I was caught in a twitterstorm of hatred yesterday, much of it led by mainstream media journalists like David Aaronovitch and Dan Hodges, for daring to suggest that the basic elements of Boshirov and Petrov’s story do in fact stack up. What became very plain quite quickly was that none of these people had any grasp of the detail of the suspects’ full twenty minute interview, but had just seen the short clips or quotes as presented by British corporate and state media.
As I explained in my last post, what first gave me some sympathy for the Russians’ story and drew me to look at it closer, was the raft of social media claims that there was no snow in Salisbury that weekend and Stonehenge had not been closed. In fact, Stonehenge was indeed closed on 3 March by heavy snow, as confirmed by English Heritage. So the story that they came to Salisbury on 3 March but could not go to Stonehenge because of heavy snow did stand up, contrary to almost the entire twittersphere.
Once there was some pushback of truth about this on social media, people started triumphantly posting the CCTV images from 4 March to prove that there was no snow lying in Central Salisbury on 4 March. But nobody ever said there was snow on 4 March – in fact Borisov and Petrov specifically stated that they learnt there was a thaw so they went back. However when they got there, they encountered heavy sleet and got drenched through. That accords precisely with the photographic evidence in which they are plainly drenched through.
Another extraordinary meme that causes hilarity on twitter is that Russians might be deterred by snow or cold weather.
Well, Russians are human beings just like us. They cope with cold weather at home because they have the right clothes. Boshirov and Petrov refer continually in the interview to cold, wet feet and again this is borne out by the photographic evidence – they were wearing sneakers unsuitable to the freak weather conditions that were prevalent in Salisbury on 3 and 4 March. They are indeed soaked through in the pictures, just as they said in the interview.
Russians are no more immune to cold and wet than you are.
Twitter is replete with claims that they were strange tourists, to be visiting a housing estate. No evidence has been produced anywhere that shows them on any housing estate. They were seen on CCTV camera walking up the A36 by the Shell station, some 400 yards from the Skripals’ house, which would require three turnings to get to that – turnings nobody saw them take (and they were on the wrong side of the road for the first turning, even though it would be very close). No evidence has been mentioned which puts them at the Skripals’ House.
Finally, it is everywhere asserted that it is very strange that Russians would take a weekend break holiday, and that if they did they could not possibly be interested in architecture or history. This is a simple expression of anti-Russian racism. Plainly before their interview – about which they were understandably nervous – they prepared what they were going to say, including checking up on what it was they expected to see in Salisbury because they realised they would very obviously be asked why they went. Because their answer was prepared does not make it untrue.
That literally people thousands of people have taken to twitter to mock that it is hilariously improbable that tourists might want to visit Salisbury Cathedral and Stonehenge, is a plain example of the irrationality that can overtake people when gripped by mob hatred.
I am astonished by the hatred that has been unleashed. The story of Gerry Conlon might, you would hope, give us pause as to presuming the guilt of somebody who just happened to be of the “enemy” nationality, in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Despite the mocking mob, there is nothing inherently improbable in the tale told by the two men. What matters is whether they can be connected to the novichok, and here the safety of the identification of the microscopic traces of novichok allegedly found in their hotel bedroom is key. I am no scientist, but I have been told by someone who is, that if the particle(s) were as the police state so small as to be harmless to humans, they would be too small for mass spectrometry analysis and almost certainly could not be firmly identified other than as an organophosphate. Perhaps someone qualified might care to comment.
The hotel room novichok is the key question in this case.
Were I Vladimir Putin, I would persuade Boshirov and Petrov voluntarily to come to the UK and stand trial, on condition that it was a genuinely fair trial before a jury in which the entire proceedings, and all of the evidence, was open and public, and the Skripals and Pablo Miller might be called as witnesses and cross-examined. I have no doubt that the British government’s desire for justice would suddenly move into rapid retreat if their bluff was called in this way.
As for me, when I see a howling mob rushing to judgement and making at least some claims which are utterly unfounded, and when I see that mob fueled and egged on by information from the security services propagated by exactly the same mainstream media journalists who propagandised the lies about Iraqi WMD, I see it as my job to stand in the way of the mob and to ask cool questions. If that makes them hate me, then I must be having some impact.
So I ask this question again – and nobody so far has attempted to give me an answer. At what time did the Skripals touch their doorknob? Boshirov and Petrov arrived in Salisbury at 11.48 and could not have painted the doorknob before noon. The Skripals had left their house at 09.15, with their mobile phones switched off so they could not be geo-located. Their car was caught on CCTV on three cameras heading out of Salisbury to the North East. At 13.15 it was again caught on camera heading back in to the town centre from the North West.
How had the Skripals managed to get back to their home, and touch the door handle, in the hour between noon and 1pm, without being caught on any of the CCTV cameras that caught them going out and caught the Russian visitors so extensively? After this remarkably invisible journey, what time did they touch the door handle?
I am not going to begin to accept the guilt of Boshirov and Petrov until somebody answers that question. Dan Hodges? David Aaronovitch? Theresa May? Anybody?
The official timeline has never included the Skripals going back home. It is difficult to see how a convenient return trip, between 12 noon and 1.15pm, can now be inserted. Even our corrupt media might smell a rat if that were to suddenly happen.
Don’t bank on it.
Aaronovitch is a zionist pretending to be a journalist, a troll for the Israeli government, like the rest of the pro Israel brigade..don’t pay no heed to these liars for whom Israel comes before UK or US interests, the same people controlling mainstream media
David Aaronovitch and Dan Hodges and the rest of the MSM can be summed up in the title of the book “Journalists for Hire: How the CIA Buys the News”. As for the “thousands” of twitter users, it’s just 77th Brigade / JTRIG with their “persona management” so they can appear to be a real people.
Thanks,Craig.
Perfume bottle(s)? May be Julia brought it with her. Wasn’t the one Charlie found unopened?
The hint is here:
“Met Police Assistant Commissioner Neil Basu said on Wednesday that police were still no further in drawing a connection between the bottles discovered at both incidents.” – the Express (https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1014606/salisbury-poisoning-novichok-sergei-skripal-nerve-agent-second-bottle-russian-spies).
Charlie claimed to have been the first to open his package. The possibility that Yulia was simply handed a similar bottle would put a rather different complexion on things. I take the view that the Amesbury incident was an ‘unforeseen consequence’ that had to be explained away.
Ben Wallace, the security minister, recently claimed in Parliament that it was the same fake perfume bottle, used by the original Russian assassins, to smear the Skripal’s door handle, which they tossed into the local charity bin behind the town centre, which resurfaced in the possession of Charlie Rowley several months later with such tragic consequences.
