1,164 thoughts on “An Update on the Inquest Into the Death of Dawn Sturgess”

1. AK-47 is a Russian manufactured gun-weapon. Once it passes on through sales-resell why
   is it Russia fault if been misused in a crime?
   Guns get copy maid also due a good design-is this still Russia fault?
   You don’t see U.S. blamed for a crime committed with U.S. gun in U.K.?
   Nerve Agent CAN BE MANUFACTURED with Russia parts {porton down}.
   It fits a story.

2. Just so you know.
   I complained to the Chief Coroner regarding Ridley’s failure to carry out his duties.

   This might not paste well into the Blogmire, so apologies.

   Dear Sir/Madam,

   I have many questions related to the ruling by David Ridley, the Wiltshire Coroner made and published this week.
   In my opinion, Mr Ridley is pontificating and delaying, rather than getting on with his job.
   He even states the role of the coroner in Point 6 below yet seems be finding reasons for not undertaking his duty.
   I have specific comments in italics,( the Blogmire has auto corrected my italics, so apologies) which I feel should be addressed.

   One
   Following receipt of a letter from the Crown Prosecution Service (“CPS”) on 15 October 2019 I suspended the investigation into Ms Sturgess’ death pursuant to Schedule 1 Part 1 para 1(2)(a) Coroners and Justice Act 2019

   This implies that Ridley was actually involved in an investigation up to the 15th 2019 date.
   Based on his other comments, I find it very implausible that 15 months of investigation would have lead to so little conclusion on the part of the coroner. Please see Point Eight.

   Two
   It is my view that matters such as why Mr. Skripal was living in Salisbury, Wiltshire and what he was doing insofar as any involvement with UK or other intelligence agencies falls outside the scope of a Jamieson Inquest.
   What is the relevance of this astonishing statement? It would appear to be an admission that Skripal, the retired spy, was actually still working with the UK intelligence agencies. Quite a revelation by the coroner, who seems to have spent less time on determining the cause of death of Dawn Sturgess.

   Three
   It is additionally advanced that the scope should not include questions as regards who was ultimately responsible for Ms Sturgess’ death and/or the source of the Novichok.

   Again, a surprising statement. Does the coroner have evidence that Novichok poisoning was the cause of death? This would seem to pre-empt the need for an inquest if the coroner is already

   Four
   In the address the Prime Minister indicated that the Government had concluded that the 2 Russian individuals under suspicion for the attack on Sergei and Yulia Skripal in March 2018, which also resulted also in the poisoning and hospitalisation of Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey, are Russian Military Intelligence Officers from the GRU and that the March 2018 attack was:
   “almost certainly approved outside the GRU at a senior level of the Russian State.”

   Relevance? Should we include Grenfell or Hillsborough comments from the House of Commons?
   The UK has made no attempt to interview suspects in this case.

   Five
   11 July 2018 – A perfume bottle is safely removed from Mr Rowley’s property in Amesbury. Approximately 2 days later the box and internal wrappings are confirmed to be contaminated with the nerve agent Novichok and the liquid inside the perfume bottle is confirmed as the prohibited nerve agent Novichok.

   Dawn Sturgess became unwell on June 30th, some 11 days later the Met announced they had discovered a perfume bottle on a countertop in Charlie Rowley’s home.
   Three days into the search before the discovery was made.
   11 days after Dawn Sturgess became unwell.

   Six
   “1. Duty to investigate certain deaths –
   (1) A senior coroner who is made aware that the body of a deceased person is within that coroner’s area must as soon as practicable conduct an investigation into the person’s death if subsection (2) applies.

   (2) This subsection applies if the coroner has reason to suspect that –

   (a) the deceased died a violent or unnatural death;
   (b) the cause of death is unknown; or
   (c) the deceased died while in custody or otherwise in state detention.”
   (1) The purpose of an investigation under this Part into a person’s death is to ascertain –
   (a) who the deceased was;
   (b) how, when and where the deceased came by his or her death;
   (c) the particulars (if any) required by the 1953 Act to be registered concerning the death.

   This is my most significant issue. Some 18 months after the death of Dawn Sturgess, the Wiltshire coroner is still vacillating over the inquest and the investigation. By introducing Human Rights and a dialogue with the Sturgess family legal team, and no doubt further appeals, the basic function of the coroner is not being carried out as per statute.

   Seven
   44. Even if I was hypothetically wrong as regards my analysis in the previous paragraph, I have found no evidence that leads me to form the view that the UK state or agents of the UK state “failed to take measures within the scope of their powers which, judged reasonably, might have been expected to avoid that risk.”. I do not realistically see what more the authorities could have done apart from evacuate the whole area which would have been wholly disproportionate to what was known at the relevant time. To suggest that the authorities should have done more is something I am unable to see from what I have been told and viewed. The expression of “looking for a needle in a haystack” comes to mind. The phrase is used to generally describe something that is impossible or extremely difficult to undertake

   Patronising at best, simplistic in reality. Ridley seems to not be aware that the 300+ CCTV cameras in Salisbury must have recorded a vast amount of footage in central Salisbury and undoubtably the Skripal home environs.
   Or he is aware, and in his “investigation” which he suspended in October 2019, he failed to ask if there was any footage of suspects in the vicinity of the skip where Rowley found the Novichok.
   A skip which must have been emptied 6 times between March 4th, 2018 and June 30th 2018.

   Eight
   Whether appropriate medical care was given to Ms Sturgess?
   85. I am grateful to Mr Mansfield QC for raising this issue as I was unaware that it was of concern to his clients. I have discussed the matter with DCI Murphy and understand that it related to evidence given by paramedics concerning an “antidote” that was given to Mr Rowley along with other drugs when paramedics attended him at his home mid- afternoon on 30 June 2018 but was not given to Ms Sturgess. I am unaware from my investigation that there is an antidote as such to Novichok poisoning. I have however tasked DCI Murphy to gather evidence relating to what treatment was given that varied as between Mr Rowley and Ms Sturgess and if there was a reason for that variation to explain why and the impact that difference may have made in relation to the outcome insofar as Ms Sturgess was concerned. Further advanced disclosure will be provided and insofar as my understanding of this issue is correct, I rule that it will fall within the scope Ms Sturgess’ inquest.

   What an amazing question!
   The victim died in Salisbury District Hospital, having received medical treatment by emergency response teams. How could the review and the “appropriateness” of the medical care NOT be an issue for consideration?
   Ridley seems unaware of organophosphate poisoning antidotes, like Duodote which are part of emergency response teams’ treatment for acute Acetylcholine Esterase concentration depressed levels.

   Just how thorough has Ridley’s efforts been in the last 18 months?

   In summary, I wish to formally complain about the conduct of the Wiltshire Coroner in this matter.

   Regards,

   Duncan

   1. Why does Ridley want to see CCTV images of Petrov and Boshirov in the centre of Salisbury ? It looks like he doubts the official version. In fact, Ridley’s task seems simple: respectable organizations like Porton Down and the OPCW have said that Dawn Sturgess had novichok in her blood, so she died poisoned by novichok.

      1. The Russian State now have an excellent opportunity to ensure that P&B are properly represented, that should make for an interesting development.

         1. If the Coroner concludes that a person died poisoned by novichok, is it the duty of the Coroner to tell how the poison was absorbed by the victim ? Is it part of the “how” question ? And is it not contrary to the fact that the Coroner cannot designate a culprit ?

         2. Ridley says (§ 77) « As a result of reviewing the evidence, I have made both Mr Petrov and Mr Boshirov Interested Persons on the basis that they may by an act or omission have caused or contributed to Ms Sturgess’ death. The investigation will include examining their movements in the United Kingdom following their arrival on 2 March 2018 until their departure on 4 March 2018…It will look at to what extent they were individually involved in bringing Novichok to Salisbury and what happened to the Novichok once it had been used in the attack (…) This part of the investigation is essential as, in discharging my judicial rôle and hearing the evidence, I may have to consider whether the evidence supports the finding of a conclusion of “Unlawful Killing” in respect of Ms Sturgess’ death. »

            and (§ 79) : « I am prohibited from determining matters of criminal liability on the part of a named person as this would directly contravene section 10(2)(a) Coroners and Justice Act 2009 (para 18 above). »

            and  (§ 80) : « this issue not only refers to potentially identifying individuals but also linking
            them to a foreign state. The determination of such a link would in my view be a direct
            violation of section 10(2)(b) Coroners and Justice Act 2009 which prohibits me
            determining matters of civil liability generally »

            It seems to me that § 77 contradicts § 79 and § 80.

            And why does he say in § 77 that he might « have to consider whether the evidence supports the finding of a conclusion of “Unlawful Killing” in respect of Ms Sturgess’ death » ? He already knows the answer, since he says in § 79 : « the death of Ms Sturgess has undoubtedly involved the commission of a criminal act e.g. the usage of an organo-phosphate nerve agent which is prohibited under International Law and Domestic Law. »

3. P.25 of the coroner’s ruling
   (available at http://www.wiltshire.gov.uk/community-environment-coroner-service#collapse7_1131311 under ‘News updates – coroner’s decision’,
   direct download at http://www.wiltshire.gov.uk/downloads/21265 ):

   “I have made both Mr Petrov and Mr Boshirov Interested Persons on the basis that they may by an act or omission have caused or contributed to Ms Sturgess’ death. The investigation will include examining their movements in the United Kingdom following their arrival on 2 March 2018 until their departure on 4 March 2018. This will include what is known as regards their movements relative to the March 2018 incident here in Salisbury and in particular the attack on Mr Skripal and his daughter Yulia. It will also examine in detail their movements after they were spotted by a CCTV camera on the Wilton Road in Salisbury, a location which is in close proximity to Mr Skripal’s home, and when they were subsequently picked up by other cameras closer to and in the centre of Salisbury.”

   That would be a first after nearly two years, if someone in a position of authority really examines in detail what P&B were doing during those gaps between the CCTV recordings that were released in 2018. It’s probably wishful thinking, though, to expect any revelations when the Met have so far offered only speculation about what they believe P&B were doing.

   1. Thanks Brendan,
      I am not holding my breath.
      In some respects, Ridley mentioning Wilton Road would imply that the Met have not shown him anything that has not already been released.
      Ridley, like all of us needs door handle, Sergei home, footage.
      In reality, what he really needs is CCTV footage of the skip Charlie dived into, some months after the two intrepid GRU super agents, resealed the deadly nerve agent having poured into a perfume atomiser tossed into a skip which is emptied 6 times before Charlie found….

      Anyway, you get the drift.

   2. Coroner Ridley says he has written to Petrov and Boshirov about the inquest:

      [p. 1] … I have recognised 2 individuals from Russia as Interested Persons under section 47 Coroners and Justice Act 2009. They may or may not wish to engage in the process and who at this stage have no legal representation and have not given any indication that they wish to participate
      (…)
      [p. 2] On 9 August 2019 I wrote to the CPS indicating that I would need to undertake some preliminary work for the PIR in October 2019 and that I intended to write to all Interested Persons (“IP’s”) mid-September 2019. Following the Chief Coroner’s Guidance Note I wrote to all IP’s on 19 September 2019 providing an agenda for the forthcoming PIR;

      He says later that P&B are “understood to currently reside within the Russian Federation”. That’s not very specific, so where did he get their contact address? From Bellingcat?

      It’s actually much more likely that Russia was able to pass Ridley’s letter on to them, but he doesn’t say that. The UK would rather ignore any mention of possible cooperation between Russia and the UK in the investigation. Russia has said a number of times that it offered to arrange for the UK authorities to interrogate P&B, but the UK wasn’t interested.

      Instead of requesting such an interrogation, Ridley makes the bizarre suggestion that the Russian state might investigate a crime which it itself allegedly committed:

      [p.29.] In terms of alleged Russian state involvement including who within the state was involved and the source of the Novichok, it seems to me that the obvious location for this evidence is not within the United Kingdom but the Russian Federation. I also make the point that the two suspects alleged to have been involved in the March 2018 attack and who are believed to be Russian GRU officers are also understood to currently reside within the Russian Federation.
      (…)
      It is open to the Court and it is possible that upon such a referral that it might determine that the Russian Federation examine the alleged involvement of the Russian state including the source of the Novichok, given that the main body of evidence relating to these issues would sit within that territory to the extent that it exists as well as the death of Ms Sturgess.
      (…)
      It flows as a matter of logic, that given also that the Court usually considers imputability and responsibility under the Convention together in relation to an alleged violation by that state, that the Court (responsible and charged with supervising the enforcement of the Convention) could, not dissimilar to Guzelyurltu, find that both the United Kingdom and the Russian Federation have a duty to carry out an effective investigation under Article 2, although what might be required to satisfy an effective investigation may differ between the two states.
      (…)
      To assist with the Russian Federation’s investigation of Ms Sturgess’ death, I do not believe that it would cause an issue to the United Kingdom, if the Russian Federation were to be supplied with a copy of the coronial investigation file which focuses on Ms Sturgess’ death. I would not object to this as it is the same disclosure material that will be provided to all Interested Person’s including Messrs Petrov and Boshirov, much of which has already been disclosed.

