Boris Johnson Attempt to Refute My Sources on Porton Down the Most Hilarious Fail 266

The Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) has issued a statement to refute my report from well-placed FCO sources that the British government continually re-uses the phrase “of a type developed by Russia” because its own scientists refused government pressure to say the nerve agent was made by Russia, and as getting even agreement to “of a type developed by” was bloody, the government has to stick to precisely that rather odd choice of phrase.

This is the official British Government statement:

“We have no idea what Mr Murray is referring to. The Prime Minister told MP’s on Monday that world leading experts at Porton Down had positively identified this chemical agent. It is clear that it is a military grade nerve agent of a type developed by Russia. None of that is in any doubt”.

Which is perhaps the most hilarious fail in the history of refutation.

The BBC sprung that statement on me during a live interview on Radio 5 last night. They also sprung on me a statement by the Israeli Embassy and were attempting to lead me into accusing Israel of the attack. But even the BBC interviewer, Stephen Nolan, was flummoxed by the rubbish he had been given from the FCO. Here is an extract from that part of the interview:

Stephen Nolan: The Foreign and Commonwealth Office have said to us tonight: “We have no idea what Mr Murray is referring to. The Prime Minister told MP’s on Monday that world leading experts at Porton Down had positively identified this chemical agent. It is clear that it is a military grade nerve agent of a type developed by Russia. None of that is in any doubt”. Well, you’ve already covered that Craig and you are zoning in on the fact that they are saying “developed by Russia”, they are unable to say whether it’s made – well they are not saying whether it was actually manufactured in Russia or the source of it or whether it was from Russia, right?”

Craig Murray Yes, exactly. No-one doubts that the Russians had the idea of making these things first, and worked on developing the idea. It has always been doubted up till now that they really succeeded. The Iranians succeeded under OPCW supervision some time ago and the chemical formulae were published to the whole world twenty years ago. So many states could have done it. The “of a type developed by Russia” thing means nothing, undoubtedly.

You can hear the whole interview here beginning about 5 minutes in.

266 thoughts on “Boris Johnson Attempt to Refute My Sources on Porton Down the Most Hilarious Fail

1 2 3 4
  • SA

    The very reliable Foreign minister assured us that Russia has been stockpiling Novichok for years against international law. What is he on?

  • Kenneth G Coutts

    The English state thought they had an initiative.
    Turns out, they don’t.
    They failed to follow diplomatic procedures and protocols.
    The have buggered up, again!
    I am happy to see it unfold.
    They tried once again to create/ build a narrative , to gain a consensus and failed miserably.
    My own gut feeling sensed the Scurrilous of the English.
    Thankfully with the insight and knowledge from yourself and others, light is shone on the darkest corners of the English state.
    The complicity of their compliant media is another dangerous aspect of this fairy tale.
    Thanks again Craig, keep on doing what you are doing.

  • Ian Neal

    Great work Andrew. Advice to those of us commenting on this. MSM will avoid addressing questions of evidence. Instead it will be all ad hominem attacks and distortions along the lines of

    “Sicko conspiracy nutjobs accuse hero bobby of poisoning the Skripals and himself.”

    Succinct questions are more effective than speculation.

    • Ecstatic Ex Cop

      The thing is, he wasn’t a bobby, he was a DS. Not renowned for leaving the office until well after an incident has been attended by uniform plod and declared worthy of the attendance of CID or any other detective-based department. Nor poking about off duty getting involved with a ’cause for concern’.

      • Aul Firey

        My thoughts exactly. Don’t think I have ever seen a CID opo get to an incident before a uniform , plus never seen so many protocols for the use of Gas suits and splash suits, decontamination of same and proximity rules broken in one place.

        • Roger Gough

          My sentiments precisely. Cast a net this afternoon (Sunday) across the UK and a ‘tec on duty would be a rare find indeed. They’re not needed in any case, bar for particularly serious cases. Burglaries would be dealt with by uniform officers thus: “Get a list together of the stuff that’s nicked. Secure your door/window and CID and forensic’ll be ’round tomorrow”.

  • Mark in Mayenne

    Porton Down should have insisted on “Of a type originally developed by Russia”

    • Jiusito

      Or (surely?) by the Soviet Union. An entity that included Ukraine among many others.

    • A Biochemist writes

      One week is a short time in chemistry. Lot’s of processes to go through. Let’s hope they are thorough and honest – and aren’t nobbled.

      This thing started of dodgy – and then went downhill. We owe Craig a deep debt of gratitude

      Perfidious Albion.

      I fear though, that the bulk of the population will not see through the lies.

  • Spencer Eagle

    Of course Porton Down are renowned for being establishment sock puppets. Look at the ‘Wood Green Ricin Plot’, following a raid on a London flat in 2002 it was announced enough ricin to kill millions had been found. In reality Porton Down knew within two days that there was no ricin. The lie continued for two years before it came light, but in that time government policy making was influenced, news laws were passed and it even featured in US Secretary of State Colin Powell’s 5 February 2003 speech to the UN to build the case for the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

  • Node

    Consideration for his loyal followers is not one of Craig’s many fine qualities.


