Boris Johnson A Categorical Liar 1859

Evidence submitted by the British government in court today proves, beyond any doubt, that Boris Johnson has been point blank lying about the degree of certainty Porton Down scientists have about the Skripals being poisoned with a Russian “novichok” agent.

Yesterday in an interview with Deutsche Welle Boris Johnson claimed directly Porton Down had told him they positively identified the nerve agent as Russian:

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?

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

So they have the samples …

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.

I knew and had published from my own whistleblowers that this is a lie. Until now I could not prove it. But today I can absolutely prove it, due to the judgement at the High Court case which gave permission for new blood samples to be taken from the Skripals for use by the OPCW. Justice Williams included in his judgement a summary of the evidence which tells us, directly for the first time, what Porton Down have actually said:

The Evidence
16. The evidence in support of the application is contained within the applications
themselves (in particular the Forms COP 3) and the witness statements.
17. I consider the following to be the relevant parts of the evidence. I shall identify the
witnesses only by their role and shall summarise the essential elements of their
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.

The emphasis is mine. 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. It might well be an attack originating in Russia, but there are indeed other possibilities and investigation is needed. As the government has sought to whip up jingoistic hysteria in advance of forthcoming local elections, the scale of the lie has daily increased.

On a sombre note, I am very much afraid the High Court evidence seems to indicate there is very little chance the Skripals will ever recover; one of the reasons the judge gave for his decision is that samples taken now will be better for analysis than samples taken post mortem.


This website remains under a massive DOS attack which has persisted for more than 24 hours now, but so far the defences are holding. Some strange form of “ghost banning” is also affecting both my twitter and Facebook feeds. So please

a) Feel free to repost, republish, translate or spread this article anywhere and anyway you can. All copyright is waived.
b) If you came here by Twitter, please retweet but also in addition create a new tweet yourself containing a link to this post (or to any other site on which you have placed the information)
c) If you came here by Facebook, again please share but also in addition create a new post yourself which contains the information and the link.

The state and corporate media now have evidence of the vast discrepancy between what May and Johnson are saying, and the truth about the Porton Down scientists’ position. I am afraid to say I expect this to make no difference whatsoever to the propaganda output of the BBC.

Allowed HTML - you can use: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

1,859 thoughts on “Boris Johnson A Categorical Liar

1 15 16 17
  • Harry Law

    The first thing a conscious person involved in an incident such as this would say in a hospital to a Doctor/Nurse or Barrister friend is, does my family know I am here, if not could you tell them I would like to see them, that’s elementary first principles for a conscious or unconscious patient. Why did the litigation “Friend” appointed by the Official Solicitor to represent the best interests of his client fail these first Principles? Note… A Barrister must promote and protect fearlessly and by all proper and lawful means the lay client’s best interests and do so without regard to his own interests or to any consequences to himself or to any other person (including any colleague, professional client or other intermediary or another barrister,
    Mr Vikram Sachdeva QC for the Official Solicitor representing the Skripals as a litigating friend, said that in this case at present it did not appear ‘practical or appropriate’ to seek the views of others who might be interested in the welfare of Mr Skripal [his mother perhaps] or Ms Skripal [perhaps a Fiance]
    Then at 17 hIgh Court iv) FF: Home Office
    Neither Mr Skripal nor Ms Skripal appear to have relatives in the UK although
    they appear to have some relatives in Russia. The SSHD have not sought to make contact with them.
    High Court . 27 The hospital has not been approached by anyone known to the patients to enquire of their welfare. The hospital know little about either patient or what they might have wished neither practicable nor appropriate in the special context of this case to consult with any relatives of Mr Skripal or Ms Skripal who might fall into the category identified in s.4(7)(b) of the Act
    What kind of a friend to the Skripals was Vikram Sachdeva QC who knowing about the evidence from the Home Dept and the Hospital does not attempt to contact the Skripals family or as section 4 [7] [b] of the Mental Capacity Act “Anyone engaged in caring for the person OR INTERESTED IN HIS WELFARE”. Obviously the Russian Embassy would be. From a purely moral point of view the failure of Mr Sachdeva QC to represent the Skripals best interests by failing to find relatives or to do his duty by informing the Russian Embassy as per 2005 MCA 4[7][b]. In my opinion Mr Sachdeve QC has failed in his duty both morally and legally to represent the best interests of Mr and Ms Skripal and should be reported to the Bar Council.
    Just who is this “Litigation friend” Vikram Sachdeva QC . Just who is he supposed to be representing?
    “Skripal and his daughter were represented in court last week by a London lawyer named Vikram Sachdeva QC. He refuses to answer questions about his role or his clients. His appointment by the British authorities does not establish his independence; according to last week’s court record, he “supported much that Mr [James] Eadie [lawyer representing the British Government] submitted.” Sachdeva’s case record shows he has been involved in cases of unconscious people in the past, but Sachdeva appears to take the side of the authorities. “A safe pair of hands [for the government]”, a source familiar with Sachdeva’s record says”. Does Yulia know [via her “litigation friend”] about her rights to Consular access and access to friends and family? It appears that she may not know, I doubt the UK Authorities will inform her either. In that case she may as well be a prisoner.
    Here are the two articles of the Bi-lateral treaty between the UK and the USSR [now Russia the legal successor state] 30
    A Consular officer shall be entitled, within the Consular district.
    [a] to protect the rights and to promote the interests of the sending state and of its nationals; the term “national” shall, for the purposes of this part, mean any person whom the sending state recognises as its national, including, where the context so permits any judicial entity;
    [1][a] A consular officer shall be entitled within the consular district to communicate with, interview and advise a national of the sending state and may render him every assistance including, where necessary. arranging for aid and advice in legal matters.
    [b] No restriction shall be placed by the receiving state upon the access of a national of the sending state to the consulate or upon communications by him with the consulate.
    This plain, yet Sachdeva QC did not bring it up, WHY?
    Finally now that Yulia is getting better and can communicate. Serious concerns relating to the Hospital Trusts ‘duty of care’ arise
    Yulia Skripal’s condition cannot but be affected by her lack of access to family, friends and consular access. As Mr Justice Williams said at the High court hearing last week, “decision makers must look at their (i.e patients) welfare in the widest sense, not just medical, but social and psychological”
    May I also point out the visitor’s charter of one NHS trust “We recognise that visiting a relative or friend in hospital plays a vital part in helping their recovery and we would encourage any visitor to socialise with our patients. To help and to benefit our patients. We will keep family members and next of kin informed of any information the patient wishes them to know.”
    The UK Government have breached their International obligations and the Hospital Trust are breaching their own Charter. Both could prove very expensive.