      Of course, almost nobody involved in politics or the media in the West would accept the results of such a Russian investigation. But asking Russia to investigate its own alleged guilt does have one convenient advantage: it absolves the UK investigators of their responsibility to travel to Russia to question the suspects and report what they learn. P&B’s testimony on what they were doing in Salisbury will never be heard in a court of law.

4. The Coroner’s Ruling

   https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6Q-T4ZDdBzHZGVickhHRTktLXIzdFNtNG9sNWQtMWFSTXRF/view

5. Apparently, if you ask for evidence, you are completely wrong.
   How did asking for evidence result in taking sides?

   https://news.sky.com/story/jeremy-corbyn-completely-wrong-to-have-stood-with-russia-over-salisbury-says-lisa-nandy-11909366

   It’s more like 1984 than 2020.

6. A new piece by John Helmer concerning the inquest and Ridley’s rulings:

   http://johnhelmer.net/the-houdini-trick-and-the-skripal-case-coroner-ridleys-escape-from-the-evidence-of-the-one-witness-who-knows-the-truth-sergei-skripal/

   1. Paul,

      I read the Ridley ruling.

      “I am grateful to Mr Mansfield QC for raising this issue as I was unaware that it was of concern to his clients. I have discussed the matter with DCI Murphy and understand that it related to evidence given by paramedics concerning an “antidote” that was given to Mr Rowley along with other drugs when paramedics attended him at his home mid- afternoon on 30 June 2018 but was not given to Ms Sturgess. I am unaware from my investigation that there is an antidote as such to Novichok poisoning. I have however tasked DCI Murphy to gather evidence relating to what treatment was given that varied as between Mr Rowley and Ms Sturgess and if there was a reason for that variation to explain why and the impact that difference may have made in relation to the outcome insofar as Ms Sturgess was concerned. Further advanced disclosure will be provided and insofar as my understanding of this issue is correct, I rule that it will fall within the scope Ms Sturgess’ inquest.”

      Ridley does not seem to know very much, having spent 18 months pondering this hearing.
      Note the present tense in the quote above,
      DCI Murphy, Southeast Counter Terror team is still on the case.

   2. Paul, more fantasy from Ridley.
      Remember, this is from a coroner.

      Whether appropriate medical care was given to Ms Sturgess?

      “I am grateful to Mr Mansfield QC for raising this issue as I was unaware that it was of concern to his clients.”

      1. There is an extremely important point that Ridley is trying to avoid.

         Dawn was taken from Charlie’s flat for an immediate brain scan, she had died in the flat, how much brain damage had been done was to be investigated.

         Even if a nerve agent was suspected and a “antidote” available it seems the paramedics arrived too late.

         But the “antidote” given to Charlie would fall outside Ridley’s scope if he has his way.

         Does Novichok have an antidote? What nerve agent did the paramedic think he was dealing with?

         1. Thanks Anonymous.
            Ridley and this discussion related to “scope” is smoke screen.
            “Who, when/where and how” is the only remit for the coroner.
            Correctly identify who Dawn Sturgess was.
            When and where she died.
            How – the circumstances that lead to her death.

            Ridley is acting beyond his own brief. He can and should rule an “unlawful killing”, but how she died is what the inquest is all about.
            For Ridley to claim he was not aware that Dawn’s family, or anyone else for that matter, would be concerned that appropriate medical treatment would be a concern, IS BEYOND BELIEF.

            1. There are several points that caused me to pause:

               1) Page 5 – 4 March 2018 – Sergei and his daughter Yulia Skripal found collapsed on a park bench at The Maltings, Salisbury. They are hospitalised along with DS Nick Bailey and a criminal investigation is commenced the following day.

               He is clearly saying that Bailey was hospitalised on 4 March.

               2) Page 14 – It is of particular note that in the aftermath of the attack the focus was very much on the concern for public safety even more so when a serving police officer, DS Nick Bailey, became seriously ill having somehow also come into contact with the nerve agent. It was later confirmed that he was exposed to the agent when he touched the door handle of Mr Skripal’s home even though he was wearing protective gloves (referred to in the press logs).

               This makes me wonder exactly what standard of evidence Ridley will accept and the source of that evidence.

               3) Page 2 – It is my view that matters such as why Mr. Skripal was living in Salisbury, Wiltshire and what he was doing insofar as any involvement with UK or other intelligence agencies falls outside the scope of a Jamieson Inquest.

               Where had that come from? Presumably a point from Mansfield but it is not stated to be so. What Sergei was really up to is certainly an interesting question but it is very remote from Dawn’s inquest. It makes me wonder whether the inquest is being set up to be replaced by a public inquiry.

               1. Paul,
                  Ridley comes across as a simpleton.
                  He is either very naive, or thinks he can do a Boris, and just blow his way through.
                  This prolonged ( Mansfield will appeal of course) discourse with the family legal team is not his brief as per the statute.
                  It looks as though Mansfield is more interested in compensation rather than uncovering the truth.
                  The Home Secretary is obviously fighting and winning that argument.

         2. Anonymous, you asked : « Does Novichok have an antidote? »

            Here :

            https://www.meridianmeds.com/sites/default/files/pi/DuoDote_PI.pdf

            they say « DuoDote® is indicated for the treatment of poisoning by organophosphorous nerve agents as well as organophosphorous insecticides. »
            If I understand this correctly :
            https://chemm.nlm.nih.gov/nerveagents/FGAMMGPrehospital.htm
            DuoDote is antidote to Novichok.

            1. Inquirer.
               Indeed.
               Deployed for the first time ever in the UK, administered to Charlie by a keen paramedic who immediately realised deadly nerve agent had been involved.
               Part of this knowledge was gained through the same paramedic being at the park bench some 3 months earlier.

               Don’t you just love coincidences.

               1. Duncan, you said :
                  “Deployed for the first time ever in the UK, administered to Charlie by a keen paramedic who immediately realised deadly nerve agent had been involved.
                  Part of this knowledge was gained through the same paramedic being at the park bench some 3 months earlier. Don’t you just love coincidences.”

                  We already discussed this question on this page.

                  You quoted the Guardian (8 July 2019) saying « Rowley was given an anti-nerve agent drug that British crews began to carry at the height of the al-Qaida threat but had not used until then. »
                  (https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/jul/08/revealed-anti-nerve-agent-drug-was-used-for-first-time-in-uk-to-save-novichok-victim )
                  The headline of this Guardian paper is « Revealed: anti-nerve agent drug was used for first time in UK to save novichok victim ». Either the headline contradicts the content of the paper or it means « that was never used against novichok, but was used against another nerve agent. »

                  Thus the Independent(9 July 2019)
                  https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/novichok-charlie-rowley-dawn-sturgess-anti-nerve-agent-nhs-skripals-a8996231.html
                  , when saying « for the first time in UK », contradicts the Guardian, which seems to have a more precise knowledge than the Independent.
                  The Independent quotes explicitly the Guardian, so we can assume that the Guardian is it source and that it misunderstood it.

                  In the same discussion, Cascadian said : « An NBC course I attended in the late 1960’s covered various subjects relating to Nuclear, Biological and Chemical threats which might be encountered in a war scenario. Items cited included an antidote to nerve agents (…) (atropine) (…) My point being that antidotes were issued for use long before Salisbury. »

                  Here :
                  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4767211/
                  we have a 2015 paper « Pharmacological treatment of organophosphorus insecticide poisoning: the old and the (possible) new », whose firs author, Michael Eddleston, works in Edinburgh. It says « We are still using the same two antidotes – atropine and oximes – that first came into clinical use in the late 1950s. »

                  Last but not least : in August 2017, the Daily Mail had an article « British paramedics to start carrying antidote to deadly nerve gas believed to have been used to kill Kim Jong Un’s brother amid fears terrorists are plotting a chemical strike on Britain »
                  https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4824432/British-paramedics-start-carrying-antidote-nerve-gas.html

            2. The inquest may provide the details as to whether the antidote used to save Charlie Rowley was DuoDote®, some other patented antidote (Denise found a Canadian antidote a while back, some $18k per shot/treatment being the order of magnitude iirc and Canadian dollars, I think) or something developed by either Porton Down or whomever in the UK.

               Also, if it was the first time it has been used the the UK, has that compound been used by or on UK forces on (active) service overseas, and/or has it not been used in the UK simply because NICE has not deemed it cost effective.

               All of interest because the UK public has been told by the then PM and the then Foreign Secretary that Novichok is Russian, because anything ‘of a type developed by Russia’ is always Russian, no matter who the producer and/or user of the toxic formulation may be. Yeh, nonsense innit.

         3. To Anonymous

            You are correct in that Dawn was already dead before they made the official announcement about her death on 8th July, hence the need to cover her body in an electric blanket during a heat wave and her family being made to wear thick, orange, elbow length rubber gloves. Even a neighbour and Sam said she looked dead when she was being taken off by ambulance. As for the fake bottle of novichok – it was just that – fake. A story made up by government/military industrial complex to put a spoke into the world cup. Other countries outside the EU aren’t interested because they know what Britain is really like – you can’t trust anything they say.

7. Extremely interesting choice for a barrister, Dawn’s family have made, to represent them at the inquest,.

   “Michael Mansfield QC (born 12 October 1941) is an English barrister and head of chambers at Nexus Chambers. He was recently described as “The king of human rights work” by the Legal 500 and as a Leading Silk in civil liberties and human rights (including actions against the police).

   A republican, vegetarian, socialist and self-described “radical lawyer”, he has participated in prominent and controversial court cases and inquests involving accused IRA bombers, the Birmingham Six, Bloody Sunday incident, the Hillsborough disaster and the deaths of Jean Charles de Menezes and Dodi Al-Fayed and the McLibel case.”

   “In November 2019, along with other public figures, Mansfield signed a letter supporting Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn describing him as “a beacon of hope in the struggle against emergent far-right nationalism, xenophobia and racism in much of the democratic world” and endorsed him in the 2019 UK general election. In December 2019, along with 42 other leading cultural figures, he signed a letter endorsing the Labour Party under Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership in the 2019 general election. The letter stated that “Labour’s election manifesto under Corbyn’s leadership offers a transformative plan that prioritises the needs of people and the planet over private profit and the vested interests of a few.”

   From Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Mansfield

   1. “It is my view that there was no risk at the time of the late June 2018 incident that was known or ought to have been known relative to the public at large and I am satisfied that both Ms Sturgess’ and Mr Rowley’s poisoning came as surprise to everyone.”

      What absolute twaddle, the police did not recover the recepticle that contained the Novichok used in Salisbury, they still haven’t!

      Until it is recovered there is still a very real and present risk to the people of Salisbury.

      Why would the culprits ditch a sealed (back up?) container and not the one used in Salisbury?

      It’s highly likely that another Novichok recepticle is still at large in Salisbury and the Coroner has blocked that line of inquiry.

      That is not his job!

      1. Anonymous, exactly.
         Ridley is going off brief.
         Where and how Dawn died is what he is supposed to focus on.
         Suspects, blame, etc is not what an inquest is about.
         This Feb 18th PIR is going to be a scope definition.

         1. Finally in, the Skripal events, something is going our way. In Dawn’s barrister, Michael Mansfield QC, we have an extremely experienced, anti-establishment barrister fighting, on our side, at Dawn’s inquest.

8. To Paul and the recent posters.
   I would suggest that we turn our focus to the upcoming inquest hearing. Maybe we could have some of our none UK Blogmirers contacting the Wiltshire Coroner to ask for press passes, in order to be able to attend.
   The coroner office is already under the spotlight, and the more publicity we seek, then the better the chances of some light being cast on this sorry tale of delay and confusion.