  • Mark Russell

    The question I would ask is why the government has accused Russia, given the facts as we know them? It can only be for one of three reasons:

    1. They hold definitive evidence that has not been made public that provides compelling proof of Russia’s guilt.
    2. They are incompetent and made an error of judgment.
    3. They are complicit to some degree or another.

    The seismic events in the Middle East really should be considered carefully. The Syrian-Iranian-Russian alliance is set to dominate the region in the near future – a position that is completely unacceptable to America, Britain, Saudi – and particularly Israel. Cui bono?


      Psy op to prepare the next Middle East War? Israel attacks Hizbollah in Lebanon, widens to Syria but then reply from Iran backed by Russia….? China….?

      For example, here is a scenario by the notorious uber-Neocon, Elliott Abrams that involves an Israeli attack on Lebanon. Lebanese president, General Michel Aoun, has said plainly and recently that the regular Lebanese Army would defend Lebanon against foreign invasion. Nonetheless, here is Abrams:

      One should bear in mind the large quantity of very heavy and specialized ordnance the US has given to Israel….

      • John

        If you and “Mark Russell” think that Israel is behind the attack, why don’t you have the guts to say it clearly and directly? Are you afraid of Mossad? 🙂

        • Mark Russell

          Hello “John”

          We don’t know who was responsible for the incident yet, everything that is being discussed publicly is speculative, but if you consider motive, capability and history, those on the other side of the line from Russia in Syria, are equally culpable, don’t you think? Israel used chemical agents in the attempted assassination of Khaled Mahaal in 1996 and don’t forget the anthrax incident in the US following 9/11, which was eventually traced back to a US lab concerned in military c/w procurement. If Mossad ran the operation, then I would suggest the UK and US are complicit to some degree on another.

          And no, pal, I’m not afraid of anyone.

          Mark Russell


          You said Israel was behind it, not us. No one knows at this stage of investigation with the exception of the perpetrators.

          If Col. Skripal worked with Steele on the “Pee Dossier” then tidying things by up putting him out of the way would seem not to point to Israel but elsewhere. If Col. Skripal or his daughter crossed some mafiya types then that raises questions.

          As a person living in the UK under a spy exchange program, one might have though he would have better security arrangements.

          It was Elliott Abrams who just brought forward in Politico the attack scenario. He is not the first to publish it but given his notoriety it is significant, we think.

          Afraid of Israel? Why? We have visited Israel, its border with Lebanon, and we have been up on the Golan Heights with the Israeli Army. The geography presents challenges.

          Elliott Abrams has a reason, whatever it may be, to float the attack scenario thesis. He is well informed.

          As to Israeli capabilities, they are known especially for expertise in assassination and black propaganda. The Hollywood film Munich presents the assassination side well for the popular audience. But, again, we see nothing at all yet to suggest any link to Israel.

    • Spencer Eagle

      I think Salisbury was most definitely a ‘false flag’, however, it wasn’t contrived for international gain but for issues at home. Successive governments have reduced UK defense expenditure, it is currently 2% of GDP but the MOD want it to be 3%. That isn’t going to happen in the current economic climate – save for events that will force an increase in expenditure.
      The writing is on the wall for a follow up incident, already the Whitehall fed media are priming us with numerous ‘stories’ informing us how vulnerable the UK’s power supplies are to ‘cyber attack’. When the lights go out the finger will once again point at Russia and like Salisbury no tangible evidence will be required as proof. It’s a slow cook coup.

    • John

      Are you hinting that someone will “get” Craig if he continues? If you are, why don’t you have the guts to say it clearly and directly? Are you afraid of MI5? 🙂

      • Rhys Jaggar

        I have had ‘the white van treatment’ which arrives just as you leave your home in te morning, leaves just as you come back, day after day, week after week. I have had the phone tapping, the flat surveillance, it is quite unnerving.

        You do not fear that, you just mourn the loss of privacy and boundaries.

        MI5 surveillance is not meant to be fun and it is not.

        • Carole Wooster

          I have had pretty much the same and worse but not from MI5 – years of it too – it has left me pretty much a nervous wreck, which in part, was what it was designed to do – at present, I assume I am still being monitored


    We notice that the British Neocons at the Henry Jackson Society-London are exercised about the Skripal Case and the Russians. Next we will hear about Russian agents lurking possibly under beds in Milbank Tower, Westminster holding their precious aluminum tubes full of Novichok or whatever.

    Creating a buzz in Parliament with shaggy Boris no doubt. Coordinating with their Neocon colleagues, per list below, in DC and getting the buzz around internationally…a Neocon’s work is never done.

  • William Mc Innes

    Thanks Craig for your information .I found it very helpful as i have my own doubts about the excuses coming from the UK GOV.

  • TomGard

    Another try, just to see, if I’m really blocked.
    All these conjectures to which aim and behoof “they” could have done it, is submissive. (What are the ways of the Lord and his bishops?) They do it in plain light. They crush down on dissent with methods of the inquisition, they postpone Brexit, they command France directly and Germany via NATO. They procure money and power and by doing all this they sideline White House within the Empire.

