No Inquest for Dawn Sturgess 340

The killing of poor Dawn Sturgess was much the most serious of the events in Salisbury and Amesbury that attracted international attention. Yet nobody has been charged, no arrest warrant issued and no inquest held.

The inquest for Dawn Sturgess has today been yet again postponed, for the fourth time, and for the first time no new prospective date has been given for it to open. Alarmingly, the coroner’s office are referring press enquiries to Scotland Yard’s Counter Terrorism Command – which ought to have no role in an inquest process supposed to be independent of the police.

Congratulations to Rob Slane and to John Helmer for their excellent work in following this.

It appears very probable that the independent coroner’s inquiry process is going to be cancelled and, as in the case of David Kelly, replaced by a politically controlled “public inquiry” with a trusty or malleable judge in charge, like Lord Hutton of Kincora. This is because the truth of Dawn Sturgess’ death in itself destroys key elements of the government’s narrative on what happened in Salisbury.

Simply put, the chemical that killed Dawn Sturgess could not have been the same that allegedly poisoned the Skripals. Charlie Rowley is adamant that he found it in a packaged and fully sealed perfume bottle, in a charity bin. Furthermore he states that it was a charity bin he combed through regularly and it had not been there earlier, in the three months between the alleged attack on the Skripals and his taking it from the bin.

The government narrative that “Boshirov and Petrov” used that perfume bottle to attack the Skripals, then somehow resealed the cellophane, and disposed of it in the bin, depends on the Russians having a tiny plastic resealing technology concealed on them (and why bother?), on their taking a long detour to dispose of the “perfume” in a charity bin – the one method that guaranteed it being found and reused – and the “perfume” then achieving a lengthy period of invisibility in the bin before appearing again three months later.

Those are only some of a number of inconvenient facts. Perfume does not come as a gel; it cannot both have been applied as a gel to the Skripals’ doorknob and sprayed on to Dawn Sturgess’ wrists. Gels do not spray. Neither Porton Down nor the OPCW was able to state it was from the same batch as the chemical allegedly used on the Skripals’ house.

Then there is the fascinating fact that it took eleven days of intensive searching for a vial of liquid in a small modern home, for the police to find the perfume bottle sitting on the kitchen counter.

Nobody has been charged with the manslaughter or murder of Dawn Sturgess. There is still an international arrest warrant out for Boshirov and Petrov for the attack on the Skripals. Very interestingly indeed, this warrant has never been changed into the names of Chepiga and Mishkin.

From the moment I heard of the attack on Dawn Sturgess I worried that she – a person down on her luck and living in a hostel – was exactly the kind of person the powerful and wealthy would view as a disposable human being if her death fitted their narrative. The denial of an inquest for her, and the complete lack of interest by the mainstream media in the obvious nonsense of the official story that ties her to the Skripal poisoning, tends to confirm these fears. What Dawn Sturgess’ death tells us, beyond doubt, is that the government narrative is fake and the Skripal and Sturgess cases are two separate incidents. Which makes a local origin of the chemical very much more likely. No wonder the government is determined to avoid the inquest.

I was struck today that the tame neo-con warmongering “Chemical weapons expert” Hamish De Bretton Gordon, former head of the British Army’s chemical weapons unit, appeared on Sky News. He was being interviewed on use of white phosphorous by Turkey in Syria and repeatedly tried to deflect the narrative on to alleged chemical weapons use by Syrian government forces, arguing that the present crisis was the moral responsibility of those who opposed western military action against Assad. But what particularly struck me was that he appeared by Skype – from Salisbury. When you look at the British government’s own chemical weapons expertise, you are continually led back to Salisbury, perhaps not surprisingly given the location of Porton Down.

I am aiming to make a full documentary film on the Salisbury events entitled “Truth and the Skripals”, based around the questions raised on this blog. I shall be looking to launch crowdfunding for the documentary shortly, probably within the week.


Unlike our adversaries including the Integrity Initiative, the 77th Brigade, Bellingcat, the Atlantic Council and hundreds of other warmongering propaganda operations, this blog has no source of state, corporate or institutional finance whatsoever. It runs entirely on voluntary subscriptions from its readers – many of whom do not necessarily agree with the every article, but welcome the alternative voice, insider information and debate.

Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received.

Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:

Recurring Donations



Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Comments will be closed on November 12, 2019.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

340 thoughts on “No Inquest for Dawn Sturgess

1 2 3
  • writeon

    Whar strikes me about this grotesque affair, is how easily the interest of the mass-media in it is ‘turned on’ and ‘turned off’, by the state. There’s close to hysteria and the ‘wartime spirit’, and then, suddenly, nothing at all, especially when the fantastical narrative begins to fall appart, like the vitual collapse of the inquest in Sturgess’s strange death. It’s like the Assange Affair. One day he’s plastered all over the frontpages, then he vanishes from view into his dreary cell in Belmarsh. How is it, what processes produce such a media pattern? I mean our journalists are supposed to be both free and fearless champions of truth, yet what one observes is degree of control and conformity that isn’t meant to exist in a democratic society with a ‘watchdog’ style media.

    • Garth Carthy

      Well, Professor Roy Greenslade the journalist did say “Most tabloid newspapers – or even newspapers in general – are playthings of MI5.”
      I think that says all we need to know.

    • Tom Welsh

      “I mean our journalists are supposed to be both free and fearless champions of truth…”

      There’s your mistake! Our “journalists” are free and fearless pursuers of their own grobby financial interests. To get a job, you need to show the right attitude and come recommended by the right people. To get a story published, you need to take the right line. To get promoted and eventually become an editor or a successful author, you need to stick very closely to the party line.

      Otherwise, shit happens. Not for any obvious reason… it just happens. Contacts clam up. You get assigned the wrong stories. Maybe you end up doing the Personals.

      ‘Marr: “How can you know that I’m self-censoring? How can you know that journalists are…”

      ‘Chomsky: “I’m not saying you’re self censoring. I’m sure you believe everything you’re saying. But what I’m saying is that if you believed something different, you wouldn’t be sitting where you’re sitting”’.

      – Transcript of interview between Noam Chomsky and Andrew Marr (Feb. 14, 1996)

      • George

        The Press and many people in Uk are controlled by the honours system and keeping their mouths shut.

        In this article by Craig, it’s mentioned I think in a comment those people who got their gongs.

        Many Fleet Street editors get their obe’s (other buggers efforts) in the past except piers Morgan.

    • Vivian O'Blivion

      Speaking this week, Hillary Clinton decries the proliferation of web news sites and forums. “I think it’s a lot harder for Americans to KNOW what they’re SUPPOSED to believe …”.
      Referring to an era where there was a small number of national newspapers she continues; “It was a much more controllable environment.”.
      Hillary has previous on letting the mask slip. You’d have thought they would have confined her to a luxury sanitarium safety removed from the cameras.

    • Tom74

      The ‘free and fearless’ meme is simply a smokescreen for a media that is little more than a PR arm for the Tories and their bosses in the American intelligence agencies. Within that Tory media, they also manufacture rivalries such as against the ‘left-wing’ BBC and Guardian which, I’ve come to the conclusion, are also largely a charade to hide the reality. You’ll also notice how coverage of European affairs and officials differs markedly in tone fro that employed regarding American ones (unless involving an enemy of the CIA such as Trump). Even the celebrity scandal itself is a cover for our media’s fawning attitude to real power.
      The Skipral affair is ignored now because all the media ever cared about was promoting the anti-Russia narrative for the Americans.

      • Herbie

        “all the media ever cared about was promoting the anti-Russia narrative for the Americans.”

        The anti-Russia narrative was for the benefit of the British, not the Americans. The British lost out with the election of Trump and the winding down of the Atlanticist order.

        • Deb O'Nair

          It also has to be viewed in the context that the US/UK were planning to use false accusations of chemical weapons use as a pretext to attack Syria in support of the US/UK proxy army which was being pushed out of Eastern Ghouta. Accusing the Russians of chemical weapons use on British soil may have been intended to put the Russians on the back foot from opposing such an attack. When the Russians held firm in opposing the attacks and threatened retaliation the US/UK kindly gave the Russians the co-ordinates of their selected targets, which turned out to be unused and unoccupied buildings which had been inspected by the OPCW a few months before. This did not stop the US/UK claiming that they had attacked stockpiles of chemical weapons and chemical weapons manufacturing facilities.