   On a different topic.
   Why did DSB attend SDH twice?

   Once, sometime after the Skripals were admitted, so see for himself what was going on in his patch.
   Secondly, when he felt unwell having broken into the Skripal home.

   1. I don’t believe that he broke in to #47 and we both know there was no poison there.

      1. Paul, I would agree.
         But the explanation I gave would be defendable and plausible.

   2. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/jan/14/dawn-sturgess-death-novichock-public-safety-duty-not-breached-says-coroner

      1. Wow.
         The plot thickens.

   3. Ridley said he had asked police to investigate why this “antidote” – the coroner’s description – was not given to Sturgess. An officer had the job of “gathering evidence relating to what treatment was given that varied as between Mr Rowley and Ms Sturgess and if there was a reason for that variation”.

      1. Ridley wanting to know about the administration of the “antidote”

         “The attack on Skripal and his daughter, Yulia, in March last year was the first time chemical weapons had been used in Europe since the second world war and put huge pressure on all the emergency services.

         Wayne Darch, the head of emergency preparedness, resilience and response at SWASFT, said: “There wasn’t a plan on the shelf for what we were dealing with. We were writing the book as we were dealing with the situation put in front of us. It was intense.” SWASFT believes the actions of its staff tending to the Skripals at the scene and in ambulances on the way to Salisbury district hospital also saved them.”

         Is Mr. Darch not prone to exaggeration here?

9. Hello All. Please help over Aircraft Transponders. Aviation is out of my league.
   Do Military Aircraft have them and can turn on-off if required eg Fast Jet
   Transport Aircraft Helicopters if a need arises? Avoid identification?
   Could Ambulance Helicopter be part of Toxic Dagger and turned off
   Transponder for exercise?
   While another situation Mill Pub was unfolding under cover Toxic Dagger?

   1. https://www.specializedheli.com/study-blog/2015/1/20/transponder-codes

      1. Thank you Cascadian. Technical stuff but will keep reading it. Can it be turned off
         avoiding contact of aircraft?
         Thank you for help but it head ache stuff.

         1. Dear Anonymous, my qualifications were only ever as a private pilot: never commercial or military. However, though I do know the terminology and have some understanding of aircraft systems (so I have a leg up on what questions to ask) I cannot say for definite that a military pilot in a combat aircraft would be able to disable the transponder as specific item.

            That being said, all the systems in an aircraft are connected to circuit breakers for safety reasons – so, if the aircraft’s pilot had access to the circuit breakers the transponder relied upon for power, then he/she/it/? could disable the transponder by tripping them.

            As to the air ambulance helicopter you would have to look up the specs of the Bell 429 to confirm the layout of its systems and whether the circuit breaker for the transponder was accessible to the pilot. I haven’t looked (yet), but my bet is that it is – after all, it’s based on a commercial design.

            1. Thank you so much Cascadian. A great incite help.

               1. The B429 transponder can be switched on and off in the cockpit controls.

                  There is a video sometime back on this blog showing the start up procedure for that aircraft, the transponder controls feature in that video.

10. So it looks like there were two separated operations on March 4th, One at the Mill and and the other at Market Walk.

    The Market Walk one was possibly part of Toxic Dagger.

    The Mill was an other planned operation, mentioned by Remora and we dont know it’s name yet.

    The Market Walk one was all theatre, The walking couple on video, McCourt and her daughter, possibly the NARU mannequin. This explains why there was such a leisurely pace doing everything for the so called patients, very slow loading of the ambulances, police sent there with pre planned cordon instructions and crisis actors all ready with their stories etc.

    The Mill was the main game but possibly went very wrong.

    This explains the AA helicopter being sent to the main/real operation happening at the Mill and not the Market Walk one.

    The Market Walk one used as a cover for the main/real operation at the Mill.

    What exactly was the main/real operation at the Mill?

11. A story on the ‘super recognisers’

    ‘Meet the gifted individuals ‘super recognisers’ who can NEVER forget a face’

    ‘Super recognisers memorised airline passenger faces from UK ­airports as well as known GRU agents, and matched them to suspects identified from 5,000 hours of CCTV footage shot in Salisbury.’

    https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1226203/gifted-individuals-super-recognisers-NEVER-forget-face

    1. But can those “super recognisers” super recognise the couple on the CCTV in Market Walk? Or would the super recognisers’ handlers rather they kept their super recognition to themselves?

       1. As we know there were two incidents on the 4th March 2018 around the area of the Maltings within minutes of each other.

          Could it be that one involved the Market Walk couple the other involved Yulia Skripal and DS Bailey? (Bailey being injured in trying protect Yulia from being taken somewhere she didn’t want to go.)

          There is absolutely no evidence that Bailey’s hospitalisation had anything to do with what caused the bench couple’s incapacitation.

          1. In fact the evidence suggests that Bailey’s incapacitation was caused by something very different from the bench couple’s problem.

             1. Earlier in the blog, you posted this image of a police tent outside The Mill:
                https://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/newpix/2018/03/06/21/49F05E2800000578-5467051-image-a-22_1520370356448.jpg

                Might Bailey have followed the Skripals to The Mill and stood there waiting while they were inside? Might he have seen the Skripals leave and head towards the car park…. at which point he gave chase… and he got involved in a skirmish… during which he got injured… and an ambulance was called for him? As you suggest, was Bailey the first incident and the CCTV/bench couple the second incident?

                Obviously that is 100% speculation but if Bailey was injured at The Mill, clearly that fact would be covered up. If he was injured at The Mill though, it suddenly makes sense of Theresa May telling the HoC that he was a first responder… only for confusion then to ensue and stories being put about that he ‘wandered down to the bench’ in the evening, or he went to the house, etc. etc.. There is still no credible explanation of what he did, or where he was, or why Mrs May said what she did – perhaps this is the reason why.

                The other oddity about Bailey’s story is that we were initially told that he attended SDH twice. That has never made sense but if he was admitted on Sunday evening because he had been injured (which we have not been told about) and was then readmitted on Tuesday morning (as is claimed) then the ‘two visits’ story suddenly fits as well.

                Repeat: this is speculation but we do need to account for 2 incidents on 4 March and also explain how Bailey came to be in SDH twice.

                1. Remember too that Remora said that there was a second named operation underway that day. In addition to Toxic Dagger

                   1. Was it code named WAFU, by any chance?

                   2. An interesting thought: if there were two incidents in the vicinity of The Maltings, then isn’t it entirely possible that the bench incident wasn’t actually the Skripal incident at all?

                      In which case, the Skripal incident has been kept off radar, out of sight, discrete, and discreetly veiled by the bench incident. (This would be in keeping with the version which places the Skripal active zone in the area around The Mill, rather than near the bench and Market Walk. Plus, it might make fact of DSNB saying that he wandered down to the bench area, after the incident was over). In effect, was the bench incident a (planned?) distraction, a coincidence, or the main event?

                      1. I think the Skripal’s ‘active zone’ always was going to be The Mill, not the bench.

                         In an interview with MK, Viktoria said this:

                         “He [Stepan] also knew her schedule, when and where she would go with her father. That on March 1 they would go to the cemetery, then to the pub.”
                         http://www.mk.ru/incident/2018/04/01/taynaya-versiya-otravleniya-skripaley-sestra-yulii-rasskazala-o-zaveshhanii.html

                         Clearly, March 1 is the wrong date (that was Alexander’s birthday) but why did Viktoria mention “the pub”? We don’t know how far in advance of Yulia’s trip Viktoria says this was discussed with Stepan but whilst a visit to the cemetery is self explanatory, “the pub” (i.e. The Mill) would tend (in my view) to indicate that all 3 of them knew exactly what was going to happen long before 4 March – and it would be the pub, not the bench, where ‘it’ would happen.

                         To confirm that Stepan knew in advance, we need look no further than this:

                         “On March 4 in the evening, when the whole world became aware of the poisoning of Julia Skripal and her father, Stanislav [Stepan] came to the foreman without warning, threw part of the repair money (Julia left them) onto the shelf and said: “I was not here!”.”
                         https://www.mk.ru/politics/2018/03/25/otravlenie-sergeya-skripalya-my-nashli-strannogo-boyfrenda-yulii.html

                         That is impossible! On the evening of 4 March NOBODY knew anything; it was 24 hours later (18:00 GMT on 5 March) that Dominic Casciani broke the news that Sergei Skripal was involved. It was first reported in Russia around 10pm (local time) on Monday evening.

                         So the question is: was “the pub” MI5’s plan or somebody else’s plan?

                         1. Paul, I realised after I’d posted that I was pretty much saying what you’d said; and indeed what you’ve been saying for quite a while now (specifically about The Mill).

                            As for Stepan and 4 March: in theory, the identity of those contaminated on the bench was not known, and it may have been that (as PS Hollingworth said) that the Russian identity was initially established by the police because of a mobile phone with cyrillic script on it. That might suggest that it was the mystery-red-bag-couple as Freya Church claimed, yet it was she who seemed to think that a female some six years older than her was ‘young’, or maybe just young in comparison to her older companion.

                            There’s still to my mind a degree of haziness as to the identies of those found in extremis on the bench … and it’s a pity that post-hoc editing is used to disrupt chronological flow.

                            BTW the side entrance to The Mill, via the car park in Priory Square, has been blocked off now. And the ‘entrance’ on the riverside walk in The Maltings is still very firmly locked – Milda, take note that I don’t think it is or has been a public entrance to the pub; it may be a private entrance, to the upper floor(s) of the building. The sign on the gate still arrows straight-on-and-then-turn-right to get into The Bishops Mill.

                            1. Eleanor, 5pm on 4 March in Salisbury would have already been 8pm in Moscow – if it is true that Stepan went and left cash on Sunday evening, I don’t think it was anything to do with who might have been on the bench. Even if, by some miracle, Stepan had heard about it at 8pm Moscow time (how?), he then had to go round to the flat… it is just not likely is it? And then he vanished, so we can be reasonably sure it was not Monday or Tuesday when he went round with the cash.

                               As previously discussed, I think all Freya said was that the woman was ‘younger’ than the man.

                               Interesting news about the passageway now being blocked. I have video taken inside that passageway, which taken just after The Mill was reopened last year. It had a wooden gate at either end but was about 4-5m wide, so very easy to get through.

                               The gateway/entrance on Riverside Walk is for a completely different building – not for The Mill at all. There are 2 small buildings parallel to The Mill and the gateway is in the one furthest away from The Mill. That gateway has nothing to do with the pub.

                            2. Agreed, Paul, that the what’s in the mk.ru article is misleading and in more than one way. If Stepan’s awareness of what had happened in Salisbury is correct, then the interaction with the foreman probably wouldn’t have been on Sunday evening; but it could well have been on the Monday or the Tuesday. TBH I have no idea whether Russian tradesmen work in the evenings, and would Sunday have anyway been a working day for them?

                               Earlier today, Google StreetView was giving me images copyrighted in June 2019; the unpainted fencing was quite clear from the street bridge. This evening, the images are those from 2010 (sigh); move a bit and yep, June 2019: from a position on the northern pavement, alongside the 1 Bridge Street premises of Fletcher & Partners, Chartered Accounts.

                               On the carpark side, there is a solid stained-black wooden fence (but it may be a gate too).
                               Freya said ‘an older guy and a younger girl’ and I suppose I’d think of Yulia as a young woman rather than a girl.

                               Noted that the wrought iron gate with signage to The Bishops Mill is at a remove from those premises.

                            3. But Eleanor, that is the whole point the story says it was Sunday evening and other stories, from his friends, tell us that they couldn’t find him on Monday, he had vanished! There are only two ways he could have known on Sunday evening:
                               1) It was all pre-planned (which I think it was); or
                               2) he got tipped off, perhaps by one of the team of 6-8 Russians in Salisbury, that the deed had been done (in which case he knew about it in advance as well, which was why he was holding the cash).

                               If you want to go by official ‘news’, the first BBC Russia story naming Sergei came out at 10pm Moscow time on Monday – I would guess the workers had all gone home for the day by then, so Tuesday would be the EARLIEST day… except he was long gone by then.

                               The video I have was taken from inside the passageway, the fences at either end have gates in the middle. The passage way is used to store old gas bottles, empty beer kegs, assorted junk, etc..

                            4. Paul, at the tail end of this strand is probably not the best place to put this, but I find it entirely credible that one party in a relationship will know some of the things the partner will do (when, and even in what order or priority), when the partner goes to stay the family.