Never mind that Charlie said it was aimint condition box and he had to reassemble the applicator for Dawn to use it. Never mind that this meant the assassins would have had to reassemble it and repackage after using it before disposing of it; never mind the thin cardboard box miraculously survived in pristine condition for months outside in Salisbury, through a freezing English winter, and all the refuse collections, and the chemical clean up of the town centre, ready for when Charlie found it in May.
I am quite ready to believe it is the Russians who were responsible but some hard evidence please. Do not insult my intelligence. I suppose the chief qualifications for Security Minister are to believe whatever you are told and regurgitate it to order with a straight face however nonsensical it is.
It was fake packaging…..why would she bring fake perfume through Customs ?
Personally I don’t think she did. I suspect she was presented with it, possibly at a very favourable price in comparison with Russia, and did exactly as Dawn Sturgess was to do months later – try it out.
I propose the perfume, box and all, is a red herring. I doubt the found box had any connection to Russia whatsoever and was not the cause of death of anyone, ever.
First rule of the govt school of lying ;when found out, lie some more and make it far more elaborate.
Second rule of govt school of lying; Repeat rule one.
When the israelis send a squad to assassin someone, somewhere, the agents use false names and false passports. Usually Canadian, Australian or other western passport. And here they want us to believe that the GRU send an assassination squad with real names and genuine, russian passports? You cannot make this shit up. It is beyond probable that a modern spy agency like GRU would do that.
You really need to go to the movies more often, and in particular the most successful franchise/propaganda ever…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q_w4DVgvVHs
Incidentally, ‘You Only Live Twice’ was one of the best of Fleming’s Bond books (whatever people think about Ian Fleming, he knew how to write well). Hollywood completely butchered ‘You Only Live Twice’, and the movie is almost completely unrecognisable from the original book. Back in the 1960s, at the height of the ‘Cold War’, this was done for political purposes.
Nothing much changes, and now in 2018 we have Rosa Kleb and Ernst Stavro Blofeld wandering around Salisbury.
As you say, you couldn’t make this shit up.
And flying on a Russian airline direct from Moscow! Top spy skills there.
And aren’t UK visitors from Russia required to have visas? And if so, aren’t they required to list the purpose of their visit??
I eagerly await the UK government revealing their real identities. If you watch the video, they seem very timid for hardened assassins.
If they were GRU they would have been professionally prepared for the interview, which obviously was not the case. They were nervous, afraid, insecure and sometimes angry and defensive, all features that would prevent them to pass human resources departments hiring spys of any intelligence organisation worldwide.
By the way, I found the attitude of Simonjan as an interviewer inquisitive and not very helpful when it comes to gaining someone’s trust and make him speak openly.
Just heard our (german)idiot state secretary say, hebelieves everything the British government says aboutthe Skripal case.
Idiots to the front!
Israelis also kill wrong people such as those in that graveyard in Tunisia whereas the real murderers from Munich Olympics are interred in Egypt….and in Norway…..
http://israelspy.com/mossad-hit-teams-big-mistake-40-years-ago-wrong-man-killed-in-norway-new-reflections/
Mossad is as good as press censorship permits
“As for me, when I see a howling mob rushing to judgement and making at least some claims which are utterly unfounded”
The only howling mob I see, Craig, is that of (the majority of) your disciples who are commenting on this blog – both the usual anti-UK, anti-Conservative gang and quite a few new ones whom you’ve emboldened to emerge from the woodwork.
Your obsession with this event and your determination to prove that the UK government is in some way or another the guilty party is srangely reminiscent of Clive Ponting’s obsession and witch-hunt about the sinking of the General Belgrano. You will have as little resonance with the sensible, patriotic public as did Clive P.
It’s not an obsession.
People in their millions,right and left, are just incredulous that a country would so readily self-incriminate itself like this. Putin’s image in the west is that of some former KGB mastermind, meddling everywhere, and yet here we’re told to accept he’s a complete idiot who sent two people to self-incriminate his country by attacking a former spy they themselves had swapped.
Yup ….there is a danger the world is on a knife edge because the Skripal events have been linked to Syrian events…UN countries representatives posturising in order to increase hysterical condemnations against Russia who with Syria seems to be the only countries genuinly combatting Isis and so many eg western countries actually supplying arms to the never to be defined clearly moderate opposition and it not being a civil war but one promulgated by mostly western powers in cahoots with Saudi,Quatar and Israel…..and if Russia had not turned Turkey where the heck would we be now….increasing sanctions putting the balance of world economies at risk..possibly if not probably an ever increasing free media shut down let alone facebook and google censoring…..
It is your so-called “sensible, patriotic public” that is responsible for the plethora of lies and half-truths bombarded at us from the four winds of western media. Those who remember the Ponting affair also remember that there has been no conviction of those responsible for the death of Shropshire rose-grower and anti-nuclear campaigner Hilda Murrell. Those who silenced Ponting may also have silenced Hilda Murrell, but I suspect your “sensible, patriotic public” neither care nor wish to know. Through your cronies justice is never seen to be done.
Charles Bostock
The difference is this government are proven liars from Boris to the miss-use of statistics.
Clive Ponting was concerned primarily with Ministers lying to Parliament, which they clearly were.
Now if you could call Maggie, Heseltine and a bunch of middle-ranking oiks ‘lying two faced pricks’ without being thrown out of Parliament for unparliamentary language whilst telling the truth, then suggesting that The Rt Hon Gentleman’s version of events runs contrary to official minutes recorded within MOD would perhaps not require ‘stringing up some Whitehall paper pusher, screws, thumbnails, the full works’, for ‘photostatting a few memos and sending them across to Halitosis Hall’ according to the immortal Dear Bill letter of Denis Thatcher.
‘What the Hell is the Cold War about if not knocking off a two-faced Russky spy before Vladimir Putin can send his boys in to do it first?’, eh??
Jaggar
I was under the impression (did not someone provide a link about this the other day?) that it is not entirely clear whether the General Belgrano was sailing towards or away from the Falklands when it was sunk.
But, as I’ve pointed out before, it doesn’t actually matter. The General Belgrano was an Argentine aircraft carrier (aircraft = a longer range than the 200 miles of the Exclusion Zone = danger for UK warships)well within the theatre of hostilities. Fair game, therefore.
