing a book on Skripal.

He didn’t tell anyone he had met him during 2017 for that purpose mind you, not even his BBC bosses, until forced to, the day after Skripal was allegedly poisoned.

Which would explain the intimate knowledge he demonstrated on Newsnight that evening, 5th March.

It’s even stranger that Mark didn’t tell his bosses earlier, when he MUST have been aware that Skripal still met his “old” MI6 handler in Salisbury.

Urban must have been aware that this handler, who was an old tanker mate of Urban, was linked to Orbis, the company Christopher Steele ran.

Seems a HUGE link, to a HUGE global story, to not tell your bosses at one of the world’s largest news agencies?

He didn’t admit to the public he had met Skripal until July 2018. FOUR months after Skirpal was “novichoked”.

Enter Harding…

So sorry for putting an image in your mind you may never recover from.

Today, Luke Harding has a piece in the Guardian publicising, sorry I mean reviewing, his mates’ book.

What is said is very interesting, and shows how Harding and Urban are deliberately perpetuating the myth of the official narrative.

Look at what Harding states in the article.

The poisoned former spy Sergei Skripal was initially reluctant to believe the Russian government had tried to kill him”

Skripal struggled to come to terms with his situation following the novichok attack on him and his daughter”

When Skripal woke five weeks later from a coma, he faced some “difficult psychological adjustments” – not least the fact that he was at first reluctant to recognise he had been the target of a Kremlin “murder plot”.

These statements raise two significant and serious problems.

Firstly, how does Harding (and you would assume Urban) know this?

Skripal was kept away from the press. As far as we are told, he has had no contact with the press, not even his own 90 year old mum, since the poisoning.

So who did Skripal tell about these struggles, for Harding make those statements?

Secondly, the picture painted is at complete odds to the statements of the people close to Sergei Skripal.

Ross Cassidy, Sergei’s best friend in Salisbury, stated in an interview that:

The best friend of Sergei Skripal has revealed the Russian spy suspected ‘retribution was coming’ in the weeks before he was poisoned.”

He also said:

Speaking for the first time, Ross Cassidy said Mr Skripal – who betrayed dozens of his old comrades to MI6 – seemed ‘spooked’ and changed his mobile phone amid concern it was being monitored.”

The Mail then makes a very bizarre statement in that same article:

Sources close to the investigation said Mr Skripal told detectives they were then followed home to Salisbury.”

It could be a typo and the journalist meant Mr Cassidy, but if it’s true, then when did Mr Skripal tell detectives they were followed home? After he woke from a coma, or on the Saturday when it happened?

Mr Cassidy continues:

Mr Cassidy, 62, a former submariner, said: ‘In hindsight, with some of the things Sergei said, he suspected retribution was coming.’

‘Sergei was very apprehensive. It was as though he knew something was up. Had he been tipped off or heard that things were moving against him back in Russia?

‘One thing is for sure. He was unusually twitchy. He was spooked.’

Twitchy. Spooked. Exactly how witnesses described Sergei in Zizzi’s.

Mr Cassidy also said, and this is worth quoting at length from the Mail article:

However, I was surprised that they said the Novichok was placed on the Sunday lunchtime. I have always thought it was placed on the Saturday afternoon when we were collecting Yulia from Heathrow, or even Saturday night.

These guys are professional assassins. It would have been far too brazen for them to have walked down a dead end cul-de-sac in broad daylight on a Sunday lunchtime.

Sergei’s house faces up the cul-de-sac. He had a converted garage that he used as his office – this gives a full view of the street.

Almost always, Sergei used to open the door to us before we had chance to knock. Whenever we visited, he’d see us approaching.

Something had spooked Sergei in the weeks prior to the attack. He was twitchy, I don’t know why, and he even changed his mobile phone.

You might say the precise timings don’t matter. But they do matter because they don’t currently make sense.’

Does any of that sound like the state of mind of the man Harding/Urban are describing?

Does Sergei sound like a man “…reluctant to believe the Russian government had tried to kill him”.

No. It’s a load of bollocks isn’t it.

He was well aware of the implications, and had changed his phone and routines to count that threat.

So why does Harding perpetuate the myth of the innocent old retired spy, living quietly in Salisbury?