                               What was planned? Certainly, Yulia’s visit to stay with Sergei was; that a birthday visit would be belatedly made to Sasha’s grave would be a priority, that imo would be a given too. Stepan would have known this and, especially he had a honeypot component to their relationship, he’s even more likely to know.

                               Were either or both aware that an abduction was being planned, or was it a fear that this might happen? Hours of navel gazing opportunities await …

                               … and did Stepan do a runner because he knew or was suspected his own safety being at risk, or because they’d both planned for him to jump ship as soon or if something happened in Skripalzone or because he wasn’t what he’d seemed (to Yulia)?

       2. Rob, without the shadow of a doubt, there would be a Super Senior Super Recogniser who overseas exactly who the Super Recognisers recognise or dont recognise. lol

          1. oversees

          2. Denise, they are easy to recognise due to the visors they wear. It’s also the reason why they are also called Supervisors.

             1. That’s funny Cascadian

       3. Speaking of facial recognition.
          This was an interesting FOI Request from last year.
          https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/salisbury_skripal_duck_feeding_s#incoming-1329372

          If you read the response, it dismisses the possibility of Porton Down having nerve agent as the UK stopped using chemical weapons in the 1950s.
          I have sent a new FOI based on this response to ask what nerve agent, primate testing, primate deaths etc. goes on as part of US paid research programmes.
          Programmes which would be illegal in the USA.

          1. “it dismisses the possibility of Porton Down having nerve agent as the UK stopped using chemical weapons in the 1950s.”

             That response sounds like unrefined BS to me, Duncan. I recall seeing (on a troop notice board) requests for volunteers for testing at Porton Down during the late 60s. Someone is being very economical with the truth.

    2. Well, I suppose that explains the queue at Specsavers.

12. First we had an OPCW whistleblower, now an MH17 whistleblower has come forward! As many have suspected, it was not the Russians… this leaves JIT in a rather uncomfortable position, which is exactly where they belong.

    “Ukranian Whistleblower Reveals MH-17 Tragedy Was Orchestrated by Poroshenko and British Secret Service. Mythology That MH-17 Downing Was Done by Donbass Volunteers Has Fallen Apart.”

    https://theduran.com/ukranian-whistleblower-reveals-mh-17-tragedy-was-orchestrated-by-poroshenko-and-british-secret-service/

    1. Ironically the only document that isn’t opening / working on the documentary makers website is the one relating to the ‘British Special Services”. Maybe it was corrupted by Juicy (GC) HQ?

    2. Perhaps there are valid arguments in the video (I confess that I don’t know the question) but can it really be said that Vasily Prozorov is a whistle blower ? In fact, he is an agent for Russia. Already in March 2019, TASS had an article entitled “Kremlin mum on former Ukrainian security officer’s statements”
       https://tass.com/politics/1050331

       1. Depends what your definition of ‘whistle blower’ is I suppose.

          We are told that former Lieutenant Colonel Vasily Prozorov of the Ukrainian Security Services, fled to Russia and has now produced a documentary, by drawing on classified documents he attained through his own high-ranking position and those close to him.

          I don’t really understand why you wanted to raise the point but I would call him a whistle blower. If you don’t agree, then that is really up to you.

13. Breaking News!
    Salisbury Journal, working with local police, at last release important CCTV footage to aid the identification of crime suspects.

    https://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/news/18139762.wiltshire-police-search-man-punched-70-year-old-head-amesbury/

    Just not the case we wanted.

14. Chepiga’s driving license photoshopped ?
    Make your opinion :
    https://gosint.wordpress.com/2019/01/05/top-intel-today-2018-stories-6-salisbury-incident-was-novichok-killer-driving-license-photoshopped/

    1. The Japanese public broadcaster NHK has sunk to a new low with this puff piece for Bellingcat.

       https://www3.nhk.or.jp/nhkworld/en/news/backstories/782/

       Bellingcat is a western security services front for the promulgation of ludicrous disinformation to people who are too lazy or stupid to work out the truth for themselves.

       But for Japan to have been dragged into this malevolent deceit is a shame the country doesn’t need.

15. This (anti-russophobia) book :
    Jens Wernicke (ed.),
    Der nächste große Krieg: Hintergründe und Analysen zur medial-politischen Hetze gegen Russland
    fifty fifty Verlag, 4 oct. 2019,
    https://books.google.be/books?id=PGK4DwAAQBAJ
    contains a pretty long chapter on the Skripal case.

    1. By the way, Rob Slane is quoted about the problem “Mills-Zizzi or Zizzi-Mills ?”

16. Anyone living in Salisbury? When/how are they filming the BBC drama?
    Maybe they are going to import tons of snow from Russia to mimic the Beast from the East.

    1. They have a “chief meteorologist” for all 3 episodes. I’m sure they’ll make sure to get the melting slush exactly right! Well I hope at least they don’t make the mistake that Kim Sengupta made recently in the Independent – where he said there was very little snow in Salisbury on the Saturday when P&B had to cut their first visit short.

       1. Is there going to be a meteor shower?

          It might explain a number of holes, so far unexplained.

17. Detective Sergeant Baily,an odd Character within the game?

18. The Russian newspaper Moskovsky Komsomolets (MK) published a new article on Sergei Skripal’s voicemail of 9 May 2019:
    https://www.mk.ru/politics/2020/01/02/raskryto-taynoe-poslanie-sergeya-skripalya.html

    The new piece is an addition to MK’s articles of 23 May 2019:
    https://www.mk.ru/politics/2019/05/23/sergey-skripal-pozvonil-plemyannice-audio.html
    https://www.mk.ru/social/2019/05/23/voskresshiy-sergey-skripal-dostala-menya-vasha-rashka.html

    They were discussed in the thread
    https://www.theblogmire.com/the-sinking-credibility-of-the-organisation-for-the-prohibition-of-chemical-weapons/
    back in May.

    According to the new piece of 2 Jan 2020, on 9 May there was one more voicemail by Sergei, which Viktoria did not reveal when she talked to journalists in May. At that time, she revealed the voicemail recording with Sergei’s greetings for the Victory Day and the voicemail recording without a message but with voices heard at the background. The latter was described in an article by Der Spiegel:
    ……………………………………………………
    …bevor Skripal seine Nachricht am 9. Mai hinterließ, hatte er bereits mehrfach angerufen. Dabei sprang einmal der Anrufbeantworter an. Auf der Aufzeichnung – sie liegt dem SPIEGEL vor – ist eine Männerstimme zu hören, die auf Englisch “Was ist los?” fragt. “Just operators answers” (“nur eine automatische Ansage”) sagt ein Mann mit schwerem russischem Akzent, offenbar Skripal. Weitere Stimmen sind im Hintergrund zu hören.

    …before Skripal left his message on May 9, he had already called several times. Once the answering machine jumped on. On the recording – it is available to SPIEGEL – a male voice heard asking in English “What’s wrong?”. “Just operators’ answers” says a man with a heavy Russian accent, apparently Skripal. More voices can be heard in the background.
    ………………………………………………..

    Now Viktoria let MK listen to another voicemail of 9 May, left at 19:05 (the Victory Day greetings were left at 19:07). MK calls the 19:05 recording “secret” («секретное» послание), though the recording does not reveal anything strikingly new. Its duration is 57 seconds, it is marred with noise, so MK had difficulty making out certain words.

    At the beginning of the recording, a hoarse male voice sounding like Sergei’s voice is pronouncing something like “Oh my god”, then noises are heard and in the middle of the recording someone is repeating some words in English which MK failed to make out for sure: MK’s versions are “I can shut” or “I can show” or “Attention.”

    With the use of a noise-suppressing program, MK also made out Russian words which had been seemingly pronounced by Skripal: “Набери, пожалуйста” (“Dial please”). Closer to the end of the recording, a new voice is heard: someone is speaking Russian without an accent; the voice is certainly not that of Skripal. Russian words are clearly heard: “сложный момент” (“a complicated moment”) and “коллектив” (“a collective”). At the end someone says in English something similar to “out, I said.”

    Viktoria also told MK that she had conducted her own investigation into the sale of Yulia’s car. She found out that the new owner of the car is a man named Valery Rodnishchev. MK says that Valery is “a close friend of Gulnara.” Judging from what is said in the MK piece, Valery is Gulnara’s boyfriend and he and Gulnara visited London together (in this case in March 2018 she was in London not with her “husband”, as it was reported previously, but with her boyfriend). Also, MK found out that housing bills for Yulia’s flat are being paid by someone named V.V.Rodnishchev, seemingly the above Valery.

19. Anyone manage to read this?
    It’s a pay site.

    https://www.independent.co.uk/independentpremium/sergei-skripal-russia-poisoning-a9266836.html

    1. It can be read here :
       https://www.pressreader.com/uk/the-independent-1029/20200103/282132113368327

       1. Thanks Inquirer.
          The usual, non questioning narrative.
          A large team, lots of planning, no one able to kill Sergei.

          1. More than that I think, quite schizophrenic in its delivery.

             The MSM mused, immediately after the US drone attack on the Iranian general in Iraq, what might Iran’s response be?

             They picked on something that did not make immediate sense but Sengupta’s feature helps put the insanity into context.

             The combined MSM suggested that a highly likely response by Iran would be targeted cyber attacks on their enemies.

             Today those fears have been elevated to a hysterical level, here is a very small selection;

             https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jan/03/iran-cyberattacks-experts-us-suleimani

             https://www.forbes.com/sites/kateoflahertyuk/2020/01/03/will-iran-respond-to-general-qassem-soleimani-killing-with-a-cyber-attack/#3259808d122e

             https://www.politico.com/news/2020/01/03/iran-retaliation-qassem-soleimani-093608

             https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-01-03/u-s-officials-brace-for-cyber-attack-retaliation-from-iran

             So the US broke tradition and instead of contacting out a False Flag, they committed the Act of War themselves, they then made up some stuff that the general was planning to kill lots of US citizens (I’m guessing his job description might include that) and now the US are bracing the world for retaliation. Of the cyber variety.

             Not the levelling of the Green Zone, or targeted attacks on senior US military figures or attacks on US Embassies in countries thought to support US foreign policy. Nor attacks on US installations in Israel. No this is going to be an unsurpassed Cyber Attack Retaliation on US global interests.

             It must be the Iranians that WILL do it and the Iranians WILL be assisted by the Russians. That is now a certainty – get down to the bookies, put your life savings on it, there will be global Cyber Attacks connected with US interests. Iran will get the blame along with Russia

             So we know the future (because we have learned from the past). But on this occasion as with the Skripals, Russia will be put in the frame.

             And we know Russia had a part to play in the Salisbury incident but they have never told us what part and what they know of events, they stayed silent then.

             Will it be the same on this occasion? Will Russia have a hand in the “game”, will they be accused again but woefully defend themselves?

             Who will benefit from a global cyber attack that will cause immense harm to the public and shareholders but not the owners of the Tech Giants that will have to defeat this menace. Internet Restrictions will be placed on every www. user in the world and forced payments from every user for the installation of better protection.

             It’s a racket and the global public will pay with increased financial costs and reduced internet access and freedoms. More cyber-surveillance will be forced into every home, work and leisure place, your car, public transport, phone, computer, CCTV, etc etc.

             So I’ll ask again who will benefit the most apart from the security providers?

             I see 3 main beneficiary States; the US, China and Russia.

             I could be wrong but I predict the attacks will begin in the next few days and it won’t be Iran that is responsible, they will however be drawn into a perpetual war unless they escalate it to one of Global proportions.

             The UK will support the scam and the man who the British electorate just handed a large majority in the HoC will see to it that no questions are asked and US foreign policy is to be continued to be unwaveringly kowtow’d to.

             We get what we vote for.

             1. Soleimani was hit while traveling in a car during a publicly announced visit to Iraq to attend the funerals of 31 Iraqi soldiers the US killed on December 29. That changes things quite a bit. It was not a legitimate intelligence based hit against an enemy operating where hit took place, it was instead the killing of a government official who went to attend a funeral and was going to leave the same day.