    • jmg

      > Writeon: “It’s like the Assange Affair. One day he’s plastered all over the frontpages, then he vanishes from view into his dreary cell in Belmarsh.”

      Yes, and a hidden news is that outstanding investigative journalist and publisher Julian Assange has been ordered to court for extradition hearing tomorrow Monday, October 21. This time not by video link but in person, at Westminster Magistrates’ Court in London. After this, the final extradition hearing is scheduled for February 25 to 29. As we all know, there is a general concern that this international, historic case — charged and extradited for uncovering war crimes and corruption — is going to define the future not only of investigative journalism and publishing but of free press around the world.

      John Pilger (Oct 17): “I saw Julian #Assange today in Belmarsh prison. Denied the tools to prepare his defence against extradition to America, his resilience endures. On Monday he appears at Westminster Magistrates Court where his epic fight begins. It’s the fight of democracy. Join us.”

  • Bob Apposite


    I don’t know if my question didn’t go through or what.

    Do you know anything about an MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology)-Russia collaboration called Skolkovo, in Moscow?

    A high-tech university?
    There’s a number of articles online saying Hillary Clinton’s State Dept. recruited all sorts of US venture capital & tech companies, including Cisco Systems ($1 bn/10 years) and Google to develop this project.

    I know your NSA friend was talking a bout “download” speeds re: the DNC hack, but Skolkovo would probably have amazing internet capabilities. And, apparently it is designed to be a “network neutral data center” domain. I’m not a techie, myself, but wikipedia says: “One benefit of hosting in a network-neutral data center is the ability to switch providers without physically moving the server to another location.

    Is this perhaps an angle you overlooked?

    • Tom Welsh

      “…Skolkovo would probably have amazing internet capabilities”.

      Let’s keep our heads; this is technology, not Harry Potter.

      Can you see that whatever they have at Skolkovo cannot possibly have any bearing on how fast data could be uploaded from a DNC server in the USA? That would be dictated by the speed at which the computer could upload (very high) but also by the speed at which the receiving device could accept data. If that were the internet router(s) the DNC had, the transfer speed recorded in the log files would be far too fast. Hence the inescapable conclusion that the data was uploaded to a device such as a USB “thumb drive” by someone who would have had to be in the same room as the server or one of its remote terminals.

        • Bob Apposite

          Yeah, 49 Mbps may be the speed of a thumb drive, but it’s also too close to the speed of standard T3 to rule out internet transfer, imo.

          Cisco gave Skolkovo $1 bn dollars.
          They probably have fantastic internet.
          I don’t see how you can say it’s not a possibility.

          • Cascadian

            Might I suggest you devote a little bit of study to the operation of Internet protocols and the structure of the Internet itself (i.e. tertiary, secondary and primary [backbone, where you’ll T3 as a physical bearer] networks) ??

            And then the degradation in raw line speed due to the local LAN protocols (CSMA/CD and the like), the overhead imposed by the packetisation of the data being transferred, and then the different layers of the protocol suite above the physical bearer (the bottom most layer), like MAC, IP, Transport and the various application layer protocols.

            After you’ve done that you may have some appreciation how 43Mbits/second become substantially less in terms of achievable transfer speeds.

            And lastly, note that the T3 speeds you have quoted is in mega ‘bits’ per second, not mega ‘bytes’ (8 bit chunks). The thumb drive can achieve, depending on the USB version, speeds which are substantially higher – e.g. 49MB/s (49 mega bytes per second) translates into something near 8 x 49Mbps (mega bits per second).

            Telecomms networks are not that quick because the raw Mbps provided at the physical layer that is usually quoted doesn’t even come close to the real achieved speeds at the application layer.

      • Bob Apposite

        A T3 line can get speeds at about 43 megabits/second.

        I don’t think I’d rule Skolokov out w/o knowing what capabilities they have.

        $1 bn probably buys you the best of the best.

      • Bob Apposite

        Let me put this another way, the MIT network sounds hella-fast:

        There’s the MIT Regional Optical Network, for example. This all-optical network provides connectivity to key Internet exchange points at speeds of 10 Gbps and beyond, making it one of the world’s largest and fastest institutional networks for global research and collaboration.

        Skolkovo is an MIT-affiliated project.

        What’s to stop them from using the optical network and making it look like a thumb drive transfer by throttling the speed to
        look like a thumb drive transfer?

        • Bob Apposite

          The fact that Skolkovo had at one time an assocation with Hillary Clinton/the State Dept., also adds to the likelihood, I think.

          I think not only do they easily have the technical capability to do that hack, but they also have a motive.

        • Reg

          Bob Apposite
          You are putting forward assertion without evidence. Do the Russians have an all optical connection to the DNC server? Have you got any evidence that the Russians have an all optical connection to the DNC server? Any intrusion would be restricted by the DNC server, and any connections to the DNC server, throttled by the weakest link. I am sure the NSA would of noticed the Russians setting up an all optical connection to the DNC server, as this would of stood out in the technical data. Why was the file format FAT, as stored on a thumbdrive? Why did the DNC prevent the FBI examining the DNC server, and use a politicly partial private company (crowdstrike, that is unreliable as it has made retractions of its analysis previously such as in the Ukraine) that not only refuse to release the raw data to the FBI, but not even an un-redacted report? Why does the NSA not have forensic evidence of the intrusion into the DNC server as Snowden and Bill Binney (the former technical director of the NSA) capture everything, and would have the evidence of a Russian intrusion if one occurred. Remember the NSA said they had ‘moderate confidence’ of Russian intrusion, suggesting they have nothing in the way of evidence, certainly nothing that can be described as evidence was in the Muller report.

          Occums razor, all previous Wikileaks have been leaks from the inside (such as Chelsea Manning), not hacks as the weakest part of any security is the human element so it is far more credible to assume a leak not a hack unless some credible evidence can be provided. It is also interesting that the prosecution against Asange concerns the Chelsea Manning leaks and does not cover the supposed ‘hack’ of the DNC, indicating a lack of evidence that the Muller report confirms. I suggest you read the Muller report and Aaron Mate’s dissection of it, as the Muller report cannot confirm when the DNC Data was transferred to Wikileaks, particularly as Gucifer2 announces themselves as the source days after Asange stated in an ITV interview on Peston on Sunday that he has these emails. Given the vault 7 leak that the NSA has the ability to create miss attributions to other parties, of its intrusions, Gucifer2 is more likely to be a CIA cutout using a friendly power.

          Consortium News also has interesting interviews on this with Bill Binney, and Kim Dotcom, particularly episode 4

          Also look at Aaron Mare in the Nation, and in the Greyzone.

          And of course Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS)

          This is what would stop them, and it is you who are positing a theory that has to prove it using means motive opportunity, you have provided none of these three.

          • Bob Apposite

            My comments were not intended as assertions.
            I think they were clearly questions.

            If MIT has a “Regional Optical Network” which “provides connectivity to key Internet exchange points at speeds of 10 Gbps and beyond”, …”one of the world’s largest and fastest institutional networks for global research and collaboration”…and Skolkovo was an MIT “research and collaborative” partner/project…

            Who’s to say they Skolkovo can’t get fast download speeds?

            That’s all.
            I’m not a “techie”, I don’t know.
            But it sounds possible, to me.

            Add Clinton & Podesta’s role in bringing investment & capital to Skolkovo, and it seems like they could easily have acquired information to hack/compromise them, through association with them.

          • Bob Apposite

            Let me add – as far as “putting forward assertions without evidence’, isn’t that what the Seth Rich theory is?

            So you guys obviously don’t have any problem doing that.

            Seth Rich is hard for me to believe – because wouldn’t a mother have some idea of her son’s politics?

          • Bob Apposite

            Here’s the problem as I see it – your “download speeds” argument only works if Russia doesn’t have access to an optical network.

            The MIT/Skolkovo things sounds like they might.

            So, I don’t think the burden is on me to show that they do have that.

            I think the burden is on you to establish they don’t, since your whole argument hinges on download speed.

            The MIT “copy” sure sounds like they would, since it specifically references “global research and collaboration”.