The Hidden Spy

Nobody has seen or heard from Sergei Skripal since, well forever. We haven’t seen a still, or CCTV footage, of him in Salisbury.

Not even a description of what he and Yulia were wearing.

Which is incredibly odd, as a national TV journalist admitted to the Shocker.

A Russian crew tried to get into Salisbury hospital, but were thwarted. You would assume other journalists have also tried to get in to the hospital, to see him.

Yet apparently, all they had to do was wander into the completely open public gardens.

Harding states:

As an information war raged between London and Moscow, Skripal recuperated, and sometimes sat in a garden near the main part of Salisbury hospital.”

And yet, nobody got near him as he sat there.

Nobody even saw him.

Salisbury district hospital has literally TENS OF THOUSANDS of people in it every week.

Yet not one saw Skirpal. Nobody has tweeted “Saw old Skirpal at the hospital!”

Nobody got a photo, or footage. In this age when people stand by filming murders and god knows what.

How did nobody report seeing him, or speak to him, if he was being wheeled around the hospital, to go and sit in a public garden?

That Nagging CCTV Question

We are told that Boshirov (now Chepiga, but it could change by tomorrow) and Petrov walked brazenly up to Skripal’s front door to apply the novichok.

In broad daylight. Sunday lunchtime.

Now you would think, considering how paranoid his mate Ross Cassidy said he was, that Sergei would have CCTV at his house. It’s cheap, and even an old spy could set-up a camera recording to an SD card, linked to a phone app that would trigger on movement, in about 5 minutes.

We have now also had it confirmed, as anyone with a brain already knew, that Sergei’s well positioned house (can see up the road, and buildings overlooking all angles) was selected for him by MI6:

Urban recalls a series of meetings with Skripal in summer 2017 when the Russian spy was living quietly and apparently safely in an MI6-bought house in Salisbury.”

By the way, notice how again Harding paints an image of a retired old spy bumbling around.

That is very much at odds with German Focus magazines sources, who suggest he was an active asset for Western intelligence, exposing Russians in Estonia in 2016, and Poland in 2017.

And of course the fact he still met his “old” MI6 handler Pablo Miller in Salisbury, at least once a month. Pablo Miller who was a consultant for Orbis, Chris Steele’s company.

Yeah sure, he was living a REAL QUIET life away from drama, wasn’t he Luke?

It’s so ridiculous, it’s pathetic.

But anyway, putting aside that massive inconvenience to the Urban/Harding/HMG narrative, we get confirmation that MI6 bought Skripals’ house for him. Actually twice, as we are now paying for it to be demolished and for Skripal to get the sale value cash.

It’s clear that Skripal was an active intelligence asset.

Who knew he was under threat.

Is it conceivable that Sergei Skripal does not have CCTV in, or near, his home, either set-up by himself, or MI6?

No, of course it’s not.
The Yard have stated to a source that they: “Cannot confirm or deny the presence of CCTV”.

So why don’t the government end this charade with Russia right now, and release that footage of the spies outside his house? It would destroy the Russian government claims of innocence immediately.

Looking at the facts, it is obvious that Luke Harding is supporting Mark Urban in perpetuating a myth around the life of Sergei Skripal that is pure fantasy.

Why?


38 Comments

  1. St.Theresa’s Propaganda Blitz is getting results; Putin loses cool, doesn’t see the Novijoke:

    Skripal is scum’ – Putin

    “This Skripal, as I’ve already said, is a traitor, who was caught, punished and who spent five years behind bars. That’s it. He went abroad and continued to cooperate, consulting some intelligence services there,” Putin added.

    https://www.rt.com/news/440211-putin-calls-skripal-traitor-scum/

  2. “Looking at the facts, it is obvious that Luke Harding is supporting Mark Urban in perpetuating a myth around the life of Sergei Skripal that is pure fantasy.

    Why?”

    Good question “Why?”… the “Urban” Myth. Sorry, couldn’t resist the Urban myth joke.

    Perhaps the answer lies in the murky world which our so called intelligence operatives work, the world of lies and deceit.

    You see I think the different narratives whether presented as news or just speculation are red herrings. The question “Why” is important. Why would the British establishment through its labyrinthine incestuous connections with the intelligence services want a story like this about Skripal?