                Russia has already spoken against the assassination:

                ““The assassination of Soleimani as a result of a bombing in Baghdad, we see this as an adventurous step that will lead to increased tension throughout the region,” the Russian Foreign Ministry said in a statement.”
                https://www.fort-russ.com/2020/01/russia-condemns-soleimanis-murder-and-declares-support-for-iran/

                Today, a spokesman for Iraq’s armed forces said that an order has been issued to restrict all US military activity in Iraq:
                https://twitter.com/halajaber/status/1213467758236581890

                The US is nominally in Iraq at the request of the Iraqi government. There are agreements in place for the US to stay in Iraq, but this action has violated those agreements. Iraq can tell the US to leave. If the US does not leave after being told to leave, Iraq can go to the UN and complain, after which all other countries will be blocked by the UN from offering any assistance to the US at all in Iraq. Turkey has already refused permission for US planes en route to Iraq to land or refuel at Incirlik.

                The US must now wait for the inevitable Iranian retaliation. In doing so, Iran will consult with China. The Chinese have massive investments in Iranian oilfields and Iran is vital to China’s ‘Belt & Road’.

                Bearing in mind that Iran, Russia and China have just complete their first ever joint naval exercise, it ought to be clear to even the most jingoistic American, that they could very quickly end up with no good options.

20. Very interesting piece about the OPCW scandal from Robert Fisk:

    https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/syria-war-chemical-weapons-watchdog-opcw-assad-damascus-russia-a9262336.html

    I have been hoping Peter Hitchens would be writing about the latest Wikileaks material but so far he hasn’t…

    1. Here is a rebuttal (?) of Wikileaks :
       https://feitoffake.wordpress.com/2020/01/02/wikileaks-biased-way-of-quoting-to-suggest-that-opcw-hides-information/
       Not very convincing since they “speculate”. A rebuttal by the OPCW would be more convincing.

       1. Not a rebuttal at all! The main point is that the DRA is specifically not to deal with any non-routine missions, which are described as: “OPCW fact-finding missions, Investigation and Identification Team missions, technical assistance visits, or joint missions with other international organisations.”

          In other words, the DRA is not supposed to hold information on the OPCW’s sensitive missions.

          The author is not saying the emails leaked by Wikileaks are not true, only that they were being stored by the OPCW in the wrong place! He then suggests Wikileaks is ‘biased’ because it didn’t explain this point.

          1. OK, it is not a rebuttal of the content of the documents published by Wikileaks. But some commentators seemed to think that the removal of a document from the DRA was an arbitrary decision of Sébastien Braha, while it seems conform to the OPCW rules. Thus, we should perhaps focus on the other mails published by Wikileaks.
             By the way, Brian Whitaker tries to use these mails in favor of the OPCW :
             https://al-bab.com/blog/2020/01/douma-chemical-weapons-investigation-and-role-ian-henderson

21. It’s sort of appropriate that the future is at the end:
    https://off-guardian.org/2019/12/31/from-my-christmas-conversation-with-spirits-of-the-past-present-and-future/.

    It’s going to be a brave new world, what with Boris’s new law to punish tech giants who publish harmful content – like those allowing comment from “The Russians did it!” doubters, perhaps?.

22. Interesting round up on Steele’s sources – it’s a recent draft Wikipedia article (hidden from search engines) by an accomplished editor who prowls all the Trump articles and maintains there is evidence of Russian collusion.

    Can’t see connections to Pablo Miller or Sergei Skripal, but others may be able to join some dots. There’s also a talk page, which may get interesting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:BullRangifer/Steele_dossier%27s_anonymous_sources

23. Two more medals for the Salisbury Novichok team.
    https://www.wiltshire.police.uk/article/5503/Deputy-Chief-Constable-Paul-Mills-and-Superintendent-Dave-Minty-recognised-in-New-Year-Honours-list

    1. “DCC Mills, who was on his first day in office as the Deputy Chief Constable on 5 March 2018”
       The right man in the right place at the right time.

    2. It would be interesting to know if there is money with all these awards, and how much.

24. The cast list for the BBC’s ‘Salisbury’ drama has been published. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt10394886/fullcredits . The names given for the characters are nearly all either fictional or blank. The only clearly recognisable names are of Sergei and Yulia Skripal.

    There is an ‘Annie Bailey’ in all three episodes who is played by a child actress. The real-life Nick Bailey has two daughters, so the character must be based on one or other of them. Expect a scene with cuddly toys being dumped into refuse bags by a Hazmat team, like in BBC’s Panorama last year.

    There’s also an actor in the role of ‘Air Paramedic’ in one episode, even though the real Sergei and Yulia were both reportedly taken by land ambulance to Salisbury District Hospital. Initial reports that Yulia was airlifted were later denied. But helicopter scenes are more dramatic on TV, I suppose.

    1. I am utterly beguiled by this:

       “Series Makeup Department
       Chris Lyons … special effects teeth: ???? (3 episodes)”

       Link for Chris Lyons on IMDb:

       https://www.imdb.com/name/nm1390452/?ref_=ttfc_fc_cr10

       And when I detach myself from unseemly flights of a/musing fantasy, I wonder if there’s something that none of us has, to date, factored in about the Skripal incident? Having watched His Dark Materials on telly, and now listening to the radio abridgement of The Secret Commonwealth, I hope I can be forgiven for wondering whether the Salisbury equivalent of an armoured bear mightn’t add credibility to the upcoming drama.

       1. There was a Red Dwarf episode featuring the use of buck teeth – the Red Dwarf characters were drugged too.

    2. Brendan, I looked at the cast list.
       Aside from Yulia, who would the other female “stars” be?
       Mrs Bailey, Wilkinson of PHE fame?

       Who are playing the 3 boys?
       How can Sergei be in two episodes?
       I can hardly wait.
       With the next Dawn Sturgess inquest date on February 18th, I wonder if that non event will impact the broadcast date?

    3. Another name has been added to the list of characters in the past few days: Matthew Rowley. That’s the name of Charlie’s brother who gave interviews about seeing him in the hospital and who accompanied him to the meeting with the Russian ambassador. So the drama will deal with the Amesbury incident as well.

25. Hamish has lost the plot! The White Helmets Le Mesurier, killed himself because he couldn’t stand all the nasty things being said about him…

    “The amount of abuse, the amount of ill-placed propaganda, disinformation that’s on social media and the Internet coming out of Russian bots and Syria, Syrian regime, and others was unbearable,” Col. Hamish de Bretton-Gordon mourns.”
    https://medium.com/@caityjohnstone/narrative-managers-claim-white-helmets-founder-was-driven-to-suicide-by-syria-skeptics-90e331483375

    Our opponents seem to be in serious trouble… how stupid are they to come up with such complete rubbish?

    1. Harumph! So a former army officer OBE mourns the loss of another army officer OBE and goes on to attribute the death that nasty internet thingy.

       Why does one survive and not the other? Why would the older of the two be more robust than the other? These and other nonsensical ruminations can be solved by the well known antidote of a hot warm beverage. Plus a mince pie, in case the imagination grinds to a halt.

    2. Instead of reporting on the OPCW scandal, the media prefer to discredit the “Working Group on Syria, Propaganda and Media”. The penalty for the Working Group being the first to publicize the OPCW scandal. True to the motto “Shooting the messenger”.

    3. Paul, one would hope that even the snowflake generation in the current British army are made of sterner stuff.
       Hamish deNoclue has only one agenda.
       Find a way to increase the UK Department of Defence budget, and hopefully win some of the gravy train.

26. What was Yulia’s real job? Courier of ‘buckwheat’? Yulia was resident in the UK from late 2010 until sometime in 2014/15. Most of her jobs seem to have been short-term and there appear to be gaps in her CV. I append a list of quotes from various sources concerning Yulia’s employment – I have only provided links for the Russian articles as the rest are easy enough to find:

    FT:
    She returned to Moscow in 2014 after a long-term friendship turned romantic, telling friends that she had a job at PepsiCo’s Russian operations. The company said she was employed on a temporary six-month contract and left in April 2017.

    Buzzfeed:
    Yulia Skripal, 33, lists her home city as Moscow on her Facebook page. Her cover image, however, is a photo of Salisbury, and she is listed as having worked at the Holiday Inn in Southampton in 2014.

    Sun:
    According to Yulia’s Facebook page, she graduated from Moscow State Humanities University in 2008 and the same year she started a job at Nike. Two years later she moved to London – the same year her dad came to the UK after he was freed in a prisoner spy swap. Yulia’s profile reveals she worked at a Holiday Inn in Southampton in 2014. It is believed she moved back to Moscow at some point after this.

    Guardian:
    After university, Yulia went to work at Nike’s Moscow branch, leaving in 2010, after Sergei was released from prison. She passed her driving test while in England and bought a car. She worked for a while at the Holiday Inn in Southampton, where she appears to have been popular with her colleagues. She returned to Russia in 2014, but continued to visit England often.

    Graziadaily:
    Yulia initially left Moscow to follow him to Salisbury and then moved back in 2015 to be with her boyfriend.

    USA Today:
    Skripal’s daughter worked for Nike in Russia until around 2010, when according to her social media she moved to London, and was employed at the Holiday Inn in Southampton over the summer of 2014, the Telegraph reported. Her social media profile indicates she now works for Pepsico in Moscow, according to the Telegraph.

    Yahoo news:
    Yulia Skripal’s Facebook profile lists her as having graduated from Moscow State Humanities University in 2008 with a degree in Geography. More recently it is believed the 33-year-old had been working in Moscow at the drinks giant PepsiCo. According to her profile, she spent six months working at the Holiday Inn in Southampton, leaving in 2014.

    Heavy.com:
    Yulia’s Facebook page doesn’t contain many public posts but does say she worked at a Holiday Inn in Southampton in 2014 and was from Moscow. In 2010, she wrote that she was a customer operations representative in Moscow for Nike. She moved to London that same year.

    Telegraph:
    Ms Skripal worked for Nike in Russia until around 2010, when according to her social media she moved to London, and was employed at the Holiday Inn in Southampton over the summer of 2014. According to her social media pages, she currently works for Pepsico in Moscow.

    KP:
    Yulia got a job at the US Embassy Information Center. Then she worked in the metropolitan branch of Cambridge International School. True, the trial period did not pass there – the level of sales left much to be desired.
    https://www.kp.ru/daily/26807.7/3842344/

    MK:
    Recently, Julia worked as a manager in the confectionery department of a food ingredients company. According to colleagues, she got along very well with everyone, but spoke sparingly about herself, and mentioned briefly about her father – they say he is a retired military man. Julia complained to friends that it was hard to work, but the salary was quite decent.
    https://www.mk.ru/politics/2018/03/25/otravlenie-sergeya-skripalya-my-nashli-strannogo-boyfrenda-yulii.html

    MK:
    Julia used the car on the eve of her departure to London – March 2, when she went to work in the Krasnogorsk company* for the production of food ingredients. By the way, she held a solid position there – an assistant to the founder of the company.
    https://www.mk.ru/politics/2018/04/18/otravlenie-skripaley-nashlis-broshennaya-mashina-i-taynaya-kvartira-yulii.html

    MK:
    Q – Victoria, our colleagues conducted an analysis of Yulia’s workplaces in Moscow and hinted that all organizations are somehow connected with the United States. Do you admit that this tangled story has an American footprint?
    A – Julia really did work at the US Embassy – but for whom?** After her father was imprisoned, she tried to get “on the ball” and it worked. For some time she worked there at the call center but at the first opportunity she left, because the conditions were intolerable. I know her very well, she is not the kind of person who will indulge in adventures and will transmit some information to her father.*** No, no and one more time no. Imagine, she was the favourite child, very spoiled. She did not like to work. Julia is definitely not a spy!
    https://www.mk.ru/politics/2018/04/06/neizvestnye-podrobnosti-razgovora-sester-skripal-yuliya-budto-chitala-po-listu.html

    Sputnik:
    She added that Yulia could have gone to the US, and that Yulia worked in the visa center of the US embassy in Moscow.
    https://sputniknews.com/russia/201804111063422503-yulia-skripal-political-asylum-unlikely/

    Notes:
    * probably SOYUZSNAB
    ** i.e. she worked inside the Embassy but was employed by a contractor. Probably Teleperformance Russia
    *** What question was Viktoria answering?

    1. The only reason we are given for Yulia’s decision to return to Russia, is her boyfriend:

       “When, Sergey Skripal was exchanged and sent to England, Julia was working as a specialist in the logistics department of Nike. A former colleague said: “We learned that her dad was the same ‘Skripal’, after the spy swap took place. A few days later she wrote a letter of resignation, said that she was moving with her parents.”