  • Duncan


    Well done.
    You and Rob Slane at the Blogmire are trying to get light shone on this disgrace.
    Your Latin is more appropriate than you possibly intended.
    Any and all of these lies and omissions, beginning with the Mill Pub and Zizzi’s magically swapping in the Skripal timeline, then the duckfeed being erased, despite the parents being informed, all the way to Rowley being treated with Duodote as a diligent paramedic recognised Acetylcholine Esterase depressed levels.
    Any and all these lies can only implicate HMG.

  • J

    “I am aiming to make a full documentary film on the Salisbury events entitled “Truth and the Skripals”, based around the questions raised on this blog. I shall be looking to launch crowdfunding for the documentary shortly, probably within the week.”

    Excellent news. Any news of theof the Skripals themselves?

    • michael norton

      Yes, we apparently heard from Yulia but not from her dear old dad?
      Let us say that the Russians did it, they had a substance which we are calling Novichok.
      It seems likely that if it was to be delivered by aerosol from a perfume bottle, that you might have more than one bottle.
      But it would be unlikely that you would also have a brush on gel method of delivery with you on the same excursion.

  • Allan Howard

    As I said in the weeks following the alleged poisoning of the Skripals, it is inconceivable that it would take three weeks before the police/chemical weapons experts would think to check the front door handle of Sergei’s house, and in the real world, they would have been at the house the very next day at the latest, and the first thing they would have checked before entering the house would have been the front door handle. The reason the authors of this fairy tale left it for three weeks, is so that the Establishment’s propaganda machine – ie the corporate media and the BBC – could brain-wash the public during those three weeks with all the speculation as to how the Novichok was delivered – ie where and how the Skripals and the police officer came in to contact with it – along with all the hysteria that it was Putin wot done it.

    As for Boshirov and Petrov, it would have been simple enough to get the Russian security services to send over a couple of agents on some pretext – ie some secret documents that Skripal had supposedly come by, for example – and then abort the meeting/rendezvous at the last moment on the Saturday, and then arrange for them to come back on the Sunday.

    And needless to say, the very idea that an assassination attempt would be planned in such a haphazard fashion, allegedly putting Novichok on the front door handle where it could be washed off if rained for any length of time. It’s just too absurd for words!

    • Tatyana

      Let the 2 poor guys alone. Bashirov and Petrov, I’ve seen their interview. They are russians, I am, too.
      They were so clumsy answering the questions and even had no reliable legend, which real secret assassins would have had, certainly.
      Nontheless, the guys didn’t tell the whole truth about their journey, it is obvious. Makes me think, that their purpose of travel was half-legal.
      They told their business is something with sport food/drinks. I suppose some ‘supplier’ invited them to discuss, or to see samples, or to buy a quantity of that stuff. Highly likely the product is half-legal, or the scheme of delivery is illegal.
      That is why they are so unsure when talking of the purpose of their visit to Salisbury.
      Most probably they were waiting for their contact person in London, most probably their contact person asked them to arrive in Salisbury on some pretext ( like short of time, or samples delivered to Salisbury, or the third involved person is visiting the town etc.)

      In this case, Boshirov and Petrov must have been scared to the guts on seeing their faces on TV as Skripal’s poisoners. And it explains why they themselves agreed to be interviewed, it is better than being wanted by police or hunted by secret service 🙂

      • Tatyana

        Another idea is, well, I don’t want to insult those 2 guys with un-based suspicion, but … all drugs are illegal in Russia. If they used sport food/drinks bussines as a cover for drugs trade, it could lead us to Porton Down maybe. Or some pharmaceutic company in Salisbury.

        • Ros Thorpe

          My feeling is that they are a couple of decoys sent as cover for the real culprit who probably worked a Porton Down. They don’t look to bright and seemed to linger too long in front of cameras. I think they were sent to deliver ‘papers’ but got a no show on both occasions. In the CCTV they look like they are laughing and joking. That’s not really convincing as a master spy.

          • N_

            What do you think SAS or SBS guys look like? Also do you know the difference between military intelligence ops and agent-running?

      • TJH

        Tatyana, Are you not aware that “Boshirov” is Chepiga? The man that claimed that Boshirov was his real name in that RT interview was at a wedding during 2017. Not only was he there but the rest of his family was too. The wedding of the daughter of a GRU unit commander. The GRU unit commander and father of the bride has been identified as Major General Andrey Vladimirovich Averyanov.

        The guy claiming to be Boshirov was photographed at the wedding by the wedding photographer.

        Note the the wedding photographer has taken a picture of the table arrangement and note the Chepiga family.

        The hotel venue in Moscow still has the video of the wedding up at following link. The very last video.

        Fleeting glimpses of Chepiga can be seen at 1:35 and 1:45.

        • Tatyana

          The first link doesn’t open. The second is the photo of an art object ( the level of craft available to a 5-years kid). The third link leads to the photos of a wedding, where a long nosed bride in a transparent wedding dress is obviously happy to get married (finally! is the main emotion in the photos). The 4th leads to a general video section of some hotel. And the fifth (I honestly tried to catch the moments you’ve indicated) – I see nothing proving, but a vague semblance, mostly due to the popular beard design. Perhaps the semblance seems more obvious to you, because of foreign type of face? You know, all asian people seem like one face, untill you know them better.

          • Inquirer

            For me, the first link does open. Let us say that there are 26 rows with 2 pictures on each row. On the 19th row from above (8th row from below), the picture on the left shows somebody looking as “Boshirov”.

          • Donaldson

            ‘where a long nosed bride in a transparent wedding dress is obviously happy to get married (finally! is the main emotion in the photos)’

            Ah, Tatyana, you made me laugh, thank you. To me the location looks German, and ridiculously extravagant. No matter where they were, that groom got a ring put in his nose.

          • TJH

            LOL Tatyana. Why not contact the wedding photographer himself and see if he took the image of that table setting? Just a coincidence that the “Chepiga’s” appear on it?


            That hotel is the Hotel “Seneshal” in Moscow with the father of the bride being identified as GRU Major General Andrey Vladimirovich Averyanov. Averyanov was not quite able to remove all his social media profile and he was identified.

            More than just a passing resemblance! I know that there will be much wailing and gnashing of teeth.


          • Tatyana

            TJH, ok ok, I agree some Averyanov is finally getting his long nosed adult woman who still had not learned that a pantie is an underware not to be demonstrated to wide public daughter married 🙂
            I agree, Chepiga may be a guest at this wedding.
            But how it makes a Chepiga to be a Bashirov?

            Many years ago a woman in a bus tried to steal my purse. She wore strange clothing, bright makeup and later I realised it is made intentionally to divert attention from the face features.

            With the face half covered with the beard and moustache, how can I tell it is Chepiga?

          • TJH

            Tatyana, After the RT interview journalists went to Chepiga’s village and asked questions of some of the residents. People in the village were able to identify the man claiming to be Boshirov as Chepiga. It was Russian newspaper Kommersant that pinpointed the village near the Chinese border where Chepiga grew up and said people there had recognized him as the man on TV claiming to be Boshirov. Obviously people who had seen the interview would have contacted journalists to tip them off that the man claiming to be Boshirov was actually Chepiga. The same thing happened for Petrov.




            Also remember that these two “sports nutritionists” had near sequential passport numbers. Just a coincidence? I think not! The Russian database leaks also identified other in the same sequence that had links to military intelligence.


            Also consider that these two “sport nutritionists” clamed to have many clients and customers in the west, but yet none of these have identified themselves. Think about the money that these clients and customers could have made from the western press/international press with this major breaking news story. Nobody came forward simply because there was no western client base or customers. Nobody coming forward even with a business card in their names – nothing!

          • Tatyana

            As always, the devil is in the details.
            I’m russian, I’ve read the Commersant reports, in russian. They say the villagers are divided in their opinion, because they knew the man when he was a schoolboy. Only one woman, who is in the best of western media’s traditions, asks to not name her 🙂 is sure.
            And I’m sorry, but I see nothing strange in ‘near sequential passport’, because it is their ‘international passports’, a document for travelling abroad. No surprise, if they applied for it at the same time in one company, and this is exactly the most likely if they were going to travel together.

          • Tatyana

            And in addition. Look at this guest list photo attentively – the first name at the left side is Alexander Petrov.
            So, why not supposing it is Alexander Pettrov himself in the other wedding photos? Why saying it is Chepiga?