    • John Goss

      Good points Harry well made. Because of the secretive nature of this obvious false-flag I have a wider concern. So little is known about what has happened, no interviews of medical staff on the case, lots of different stories about the ‘source’ of the alleged poison. The latest is that it came from the handle on the front door of the Skripals’ home yet it can’t be three weeks since we learnt from Sky and the BBC that a table was so badly contaminated it had to be destroyed. Nobody points out that that is a destruction of evidence in an alleged attempted murder investigation. They are making it up as they go along.

      What really concerns me is if that if Mr and Ms Skripal have been poisoned and she is awake and communicating and her father is still in a coma that she could be coerced into presenting a scripted scenario to any visiting family member (or consul if international law is upheld and access granted) under threat that her father might not otherwise survive.

      Another thing occurs to me, if her father is in a coma, whether that coma has been induced by the medics on the advice of our ‘spooks’. My guess is that most of the non-medical visits she will be getting if she has recently been ‘woken’ up, by whatever means, will be from HM visitors, which must be very daunting and traumatic. The trouble is we know nothing. She and her father could be complicit in the UK
      government’s attempt to scupper the World Cup and been watching the whole ridiculous saga on TV. Yulia, or someone, accessed her VK account three days after she was allegedly poisoned. One thing is sure – no nerve agent was used. If that had been the case the whole of Salisbury would have gone into lock-down.

    • John Goss

      The other thing is the comment at the top and on view (pro-Israel) has much fewer likes than the one at the bottom which reads.

      “manoftheworld 1d ago

      Israel has chosen a permanent military and security solution to what is essentially an issue of rights – human, democratic and sovereign. It is worse than a disgrace. It is a heinous crime. And yet to read the IDF and Israeli politicians comments afterwards – especially the despicable Avigdor Lieberman – is to understand that there is no real cost for Israel to behave in this way, no self-awareness or humanitarianism, no shame. This is what has to change – and it’s up to us to change it.”

      When you own the media you can do that!

    • John Goss

      Yes I saw that on RT. But that was always going to be the case unless the ‘nerve-agent’ had a traceability code on the jar. 🙂 More pertinent was the comment that if Porton Down had an antidote they must be making it and must have known what it was from the start. That really is a smoking gun.

      • Paul Barbara

        @ John Goss April 3, 2018 at 20:29
        The traceability is embedded in the compound, it is not on the ‘jar’, just as was the traceability of Semtex.

  • Victor

    Mr. Ambassador, many thanks for trying to understand this problem. My comment will be in Russian, to exclude the errors of my knowledge of English (bad) and misunderstanding of my words.
    Я русский офицер, подполковник. 25 лет назад я уволился из армии. Последнее место службы – штаб войск РХБЗ, то есть я знаю немного больше, чем другие военные. Но я не могу быть военным экспертом по боевым отравляющим веществам, так как у меня другая военная специальность.
    Вещества, разработанные по программе “Фолиант” никогда не числились в номенклатуре баз хранения боевых ОВ России. Они характеризуются мгновенным действием (от нескольких минут) и распадом в течении 7-15 суток.
    1. Нигде не показана процедура дегазации, ни работающих в зоне поражения, ни самих объектов.
    2. Зона поражения нигде не отмечена метками с указанием уровня концентрации ОВ и времени замеров, что очень важно для определения типа использованного боевого ОВ.
    3. Непосредственно возле зоны поражения находятся люди без средств защиты. Это уже мертвецы.
    4. Если Портон-Даун определил тип ОВ и вероятную страну изготовления, то почему они не запросили у России антидот? Только потому, что ОВ и антидот британского происхождения?
    5. Снимали голливудский триллер, а получилось болливудское мыло.
    6. Я бы порекомендовал продавцу боевых многоцелевых каминов, как следует порыться в мусорных баках Солсбери. Там он обязательно должен найти парашют с надписью ГРУ ГШ ВС РФ, удостоверение русского шпиона на английском языке с орфографическими ошибками и бутылку водки с русскими отпечатками пальцев. Они же, по мнению вашего правительства, должны отличаться от обычных человеческих.
    Maybe Theresa May and wanted to be an “Iron Lady”, but she’s an old honorary Pussy Riot of Great Britain. This is not an insult, it’s a diagnosis.