       The next five years, Yulia lived in England, occasionally visiting Russia. Then she decided to return to her homeland. “The fact is that she still has a young man here,” said Yulia’s girlfriend, Irina Petrova.”
       https://www.kp.ru/daily/26807.7/3842344/
       [The above is a précis of what was reported, not a full translation.]

       And here is another ‘job’ Yulia started:

       She returned to Russia and got a job first in the capital’s branch of the Cambridge International School, and then as a consumer interaction specialist in the Moscow branch of the international company Avanta Solutions, which provides recruitment services.
       https://www.rosbalt.ru/moscow/2018/03/13/1688313.html

       In 2014 she returned to Russia and worked for the local Pepsi office, then worked for Nike, the Russian affiliate of Cambridge University, and Avanta.
       https://zleva.info/index.php/zahranicni/226-pripad-skripalovi

       So following her return to Moscow she worked for:
       A contractor at the US Embassy
       CIS
       Avanta
       Pepsi
       A food ingredients company

       That does not sound to me like someone ‘putting down roots’… and how and when did she meet Stepan, if he was her reason for returning? Was she unable to hold down a full time job because of her frequent trips to the UK?

27. Knowing our enemy, the 77th Brigade.

    Another office at the 77th Brigade was “more analytical, focusing on creating “attitude and sentiment awareness” from large sets of social media data.”

    “Explaining their work, the soldiers used phrases I had heard countless times from digital marketers: “key influencers”, “reach”, “traction”. You normally hear such words at viral advertising studios and digital research labs.”

    You can see why they so often attack Paul, he is seen by them as a ‘key influencer’

    https://www.wired.co.uk/article/inside-the-77th-brigade-britains-information-warfare-military

    1. Denise, they might have the resources but they are dealing in lies, not real information. All we have to do is unpick their lies, which gets easier as they try to double down and trip over something they said before. Look what a mess they have got themselves into and now they have no way out.

       This is the reason that FoIRs for ambulance times, or when Bailey went on and off his shift, are matters of ‘national security’! They have lied and they know that we know it. If the ridiculous ‘door handle theory’ was the best they could come up with, they stand no chance. They all belong behind bars!

    2. Denise,
       The only person here who “attacks” Paul is me (though I would not term it this way, I just say what I think). And I am certainly not in the 77th brigade, I am not even a Briton. So your remark seems to be strange.

       1. A messiah complex is not a mode behaviour synonymous with mental health, Milda.

       2. One does not wish to aver that someone (else) has missed the point, even when such is apparently so.

       3. You flatter yourself…

          1. https://www.theblogmire.com/an-update-on-the-inquest-into-the-death-of-dawn-sturgess/#comment-32945

             1. Rob was simply asking you to avoid being ignorant.

                “To attack” – take aggressive action against (a place or enemy) with weapons.

                You don’t have any weapons Milda, you are just rude. If you had any real ideas or facts, there would be no need for you to behave as you do – instead, you would beat me with facts… but you can’t do that.

    3. I agree with certain part of your statement, Denise.
       Members of the 77th Brigade or similar units are certainly trained to be key influencers.

    4. I am a little embarrassed, because 1 ° I incline to agree with Milda on the fact that the case of Amesbury was a drug affair (where Dawn Sturgess did not necessarily consciously use drugs); 2 ° I sometimes contradict Paul. Am I therefore suspected of being a member of the 77h Brigade ? For me, all the regular commentators here are intelligent people who make interesting comments.

       1. No need to be embarrassed Inquirer. We dont have to all agree on everything. i.e. I think at some point a NARU training mannequin was used as part of the operation. Not in Operation Toxic Dagger but the un-named subsequent one that Remora referred to, also on March 4th near Market Walk. I believe that it was a mannequin that was said to be Sergei and was in a sitting position and was said to have been difficult to get in the ambulance. Not everyone believes that it was a mannequin,

          Keep up the good work Inquirer.

          1. Thanks for the friendly words, Denise.

28. “RELEASE: OPCW-Douma Docs 4. Four leaked documents from the OPCW reveal that toxicologists ruled out deaths from chlorine exposure and a senior official ordered the deletion of the dissenting engineering report from OPCW’s internal repository of documents.”
    https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/1210561455977893893

    This is bad: according to the e-mails, Sebastien Braha, Chief of Cabinet at the OPCW, has demanded that an engineering report, as well as all traces of this document, be removed from the organisation’s Documents Registry Archive.

    1. MUST READ!!

       Another excellent piece from Catie Johnson:
       https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2019/12/28/medias-deafening-silence-on-latest-wikileaks-drops-is-its-own-scandal/

       “As of this writing, a Google News search for this story brings up an article by RT, another by Al-Masdar News, and some entries by alternative outlets you’ve almost certainly never heard of like UrduPoint News and People’s Pundit Daily.

       Make no mistake about it: this is insane. The fact that an extremely important news story of immense geopolitical consequence is not getting any mainstream news media coverage, at all, is absolutely stark raving insane.”

       And she lays into Bellinghoax:

       “Bellingcat narrative jockeys such as “senior investigator” Nick Waters are already scrambling to perception manage everyone into believing their own eyes are lying to them. Waters has a thread on Twitter that’s being shared around by all the usual Syria spinmeisters claiming, based on no evidence whatsoever, that WikiLeaks is selectively publishing the documents it has to create a false impression of events in the OPCW. Waters falsely claims that an email by Sebastien “Voldemort” Braha — the guy at the center of the scandal — proves that Ian Henderson was not a part of the Fact-Finding Mission (FFM) in Douma, in contradiction to the claims made by the anonymous second OPCW whistleblower who goes by the pseudonym of “Alex”.”

       1. I remember a warning I read some decades ago. It was written on the instructions regarding the use of a pressure cooker – it read something like “under no circumstances should the safety valve, which determines the amount of pressure built up inside the cooker, be fully close. Failure to comply with this instruction may result in an explosion”.

          It is possible that the denizens of the media outlets following the official narrative have never had occasion to use or have even heard of the concept of a pressure cooker.

          Now, I wonder who it is that has been fiddling with that valve.

       2. The germ of the transition of the OPCW from independent scientific body to a a political pawn began before the 2nd Iraq conflict as seen in this forcast here

          https://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/apr/16/iraq.comment

          The piece was signposted in the (single) comment here

          https://timhayward.wordpress.com/2019/05/20/press-release-leaked-report-says-the-chemical-attack-in-syria-in-april-2018-was-staged/

          Prof Miller here

          http://www.bristol.ac.uk/sps/people/445475/pub/200435483

          Braha it seems was instrumental in facilitating the ultimate war crime against Syria.

          But have no doubt; the US, UK and France were not fooled by the Hoax, they created the Hoax.

          The ultimate war crime was committed by the US, UK and France through the corrupt offices of France and OPCW using the whore Braha.

          This Act must not go unpunished yet with the ICC also nobbled by the US there seems justice via democracy and the courts is no longer available.

          The British people have got the government they voted for, expect more of the same.

          1. Monbiot’s journey from ignorance to delusion via stupidity and madness;

             https://www.newcoldwar.org/george-monbiot-and-syria-a-critical-enquiry/

             1. Scott Ritter’s take;

                https://www.truthdig.com/articles/chemical-weapons-watchdog-is-just-an-american-lap-dog/

          2. Braha was appointed 3 months after Douma, specifically to ‘investigate’ the incident. Clearly he went there with an agenda…

             “The French diplomat is an “officer of the Orient” (high ranking official of the French Foreign Affairs Ministry) who was seconded to the OPCW three months after the alleged chemical attack on Douma in order to oversee the organization’s investigation.”
             https://www.voltairenet.org/article208709.html

             The whole story you outlined above reminded me of how Hans Blix was adament that Iraq did not possess WMDs but was not allowed to complete his work before the Iraq War started.

             “”There were about 700 inspections, and in no case did we find weapons of mass destruction,” said Hans Blix, the Swedish diplomat called out of retirement to serve as the United Nations’ chief weapons inspector from 2000 to 2003; from 1981 to 1997 he headed the International Atomic Energy Agency. “We went to sites [in Iraq] given to us by intelligence, and only in three cases did we find something” – a stash of nuclear documents, some Vulcan boosters, and several empty warheads for chemical weapons. More inspections were required to determine whether these findings were the “tip of the iceberg” or simply fragments remaining from that deadly iceberg’s past destruction, Blix said he told the United Nations Security Council. However, his work in Iraq was cut short when the United States and the United Kingdom took disarmament into their own hands in March of last year.”
             https://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2004/03/18_blix.shtml

             1. Braha was involved with French meddling in the OPCW for some time.

                The French were the first to put a question mark against the chemical which was said to have been identified in the Skripal case.

                https://nl.linkedin.com/in/s%C3%A9bastien-braha-22a73328

                1. France was leading the witch hunts

                   https://www.opcw.org/sites/default/files/documents/EC/M-59/en/ecm59nat01_e_.pdf

                   1. “A substance, never declared to OPCW, had been used in a European country. “France will never accept impunity for those who use or develop toxic agents,” he [FRANÇOIS DELATTRE (France)] said.

                      https://www.un.org/press/en/2018/sc13247.doc.htm

                      It should not be forgotten that DSTL were able to identify the substance within 13 hours of receiving blood samples from the victims, how could DSTL have known what the substance was if they or an ally had not previously developed it?

                      And once developed by the UK or an ally why was it not added to the OPCW database. The US had removed Novichoks from their database a decade before.

                      It seems the US, UK and France had all the evidence they needed to justify bombing Syria and accusing Russia over the Skripal affair.

                      No one else in the world had that evidence. They still don’t.

    2. The OPCW scandal is like RussiaGate: it reaches the top floor.
       You have to study the leaks very carefully to understand the full extent.
       Our “quality media” are probably overwhelmed. LOL.

29. In mid-December, the British ambassador to Russia Laurie Bristow talked to the Russian radio station Echo of Moscow. A brief account of his interview can be seen here:
    https://www.urdupoint.com/en/world/skripals-voluntarily-refuse-to-meet-with-russ-789868.html
    “The Skripals are alive, Bristow said, but decided not to meet with Russian diplomats out of their own will, a choice the [UK] government must respect in order to protect them.”

    Viktoria Skripal reacted to the Ambassador Bristow’s interview here:
    https://ria.ru/20191217/1562505783.html
    Aside from expressing her opinion on the ambassador’s statements, Viktoria confirmed that the Skripals had not contacted their relatives in Yaroslavl since 26 June:
    Она подтвердила, что с 26 июня Скрипали не связывались с родными в Ярославле.

    Viktoria said [my translation]:
    “I do not need them to call me. I want him to communicate with his mother. There is a 92-year person [Viktoria tends to refer not to the actual age of Yelena Skripal, Sergei’s mother, but to the age Yelena should turn her next birthday; currently Yelena is 91, as in July 2018, when Yulia called her, she turned 90], she keeps to her bed, she practically does not get on her feet, she is waiting for his call, and I want him to call her. I nurse his mother, but she is not my mother, she is his mother. Is this how he cares about the dear person? Parents may be of all sorts, but everything he has he owes his parents.”

    A couple of quotations from Mark Urban’s book The Skripal Files:

    “At home he [Sergei] and Valery [his brother] were fussed over and cherished by their mother Yelena, who inculcated them with self-belief for good measure.”

    “In Sergei’s case, the triangle of faith and mutual commitment formed by his mother, the army, and Liudmila would prove the foundation of his adult life.”

30. @Remora & “certain non-contributors” !
    You mentioned Donnelly and other IOS.
    Look whom Dalziel is following : a good lead.
    CND Gen list 2 – 22 interesting names. This group is able to plan, finance and execute every false flag in the world.
    Inner Core – Russia : another lead.
    RUSI connects the Inner Core to RussiaGate.
    Howard Body connects Porton Down and military wargaming.

    January 5, 2016 – Gov.UK published its Influence Programme, authored by DSTL.
    March 5, 2016 – Browder and Urban at Newsnight presented the Skripal talking points.
    March 6, 2016 – UK parliament, Subject: Fake news. Witnesses Browder and Lucas have an argument two days after the Skripal poisoning. All players have taken their position now.
    March 16, 2016 – Look who partizipated at putin.com. Browder´s big day…

    @Remora, does Harry (Bimbo) Hart rings a bell ? The Kingsmen ?
    Chester King and his eGames Group ? Stoke Park in Buckinghamshire ?
    Chester, a good friend of Carlos Peres and Charles Filmer.
    Why did Charles Filmer resign on July 10, 2018 as Secretary of MARV STUDIOS LIMITED, two days after Dawn died ?