    George Galloway writing about MI6, the Cold War, spies and traitors from Gordievsky to Skripal at RT
    https://www.rt.com/op-ed/440191-gordievsky-skripal-mi6-spies/

    He makes an interesting observation about Yeltsin and poses a question about Britain and the Skripal recruitment :

    “But Britain recruited Skripal in 1996 when not only was the Soviet Union dead but Russia was ruled by the West’s performing bear Boris Yeltsin….
    Why was Britain still fighting the Cold War against Russia in 1996, and why is it still fighting the Cold War against Russia now?”

    17
  3. In fact, this is excellent news; Harding has a whole following in the UK which raucously mocks everything he says, and his entry into the fray can be likened to the new Ukrainian claim that one of the Skripal suspects was recognized in Ukraine as one of the conspirators who helped Yanukovych flee Ukraine in 2014.

    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-russia-skripal-ukraine/ukraine-minister-says-skripal-suspect-helped-ex-leader-flee-in-2014-idUSKCN1MC2IU

    They just keep piling on the foolishness, and the more they do, the more stupid errors show up that make people say, “That couldn’t happen”. Before you know it, it will emerge that Boshirov/Chepiga’s grandfather assassinated Stepan Bandera.

    And that’s the effect Harding compels. As soon as he declares for the cause, with his smarmy characterizations and breathless innuendo, the world knows it’s rubbish.

    24
    • Yes, I thoroughly recommend it, my other half translated the Russian language version for me a week or so ago and it’s one of the most convincing rebuttals of the British case which I’ve come across.

      • vexarb says

        @D’Esterre & Peter. Seconded. A thoroughly professional look into the work of real secret agents, compared to St.Theresa’s wildly improbable Whitehall farce.

  4. Kathy says

    Curiouser and Curiouser said Alice.
    It is obvious that the UK government and its lap dogs MSM are drip feeding things out and attempting to keep this story in the news and to continue to poison public perceptions.Creating a narrative in the first instance and then little by little fitting events to it The Novichok the spy and the drug addicts. The lack of witnesses. The lack of evidence and the immediate accusations all suggest an attempt to sow seeds of misinformation and to keep trickle pouring on the fertilizer. There are several scenarios and possibilities but an attempt to prevent Skripal returning home to Russia and realigning himself with the Russian government seems the most likely of all. It must always be in the back of a countries mind when a spy defects that they at some point might want to re repatriate.Turn coats are somewhat likely to decide to turn back at some point especially where strong links of family are present. There is no way the UK government would risk this happening if Skripal was privy to British intelligence secrets and espionage. Getting their story out immediately and blaming the other side to enhance the story line of anti Russian vitriol,Trump collusion, Chemical weapons in Syria all in one go.

    32
  5. Carl Harris says

    Someone in the UK should start a habeas corpus application for Yulia.

    15
  6. MichaelK says

    I doubt that Skripal has any illusions about the ‘delicate’ position he finds himself in, not least because his daughter is involved too. So he doesn’t just have his own safety to think about. He could easily suffer ‘delayed after effects’ from being poisoned with the world’s deadliest nerve agent and this time, unfortunately, despite their best efforts, he didn’t make it, sigh.

    It’s still remarkably odd how few probing questions the assembled UK journalists ask about this affair. It’s odd that they have greased some of the people from the hospital in Salisbury to tell what they know.

    31
    • kayaboosha says

      Sadly there is nothing odd at all about the actions of the mainstream media, either in the UK or practically every other country in the west. As an ex UK resident who left 28 years ago I never ever thought I would see the day when I trusted a Russian media outlet over the BBC. RT may have a bias, every country does, but it is certainly much more believable in how it reports international events than any of the alternatives in the UK and US.

      53
    • Mulga Mumblebrain says

      Odd? That the presstitute vermin do not do any real journalism? Hardly-these are paid, lying, propaganda hypocrites. The lowest form of life.