As for “lying to Parliament”, puleeeez! Again, even if Ministers were, so what? Not a particularly heinous lie in my opinion. I’s pretty sure that Ministers of all governments (and in all countries) lie to their parliaments on a daily basis, sometoimes by commisiiomn and more often by omission, so let’s not be too sanctimonious there, eh?
Finally, the following thought occurs: if the British government had meekly accepted the invasion of the Falklands, and their ensuing annexation by Argentina, that would mean that the population would have fallen under the rule of a dictatorship infinitely more brutal than that of, say, General Pinochet (a man much maligned in this blog). Is that what the posters on this blog would have wished?
Why is it that when anybody starts to seriously question something we are supposed to just accept, the defenders of the establishment huff that the sceptic is ‘obsessed’ with it. We are not obsessed – we want answers that is all. (Do you think the journos and press people are obsessed with Jeremy Corbyn’s supposed anti-semitism – no …thought not lol).
You people, Charlie mate, you people want your fellow country women and men to be patriotic and docile and so somehow ‘sensible’ and leave the politics and journalism to ‘sensible’ people who know who the enemy is and always put faith flag and family first and the rest of us should button our oiky mouths.
Well feller me jib – time’s up on that a long time ago. You and your type are done. So save your sad establishment rants and leave the comment space for somebody who’ll write something interesting.
Why is being “anti-Conservative” objectionable ? How can one equate “anti-UK” with “anti-Conservative” ? The sheer destructive nature of Conservatives with respect to the Constitution and Social Fabric of England, and the other nations of the UK is beyond belief. It is like a Carpetbaggers Ball.
Next year I get the choice of 3 different passports depending on when I have to renew my existing one !!! Truly bizarre. I do not know if I can fly to the UK after April nor whether your ports will function………and people worry about snow in Salisbury in March !
Charlie, if you’re not a disciple, does that make you a supporter of Barabbas, or that ilk? I see you’ve got the same delusions of grandeur as Habbabkuk… ?
Charles – I’ve already received the ultimate insult of being described as a ‘mindless follower’ by one of Craig’s followers.
@ Made By Dom
Oh, I take the insults with which my comments are usually met as a sign of their pertinence and as evidence that they’re hit home. After all, proper rebuttals are difficult but insults are easy. So being described as a mindless follower (of the establishment line, presumably) by a mindless follower of Craig’s is something to be both amused by and proud of!
Charles Bostock:
You really are a complete arsehole – Craig may decide (again) that that may be a ‘comment nuking’ epithet, but you REALLY need to be told that.
Clive Ponting’s heroic whistle-blowing efforts gained MASSIVE traction with the British Public – at least as much as or even more than with those that sat on the Jury that decided in his favour at his trial. Which then further reverberated in the War-Criminal Thatcher Govt. at the time actually getting the law of the land changed – so that unlike then, no future whistle-blowers will be able to call on the Public Interest Defence. I believe the bought and paid for corrupt bastard of a judge at that time even tried to impress on the Jury that they couldn’t use that defence – but they were having none of it.
I see there’s no concern on your part for the hundreds of Argentinian sailors on the Belgrano brutally murdered by the captain of the Conqueror UNDER THE DIRECT ORDERS of Margaret Thatcher, which ship was at the time WELL OUTSIDE Thatcher’s 200 mile ‘Exclusion Zone’. There was NO legal basis anyway in maritime law for such a zone – it was only declared so that the War-mongering Brits. wouldn’t have to bother spending the time identifying ships in the zone as Argentinian – in other words, any and all shipping of whichever nation would be subject to attack – totally FUCKING illegal – declaring a sizeable swath of ocean as unaccessible to ALL under pain of death.
The REAL reason the Belgrano was heartlessly sunk is because Thatcher’s foreign secretary Francis Pym was making good progress negotiating with his Argentinian counterparts and others in some third South American country; and as a negotiated peace was the LAST thing that Thatcher wanted, that Witch-BItch who would make the pits of Hell ashamed, ordered that the Belgrano be sank – to scupper those peace talks. The Foreign Secretary was FURIOUS at Thatcher’s decision.
So you are WRONG. If it were not for Clive Ponting’s admirable and brave efforts this dweeb would not have bothered to pay attention to the above at the time – or realise any of it – which, btw, is from memory, but I’m pretty sure much more right than not. In any case to bolster all of this is the case of Conqueror’s missing log-book. The Government’s line on this at the time was so ludicrous it should be in the Guinness Book of Records as the line most possessing that attribute in all of history: a crew-member had nicked it as a souvenir – as if any member of the Brit. navy wouldn’t know that that’s getting pretty damned close to an act of treason – and certainly in contravention of the Official Secrets Act.
All that said though, you have a point in that the British public today are different than back in those days – larger numbers being much more concerned with day-to-day survival – many, Many, MANY more living on the streets than even in Thatcher’s time; harder, more bloody-minded, more racist and pro-war propaganda-prone as a result of the dreadful changes instigated by Thatcher, all pretty much as a result of the DELIBERATE dumbing down of the population since the ‘student problems’ half a century or so ago: The Designer Dumb.
.
Dennis, I’m not sure if we should take Charlie Bostock seriously. He/she will likely know all the detail in your comprehensive post but will have a different agenda. Charlie may disagree with your opening line, although many, I’m sure, will agree with you!
😉
Thanks, I agree; just wanted to call him an arsehole and stand a fair chance of getting away with it; hence the detail 😉
In addition Clive Ponting was kind of a hero of mine – first one I remember from the kinda-sorta political field – in fact I’m scratching my head to think of others – oh yea – they’re also predominantly Govt. whistleblowers – Katherine Gunn, David Shayler, Richard Tomlinson, Peter Wright, & Craig as examples (& some of their American counterparts) – didn’t take long for some names to flood back into my brain. In any case I type pretty much as fast as I think, and I tend towards laziness – so I just often plonk stuff down pretty much as it comes to me – as I’m doing now; but longer stuff might get a bit of editing before I press the ‘button’. Can’t get away without adding the outstanding Julian Assange to the list.
.
.
CB
You clearly don’t realise it’s people like you who embolden newcomers to voice their opinion – they can’t believe the blinkered drivel you and some others on here come out with and feel compelled to respond or at least add their weight to Craig’s support network.
@ Borncynical
That’s fine by me and should be fine by everyone.
After all, hasn’t Craig told us that he wants us to think outside the box and debate and discuss and that all opinions are welcome?
But perhaps Mr Dennis Revel missed that bit.