    • JakeMorris

      Google translate of the Russian text:

      “I’m a Russian officer, lieutenant colonel. 25 years ago I retired from the army. The last place of service is the headquarters of the RCBZ troops, that is, I know a little more than the other military. But I can not be a military expert on military poisonous substances, since I have another military specialty.
      Substances developed under the “Foliant” program have never been listed in the list of storage bases for military OMs in Russia. They are characterized by instant action (from a few minutes) and disintegration in 7-15 days.
      1. Nowhere is the degassing procedure shown, neither working in the affected zone, nor the objects themselves.
      2. The affected area is nowhere labeled with the indication of the concentration level of the OM and the time of measurements, which is very important for determining the type of combat OB used.
      3. Directly near the zone of defeat are people without means of protection. They are already dead.
      4. If Porton Down determined the type of OB and the likely country of manufacture, then why did they not ask Russia for an antidote? Just because OV and antidote of British origin?
      5. They shot a Hollywood thriller, and it turned out to be a Bollywood soap.
      6. I would recommend to the seller of multi-purpose fireplaces how to dig in salvage bin Salisbury. There he must find a parachute with the inscription of the GRU GSh RF Armed Forces, a Russian spy certificate in English with spelling mistakes and a bottle of vodka with Russian fingerprints. They, in your government’s opinion, should be different from ordinary human beings.”

      Acronyms like RCBZ, OM, OB don’t readily translate. Presumably chemical warfare related. My recommendation to Victor would be to not use acronyms but rather print out the entire terms, which can then be properly translated.

      Regarding the substance: some interesting points, further highlighting that proper decontamination procedure wasn’t followed in Salisbury, which makes it “highly unlikely” that UK authorities actually believed there was a deadly nerve agent set loose among the populace.

      Another valid question is why UK did not ask Russia for an antidote. It wouldn’t have been necessary if Porton Down had it on hand, but Gary the PD Head denied this yesterday. So either UK had an antidote at some other facility (even more secret than PD? Undeclared to OPCW?), or Skripals were not poisoned by Novichok, because otherwise their survival, and Yulia’s recovery, is quite inexplicable.

      Regarding the style: apparently dry and coarse humour is common to any military. Not unappreciated at these trying times.

      • JakeMorris

        Another thing I missed initially: it seems Victor is saying that Novichok type substances were never actually stockpiled because they couldn not be maintained for longer than 7-15 days? This blows a hole in another of May’s accusations – that Russia had been “stockpiling” Novichoks for assassination purposes.

        • Victor

          Thank you, I’m sorry/
          РХБЗ – troops of radiation chemical and bacteriological protection.
          ОВ – chemical agents.

          7-15 days after spraying. Storage can be very long, the binary components are separated in a bomb, but gradually lose their properties. Shelf life is unknown, since this chemical agent was not used in the army.

          For the application of combat chemical agents, a minimum of 2 cars and 5-6 agents are required. Control, attack, evacuation. James Bond would ask for help from M., Sherlock Holmes and Lestrade. Dr. Watson refuses, he is a gentleman.

        • Victor

          I met with British, American, German and French officers. We respect and understand each other. Drinking whiskey in this company is better than looking at each other in sight. We are different, but we want one thing: to put politicians in trenches and give them more weapons.

  • Tony M

    Pollen Filter is a bit of a misnomer, a marketing wheeze. Cars never had such things until catalytic converters became almost ubiquitous, the reason being that as they age, within months if not weeks from new, the constituent metals of your and other car’s cats, including particles of platinum, palladium, rhodium and others, are being blown out the exhaust at high velocity, particularly heavily on motorway and fast A-road usage, and are turning up in people’s lungs and cannot be eliminated from the body, constituting a hazard to life debatably as harmful as the emissions the cats were introduced to reduce. Without pollen-filters this adds an extra hazard to the practice of tail-gating.

  • Tony M

    The above should have been a reply to an earlier comment, don’t know why it has ended up up at the end of the thread.

  • Adam Millard

    Dear Sir,
    I have been watching this Anti Russian propaganda narrative play out in the media over the past few weeks. This demonstrates beyond any reasonable doubt that the British government are deliberately trying to provoke Russia into an escalation of hostilities which could result in a World war. This is reckless beyond measure and I would hope those responsible are made fully accountable and expect nothing less than their immediate resignations. Also criminal proceedings to take place which should result in their imprisonment, the charges being high treason against the British people.

1 15 16 17

Comments are closed.