      16
  7. Les Campbell says

    Some how I think Harding is twisting Urbans words. I thought that it was Urban, in 2017, that introduced Skripal to the idea that the Russians were after him. Harding is twisting the tense to create an obviously impossible interview after the poisoning.
    My question should be why is Urban suggesting to Skripal, in the summer of 2017, that the Russian government want to kill him? Not surprisingly Skripal finds it hard to believe.
    After all the U.K. intelligence services role in subverting the American election was becoming increasingly clear by that time. Blair told Trump the UK had spied on his campaign. Johnson returned from America to announce Trump knows the U.K. spied on his campaign. He also, correctly, told the Parliamentary committee that “We have no intelligence that Russia interfered in EU Referendum or the American election.” The British press had reported the meetings with Trump campaign officials Manaford and Misfod, Halper, Steele, Papadopolos and Boris was involved in some way. Probably bait to lure in and create atmosphere of credibility.
    Now we hear that May telephoned Trump to persuade him not to declassify the FISA documents and “insurance policy” emails and communication. What did she say to him? Was it a threat? Was it a plea?
    Urban did not reveal his 2017 meetings. Was he sent to spook Skripal? Was Skripal going home to Russia? How could MI6 stop this? What a mess.

    32
    • Yonatan says

      The UK state security tells Skriapls that the Russians are coming for him. Do they take him to a new undisclosed safe house. Did they beef up security around the house – CCTV? It all sounds like a bit of conditioning, so that when the same deep state tries use him to frame Russia, he already knows ‘who dun it’ – The Russians of course.

      The deep state seems to have learnt from the Litvinenko episode. This time they waited until a couple of dodgy Russian patsies were due to arrive in England (courtesy of visa interview – “Business of Pleasure?” “Pleasure.” “Where are you going?” Visiting touristy places. London and the like. Got any suggestions?” “Salisbury is nice at this time of year” “Spasiba!”) to give some extra ‘plausibility’ to the case.

      29
  8. There are so many loose threads surrounding the Skripal case, you wonder if anybody will be able to knit them together to make a garment that anybody can recognise. I think that will only happen when Sergei and Julia emerge from their deep freeze and are able to answer a few questions.

    A lot of time is spent looking at the minutia of the case and little on the big picture of who and why. Cui Bono as the Romans might say. A short time before the poisoning, Trump stated he was going to remove American forces out of Syria. Since that time, his position has completely changed. As to who, it is like a good Jewish joke that works on several layers at the same time. The first was to change Trump’s policy, then maybe it was to discredit British intelligence and the Government as well. It could be that Skripal was worried about something that was equally relevant.

    A few weeks ago, it was mentioned that two Russians had been deported from Belgium back to Russia. It was reported that they had data recording equipment with them and it was connected with the Swiss lab that tested the samples. Maybe, this was why Lavrov was able to say with complete certainty that the first sample was BZ with a trace of A234 added that had degraded followed by another trace at a later date. So this was no assassination attempt. It is persistent and long lasting so maybe why everything involved is being destroyed to eliminate all the evidence.

    Again, one must ask about the D notice just what are its aims and why?

    Again, one must question the two characters from central casting. They are obviously involved in some way but only as unwitting participants. Could the CCTV footage at the petrol station be anywhere near Steele or Miller’s home? It is somewhat ironic that when these two try to be ironic by saying that they went to see the cathedral, people feel that they are trying to lie to cover up some more sinister purpose.

    I was reading the other day about the $2.1 billion contract being run by the CIA into bioweapon research. The article was mainly about Bulgaria but it would appear a host of other countries around Russia are also involved. It also mentioned that £170 million went to Porton Down. Could it be that Skripal being a good and loyal Russian might have found out and objected to this work?

    Salisbury might not be worried about Novichok but should they be worried about Porton Down especially when America appears not to want this research carried out in their own country?

    30
    • I should like to add, does President Putin sound like the kind of guy to keep a loaded pistol tucked into his belt with every likely-hood that he might shoot his balls off at any moment.

      If you say yes then you probably still believe in Father Christmas.

      12
      • GrigoryZinoviev says

        Putin is reported as having called Sergei a ‘scumbag’, so anxious to expand my Russian vocabluarly I found the word in Russia, подонок – podonok – and looked it up in the Oxford Russian dictionary which gives’ dregs’ and figurative’ ‘scum, riff-raff’. ‘Scum’ is dismissive, ‘scumbag’ less dismissive and more aggressive. I’m not expert enough in Russian but it seems that translation may be used to ramp up Putin’s words to suggest that he had reason to order Sergei’s assassination.