I’m sorry,but I seem to have missed some of this Carry On. Is this the one where Syd James is the wicked Count, Ivan Knobov and Kenneth Williams is the hapless British Ambassador to Moscow Sir Phil Macracken and they struggle for the love of Lady Titzanoll .
Is it the flagon with the dragon that has the brew that is true and the vessel with the pestle has the poison?
Is the music by Handel or is it all another Carry On all together?
Carry On Up The Kremlin?
(sorry, couldn’t resist that – *cue the Sid James chuckle*)
Charlie Rowley= Crowley
Order Of The Golden Dawn Sturgess.
Whit??
I have only just come back to the website after a few hours of relief away from some of the anti-Russian morons posting here, so have only just seen Craig’s latest musings: excellent rational summary in my opinion. The sort of comments that should be emanating from the MSM, if not Parliament who clearly have an agenda forbidding them from acknowledging that perhaps they have got it wrong. The MSM as a generic group are ignorant scum with only a handful of individuals who have any integrity and honesty to see what is presented to them for what it is and to not adopt the ‘lynch mob’ mentality. I would hope I am repeating what others on here have said – I just felt compelled to give my ‘two penneth’ before trawling through all the other comments.
Please, please double-check that link to ‘Jack’s’ up-load you sought out earlier regarding the slacks issue. I cannot see any pics there at all. It could be important.
Many thanks
There are two forms of spy – i) under diplomatic cover with diplomatic protection and ii) under deep cover with no legal protection. In i) the spies travel from their home country under their real names to nominally serve as a generic diplomat eg second secretary. In ii) the spies have to have a carefully created false background to hide their intelligence service background eg. journalist. They also do not travel directly from their home country to the target, rather make an indirect journey again to hide their origin.
The UK presented photos of two alleged assassins with their names, supposedly aliases, though the UK supposedly knows their real names (which may be the same as the ‘alias’). If the spies were in mode i) there would be diplomatic records showing they were accepted as diplomats. In mode ii) the known names would be aliases and they would not travel directly from Moscow to London. We can exclude mode i as neither side refers to diplomatic cover. The setup does not work for mode ii) unless the UK is going to claim that the Russians are appearing under their aliases in the TV program. The UK might have pre-empted this given the early oddity of the UK releasing ‘alias’ names but not ‘real names’. The cover story would also be something not likely to raise questions eg journalist or art dealer, certainly not a dodgy drug importer.
The UK story is not consistent with either mode. They could help their case by revealing the real names of the two people showing the Russians appeared on TV under their aliases. My guess is they won’t as the whole Skripal process is intended to be trial by media rather than formal independent legal process. The intent is demonisation rather than solving an actual crime.
It will be interesting to what comes of their impending 4 ‘cleaners’ story.
BTW if the two really were professional spies, they could get from the railway station to the Skripals without passing the garage station CCTV. Instead of turning left out of the station, they could have turned right along Churchfields Road, continue along Lower Road, then right into Cherry Orchard Lane under the railway line, then left onto the A36. This route is also slightly shorter than the supposed route, giving them more time in hand for some extra vigorous smearing.
“RUSSIANS ARE BORN WITH SNOW ON THEIR BOOTS.” Jon Snow did not quite say that but he must believe it. He said Russians would never be put off by snow. These Russians did say they were put off by snow. Therefore they were lying. There for there was no snow. Hence by pure a priori reasoning, based in his understanding of Russians, he excuses himself an basic fact checking. That follows a general ITV guidline to its reporters on matters Russian.
I was disappointed by Jon Snow. Had him pegged as a good egg, now I think he’s a bit of a plonker, if not worse. Best case scenario is that in this instance he was a useful idiot.
‘A bit’ of snow or slush was seen in the urban CCTV images, but actually there were road closures everywhere and drifts 6ft high and a wind chill of -20. Could have been more, actual -17 a few year back without wind was pleasant compared to this, this wind chill made my face feel like it was blistering, and of course Nanny was saying don’t travel unless absolutely necessary. Get wet and you’d be in real trouble. All this was conveniently forgotten by J Snow when he ridiculed the Russians for being put off by snow and claiming that ‘everyone over here’ is of the same opinion.
Canadians have snow too so do Americans on East Coast and in Montana……..are they born with snow on their boots ? Only a twerp as son of Bishop of Whitby could be such a pr$t
Well done GraigMurray. Obviously questions that obviously need answering. We wait. For ever?
Until quite recently, most Russian people thought us English quite normal. Some had even been to Scotland.
There is no evidence, that anything “real” happenned, except a pre-written theatre show, with the actors including guys in Hazmat suits, and Press photographers there the same evening, that two people puked up on a park bench in Salisbury due to suspect fentanyl poisoning ( a prescription opiod drug, also used by junkies) The doctor receiving them, wrote a letter to The Times, that was published shortly afterwards, which said that no one in Salisbury Hospital was or had been treated for posioning by a military nerve agent. Then the UK Government put out a D-Notice, which made clear to everyone who had any knowledge of what was going on, that if they say or write anything, about this farce, then they will send the heavies round “We know where you live”
I knew it was a load of bollocks from day 1, cos no one is the slightest bit interested in a couple puking up on a park bench, except the people who phone for the ambulance, and the people who treat them.
It is not front page news on the Daily Mail within hours. Such an event would be hardly likely to even make the local weekly rag, posted through your letter box, or left outside the local train station.
Get a grip. It’s all nonsense. They are making it up, and making themselves look increasingly silly, the longer it goes on.
It is just propaganda to demonise the Russians, who are pissing themselves laughing, except the two unfortunate Russian tourists, who just happenned to be there. Even I have been to Salisbury, and Stonehenge too, several times, and I come from Oldham. I’ve even sold my car to a bloke from Latvia. He offered me the highest bid on ebay, and flew over for £30 on easyjet, and paid me £450 in well used notes. They were perfectly legit. Even the local bank accepted them.
Tony
This Fentanyl and Carfentanyl comes in by post from China and is rampant apparently around Salisbury
Does Skripal still get mail ? who is taking care of his daughter’s Moscow apartment ? Must be quite dusty
Are the Skripals dead? Where are they?
This whole story stinks. And maybe that’s exactly what it is, a story.
I notice in the interview that the guys were pretty clear about not wanting to compromise people in terms of privacy and personal matters, suggesting that they had a motive beyond tourism for visiting Salisbury. Whilst I understand that, I think they potentially have a slam dunk available to them, if needed.
These guys are innocent. I’d bet on that.