          • Brendan

            Tatyana, that’s weird. Alexander Petrov is supposed to be the name of the other guy (also known as Mishkin), but he doesn’t appear in any of the very many images from the wedding.

            I understand that Petrov is a common name in Russia but it’s still a big coincidence. I wonder if Boshirov/Chepiga (or whatever his name is) ‘borrowed’ the name Alexander Petrov. It’s just as plausible as Bellingcat’s explanation that Anatoliy Chepiga “used the pseudonym of Aleksey Chepiga”.

      • John A

        Tatanya, I suspect the so-called energy drinks etc., are some kind of body building protein supplements popular with gym goers who want to become muscle guys. Many of these are not medically approved and with potentially harmful long-term effects. And therefore either banned or not on open sale. But such gym ‘bunnies’ are only concerned with the short term benefits of a ‘body beautiful’ (in their eyes) and so use them.

    • Duncan

      Wiltshire Police were at the Skripal house on Monday March 5th onwards.
      The BBCs Karen Gardener watched them trek through the front door.
      They were in normal uniforms.
      Several days later, Novichok and the door handle became the focus.

      • Allan Howard

        Oh, well how come all the media were speculating as to how the Novichok was delivered for THREE weeks, and it was ONLY when the ‘door handle’ story was widely reported by the media (after three weeks of speculation) that ALL the speculation stopped. And I’m sure you will recall that just a few days later the media were reporting that Skripal’s guinea pigs had been found dead in the house, and that his cat was in such a bad state that it had to be put to sleep. I think you’re trying to rewrite history Duncan.

        So how do you explain all of the above?

        • Liane Theuer

          @Allan Howard – do you believe the dead pets make the “poison on doorhandle” story more believable ? To the contrary !
          The guinea pigs died from lack of water and the cat allegedly was found half starved.
          The pets were NOT novichoked !
          So how do you explain this, despite the fact that the police was all over the house since March 5th ?
          Is Wiltshire police that careless ? Or is the pet story just another lie ?

          • Andyoldlabour

            Liane Theuer

            “The guinea pigs died from lack of water and the cat allegedly was found half starved.
            The pets were NOT novichoked !
            So how do you explain this, despite the fact that the police was all over the house since March 5th ?”

            That is one of the many things that I find totally unbelievable

          • pretzelattack

            because the cops didn’t feed and water the pets. they left them to starve or die of thirst in the house.

        • Allan Howard

          I can assure you (Liane and pretzel) that the animals are absolutely fine, and have been all along, and are happily living with Sergei and Yulia:

          PS Yes, I know it kinda contradicts what I said, but I was using a couple of examples of the false narrative to make a point to Duncan – ie we were all led to believe that the police and the chemical weapons experts didn’t discover the Novichok on the front door handle until some three weeks later (but of course in the Real World, they would have been at his house the very next day at the latest, and the door handle would have been the FIRST thing they checked before entering, and the pets then removed of course and taken care of), but the pets had to ‘die’ in the false narrative, because in the false narrative they didn’t enter the house until three weeks later AND discover the Novichok on the door handle prior to going in. Yes, it’s convoluted, but it always IS trying to dismantle the false narrative.

  • ZigZag Wanderer

    Documentary ? You’ll need training as well as funding .

    Try saying ” City Stay Hotel novichok same batch as Salisbury ” without laughing.

    Not easy Craig.

    • Tom Welsh

      So laugh!

      Check out this movie:

      Tom Naughton is a professional comedian (as well as a professional programmer), but he also knows far more about nutrition than most doctors. Not surprising as he has studied and learned much more.

      Tom’s humour lends a great deal of power to his movie. Particularly, to my mind, when he appears in a hoodie in a shadowy car park saying, “Follow the money!”

  • Brendan

    Perfume does not come as a gel; it cannot both have been applied as a gel to the Skripals’ doorknob and sprayed on to Dawn Sturgess’ wrists. Gels do not spray.

    It was already announced in April 2018 by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) that the Novichok nerve agent on the Skripals’ door was “in a liquid form”. That would seem to show that the same (liquid) substance was involved in both incidents, but it raises other questions that are very hard to answer:

    – Why would the highly trained Russian assassins spray a lethal substance on the door handle when it might possibly be blown back at them by the wind. That would be almost suicidal.

    – Organophosphates (including nerve agents) are known to degrade quickly if exposed to humidity (in a process called hydrolysis), but the Skripal Novichok had high purity when found at least two weeks later despite being exposed to moisture in the open air.

    These are the reasons why it was initially assumed that the nerve agent was applied in gel form – no problems resulting from the effects of wind or moisture.

    Craig, if you have the budget and resources when making your documentary, could you ask some chemistry expert about the seemingly inexplicable behaviour of this substance?

    • Ros Thorpe

      The most inexplicable is that it has a delayed reaction window that is exactly the same for 2 people of different weight, age, sex receiving randomly different doses. It’s a wonder of chemistry that even Mendeleev couldn’t explain.

    • Andyoldlabour


      “Why would the highly trained Russian assassins spray a lethal substance on the door handle when it might possibly be blown back at them by the wind. That would be almost suicidal.”

      Exactly, and if the London hotel had Novichok samples all over it, then the same would apply.

    • Kaliya

      Just two alternative angles I’d like to point out: It’s not necessarily a gel. The oily substance mentioned in the context of the Sturgess murder fits the narrative, could be like fuel or crude oil, making it more sticky than watery liquids. High purity doesn’t mean it didn’t degrade, either, an impure substance has other secondary components mixed in, which can point to a messy production process. A pure substance (high percentage of the “novichok” molecules) doesn’t become less pure when diluted, when we disregard the rising percentage of water molecules etc. I think these two points are dead-ends.

      • Brendan

        The oily substance mentioned in the context of the Sturgess murder fits the narrative, could be like fuel or crude oil, making it more sticky than watery liquids.

        Yes, the Amesbury substance was described by Charlie Rowley as oily. And Novichok is said to come in an oily form. The idea of the gel was presented to explain why the substance did not degrade quickly, but then Defra announced that it was actually liquid.

        High purity doesn’t mean it didn’t degrade, either, (…)

        If it was highly pure Novichok, degradation should have occurred (due to hydrolysis) anyway – it didn’t need impurities for that to occur. Organophosphates are supposed to degrade quickly in the presence of moisture.

        A pure substance (high percentage of the “novichok” molecules) doesn’t become less pure when diluted, (…)

        If you mean diluted with water, it will become less pure (degraded) over time by reacting with the water. It should be severely degraded after two weeks, when the Novichok was said to be discovered on the Skripal door handle.

  • TJH

    Craig, you are not stating facts. Charlie Rowley is not adamant that he found it in a charity bin and especially not that specific charity bin.

    Charlie gave an interview to ITV in 2018 and stated.

    “It’s a possibility that I may have found it here.” he tells us at some bins outside the back of some shops in the centre, but he says “I don’t know, all I can say is a vague description of an area and this being one of them”

    Charlie had a habit of searching for “treasure” in bins. The items that would catch his attention were the new still sealed products.

    He cannot be sure but thinks the most likely option is that he found it in a city bin a couple of days before he and his partner Dawn Sturgess were contaminated with the chemical weapon.

    • Cascadian

      But there were newspaper reports that, at least initially, stated that that was where he found it.

      Take a look at the blogmire site – a weeks worth of reading should suffice for you to find the relevant detail. I’m sure one of the blogmirers could fill you in if you ask the right questions.

    • Brendan

      Charlie’s recollection of finding the bottle evolved over time, possibly influenced by what other people suggested to him. He was initially very unsure about where he found it, but in an interview with the Guardian from 21 June this year he said (almost as a fact) that he found it in the charity shop’s bin.
      It’s discussed in this thread (which is a bit long):

    • John A

      If some person decided to donate a bottle of perfume to a charity shop and put it in a charity bin, surely that person would have come forward by now to say something along the lines of, ‘yes I put it in this specific bin at X on such and such a date. The perfume was an unwanted present’ or words to that effect. Plus the bottle appears to have been hiding in plain sight on the kitchen table for 11 days. And when it comes to the alleged ‘bacon wrapping’, that sounds more like the kind of thick plastic you put round a batch of packaged products for safer transit, rather than round one single perfume bottle box.