        22
        • Yonatan says

          Just to clarify your statement. When Putin did use подонок in context of Skripal, he actually called him a traitor and scum, “just like all others who sell out their country”. So Putin did not make a specific statement about Sjkripal with intent to do him in. The use of the подонок as evidence of Putin’s intent to do away with Skripal is being very liberal with the actualité and positively over egging the pudding.

          18
        • подонок – podonok is most definately “dregs” [of society]. Its root is дно – bottom.

          сволоч – svoloch is “scum”, usually translated as “bastard” in English dictionaries. It’s what you skim off the surface.

            • Putin labelled the venal, traitorous Skripal as подонок [dregs], and did not use the American vulgarity “scumbag”. The “free” Westen media chose this term. Now, if Putin had said that Skripal was a
              мудак, well that would have been another matter.

              As I have already said, подонок [podonok] does not mean “scumbag”.

              The root of the word is дно [dno], meaning “bottom”, i.e. the very bottom of a barrel or the sea, i.e. the sea bed.

              Putin simply stated that in his opinion Skripal exemplifies the very dregs of the society that he betrayed. I am sure that the vast majority of Russian citizens agree with him on this matter. I do, and i am not Russian.

              Do Americans respect Benedict Arnold?

              Furthermore, and usually not reported in the “free” Western media, Putin also said:

              Этот Скрипаль – он предатель, как я сказал. Его поймали, он наказан был. Отсидел в общей сложности пять лет в тюрьме. Мы его выпустили. Все. Он уехал. Ещё сотрудничать продолжал там, консультировал какие-то спецслужбы. Ну и что?”

              “This Skripal – he is a traitor, as I said. He was caught, he was punished. He spent a total of five years in prison. We let him out and that was that. He left. He continued to cooperate over there and consulted with the special services. So what?”

          • GrigoryZinoviev says

            The Oxford Russian dictionary states that подонки – podonki is literally ‘dregs’ and подонок – podonоk figuratively ‘scum’, and that inversely (sic) сволочь – svolich is literally ‘scum’ and figuratively ‘dregs’.
            I do like their example under некто – nekto – ‘someone’ which is некто Петров – ‘nekto Petrov’, a certain Petrov, and briefly wondered if there a career path from working on the dictionary to MI6.

            • moscowexile says

              I think the Oxford Dictionary and others get the terms topsy-turvy because in English “dregs” is always in the plural and “scum” in the singular.

              Therefore, in English one does not say “the dreg of society” but “the dregs of society”, and because “scum” is always in the singular, when one talks of one person as being a подонок (podonоk; plural подонки [podonki]), then native English speakers translate that as “scum”.

              The term “scumbag” has been added in recent years as a translation of подонок (Google Translate, for example, gives “scumbag” for подонок) because, I suppose, it seems to be a sign of being au fait in English to use US English vulgarities.

              Almost 30 years ago, when I last lived in the UK, I never heard the term “scumbag” and at that time there were “railway stations”, “railway guards” and “blokes” in my native country; now there are “train stations”, “conductors” and “guys”, one of the latter being a person who told the mendacious Boris Johnson at Porton Down that the poisonous substance that had allegedly been used against the Skripals was “novichok” and had most definitely come from Russia.

              • I believe the origin of the word ‘scumbag’ is from New York street slang of the 1920s. It originally referred to a discarded used condom.

    • mark says

      Uncle Sam has got biological weapons factories all round the former Soviet Union in countries like Georgia, Kazakhstan. I think there are about 20 of them. The people who work there have all got diplomatic status, so they can move across borders without being checked. They are known to have been collecting DNA samples from Russians, supposedly for some kind of “ethnic bomb.” I’m not sure how this would work, given the 100+ nationalities in Russia, but they’re obviously up to no good. This takes some front when they’re issuing ultimatums to Russia to confess to a non existent biological weapons programme. But you can do that when you’re “exceptional.” Personally, I never stand behind an American for fear of being blinded by the sun shining out of their a***holes.