One explanation as to why Sergei isn’t being wheeled out is because it’s perfectly fine to doubt him. He’s a known traitor, who betrayed his own country . As soon as he speaks, the MSM doubts can be freely expressed without this ‘how dare you ‘ mob mentality directed at anyone expressing doubts currently.
Sergei is a known liar, with zero credibility, the moment the story becomes about his words, is the moment the msm mouthpieces and other assorted puppets/actors struggle to defend against those stating ‘I simply don’t believe this man’.
Sergei is living it up with Hidalgo…….I mean Pablo Miller
At least Mark Urban’s book will get a spicy new chapter.
March 4 – “when they got there (Salisbury), they encountered heavy sleet and got drenched through”
So they painted a door lever with nerve agent during a patch of heavy sleet?
The abuse of Assange says a lot about the current British justice system and the character of the political class, so volunteering oneself into that maelstrom requires a great deal of caution. But hiring a top-notch attorney to begin to call the bluff might be a good start.
I neither know or care anything about the personal history of the two Russian tourists, accidentally caught up in this embarrassment. I can only apologise for the absolutely atrocious story, almost certain written, by the people in Washington DC, who forced The British Government to go along with it. The only effect it has had is to completely discredit The British Government, and enhance the reputation of The Russian Government. It will all soon be forgotten, as will your names, and you will be able to carry on your life much as you did before. I thought you were very wise, to just give the one interview. I am sure you have the full support of the vast majority of Russian people, including President Putin, who suggested you make this one appearence. I hope you find this music video amusing regardless of your personal relationships of which I know nothing. I find it hilarious. Even the music is excellent.
“The Electric Six”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-XNFokmDKrE
Tony
Boshirov and Petrov are just a couple of charming, sensitive and rather shy guys who came to Britain to spend a little quality time together. And the next thing they know, mad Mrs May is accusing them of mayhem. I haven’t forgiven that rancid old fowl for the needless death of the cat.
I thought the story was that the cat (a very rare and expensive one) disappeared and the hamsters died? No? Must check my notes…:)
I do wish that Craig could break off from this Salisbury affair and give islus his thoughts on the state of the country which is falling to bits – NHS, prisons, railways, roads, rising personal indebtedness.
Now with the impending date for leaving the EU drawing near, we hear talk of another crash of the monetary system, similar to the one in 2008, followed by a collapse in house prices (leaving many in negative equity) and unemployment.
Plus of course, the threat of a greater war breaking out in the Middle East.
Craig is an ex diplomat….so he is dealing with international.affairs here…..considering so much is at stake……
“I do wish that Craig could break off from this Salisbury affair and give islus his thoughts on the state of the country which is falling to bits – NHS, prisons, railways, roads, rising personal indebtedness.”
Funnily enough, I do actually agree with Sharp Ears on this one. I have myself said that we should see more posts on the matters of more immediate concern to most readers and certainly commenters such as the NHS, benefits and so on (especially since most commenters seem quite aavanced in years.
The problem with that is that the rare posts of that nature don’t seem very popular when one compares the number of comments they attract with the number of comments attracted by posts which involve amateur sleuthing, the elaboration of grandiose theories (all ultimately unprovable) and tales of great infamy committed by the likes of the BBC, the MSM and individuals like Philip Cross, Furthermore, it’s striking how quickly commenters go off topic when Craig does post on one of those themes, the commenters are evidently impatient to air and re-air their obsessions about such questions as the Middle East, the BBC, the MSM, etc.
So, in conclusion, Sharp Ear’s plea is a fair one but one which would go against the ethos of the blog and its aims and not be attractive to the customer base.
Sharp Ears,
We are all delighted when Craig writes a new article. We miss him when he doesn’t and worry if he’s O.K.
Craig is a human being (well so far as I know). He can’t deal with absolutely everything. I am sure, he has lots of other things to do, rather than replying to Twitter attacks from the likes of Dan Hodges. I gave up with Dan Hodges years ago. So far as I am aware, Dan still lives with his Mum. Nothing wrong with that of course, but if I had been Glenda Jackson, I would have thought seriously about kicking him out, rather than giving him my house, and allowing me to still live there.
I always thought Glenda Jackson was Brilliant.
She still is. I know Moreton, in The Wirral really well.
“Glenda Jackson criticises Margaret Thatcher in Commons debate”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y6NiHDDwC4o
Tony
I must say I find the Salisbury affair bores me to tears. As for the oncoming financial collapse, Chris hedges seems to think it will be the collapse, but I think they’ll just buy more bonds and pump more money into it, most of the new money goes into savings as it’s far to large to ever be spent, so it keeps inflation as a trickle rather than a flood. Someone will get rich from a collapse of the Chinese markets. Of course it makes the rich richer which makes us all poorer. But heaven forfend they use it as an opportunity to put some fairness back into life. A good war instead is what’s needed, thin out all those radical young people that have been excluded from society.
The monetary system is headed for Crash with or without BreXit. Trump has used tax cuts to get US Corporations to repatriate profits and cause a Dollar Shortage for countries heavily borrowed in US dollars — Turkey, Argentina, Brazil, — and it is going to be a repeat of 1998 which is why Russia is insulating itself this time around.
Once Turkey goes it will take down Italian and Spanish banks which have stuffed the ECB (UK 3rd largest shareholder) with sovereign debt and let their customers transfer their funds to Germany and buy property which is why TARGET2 is close to I trillion Euros and gives Germany an existential problem.
Let’s not forget Trump has raised prices of Oil and Aluminium and most core components of manufacturing in USA so the dollar surge will expand global inflation. Meanwhile $23 Trillion of Chinese Credit Expansion plus $20 Trillion of US Credit expansion means most of the Bond Market and around 40% global equities now belong to Central Banks !
There are many people better qualified to comment on those things. Craig is commenting on things where his experience, knowledge or contacts add some value. That’s all good.
Bingo! The timeline does not fit
If the Skripals left their house hours before Boshirov and Petrov even arrived in town, how could B and P have poisoned them??
How can this detail have slipped the attention of our police detectives, intelligence bods, political class and fourth estate??
It hasn’t slipped their attention. They just ignore uncomfortable facts until or unless the Skripal scriptwriters can come up with a half decent story to make it plausible. I doubt any of them would get work on the Archers, let alone Corrie.
Andrew Neil’s rapier wit on Twitter:
“Best joke of week: the claim that Petrov & Boshirov, our Russian nerve agent double act, were put off by a dusting of British snow from walking from train station to Salisbury cathedral (you know, the one with the ‘world famous 123 metre spire’). Russians not used to snow, obvs.”
That got 3.3k likes.