  • Ros Thorpe

    I feel very sorry for that lady as don’t believe she had anything to do with this. I don’t find the man she was with to be a credible witness and don’t believe his account of how he acquired the bottle. He looks empty.

  • Tony

    Craig, I used to pay a monthly subscription to your site, but I withdrew it because of childish, partisan behaviour by your moderators (I suspect they’re mostly in their twenties, right? Your project on this issue will get my financial support. Keep up the outstanding work.

  • gyges01

    Do you have any links to the chemistry of novichok? Throughout all of this I haven’t seen any sensible discussions of the chemistry of the compound.

  • Ros Thorpe

    Not sure that any documentary could shed real light on this very dark and very secret incident other than exposing the obvious holes in the official story. The government can simply say they have compelling evidence that can’t be shared for security reasons. This narrative comes down to do you trust the establishment? Most people do sadly even after many cases such as Hillsborough demonstrating that one shouldn’t.

  • Ros Thorpe

    Sadly it seems to me that the Skripals are dead due to the fact that their family have not heard from them. Coming from a Russian family, this is unthinkable. Sergei despite having no morals contacted his mother diligently.

    How they died I do not know but very much doubt that the two stooges had anything to do with it.

    It is mystifying that the government would think it a good idea to put a commercial director of a phone company as CEO of a chemical weapons lab. Scientists working in such places can start to want to do ‘experiments’ unfettered.

  • mark golding

    A very powerful and poignant message from Craig, passionate to it’s core and his very best. We can maybe appreciate or realize David Kelly appears at one end of a shady, dishonest continuum, with Dawn Sturgess at the other, her warmth and gentleness sadly missed. Be it a disposable soul in the minds of the spiritless, or a severe risk to the spiritless schemes when lit up in the minds of the we.

    Yet it is ‘we’ who can intervene to change the direction of time, we can, and we must. Even by carefully considering today’s Brexit chapter, the message is the same; the aristocracy’s, that is the powerful and wealthy, are willing to instruct their puppets, their pawns and their mouthpieces in Palace and Parliament to disregard the law, to deceive, to destroy and deep six innocent people’s lives.

    I might add, if you are polarized, no matter, all will remain the same.

  • N_

    Craig – I hope you mention Nikolai Glushkov in the documentary about Salisbury and Amesbury. A rich “businessman from the former USSR with an unclear source of wealth who was welcomed to Britain”, he was by no means an innocent like Dawn Sturgess, but it’s interesting that the inquest into his death too has not yet got properly underway. Oh yes, and his daughter’s clothing was tested for radioactivity.

    One thing that sticks in the mind was how a journalist asked a friend of Dawn Sturgess’s why he was organising a memorial get-together? What a moronic question! Welcome to the British caste system in which members of lower castes are viewed as subhumans.

    PS Dig the ref to Lord Hutton of Kincora. No writ yet? 😀

      • N_

        Not sure whether I’ve said this before, but New Malden where Glushkov was killed is one of the very few stomping grounds in Europe of the North Korean intelligence service. What connection they might have with Glushkov I don’t know. They don’t have huge ears across Britain, but they do have a formidable network in that particular part of London, as the South Koreans in the area are well aware. (I don’t advise anyone to start shooting their mouth off in the cafes around there that they think Kim Jong-Un’s a wally.)

        Glushkov was due to give evidence in court in an Aeroflot case. Bang – didn’t happen.

        Similarly with Boris Berezovsky in the Litvinenko case. BB obviously had it coming to him: a friend of the British royal family he had been, but he got slapped by Roman Abramovich, who was (and still is) a friend of the poshboy Britty regime, the Putin regime, AND the Zionist regime. BB was no longer a friend of the first – which had protected him and his money when he fled from the second – and he practically accused the poshboys and the Putin org of cooperating with each other with respect to Litvinenko, making it obvious he was on his way out, because he was saying this from Surrey, not from Beijing. I speculate he was probably none too welcome in Israel either, and in any case he’d have had to get to an airport. I don’t feel sorry for the guy at all. He was a mafia killer with a lot of blood on his hands, including in Chechnya and in London too.

  • John Goss

    “The denial of an inquest for her, and the complete lack of interest by the mainstream media in the obvious nonsense of the official story that ties her to the Skripal poisoning, tends to confirm these fears. What Dawn Sturgess’ death tells us, beyond doubt, is that the government narrative is fake and the Skripal and Sturgess cases are two separate incidents.”

    Thanks for another incisive post. As well as Dawn Sturgess and Dr David Kelly another high-profile character denied an inquest was Alexander Litvinenko. This should raise questions in the minds of decent people everywhere. After the death/murder of David Kelly an inquiry was held presided over by Lord Hutton as you say. It was Tony Blair who called for this inquiry to conceal the truth. At that time it was an illegal act for a coroner’s legal responsibility to be replaced by an inquiry. Nevertheless it went ahead without challenge. Since then Coroner’s Law has been changed and were Dr Kelly to have been murdered today an inquiry could legally replace the offices of a coroner.

    Erosion of human rights is gaining momentum rapidly. Few question and those who do are labelled “conspiracy theorist”, “unpatriotic”, “useful idiot” and other derogatory cliches used to replace argument.

    • George McI

      “conspiracy theorist” is the killer. The term is now being used to discredit – and indeed abolish – any critique at all.

      • Paul Barbara

        @ George McI October 20, 2019 at 11:03
        It’s the Pavlovian response from the brain-washed Sheeple. Actually the term was weaponised deliberately by the CIA after people started questioning the JFK assassination; it worked beyond their dreams!

          • George McI

            ‘sheeple’ and ’shill’ are hardly part of mainstream media discourse. If they were heard more it might encourage people to think. I think the most important thing you can do for someone is to get them to stop automatically putting faith in mainstream media. Sad to say, even the most intelligent people around me still prove gullible with TV and newspapers.

      • Tony

        Roger Stone was accused of being a ‘conspiracy theorist’ for his claims, shared by a number of others, and backed up with a welter of evidence, that LBJ was behind the assassination of President Kennedy.
        His response was that he was a ‘conspiracy realist’.

        The term ‘conspiracy theorist’ was a CIA term for those who did not believe the official version of the JFK assassination.

        • Tatyana

          Conspiracy realist! Great! Remarkably the name is Roger Stone, and I know another good and decent man, whose name is Roger Waters.

          We still need Roger Air and Roger Fire and a Lilu. Corbyn is already out there 🙂

  • giyane.

    So that’s why the 16 mm 2 armoured cable I bought from Salisbury was only £ 15 instead of £80. Even if the builders who sold it me got it from Porton Down it’s not likely to kill anybody.

    Surely Dawn Sturgess has been deliberately disappeared or killed because of something she knew. Local people would never touch or open a perfume bottle after all the tripe put out about the skripals.. citizens of a post truth age still have to take pre cautions.

  • Allan Howard

    It has of course been common knowledge for a long time that Charlie Rowley found the perfume bottle in a charity bin (which was emptied regularly anyway), but I hadn’t heard before the part about him combing through it regularly (and neither do I know WHEN or HOW Craig got to hear about it). But if Craig got to hear about it at some point, then it’s unlikely that the MSM wouldn’t have heard about it, and it would be more than a little interesting as such, to ascertain if the media have reported the fact. I suspect that they HAVEN’T, because not only does it contradict the official narrative, but also raises the question of WHO put it in the charity bin.

    As I have said on more than a few occasions during the past fifteen months or more, I have no doubt whatsoever that the whole Skripal poisoning saga was staged, and there wasn’t any Novichok, and neither the Skripals or the police officer were poisoned, and I came to THAT conclusion for a number of reasons, not least the fact that it is inconceivable that TWO people, who had come into contact with a nerve agent several hours earlier, would just happen to become incapacitated in exactly the same moment, let alone the fact that Vladimir Putin would suddenly get it in his head to have Sergei Skripal assassinated, AND to have it done just TWO days before the celebratory events to mark 100 days to go to the start of the World Cup Football Tournament (which Russia was hosting for the first time), AND just THREE months or so before the event itself kicked off, AND for the assassination attempt to be planned and carried out in such a ludicrous and haphazard fashion.