    1. I am sure you know that Filmer had a small part in the 2014 film “Kingsman: The Secret Service”:
       https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2802144/

       Filmer was the Company Secretary of MARV Studios from 18 September, 2008 until he resigned.

    2. Paul, not only Charles Filmer but Harry Bimbo Hart, Chester King, Nick English, Alastair Macintosh and Carlos Peres too. They all made a cameo in the film as senior members of the Kingsman. It seems they love spy games…

       1. The former President of WAA, Richard Youens, was also involved in the film industry. His career was in film insurance and he was involved in films such as ‘Apocalypse Now’.

          Richard (who was “Mr WAA”) was quietly removed from his role six months after Salisbury.

    3. I don’t quite get the context of this, but I wonder if anyone named has been involved in the production of the Strike Back TV drama? It looks like this was wound down in 2015, on completion of the 5th series, but then got back in to its stride with plans also for a movie version.

       Here’s a link to the fateful 6th series, which surprisingly shows a continuous timetable of broadcasts, apart from an understandable hiatus in December. I understood that the first half of the series ended broadcast late summer 2017, to be resumed early 2018. Maybe these are broadcast times for the US.
       https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1492179/episodes?season=6

       From the IMDb trivia section, it seems the actors had quite a bit of contact with SAS and SBS instructors, and much of the production was done in South Africa.

31. Merry Christmas Blogmirers.

    In an interview with The Mirror, last December, Charlie said:

    “I remember suddenly feeling really ill, then I woke up in hospital and I was watching myself on TV news. About a week later doctors told me, ‘Your partner has died’. I was in tears for weeks, continuously breaking down.”
    https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/novichok-attack-survivor-charlie-rowley-13703922

    Dawn’s death was announced on Sunday 6 July and Charlie is said to have woken from his coma on 9 July. We have previously noted that if Charlie was watching himself on TV for “about a week” before he was told of Dawn’s death, then he cannot have been in a coma until 9 July.

    Now, Eleanor has spotted that on the Sky video from 30 June, Charlie opened and closed his fist when he was being loaded into the ambulance. Here are some screenshots to prove it:

    Left hand:
    https://anonfiles.com/ldp8udIen1/1-46_hand_closed_png
    https://anonfiles.com/36pfufI4n2/1-48_hand_open_png

    Right hand:
    https://anonfiles.com/F1p4u1Ian4/1-54_hand_open_png
    https://anonfiles.com/TapaubI1nc/1-55_hand_closed_png

    Which means Charlie was certainly conscious at that time. If he was conscious when he left his home and he then watched himself on TV, was he ever actually in a coma? What really happened to Charlie?

    On 10 July, Lorna Wilkinson, director of nursing at the hospital, said: “We have seen a small but significant improvement in the condition of Charlie Rowley. He is in a critical but stable condition, and is now conscious.”

    Does anyone still believe anything that SDH has said?

    1. Are convulsive movements of the hands incompatible with coma ?

       “It is certain that convulsive movements are compatible and are indeed generally found co-existing with coma” (John Forbes, The Cyclopaedia of Practical Medicine, 1833, p. 230, left column
       (https://books.google.be/books?id=QJtUAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA230 )
       Of course, this is an old source.

       According to the French Wikipedia, convulsions can be followed by coma :
       “Certaines maladies, ou des empoisonnements (dus à des « convulsivants » (ou « convulsifiants »), tels que alpha-Chloralose, crimidine, strychnine …) entrainent des convulsions, pouvant parfois conduire au coma ou à la mort.”
       https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convulsion

       1. “Are convulsive movements of the hands incompatible with coma ?”

          Have you watched the video, Inquirer?

          Those were not convulsive movements, they were deliberate and slow movements where the patient (assumed to be Charlie – is there confirmatory evidence of it?) slowly clenched his left hand (what I saw) then fully extended his fingers before clenching them again. Does that seem to you like the result of convulsions? And, if Charlie had really been subjected to contamination by a nerve agent then his actions are inconsistent with what I was taught, as a student on an NBC course in the late 60s, to expect as symptomatic of being contaminated by a nerve agent – in that I was told that I would lose control of my bodily functions and in particular, muscular control. We know from what has been revealed previously on this blog that one effect is that the muscles are prevented from releasing – so how would Charlie be able to fully extend his fingers ??

       2. I don’t think these are ‘convulsive’ movements of the hand. Watch the video from 1 min and 40 seconds. Charlie’s hand is clearly visible and steady. You will see him open his left hand around 1:46. The gurney is then turned around and as it is being reloaded, Charlie’s right hand is clearly visible with out-stretched fingers and at 1:58 he makes a fist.

          ‘Convulsive’ means violent and uncontrollable – that is the opposite of what we see. Charlie has control of his forearm and hand (both are slightly raised) and he makes a deliberate hand gesture.

          1. You can download a copy of the relevant clip here:
             https://anonfiles.com/HbQ78cIanb/SkyNews_clip_30_June.mp4-_mp4

             1. Thanks for the clip, Paul.
                But Google finds “slow convulsive movements”. In one result, they are called “athetosis”. And look at here : “Athetosis may occur as a manifestation of basal ganglia diseases or DRUG TOXICITY. ”
                (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/medgen/2115 )

                1. Inquirer, from your link:
                   “resulting in continuous slow, sinusoidal, and flowing involuntary movements”

                   We don’t see that either. All I see are a couple of examples of someone opening and closing their hand – it is neither a ‘violent’ nor ‘continuous’ movement. I certainly do not think it looks ‘uncontrollable’ or ‘involuntary’.

                   What do others think?

                   1. In expectation of other opinions, I add some elements.

                      According to the French Wikipedia
                      https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ath%C3%A9tose
                      athetosis can be caused by the “syndrome anticholinergique”.
                      And according to
                      https://www.centreantipoisons.be/professionnels-de-la-sant/articles-pour-professionnels-de-la-sant/intoxications-aigu-s-et-antidote-1
                      the “syndrome anticholinergique” can be caused by atropine.
                      And according to
                      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nerve_agent
                      atropine is an antidote to… nerve agents.

                      Thus, it is perhaps true that an antidote against nerve agents was administered to Charlie Rowley before he was admitted to hospital ? Of course, this doesn’t prove that he had been intoxicated by a nerve agent. And yes, as Annymous asked : if an antidote against nerve agents was administered by a paramedic, how is it possible that the hospital diagnosed drug overdose ?

                      1. https://www.healthline.com/health/athetosis
                         Athetosis is a movement dysfunction. It’s characterized by involuntary writhing movements. These movements may be continuous, slow, and rolling. They may also make maintaining a symmetrical and stable posture difficult.
                         With athetosis, the same regions of the body are repeatedly affected. These typically include the hands, arms, and feet.

                         https://www.healthline.com/health/athetosis#causes
                         Drug toxicity
                         Drugs that increase levels of dopamine in the brain may damage the basal ganglia and cause symptoms of athetosis.

                         https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dopamine
                         Cocaine, substituted amphetamines (including methamphetamine), Adderall, methylphenidate (marketed as Ritalin or Concerta), and other psychostimulants exert their effects primarily or partly by increasing dopamine levels in the brain by a variety of mechanisms.
                         …………………………………………………

                         The above fits with the scenario where Dawn and Charlie took drugs from a new batch which turned out to be rogue. Dawn took a tablet thinking that it was a pain reliever. That morning, 30 June, she had a bad headache (see Sam Hobson’s interviews).

                   2. If I understand this correctly, athetosis (in its variety choreoathetosis) is not usually a consequence of opioid (should I say opiate ?) overdose, but it can :
                      “Choreoathetoid movements associated with rapid adjustment to methadone.
                      Choreatiform hyperkinesias are known to be occasional movement abnormalities during intoxications with cocaine but not opiates. This is a case report of euphoria and choreoathetoid movements both transiently induced by rapid adjustment to the selective mu-opioid receptor agonist methadone in an inpatient previously abusing heroine and cocaine.”
                      (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9754849 )

                      Well, Charlie Rowley took methadone and was “an inpatient previously abusing heroine”…
                      A possibility : the story of the antidote administered by the paramedic was invented in order to reject the explanation of the athetosis of Rowley as a reaction to methadone : it wasn’t methadone, it was the atropine in the antidote.

                   3. Other quotations in the same sense.
                      Here :
                      https://stanfordmedicine25.stanford.edu/the25/im.html
                      we read :
                      [QUOTE]
                      Other drugs associated with hyperkinetic movement disorders include (…) methadone, and fentanyl.
                      [/QUOTE]
                      And what are ” hyperkinetic movement disorders” ? Well,
                      “Hyperkinetic movement disorders (HMDs) are characterized by excessive abnormal involuntary movements. Hyperkinesias that frequently present in practice include athetosis (…)”
                      (https://now.aapmr.org/hyperkinetic-movement-disorders-including-dystonias-choreas/ )

                      Were the movements of the hands of Rowley precisely athetosis, or another hyperkinesia ? In any case, it seems to me that they can be explained as an effect of methadone.

                   4. By the way, it was said that Skripal was doing “strange hand movements” : athetosis caused by fentanyl ?

    2. What if the bad guys (MI56) arranged to have Charlie put into an induced coma, on arrival at SDH, for a few days, to support their, ‘the reckless Russians’ did it story?

       1. Why bother with a coma? Put him in a hospital bed, give him a TV and get SDH to lie about his condition – job done!

          Remember what Charlie’s brother (Matt) said in a BBC interview: “he’s fit” “he’s alright”:

          https://skwawkbox.org/2018/07/06/video-bbc-ignores-amesbury-brother-hes-fine-im-not-sure-how-he-got-involved-with-that-lot/

32. Fellow Blogmirers.
    Trust me, if I was a member of an elite team of assassins,then:

    1) You would not know who I am.
    2) I would not be in a team of 8.
    3) My targets would be dead.
    4) The fake ID I used in 2015, I would not be using in 2018.

    https://www.rferl.org/a/bulgarian-poison-probe-russian-spy-chief-snovichok-attack-skripals/30334479.html

    1. It would appear that they are suggesting that the Bulgarians are completely incompetent:

       “Bulgaria’s initial 2015 investigation was closed without finding evidence of any substance that has been banned by the Chemical Weapons Convention (OPCW).

       But Novichok was a relatively unknown chemical warfare agent until the failed 2018 attack on the Skripals.”

       Apart from the fact that Novichok was of course known in 2015 (to many countries) did the Bulgarians fail to find any trace, or did they find it but then decide to do nothing? If they suspected an unscheduled compound would they not have called in the OPCW?

       The article is risible – I can’t imagine the Bulgarians are very happy about it.

33. To answer your questions:

    “Hi Remora, IF your credentials are verified, what are you proposing / hoping to come out from this contact?”

    I propose nothing. Maybe you should consider other reasons for my posting here. Perhaps I address my posts to certain non-contributors here, who follow closely but remain silent. Perhaps they need to know that some of us know the truth that they’ve been struggling to conceal for so long.

    “a small English town of name beginning with the letter B”… sounds like you have the A to Z of what happened… do you want to compare notes?”

    I would if I was somebody seeking information, but I am not. I/we have enough information to know what happened in March 2018, even though the locations of certain key player/s are still unknown to us.

    Yes, there were two responses to the two incapacitated Russians, at 1615 and 1624. Did Col McCourt make the silent call that initiated the first?

    Inquirer said:

    “Could it be that the hospitalized man and woman were actually under the influence of fentanyl? There would then be two possibilities: 1 ° the Skripals were under the influence of fentanyl and were hospitalized; 2 ° the hospitalized couple were not the Skripals”.

    Answer is 2 °.

    I can add that NARU involvement was part of the extended Toxic Dagger exercise (which had its own separate code name) and that very soon after the UK plan failed an emergency meeting took place between Sedwill, Donnelly and others to hurriedly plan new disinformation operation.

    Buckwheat and bay leaves are easily obtainable in UK health shops. Russian buckwheat is easily obtainable in London. Gulnara had no need to bring these from Russia, nor was she the Russian woman with red bag.