Neil’s another smug, self-righteous one way past his sell by date, if he ever even qualified for one.
Not nearly as funny as that weirdly coloured stuff atop Andrew ‘Brillo-pad’s, sweaty, rubicund head. His chronic inability to accurately deliver lame, scripted jokes off the autocue on “This Week” is also amusing in a tragi-comic kind of way.
Slightly off theme. The question I want the answer to is where Skripal got the money to buy a house in Salisbury and a BMW bearing in mind he presumably arrived in the UK with nothing. I find it hard to believe the Russians are still paying his pension. He would have been a bit old for a mortgage.
We’re paying for all that, mate. These double agents don’t come cheap.
His son had a £400,00 unmortgaged house and he had only been in UK a short time
The lengths to which you will go to defend all things Russian, Craig, are truly mesmerizing. If I hadn’t met you, and read your excellent books, I would presume you were enjoying some nice little backanders from Mr Putin.
Yuk.
There’s not much left after I’ve had my backhander from the Kremlin. 😀
The lengths to which you will go to defend all things Russian
Interesting phrase….”all things Russian”……tells us more about you than about Craig
so you swallow propaganda whole, and accuse others of being putin agents for not doing the same.
A few questions for the sanctimonious British Press:
1) Would you scorn with derision at English tourists having a 3-day break to Volgograd in 2018 and would you collapse into paroxysms of mirth if they claimed to have visited ‘The Motherland Calls’, when it is known that vulgar twits who watch football matches leave that sort of nonsense to FA officials?
2) Would you challenge the veracity of English fans flying at short notice to Kazan, then to take a terribly slow train to Samara, a place almost no Brits have ever heard of, and then being seen in front of an orthodox cathedral rather than getting pissed down the pub both before- and after the football game they purported to come and see?
3) Would you consider English footballs fans shifty if they felt it might be unwise to reveal that they had experienced enjoyable sex with a Russian woman who turned out to already have a husband whilst enjoying the World Cup in Moscow? Would they feel that identifying her might put her in a position of considerable difficulty, something no decent man would impose on a woman who had shared pleasure not strife that evening?
I am sure there are all sort of superficially dodgy or unfortunate things that England fans got up to in Russia over the summer, but to suggest they were menbers of teams of drug pushers or hooligan gangs would appear somewhat hysterical, not to mention inaccurate.
To all those who keep asking for their photos and other evidence to corroborate their story: In what country does the accused have to prove his innocence? Suddenly, most people forget the basic principles of law and human rights.
These guys are innocent until proven guilty, not vice versa.
Poor guys…
To me they seemed credible because they did not have a full story and were clearly not coached. Contrast this to Yulia Skripols ‘statement’ that was wooden and pat and clearly rehearsed. A practised liar has answers to everything and is slick rather like Tony Blair.
They were uncomfortable and were grasping for answers and were not entirely coherent, very unlike people trained to deceive in the secret services (or in journalism). Just imagine being arrested for something you did not do, if anything you would be more nervous as it would of not of occurred to you you might be arrested having done nothing wrong, A criminal would already be formulating a story being aware of a risk of being caught. You would be annoyed, fearful and at times incoherent at this unexpected injustice. If they were secret service they could of obtained fake passports for the camera and other witnesses, that it was so half assed makes it credible as they would be aware how they looked, would of been rehersed and would of used much more detail, liars always over-explain.
If you take any notice of the likes of David Aaronovitch then you need your head examined.
The point you make about the door handle is absolutely key and have posted my views on this elsewhere. When trying to unravel the Salisbury novichok affair its always important to preface any comment with the government, police and scientific community’s claim that this weapons grade nerve agent is absolutely deadly and even the smallest about on ones person can lead to serious illness and death. As you say, the time line for the two Russians to put novichok on the door handle of the Skripal’s house just doesn’t add up, but it really is beside the point whether they did or didn’t contaminate the door handle, because had the Skripals touched the door handle they would have been overcome within a very short time and at least within an hour or two. As we all know they were not taken ill until some 4 to 5 hours later following a visit to the cemetery, drinks, a meal and time feeding the ducks and remarkably, were taken ill at exactly the same time on a park bench. Clearly, the door handle theory so beloved of the authorities is rubbish. The investigators can’t claim dire potency of novichok and then ask us to believe the 5 hours delay it took for the Skripals succumb and do so at exactly the same time. Its obvious to people with the meanest of intelligence that the Skripals were contaminated on the park bench or very shortly before.
Its my contention that the Skripals went to the park to chill out and take a couple of happy pills, angel dust or some other SYNTHETIC drug. I say this because no one whatsoever in the chain of contact with the now distressed Skripals received any contamination from them by novichok. Two members of the public, the ambulance crew, the helicopter crew all the staff in the accident and emergency department had no contamination or were taken ill. In the initial stages at the hospital the Skripals were treated like any other member of the public who have collapsed. But at some stage in A and E someone suddenly decided that these two people had been attacked by a nerve agent, but who was this? At one point the doctor treating them said no one was in any danger from a nerve agent, so was he over ruled? if so, by whom? No more was heard from the Skripals for weeks until the daughter gave a hostage style comment from some secret location. It was obviously fake in the sense that she was clearly reading from a script. One might ask, that had the Skripals taken drugs, surely they would remember and tell all. But after being in a coma for weeks and they then wake up to police, government minders around their beds and of course, would have been shown the all important speech by Mrs May and all the rest of it was the “Russians wot done it” TV show, why would they even think about any drugs if that’s what had laid them low. They both knew of Mr Skripals’ colourful past! Its worth pointing out here, that despite the drama of bio suits, burying ambulances and cars in land fill, restaurant and whole areas of Salisbury cordoned off, and lately, the supposed decontamination of Skripal’s house, the accident and emergency department nor the hospital was ever closed and remained open for business as usual. Why? surely if five people had been there (and for some length of time at that) who were contaminated with this deadly nerve agent, then all other patients should have been diverted elsewhere for treatment and the A and E at least be closed?