    I can only conclude that the perfume bottle/Novichok was put in the bin so as to counter the ever-growing incredulity of the official narrative in the months afterwards, which was shot full of holes, so as to shut it/them down, and if one or more people died as a consequence, well so be it, cos it must have been the Ruskies who put it in the bin, and so THEY are responsible. Well, that evil Mr Putin that is! Whoever was responsible for putting it in the charity bin – and let’s face it, there aren’t many people who have access to nerve agents! – they couldn’t have known that it would end up in the hands of someone pilfering stuff out of the bin AND, that in all likely-hood, it would end up on the shelf of the charity shop AND at some point be bought by someone……. It would be interesting to ascertain how often the bin was emptied by the people working there, as it seems most unlikely to me that they would leave it for more than a few days at a time. In fact I WOULD have thought that they emptied it every day (except for Sundays, when I assume they are closed)!

    Now THAT’s a thought, isn’t it!!

    PS And can I just say to the posters who are so keen to cast doubt on the fact that Rowley found the perfume bottle in the charity bin, that it is inconceivable that someone wouldn’t recall exactly where they came across it!

    • Deb O'Nair

      “It has of course been common knowledge for a long time that Charlie Rowley found the perfume bottle in a charity bin”

      As someone commented earlier, this is where Rowley *thinks* he *may* have found it. In interviews he is vague and uses language that infers that he is simply letting others conclude what they like without confirming it. The sort of behaviour one might expect when someone is being asked to admit something that they know is not true but denying it would give them a big problem. The long and short is that *thinking* something *may* be true would not stand up in a court as evidence of anything.

  • Hatuey

    As far as the Skripals and Salisbury are concerned, it would be optimistic to say you have little chance of finding out what happened. The truth is you have no chance. The complete collection of facts that you see before you in this case probably represents less then 1% of the facts.

    On top of that, we don’t know if all the pieces of information you have at your disposal are reliable or not. If only one intelligence agency was involved, arriving at the truth would be impossible enough. We know or can guess that at least 2 were involved in Salisbury.

    I remember SETI encouraged us to install a screensaver that allowed them to harness the collective processing power of computers when they weren’t being used in the search for extra terrestrial intelligence. We didn’t find any aliens but it was to our advantage that we didn’t know at the time it was doomed to fail.

    We don’t have that advantage in this case.

    I’m not being pointlessly pessimistic or negative. On the contrary, I believe your collective processing power as human beings is a valuable resource and that it should be employed usefully. There’s a lot of stuff going on at the moment, stuff that by any standard is much more important than the Skripals story.

    • Ian

      I agree. You can make a doc about how little we know, and how none of it adds up, which will be repeating much of the already discussed material. But going further would require a whistleblower from a highly placed source. We have seen before how the intelligence services are adept at stonewalling the public and governments. We’ll probably never get the whole story.

        • Ian

          Exactly my point. So we will be left with the same unsatisfactory blend of incompatible explanations, speculation, conspiracy theory and unsolved crimes. As they wish.

          • Hatuey

            Yip, a re-run of the debate they have had about 15 times before, one of which lasted months, with every crackpot under the sun hanging his kinky underwear out to dry.

  • Robert

    Would it be surprising if the perpretators of the original attack had a back-up – of a spray, packaged up so’s to get past scrutiny? If they did, might they not dispose of it after the event as quickly as they could? Charity shops often pass unsold stuff on elesewhere, in the hope of someone buying it. Or maybe someone noticed it in a bin and thought “that’s too good to waste”.

    Also looks to me as though Bashirov and Petrov were trying to be seen by CCTV in Salisbury.

  • nevermind

    Its not the first time an inquest was postponed or the results of an autopsy being kept a secret.
    There must be a big room full of highly damaging secrets somewhere, keeping this crumbling edifice of a political shambles alive for the sake of a rich versus poor status quo continuum.

    As for film/trailer on this broken biscotti puzzle of disinformation and accusations, timed to disrupt a Russian world cup phase of sporting good news, was it an action of petty jealousy?
    It would be educational to stop the trailer/ film at every questionable timeline in the saga of Salisbury, presenting the essential changes and changing of official facts/ narratives.
    It would be great if there was an alternative explanation as to the presence of the two Russians at that precise time. I feel that a little fishing in Russia might bring out a little more of Scripals shady deals to light.
    I would not be surprised if he had something to say on chemical weapons in Syria, white Helmets and those who supplied the to Syria.
    Without a serious new angle that links the Government to his business, whatever it was at.the time, it would leave an open end to all who view it, imho.

    I am amplifying the note of warning from others, do re train your periferal vision at all times as you are treading on some big toes. Im sure that Sputnik would give you a heads up in finding out more/ raising funds for such a project.
    I’ m in, but should you decide to drop it for fears of being watched/targeted, then I would understand that as well, my contribution is a one way transaction via a cheque, no paypal por moire.

    Viva Catalunya!

    • Blissex

      «There must be a big room full of highly damaging secrets somewhere»

      The risk that J Corbyn gets the keys to this “room” when he becomes PM is most likely why he is being dementedly slandered as “antisemite” and “racist” asnd “communist”.

      • Mark

        I believe that a new Government cannot simply go on a fishing expedition through the files of the previous Government.
        Those files will be kept locked up and well away from the prying eyes of Corbyn. Even the national archive is not trusted with that kind of incendiary stuff, the spooks have their own separate storage location.

  • Alyson

    Does anyone remember the interview with the inventor of Novichok? Somewhere outside New York maybe? He came to his large metal gates to talk to the media. My impression was that he was very proud of his achievement in developing the toxin, not that he seemed to have any knowledge of the incident in Salisbury, but who he was I can’t remember, and why is he living in the US? Was he Russian? Can anyone recall any more detail? It didn’t seem particularly relevant to the story as it unfolded

  • Allan Howard

    In the wikipedia entry of the ‘Amesbuy poisonings’ it says that ‘According to the subsequent press report released by the Metropolitan Police, at 10:15 on Saturday 30 June 2018, the South Western Ambulance Service was called to a residential address in Amesbury after Dawn Sturgess had collapsed’ , and it then goes on to say (in the press report) that ‘That same day, at 15:30, the South Western Ambulance Service was called back to that same address, after Charlie Rowley had fallen ill’, and that he was taken to hospital. And further on it says:

    ‘Rowley gave an interview to ITV News on 24 July 2018, stating that he believed a sealed box of a recognisable brand of perfume, which he had found and given to Sturgess, was the source of the Novichok. His partner became sick “within 15 minutes” after spraying the “oily substance” onto her wrists before rubbing them together, under the assumption that it was perfume. He also stated that he came into contact with the chemical agent after some tipped onto his hands while attaching the plastic spray dispenser to the bottle, but had washed his hands soon after.’

    Anyway, so going back to near the beginning of the wikipedia entry, it says the following:

    ‘On 11 July, he [Rowley] was no longer in critical condition and the hospital downgraded his condition to “serious but stable”. The same day, officers from the investigation team spoke with Rowley. He told his brother Matthew the nerve agent had been in a small perfume or aftershave bottle, which they had found in a park about nine days before spraying themselves with it. The police later closed and fingertip-searched Queen Elizabeth Gardens, a riverside park in central Salisbury, which the couple had visited the day before they fell ill.’

    So (it says) he told his brother that he found the perfume bottle in a park about nine days before spraying themselves with it, and then (it says) that the police later closed the park etc, ‘which the couple had visited the day before they fell ill’.

    Confused? I know I am! I mean if you found a bottle of perfume in a park and gave it to your girlfriend, it beggars belief that she/they wouldn’t open it and check it out until some nine days later, but whatever the case, what possible relevance does it have to mention that they had visited the park (again) the day before they fell ill?! And it does seem extaordinary that Dawn Sturgess became ill and collapsed within fifteen minutes of ‘contact’ with it, but Rowley didn’t become ill until some five-and-a-half hours after coming into ‘contact’ with it (yes, I know he washed his hands and all that!). I mean did it smell like perfume? Does it seem likely that anyone would think to mix the Novichok with some perfume? But if it WASN’T – and it seems MOST unlikely that it WAS – then they would both have realised as soon as Dawn tried it that it wasn’t perfume, and surely when she became ill and collapsed just fifteen minutes later, Rowley would have mentioned it to the ambulance crew when they arrived.