    And they quite effectively foiled a possible Novichok-false-flag in the Middle East.

  • Billy Bostickson

    Uncle Boris and Madame May are taking great care in the precise wording of their public statements while leaving the dirty work through exaggeration and innuendo to their lapdogs in the British Media. It would also be “true” to say that the .Britain “developed” a range of poison gases, originally chlorine and later phosgene, diphosgene and mustard gas. After the war, the Royal Air Force dropped mustard gas on Bolshevik troops in 1919. Is Britain thus to blame for all cases where they were used anywhere in the world by any subsequent State terror campaign?

  • Barden Gridge

    “Britain Elects” has tweeted this:

    “UK voters are supportive of economic and cultural sanctions against Russia, including taking @RT_com off air.
    Support for invoking NATO’s Article 5 has 40% in favour, 20% opposed.
    via @OpiniumResearch, 13 – 15 Mar”

    It appears that the survey question referred to “a Russian-made nerve agent”.

    Who commissioned this survey?
    Who decided on that wording?

  • Harry Law

    “Why of course the people don’t want war. Why should some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally the common people don’t want war: neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But after all it is the leaders of a country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or fascist dictatorship, or a parliament or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peace makers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.” Hermann Goering at Nuremberg.
    That lack of Patriotism and exposing the country to danger, is what May and Johnson disingenuously accuse Jeremy Corbyn of.

  • mike

    Ian Blackford and Nicola Sturgeon have made serious errors of judgement regarding the Skirpal affair. They accepted the British state’s version of events far too readily. Or, to put it another way, two senior politicians ostensibly committed to Scottish independence agreed immediately with the woman who is out to thwart their ambitions – the Official Enemy of the State was responsible for the Sailsbury poisoning, and no evidence is required.

    This has damaged both leaders, certainly so far as rank and file SNP supporters are concerned. You only have to look at the Sunday Herald’s front page to see that. Are ordinary SNP supporters now considered to be Kremlin trolls? This is bully boy tactics, designed to silence those who are probably shocked and unsettled by how quickly Sturgeon and Blackford fell into line. The latter in particular could have been reading off a script written in Number 10. There’s nothing like a place on the Privvy Council to make you feel like an insider.

  • Republicofscotland

    “U.K. officials now have a clearer picture of just how the attack was conducted, sources said. They believe the toxin was used in a dust-like powdered form and that it circulated through the vents of Skripal’s BMW.”

    “Three intelligence officials told ABC News that the Russian military origin and the nature of the substance, a “dusty” organophosphate neurotoxin, are clear to them.”

    ABC news appears to know more about it, than our news channels, or its more likely our propaganda channels don’t want to ask awkward questions.

    • mog

      Reminds me of the Manchester bomb of last year when intel was leaked across the Atlantic.
      The ABC report repeatedly makes that apparently false claim, ‘more than three dozen people were sickened by exposure to the agent’.

  • Dave G

    So Boris Johnson is saying that Russia has been stockpiling Novichok for the last decade, yet in 2016 the top man at Porton Down wrote, in a scientific paper, that the existence of Novichok was “speculation”. Isn’t that something of a contradiction?
    If someone was to ask Boris Johnson where the dastardly Russians were stockpiling this Novichuk, I think we’d get something similar to Rumsfeld’s “We know where they are. They’re in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat.”.
    Johnson just makes it up as he goes along.

  • Bob Apposite

    Craig’s argument here is weak. Has Craig ever played the board game “Clue”?

    Novichok is just the weapon.
    The scene of the crime – appears to also be Russia.
    Which means all evidence – is in Russia.
    Which means – the attacker – was in Russia.
    Which means all evidence of who the attacker was – is in Russia and the custody of Russians.

    Yet Craig is giving Russia talking points as to why it shouldn’t have to cooperate in an investigation or produce any evidence at all.
    It’s almost as though Craig is in conspiracy with the assassins to cover up the crime.

    • Merkin Scot

      “Craig’s argument here is weak. Has Craig ever played the board game “Clue”?”
      Aha, a board game is the answer.
      You don’t give any evidence of actual reasoning here. Are you saying it was really Super Mario Brothers or Bob the Builder?

  • james

    thanks for all your hard work and effort to challenge the propaganda craig.. great work and wonderful radio interview commentary too.. thanks!

  • Hans-Peter Zepf

    1. Any court asks for motivation for crimes. Supporters of chemical weapon allegations never do. so let’s do now:
    What should be the motivation of Putin to murder a former sßy who is inactive for 14 years if he had an easy chance 100 times before?
    2. How can this brutal secret service with all his criminal exerience fail to murder him successfully? There are so many easy methods.
    3. If an experienced strategist like Putin wants to kill a spy he uses a knife with an inscription “Wladimir Putins knife” which he leaves in the back of the victim? This is exactly what would happened if really Putin would have murdered him with an agent which is available worldwide for nobody else but Putin (as so many different methods exist).

1 2 3 4

Comments are closed.