The next incident in this saga which took place months later was with the supposed contamination by novichok by Dawn Strurgis and Charlie Rowley, two people who were allegedly known to take drugs. We are told they were contaminated with novichok following the finding of a bottle of perfume by Rowley. At first Rowley said he found it in the park where the Skripals were taken ill. Then he said he found it in a dumpster and the latest place he says he found it was in a charity shop bin. Who know where he found it. He says the bottle of scent was in a box with the cellophane wrapper still on the outside. This suggest that the package was new which of itself raises lots of questions? Rowley gave the scent to Dawn as a present and according to Rowley, she sprayed some of the contents on her wrists. For some reason she gave the bottle back to Rowley (its her present so why not put it with her make up stuff, the bathroom, bedroom etc?) and he broke the bottle and said it splintered in some way and he spilled the stuff on his hands to such an extent, that he had to wash it off. The police say that they found this bottle in the garage when they searched the premises, so why did Rowley and Dawn put the bottle in the garage? Of course, none of this makes any sense. According to Rowley, Dawn became unwell in about 15 minutes and asked for an aspirin or similar which he went get. When he returned he claims he found Dawn fully clothed in the bath seriously ill. She was taken to hospital where she was diagnosed with novichok poisoning. Why, she was a known drug addict and not in any way connected to the Skrippals? We are told that novichok is an exotic drug that only the Russians can produce, yet the doctors are able to diagnose its affects and treat it? She died later. I wonder what the doctors have put on her death certificate? Following Dawns removal to hospital, Rowley was taken ill some two hours later and he too was dispatched to Salisbury hospital. Dawn only applies a small mist like spray of the substance on herself and fell violently ill 15 minutes later. Rowley on the other hand pours the stuff on himself to the extent he has to wash it off. Surely, Rowley should have died within minutes or at least an hour, yet he survived and recovered a few days later, leaving the hospital in just a few weeks. I believe the perfume bottle is a red herring and not in any way connected to the illness of Dawn and Rowley. I make no accusation, but I suggest (and its only my opinion) that drugs were involved and that if drugs were involved they would have been the same type as I have suggested the Skripals might have taken. If these people were contaminated with novichok then this potent substance acts in a very strange way and does not conform to the British government’s expectations of it.
In the mix of this farce is the mystery policeman who is also said to have been contaminated by the door handle. If there was no novichok on the door handle then where was he contaminated, that’s if he really was contaminated? As Sherlock Holmes said to Dr Watson ” the clue is the dog that didn’t bark”
As for the two Russian that appeared in an Interview on RT, like most people I sensed that there was something fishy, unsure and evasive about them. Clearly they are absolutely not members of the Russian secret service or any other government department. The Russians like the British, Americans French etc etc would never allow their operatives to appear on TV and give this garbled account of why they visited the UK. Yet there was something they seemed to be hiding. After all, they came to the UK and visited Salisbury in just a few days and claimed to want to see the cathedral and other places of interest. They don’t appear to have gone into the cathedral or even spent any length of time in Salisbury at all. Bearing in mind that the police say they found traces of novichok in the hotel room in which they stayed in London, could it be that they went to Salisbury not to admire the scenery, but to buy drugs instead and from the same source that I have suggested that the Skripals and the other two got theirs? Only a suggestion of course. These two Russians finding that they were implicated in some thing with international ramifications that was nothing to do with them, probably panicked and came forward to clear their names. If they did go to Salisbury to get drugs (remember, a novichok like substance was found in their hotel room) they could hardly say so. Hence, the rather foolish story they came up with and why they seemed so uneasy.
Modern synthetic street drugs are manufactured clandestinely in back street laboratories and no one really knows whats in these drugs. We are told there are over 50 different kinds of nonivchok and it has been suggested that anyone with a bit of scientific knowledge could make the stuff. Is it not possible that there are drugs out there with a novichoc component or signature? Perhaps when the chief constable of Wiltshire next has a seizure of street drugs he should take them along to Porton Down to be tested, there might be some interesting results. Perhaps too, the Russian authorities should go to the homes of the two suspected novichok Russians and search their homes to see what they can find. Indeed, I would have thought this would be a matter of course under the circumstances.
Finally, whatever really happened, it would stop all the speculation and theorizing if only the police and the authorities would be straight and honest with the public. Tell us what you know and why you are doing what you are doing. Why for example in just the last two weeks have the police been to the home of 12 people who were in Zizzi’s restaurant and taken away their clothes, and this 5 months after the event. Surely the police know people wash their clothes once a week or at least once a month !! Further, why did the police go to Boots the chemist wearing hazard clothing (again, months after the event) to take away the shops security video? what were they looking for in just these two instances months after the event and when they already knew about the two suspect Russians? Whats wrong with a straight forward approach?
Could it be the British security service knew the two men were visiting, and used their trip as cover to poison the Skripals, knowing fine well both Russian’s would be prime suspects.
It seems at least feasible, and would give room to allow the authorities to claim the Russian’s did it. The door knob timing, is as you say way out of kilter, and not a convincing argument.
As I’ve said before where are the Skripals? Why haven’t they came forward and given an interview similar to those two men. The British government are doing themselves no favours by keeping them quiet.
Also if the door knob story from the British, doesn’t stand up under scrutiny, then surely the same must apply to the claims that Novichok, a deadly nerve agent was used on the Skripals, when both are still alive, or are they?
There’s a wrong premise there: the Skripals were poisoned.
I don’t believe that for a minute.
They disappeared. There’s a connection to Steele.
I agree, I think they were drugged as a warning; then as cover the story spiraled out to implicate Russia prior to a planned Syrian FF. Now that the story has a life of its own, they need to keep spinning the lies to stay ahead of the collapsing narrative.
Were it straight forward, you sense the Skripals would have emerged to speak freely by now. Or at the very least be interviewed by a few well-known journalists in a secure location eg. say Channel 4’s Jon Snow. The very absence of the Skripals and all updates on their condition etc. is really bizarre. In her phone call, Yulia sounded almost homesick and the idea she’s shun all contact and wouldn’t want to speak again to her boyfriend(?), relatives or anyone else in Russia is just plain odd.
Yes, its strange, that the Skripal’s are nowhere to be seen. When Litvinenko was poisoned, his wife was in the media eye on a regular basis. Yet here we are with two survivors father and daughter, yet they’re nowhere to be seen.
One has to ask why that is.
I guess they’d argue it could jeopardize a future trial (even in absentia) , but that reasoning hasn’t stopped politicians making sweeping accusations, or the tabloids eg., ‘Putin’s Hitmen’ etc.
they could be waiting a long time for two that fit the intended profile (at least in the public’s eye) and to know they are coming and to know they will be seen in the correct area in a timely fashion for their intended operation. Much more likely they were set up with set times for a meeting that ended up being a no show.