    But even if he didn’t think of it in the moment, one would have thought that sooner or later his mind would have drifted back to the perfume that didn’t smell at all like perfume OR have any smell at all, and then contact the hospital and mention it to them. And given that she became ill very suddenly and then collapsed, it does seem odd to me that Rowley didn’t go to the hospital with her in the ambulance, or think to make his way there more-or-less straight away if that wasn’t possible for some reason. I know if a girlfriend of mine became suddenly ill AND collapsed, *I* certainly would! I would be beside myself with worry, and if they couldn’t take me with her in the ambulance (and if I didn’t have a vehicle), I’d call a minicab to take me there, and if I didn’t have the money for a cab, I’d be on the first bus to Salisbury and get to the hospital as fast as I could.

    NB As I said in an earlier post – and as I’ve said on more than a few occasions during the past eighteen months or so – the very idea that an assassination attempt would be planned and carried out in such a ludicrous and haphazard manner is… er… ludicrous, and the idea that they would take an additional Novichok perfume bottle with them to Salisbury is BEYOND ludicrous, let alone then dumping it in a park OR a charity bin! My point is of course that it didn’t happen.

    • MJ

      “it didn’t happen”

      Agreed. A toxic psyop in which we were the targets. Remarkably successful given that the narrative was so flawed from the very beginning.

  • Blissex

    Another thing that has never happened is a number of “The SUN” scoops/interviews with the Skripals, the hospital staff/doctors, and other people involved. Zero. Apparently “The SUN” is no longer at all interested in sensational scoops.

    • John Goss

      It’s much worse than that Blissex. Sergei Skripal is known to be untrustworthy by his history of selling secrets to the west. Not so his daughter Yulia. My assumption is she inherited her mother’s genes. Her mother knew nothing about Sergei’s secret life with our secret services.

      The last time Yulia spoke to her family in Russia she apologised for previous accusations regarding her cousin Viktoria (no doubt fed to her by UK spooks). She explained that she now had access to the internet and knew everything. As far as I can gather she has not been allowed to speak with her family since. Sergei has though but then he is so malleable in the hands of Pablo Miller’s cronies it is understandable. He stuck to the script.

  • Ort

    I applaud Craig’s intention to produce a “Truth and the Skripals” documentary, but reading the comments thread refreshes my divided mind, so to speak.

    To draw a parallel: I am one of those naturally curious and skeptical types easily derided as a “truther”, although not the militant, obsessed sub-type who give truth-seeking a bad name. So I am interested in JFK assassination research, and visit certain Internet sites on the topic to see if anything new and interesting is being bruited about.

    One researcher specializes in the murder of Dallas police officer J.D. Tippet, who was allegedly shot dead by Lee Harvey Oswald during his supposed flight from the Dealey Plaza assassination scene. This researcher has gone over chaotic and fragmentary evidence, including scrutinizing police-radio transcripts, to an impressive degree; he checks, cross-checks, compares, and contrast divergent and contradictory official and unofficial accounts in order to reveal the most likely, truthful explanation possible.

    But when I read his scrupulously-sourced posts, and discussions and debates with fellow researchers, I remind myself that they are picking over disputed events that occurred over half a century ago– 56 years, to be precise. This excellent researcher, like others in comparable circumstances, has definitively established that the official narrative is false– but he has not unearthed any hitherto-unknown key evidence to decisively establish what really happened.

    I bring this up to say that reading Skripal-related comments threads induces déjà vu. This is partly because they’re effectively continuations of the “meta” commentary that has been simmering along since the dodgy incidents that inspire them, but also because they are so similar to the JFK discussion.

    I’m not deriding or mocking anyone for this, but it seems as if good-faith “truthers”, i.e. curious skeptics, typically remain in a recursive loop. So, as we see here and in every other discussion thread on the topic, every element of the narrative is revisited over and over. The discrepancies and contradictions are teased out, the obvious mendacity and deception of official sources is reaffirmed, etc.

    But, as with JFK, these “people’s inquiries” always end by correctly repudiating the false official narrative, affirming that the truth of the matter remains unknown, and typically calling on authorities to acknowledge both the inadequacy of the existing official account, and the necessity of conducting a new transparent investigation to finally get to the truth.

    That’s my divided mind: appreciating Craig’s responsible “trutherism” on the topic, and welcoming his proposed documentary– while fearing that if Internet discussion forums are still a “thing” 56 years from now, they will feature familiar discussions and disputes over perfume-bottle wrapping, what that pair of Russian guys were really up to in Salisbury, etc.– ad infinitum.

    • J

      I think you’re missing the point. Key facts are available to be known, but right now cannot be encountered by the majority, since established media deny, obfuscate, distort and outright lie with alarming equanimity. Which is the whole point of making an independent documentary. Such key facts will surely help any audience toward a more realistic and informed understanding, however they choose to interpret them.

    • Blissex

      «But, as with JFK, these “people’s inquiries” always end by correctly repudiating the false official narrative, affirming that the truth of the matter remains unknown»

      And that’s very important: the english government has been creating a number of implausible conspiracy theories about the Skripal affair, and arguing against them has the good effect of helping an increasing (hopefully) share of the public to be skeptical about other implausible conspiracy theories, and in general propaganda by “the establishment”, so that there be less support for twisted policies and manipulating politicians. Maybe in 100-200 years historians will have access to the files of the agencies or the diaries of the participants that explain what actually happened.
      For now what is needed is even just rejection of obvious propaganda. It may be inevitable that “the establishment” do their dirty deeds above the heads of those they regard as “gullible simpletons”, and we should let them get away with them, but not with the propaganda that puts a ridiculous spin on those dirty deeds.

    • Mark

      Ort – We have wondered off topic a little but what has kept the JFK assassination simmering is the fact that new information has over the years slowly and steadily come to light. The withheld Zapruder film being made public initiated the HSCA investigation. During this time the Church Committee looked into the rather unorthodox behaviour of the CIA. Then there was further revelations re the veracity of the autopsy. Then we had Oliver Stones film and the JFK Records act leading to the ARRB and the eventual release of a gigantic quantity of official files (enough to keep researchers going for decades). The Air Force One radio recordings also emerged having been locked away in a Pentagon desk with some very incriminating conversation. Now there is substantial evidence emerging that the Zapruder film itself has been altered and is not a camera original film. Where and how the death of JD Tippit fits into this is a whole new sub plot and mystery. This JFK stuff really is the conspiracy that keeps on giving, every time you think its dying out it suddenly re ignites. Over 56 years the Warren Commissions report has been completely shot to pieces and at the time they said it would be the Rock of Gibraltar standing the test of time. No chance of that in the internet age of information.

    • Allan Howard

      I don’t think it’s so much a case of WHAT happened Ort, so much as what DIDN’T happen, and also thinking about it all in terms of Cui Bono. There are many big holes and implausibles in the official narrative, but if I had to choose just ONE, it would be the inconceivability of two people – who came into contact with a nerve agent several hours earlier (and presumably at different times, unless they jointly closed the front door together) – becoming incapacitated in exactly the same moment, and so much so that one didn’t have the time to call an ambulance before THEY were incapacitated. The chances of THAT happening are absolute zero. They were acting!

      As for JFK, I take it you’ve seen the series The Men Who Killed Kennedy, and Part 9 in particular. I was already most of the way ‘there’, and THAT just confirmed it for me. Anyway, here’s a link to it for anyone who hasn’t seen it:–hA&index=9

    • Tom Welsh

      “It often happens that, if a lie be believed only for an hour, it has done its work, and there is no further occasion for it”.

      – Swift, The Examiner, 1715.

    • Tony

      What really happened is that LBJ ordered the assassination.
      He knew he was about to be dumped as vice president and that the scandal surrounding Billy Sol Estes and Bobby Baker could even send him to prison. That is a very powerful motive.

      It is not a coincidence that the shooting took place in Johnson’s home state of Texas. Johnson and his men planned the route of the motorcade. They chose a route that was about seven miles long when a different route to the Trade Mart was only about 4 miles long!