      They did something similar in Afghanistan. They recruited Save The Children to collect DNA samples for the CIA under the guise of vaccinating children. This was then used for targeting drone strikes. Not surprisingly, the locals weren’t too impressed, and if any genuine health workers turn up in their villages trying to vaccinate children now, they shoot first and ask questions later. As a result, polio, which was virtually eradicated, has been making a comeback. If it spreads back here, then the NHS will have to go back to a comprehensive vaccination campaign against it costing billions. But when you’re “exceptional,” little things like that don’t matter.

      Just after that, Save The Children gave their “Humanitarian Of The Year” Award to our very own Tony Blair. Nice to know that all that charity money is being put to good use.

      17
  9. Antonyl says

    On the day before the Novichok attack, Mr Cassidy and his wife drove the 67-year-old to Heathrow to pick up his daughter Yulia, 33, who had flown in from Moscow. Sources close to the investigation said Mr Skripal told detectives they were then followed home to Salisbury. from DMs Cassidy article.

    That should be enough for UK agencies to keep an eagle eye on Skripal, but we are to believe that they let it go and have some Russian clowns straight from Moscow poisoned him mid day at his own house with a WMD and escaped by public train.
    All this while simultaneously a UK concocted Steele “dossier” jinxes the US presidential position. Really?

    56
    • Hmm…wonder if she had a ticket she could return the next day…..and one for father too.

  10. GrigoryZinoviev says

    I have a query about Urban’s book as serialised in the Mail. Putin is reported as ‘putting the boot into the defectors who’d gone the other way in the spy swap’. The comments appear to date to 2010. Putin was not President between 2008-12. The date and occasion of the comments, which suggest that Putin ordered his assassination, is not given.

    40
  11. The big question is what has happened to the Skripals and why the secrecy and whether it has anything to do with the material supplied by Steele to the FBI/CIA on Trump to which the FO were said to approve and which Trump is apparently keeping close to his chest until an appropriate moment – whatever and whenever that might be.

    23
  12. Philpot says

    President Putin’s statement today is very revealing. When taken with this article I’m now thinking of James Bond’s lovely adversary in ‘The spy who loved me’… “Triple X”
    Motive, opportunity, probability: MI5/6 couldn’t let ‘their’ man go…

    28
    • Philpot says

      i.e. it wasn’t the FSB he was worried about coming down his drive…

      36
  13. Paul X says

    The idea Sergei couldn’t believe the Russians had poisoned him sounds quite likely if he knew MI6 was against him returning home to see his 90 year old mother. I imagine he’d still like to see her. It’s also interesting he is described as a ‘Nationalist’; or Patriotic might be a better description. Once he was back in Russia the chances are he would have liked to spend his last days there with his extended family. It would mean a lot of beans would have to be spilled.

    27
    • Maggie says

      @ Paul X,
      I understood from various sources that it was Skripal’s intention to go back to Russia for Yulia’s Wedding?
      ‘IF’ Boshirov and Petrov were in fact looking for the Skripals, it could have been to give them safe passage back to Russia, but MI6 got there first… I don’t know if they intended to kill him or just give him a taste of what was to come if he dared open his mouth?
      It is clear as day that Skripal was involved with the Steel Dossier, and Orbit’s attempt to discredit and defame Trump. How I don’t know, but only MI6 had the motive and means to ‘kill’ them… For I am certain that they are now dead….. What possible reason could Yulia have for wanting to stay here, when she has Wedding arrangements to make and a fiancé to love.

      16
      • Yonatan says

        If Skripal did go back to Russia, he could spill a lot of beans on current western intelligence operations, potentially even about ‘Russiagate’. In contrast, he would know very little about current Russian intelligence operations. So the UK security services would have a real motive to get rid of him, or at least use him as a patsy in an attempt to smear Russia, with the side effect of deterring him from returning..

        14
      • Yeah, Right says

        “I understood from various sources that it was Skripal’s intention to go back to Russia for Yulia’s Wedding?”

        If that is true (which I don’t know) then the entire rationale behind the Russians sending a pair of assassins to the UK to kill him falls through.

        After all, just wait till he comes back to Russia and then do the deed.

        No mess. No fuss. No nasty international complications.

Please note the opinions expressed in the comments do not necessarily reflect those of the editors or of OffG as a whole