RoS,
Your idea that the security service planned the event around the two men visiting Salisbury was a hypothesis I put forward on the earlier thread on this matter. It struck me that the key to this would be the information the ‘lads’ put on their visa applications, presumably several months ago, about their plans for the visit – did they mention intentions to visit Salisbury as someone wishing to be open and honest would probably do as it was such a short visit? For a longer visit an applicant would probably just put “to visit various tourist sites” but for a brief weekend visit you would be more likely to be specific.
The security services would know that Russians do visit Salisbury and it would be a case of sifting through applications to find Russian/Salisbury juxtaposed on an application and ‘bingo’ . Knowing roughly when they were going to be in Salisbury they could arrange the ‘Novichok attack’ for that same weekend. And the weeks since then have been spent trawling through CCTV specifically to find images of the ‘lads’ to back up the story. As long as they were indisputably in Salisbury, the details of their movements and timings and the actual CCTV released as evidence could easily be manipulated, censored, edited or whatever to suit the narrative. And what if the security services initially looked for CCTV of ALL Russians they already knew might be in Salisbury over that weekend (that would take a good few months). Possibly they weren’t necessarily looking for the ‘lads’ at the outset just any Russians who might make plausible GRU agents (male or female) but the ‘lads’ were unlucky because there was the most CCTV footage of them available. It could have been any Russian group. Originally we were told it was a group of maybe six Russians who were being sought. Could they have been the original intended stooges but they failed to make an appearance in Salisbury over that weekend, because of the weather maybe? So the focus was placed on the ‘lads’. I think it adds up but am I being too fantastical? What they wrote on their visa application would be critical in backing up this scenario.
Could the microtraces of organophosphate, found at first sampling in the hotel room, but not found later, just be insecticide, something that is used in insect control in buildings? And if no traces were found later, this could just be because of regular cleaning of the room.
Organophosphate after all is present in samples of urine of humans and animals. Just one example of its presence in dozens products is the brand Chlorpyrifos.
“Chlorpyrifos is a broad spectrum insecticide, a chemical used to kill a wide variety of insects. It was introduced in 1965 (45). While originally used primarily to kill mosquitoes in the immature, larval stage of development, chlorpyrifos is no longer registered for this use. Chlorpyrifos is effective in controlling a variety of insects, including cutworms, corn rootworms, cockroaches, grubs, flea beetles, flies, termites, fire ants, and lice (38). It is used as an insecticide on grain, cotton, field, fruit, nut and vegetable crops, and well as on lawns and ornamental plants (40, 2). It is also registered for direct use on sheep, turkey, for horse site treatment, for treatment of dog kennels, and for domestic dwellings, farm buildings, storage bins, and commercial establishments (40). Chlorpyrifos is available in emulsifiable concentrate, dust, flowable, pellet, spray, granular and wettable powder formulations (46).”
The above quote is from: http://pmep.cce.cornell.edu/profiles/extoxnet/carbaryl-dicrotophos/chlorpyrifos-ext.html
The point is moot. Apparently the sample was so minute that it was unfortunately destroyed in the act of sampling – an odd quantum effect one supposes. That there is now no ‘novichok’ to be sampled means that we must take the official word as true once again.
I suspect Mr Murray asked his scientist friend the wrong question, or that neither of them knows much about mass spectrometry.
The assertion that if the sample was too small to be harmful then an accurate assay would be impossible is probably incorrect. I wonder if Mr M really does want to know more about this “key question”, though I’m fairly confident he will not be reading this.
On the off-chance he is : Please feel free to email me at this address. I think we may have met in Pimlico in Jan 2003. I was meeting the late Hugh Mortimer.
“I’m fairly confident he will not be reading this.”
Others are.
“The assertion that if the sample was too small to be harmful then an accurate assay would be impossible is probably incorrect.”
Because?
Or is that ‘probably’ to be interpreted with the same level of confidence as Carlsberg advertisements?
Hi Doodlebug! I’m getting a bit sick of posting on here and having comments removed for no good reason I can see. I have been experimenting a bit to see what stays and what gets cut, and I’m not liking what I’m finding.
[ MOD: The comments were deleted for multiple infringements of the following rule:
The latest instance has been restored as an example. Please use one identity only. ]
My comment was a reply to chris moffatt, who tickled me with his “odd quantum effect”.
For a brief answer, you would need to be already pretty conversant with mass spectrometry, chromatography, and electron microscopy techniques, in which case there would paradoxically be no need for an explanation!
If not it would take ages, and like I say to be 100% honest I’m getting a bit fed up writing sensible stuff which gets deleted.
Not a drop of Carlsberg though Doodlebug, just boring old physics and chemistry.
prosperum iter facias
James
uh your comment replying to moffat is above.
There are so many trolls on here, the task of moderation must be a bloody nightmare. I’m fairly confident you’re not one of them, despite the silly name Doodlebug. I’ve just been thinking of how to give you a taste (still no Carlsberg I’m afraid).
Google Avogadro’s number to get an idea of the size of a molecule. Google DNA profiling to get an idea of what is currently forensically possible. Admittedly, DNA is a comparatively huge molecule (which makes it harder), and current techniques using superb refinements of the polymerase chain reaction (making it easier) have nothing to do with assaying say, a nerve agent. Just gives you an idea of the possible.
Now consider you have an absolutely minuscule amount (let’s say a pictogram, so way below toxicity) of a simple molecule like novichok (hmm, the less said..) from a forensic search. From Avogadro’s number calculate how many molecules you have. The problem you face in your assay using mass spectrometry is the pico grams and micrograms and milligrams of other stuff in your sample. You might call that “noise”.
The main challenge would be filter g out the noise, but knowing what molecule you are looking for makes that considerably easier.
I forgot to mention other techniques involving radioactive isotopes of carbon (and other elements), X-ray crystallography and novel biological amplification techniques but best leave it there.
It certainly can be done. Probably.
Thanks be to Mods! I’d worked that one out after Clark pointed me to Craig’s guidelines of 2015 and 2016. I regret to say that “sock puppetry” is not my only infringement, as I mentioned I’ve been experimenting.
I appreciate your task must be daunting, especially just now and I apologise for wasting your time.
I have had some quite sensible, serious posts deleted (and no, these were not “collateral damage” due to being a reply of a post itself deleted… I’ve had those too)
Thanks again for your patience and taking time to reply
prosperum iter facias
James
OK James. I take your point. You are clearly not among those given to bold claims with no rationale in support. (And btw., Carlsberg is not without serious competition).
The term ‘nivichok’ Itself is used to obfuscate as I explained before. There is no such thing.
You write of the Skripals “Their car was caught on CCTV on three cameras heading out of Salisbury to the North East.” That would be headed to Porton Down then.