      According to Evelyn Lincoln, Kennedy’s secretary, Dallas was repeatedly deleted from the itinerary and repeatedly re-instated. This is highly suspicious. The mayor of Dallas was Earl Cabell, a Johnson man and brother of Charles Cabell who was sacked from the CIA by Kennedy following the ‘Bay of Pigs’.

      The head of the Secret Service was James Rowley, a close associate of LBJ. His men failed to carry out its own procedures to protect the president.

      Oswald was silenced by Jack Ruby who was introduced to Congressman Richard Nixon in 1947 as ‘one of Lyndon Johnson’s boys’.

      Ruby later implicated LBJ in the Kennedy assassination (a very dangerous thing to do):

      Oswald’s claim that he was a ‘patsy’ is true and that is why he was killed.

  • pete

    I suppose the fundamental point Craig is making in his excellent piece is that Dawn Sturgess is a pawn in an information war, an attempt to manipulate facts in order to give credence to a particular narrative spun by the government for its own ends. Gilbert Mercier clarifies this perception rather better than I can in his piece in the news junkie post back in March:
    As of writing I am more convinced by what Craig says than by any of the assertions regarding the matter in the main stream media, for this reason I will gladly contribute to the cost of any documentary he may make about the Skripal affair.

  • SIS

    The Skripal event was a total scam, Psyop, perception management operation. The Dawn Sturgess event, a “trigger follow up” event, used to trigger the perception of the public. Such follow up “trigger events” are used all the time by the state and media. A recent example was the “stabbing terrorist” event, again in Manchester last week or so, used as a trigger event to re-trigger the mass brainwashing over the fabricated terror attack at Manchester Arena. (Must watch: Rich Planet documentary on that).

    Skripal and daughter are lving under new identities.

    Dawn Sturgess if even a real person, and not made up, assuming a real person and dead, was likely a victim of a drug overdose, and nothing to do with any farcically concocted nerve agent.

    Critical thinking is the key to seeing through the lies in the media.

    • Ian

      Critical thinking may be one thing. Believing ridiculous websites like Rich Planet is another. A site that believes every terror attack is ‘fabricated’, despite the mass of evidence, believes in UFO’s and all the associated claptrap, and even pegs the Croydon Cat Killer as a ‘psyop’ operation. Lol. This is where internet conspiracy nonsense leads you. To spout gibberish, and believe every third-rate alien monster scare possible. Puts the Daily Star to shame.

      • Tom Welsh

        “A site that believes every terror attack is ‘fabricated’, despite the mass of evidence, believes in UFO’s and all the associated claptrap, and even pegs the Croydon Cat Killer as a ‘psyop’ operation”.

        That appears to be a very fallacious argument – although, of course, it isn’t an argument at all. Evidence? You calim that the Web site is unreliable, but you give no reasons for believing that (other than your opinion).

        As it happens, it seems to me that most “terror attacks” are invented. Just like the “security theatre” we can see around us every day, they are “terror theatre”. What’s more the two are symbiotic: without the terror theatre, security theatre would be much harder to justify.

        That excludes by far the greatest, bloodiest and most common terror attacks: those carried out by governments. Whether “terrorists” perpetrated 9/11 – killing about 3,000 people – pales into insignificance when we know perfectly well who perpetrated the attacks on Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Somalia, Iraq, Iran, Libya, Syria and Yemen – among others – which killed at least 1,000 times as many.

      • George McI

        I had a look at this Rich Planet thing and it seems to me to do what David Icke does i.e. to link all conspiracy theories to e.g. UFO visitation, reptiles from the fourth dimension, ancient cataclysms etc. And any source that tells you “You will be stunned!” sounds like sideshow entertainment stuff. The crop circle section on Rich Planet tells me “The evidence presented will leave you in no doubt…” which prompts me to think, “Well since you have figured out my response, you obviously don’t need me.” When you see all sorts of colourful theories getting banded about, it actually becomes dull. Yes, the moon is artificial, there are other intelligent species living under us, we are living inside a virtual reality generator à la those Matrix movies. (This last is one that Icke has been peddling. He doesn’t seem to realise that it negates the very concept of proof.) The net effect of this conspiracy saturation is to emphasises the mainstream media notion that all conspiracy theory is for nutters (while conveniently overlooking mainstream media conspiracy theories like Russian cyber interference, Skripal etc.)

        • Herbie

          If you do a little research on UFOs, you’ll see that most or all of the stories come from mainstream media, the USAF and film and so on.

          They weren’t created by alternative media.

          They’re fictions created by elite media and associates.

          “we are living inside a virtual reality generator à la those Matrix movies. (This last is one that Icke has been peddling. He doesn’t seem to realise that it negates the very concept of proof.)”

          Thing is, Plato said more or less the same thing. Shakespeare too.

          What they mean is that you’re living through a contrived drama, even playing a part in it, though it’s scripted by others.

          Brexit, and the Dems v Trump nonsense are wonderful examples. Think of the Groundhog Day nature of these three year long dramas. Then look at who’s funding the main players.

          You’ll see similar things going on if you look at who’s funding the rise of the Right and its online media, and their relationship to those funding Left online media.

          And again, you’ll see it in those behind the rise of Right wing politicians in Europe, and their relationship to those who were funding the Left.

          “The net effect of this conspiracy saturation is to emphasises the mainstream media notion that all conspiracy theory is for nutters (while conveniently overlooking mainstream media conspiracy theories like Russian cyber interference, Skripal etc.)”

          Aye. That’s the idea.

        • Hatuey

          Well, Ayer and various others have struggled with the problem of knowledge — can we ever really know anything? — and the bottom line is that it’s up to us as individuals to decide what we will prioritise and disregard, regard as truth and untruth, etc. It’s not something new; sceptics have been grappling with this stuff for hundreds of years.

          As for the idea that we live in some sort of construct invented by the media or whoever, again, you could have said that hundreds if not thousands of years ago. For example, do you think all of those people in medieval times — just as intelligent as any of us — swallowed the God construct? Back then if you didn’t buy the narrative you were likely to be done in.

          If things have changed, then, they have changed for the better. It’s relatively easy to determine what is most likely junk and what is worth looking at too. If they talk about it on mainstream news or the discovery channel, it’s probably not worth looking at. The stuff about aliens is a good example; it’s wall to wall on some of my channels.

          Video is a terribly corruptive way of communicating ideas and I’d suggest it has a big part to play in the apparent increase in crazy stuff going around. Five million people watch a YouTube video about 911 and four million of them convince themselves they are structural engineers for a week or two, using phrases like “controlled demolition”, etc. It’s dire.

          Of course, one of the big reasons video is so potent is because most people are too lazy to read books and devote time to learning. But video is a really inefficient way of delivering information. As s guess, I’d say it takes about 30 minutes of video to communicate about 100 words of text.

          If your only or primary source of information is video or TV, you basically aren’t worth talking to in my opinion. And you’re probably insane.

      • Andyoldlabour


        I agree Ian, you cannot just go around spouting nonsense about terror attacks not really happening, because it is an insult to the victims and their friends and family.
        I was working in London for a large company when the 7/7 attacks happened, and one of our colleagues was badly injured in the tube incident.

      • Deb O'Nair

        Rich Hall does have a scatter gun approach but he is nonetheless diligent, tenacious and persistent. My view is that when you are dealing with mass deception and government lies you are dealing with a construct that has multiple layers of perception. The psyop narratives are crafted so that ill-informed casual observers will be convinced at the slightest hint of the official narrative from the media and then you have something more complex going on for the more informed, questioning types. Some of these narratives are very well thought out and diversions, red-herrings and linguistic traps abound, the point is to convince enough sceptics in order to create confusion and disagreement in which those that may perceive the actualities can be side-lined as one group of conspiracy theorists amongst many. The Rich Hall investigation into the Madeleine McCann affair is a good example of the diligent and comprehensive investigation into a highly suspicious event which has been controlled and managed by the UK government from the get-go, whereas other films I’ve seen leave me wondering why he even bothers – as the saying goes ‘don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater’.

        • Ian

          What is very funny about these kind of UFO/giant lizards sites is that their followers, as here, stoutly proclaim how they can see through all of the mainstream media, and are critical thinkers, and then proceed to swallow the most egregious, laughable nonsense on an internet site, because it isn’t the ‘fake’ mainstream media. No cognitive dissonance there at all, oh no.

1 2 3