    1. Remora, Are you willing to help us? Three questions, one for each of the key players, if I may:
       1) Did the helicopter pick up anyone at Distillery Farm?
       2) Are either of the Russians found on the bench still in the UK?
       3) Did Skripal visit Glushkov before he left the UK?

       I have a source for one of those questions so interested if you can confirm.

       1. Sorry, phrased that badly! I meant, are you willing to continue helping us?

    2. Hello Remora,
       You seem well connected, and your posts are usually insightful.
       If the hospital couple were not the Skripals, then why were other people substituting for them needed?
       I know Paul and some others are convinced that the Skripals were not admitted, but I don’t understand the need for anyone to be taken to SDH in their place.
       To remove Yulia and Sergei, either to kill, or make them disappear, would not need this level of complexity.
       Two victims in SDH only helps the UK government claim and “Bad Russia” narrative.
       If that was the only intention of the piece, then it could be accomplished in a simpler fashion.
       Therefore, there must have been two actions taking place on Sunday March 4th.

    3. ““a small English town of name beginning with the letter B””

       Hello Remora, I’ve been pondering, since first you offered this nugget.

       My thoughts are that, if it’s a small town (and what is a small town, is it a town with a population of around 10k or under?) then it’s notionally a smaller haystack in which to hide a needle; or it would be, unless a significant proportion are covered by the restrictions and ethos of the OSA or similar.

       Speculating further, the wider Salisbury area would be ideal, not least because the local population have already clearly demonstrated that they know when and how to be discreet.

       I have a notion that if either or both of the … erm … rebadged Skripals are still … in England … then a familiar locale and in plain sight could have much to commend it.

       Even if this is not so, is this reasonable speculation? I have not ever commented on a anonymous post much earlier this year, which hinted where at least one of them was (at that time).

    4. Thanks for your insightful comments, Remora.

       One thing that puzzled me from one of your previous comments back in August, was that you suggested that something happened at The Mill pub that threw a spanner in the works of the original plan. I have long believed this to be the case, but I now believe I was mistaken in thinking that something was meant to happen at that place as part of the original plan.

       I have now come to believe that the reason the Metropolitan police have insisted the Skripals were in Zizzis from 14:20 – 15:35 was because this was indeed in the original plan. What scuppered it, was that he and his daughter were called away from Zizzis to The Mill (perhaps through prior waring), hence the scene in that restaurant where Mr Skripal demanded the bill with the main course. In other words, they were not meant to be in The Mill at all, and instead of walking through Market Walk at around 15:40, they were already in The Mill, where something happened.

       Your thoughts on this would be of interest.

       Best wishes,

       Rob

    5. Dear Remora, companion of Sharks,

       You say you know what happened, but why are you so coy about your (implied) inside knowledge? IF, as you imply, you do know what happened, then why not share your knowledge? I am quite sure that you are aware of our collective aching desire to know the truth of the happenings in Salisbury and Amesbury and, crucially, why FFS! Why!!

       I’ve been convinced, for some time now, that we humans (how strange that the word ‘humanitarian’ is derived from the label that supposedly describes us – barbarian would be much closer) are nothing but creatures minimally evolved (that thin, very thin, veneer of intelligence) from a precursor to the apes, and yet we seem to be regressing rather than advancing beyond that primitive watermark.

       So, please enlighten us with your inside knowledge, and perhaps convince us that we are more than just apes with a messiah complex.

    6. Hi Remora,

       It is clear from your postings that you are confident that you know a great deal about what went on, and I don’t doubt that much of your confidence is well founded. However, on at least one important point I am equally confident that you are incorrect. I can’t presently say what that important detail is, which was posted on a previous article, but I would imagine that by know you have revised your thinking and corrected your error.

       Best wishes,

       Rob

34. I have an unusual theory – and I want to stress that it is nothing more than that – that Yulia Skripal herself might have been the poisoner. I first formulated this idea in the Summer. Respectful discussion of the issues raised is requested.

    I have never believed that “Novichok” or any other nerve agent was involved in the poisoning of the Skripals. Initial reports suggested Fentanyl and that still seems the most likely poison to me.

    Yulia Skripal, when interviewed after the poisoning had a tracheostomy scar. This is not consistent with nerve agent poisoning. Nerve agents are extremely toxic chemicals which poison by (paraphrasing wikipedia now) “disrupting the mechanisms by which nerves transfer messages”. So you can be asphyxiated by the action of a nerve agent simply because your chest muscles are unable to move. The muscles can only move in response to nerve impulses which are blocked. A tracheostomy is not going to get rigidly paralysed chest muscles moving. The antidotes to nerve agent poisoning are other chemicals, not surgery. And they must be administered very quickly.

    To me it makes no sense at all that a third party would carry out an assassination attempt on Sergei Skripal’s life while Yulia was visiting him. Yulia could alert her father if someone was seen approaching. She herself could be an unintended victim – and complication. (As she apparently is, of course). Any serious assassin would surely wait until she went home to Russia before making an attempt on Sergei Skripal’s life.

    The fact that there are no leads other than these two Russian men is also suspect IMO. They don’t look like professional hit men to me, they looked terrified when interviewed by RT and they were never seen anywhere near the Skripals. Their story of wanting to visit Salisbury is almost too ludicrous not to be true! A professional hit squad would surely have had a better cover story.

    Why would Yulia want to kill her father? Her mother and brother are both dead. Her father was a respected military man who brought great shame on his family when he was unmasked as a traitor. Russians are extremely proud of their country. I think Yulia would have suffered greatly due to her father’s fall from grace.

    I am only speculating that it was her, but I feel that it is possible that she intended to kill her father and then herself. This may also explain why she was tight lipped about the circumstances of the poisoning in her interview. The poison may have been administered at the bench in Salisbury city centre shortly before they were found. If the British military were following then it may be that they had reason to suspect that Yulia was planning something like this.

    Personally I think that Dawn Sturgess and Charlie Rowley had nothing to do with it. They and everything that has happened since 4th March 2018 has IMO been a smokescreen to divert the public’s attention away from the scene of the poisoning, which I believe was the bench in the centre of Salisbury where the Skripals were found.

    1. Anonymous London, you said :

       [QUOTE]
       Yulia Skripal, when interviewed after the poisoning had a tracheostomy scar. This is not consistent with nerve agent poisoning. (…) A tracheostomy is not going to get rigidly paralysed chest muscles moving. The antidotes to nerve agent poisoning are other chemicals, not surgery.
       [/QUOTE]

       Well, in Elspeth J. Hulse, James D. Haslam, Stevan R. Emmett and Tom Woolley, “Organophosphorus nerve agent poisoning: managing the poisoned patient”, British Journal of Anaesthesia, 123 (4): 457-463 (2019, p. 460-461), we read :

       [QUOTE]
       The duration of intubation and ventilation will be determined by the above, and the strength of the patient’s respiratory muscles. If intubation is prolonged, tracheostomy formation mayprove useful on the ICU [= Intensive Care Unit, I presume.
       [/QUOTE]
       (https://bjanaesthesia.org/article/S0007-0912(19)30401-5/pdf )

       Perhaps you will object that author James D. Haslam is from Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Salisbury NHSFoundation Trust, Salisbury, UK, and author Stevan R. Emmett from Defence Science and Technology Laboratory, Wiltshire, UK, i.e. Porton Down…

    2. Anonymous London
       Fentanyl kills people. It is too dangerous to use. The dose response data does not exist,
       BZ is a better and well studied incapacitant, especially if you want witnesses and onlookers to think a nerve agent has been deployed.

35. The New York Times reports today on another failed Russian assassination attempt by means of spraying poison on door handles. But this one happened in Bulgaria in 2015 and the door handles were on cars, not houses, and the alleged door handle poisoning is purely a suspicion.

    “In the garage, prosecutors discovered grainy surveillance video that showed a well-dressed figure approaching Mr. Gebrev’s gray Nissan, as well as the cars owned by Mr. Gebrev’s son and by the production manager. The figure appears to smear something on the handles of all three cars. Western intelligence officials have surmised that the substance was a poison.”
    https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/22/world/europe/bulgaria-russia-assassination-squad.html

36. THE AMESBURY EMERGENCY CREW

    Pictures say more than words. That’s why I created a visual assignment of the crew members :
    https://ibb.co/vZQC4ms
    https://ibb.co/pdyxL9f
    https://ibb.co/BBL0z58
    https://ibb.co/ZS7h88M

    DAWN CREW :
    2 Air Ambulance Paramedics (Woman and man)
    1 NARU Paramedic in a Standard Ambulance Uniform.

    CHARLIE CREW :
    2 NARU Paramedics in protective gear, South Central Ambulance Service, Incident Respond Unit.
    Ian Parsons was the leader of this crew.
    2 Wiltshire Police Officers

    KEITH MILLS :
    Keith Mills is not seen in the pictures.
    But some photos show that two NARU South Central Ambulances attended Charlie´s incident.
    Keith Mills could have been inside Charlie´s flat to collect identification documents and evidence like syringes, drugs and so on.
    Maybe that´s the reason why Mills´ private Audi had to be destroyed.
    Isn´t it a joke that on July 9, 2016, one day after meeting with Sajid Javid, Keith Mills´white Audi was seized by military personal ?
    Most probably Mills used his car to drive from Swindon to Salisbury for the meeting.
    Mills shook hands with Javid, although he „got bodily fluids on him, but he had been checked over by doctors and given the “all-clear”. His car and his clothes were being taken to the government laboratory at Porton Down to be destroyed.“
    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-44779969

    YES, Wiltshire Air Ambulance is part of NARU !
    You can see the NARU logo in this article :
    https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/986497/amesbury-poisoning-latest-news-swindon-salisbury-novichok-dawn-sturgess-charlie-rowley

    CONCLUSION :
    National Ambulance Resilience Unit (NARU) personnel were present in all three accidents (Skripals, Dawn, Charlie).
    Is that a coincidence ? Hard to believe.
    NARU personnel were seen in a lot of decontamination efforts in Salisbury and Amesbury.

    1. You can also see Mills’ house, its the one without the roof.

    2. Liane, In your last image, you identify the very large paramedic (with open hazmat gear!) as #7 in your first image. But look at your first image again – #7 is one of the smallest people in the picture! Not 100% but I think he is Dan Avery:
       https://twitter.com/DanAveryActor/status/1015939576857268225

       1. Paul, the “very large” paramedic is smaller than Ian Parson (as he is in the video too).
          To compare the sizes, please consider that the back rows are on a pedestal.

          @Anonymous – lots of Freedom of Information Requests were made, with near zero results.

          1. Liane,

             Look at the size of him!
             https://e3.365dm.com/18/07/2048×1152/Ut_HKthATH4eww8X4xMDoxOjA4MTsiGN_4353621.jpg

          2. Ian Parson bowed his head in your picture, Paul. But he’s the tallest of the four.
             Police officer 2 (the taller of the two) has about the same size than the other paramedic.

             1. Liane, sorry but I do not agree! In the team shot Ian Parsons is by far the tallest.

                Here is another video, you can download it and examine it frame by frame:
                https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5919101/Dramatic-footage-emerges-man-foaming-mouth-novichok-exposure.html

                It is not the same as the Sky video and there are not many clips that have both of them in the picture but if you closely look at the first few seconds you can see the top of Ian’s head but the one on the right looks taller to me – the top of his head is out of shot. I know all about angles and bending over etc. but I think Ian is not as tall as the other guy.

                Never mind how tall they are, look at how they each fill the hazmat suits! Ian looks fine, the other guy looks like he is going to burst out!

       2. Paul, I’m so confused, you know everything that happened. What satisfaction does it bring you to play along pretending you’re discovering new things along with the rest of us. It’s like a mad man creating a problem only to have the satisfaction of solving it. Why was skripal scared? Who attempted to really poison him? And then who / how did he get saved? Just answer that and then you can continue the irrelevant ambulance crew discussions and just play along.

          1. Just ignore this Paul. Its most likely a 77th Brigade alt media blog disruption play.

             1. Oddly enough, I was thinking exactly the same thing.

                1. Its a case of ‘great minds’ Cascadian. lol

             2. Denise,
                My guess is that the 77th Brigade are pleased with your comment.

                1. I’m not so sure Milda, the 77th hate any sort of exposure, it weakens their effectiveness.

    3. Make a Freedom of Information Request

       https://www.swast.nhs.uk/welcome/foi-key-documents/making-a-freedom-of-information-request

       Directly or at

       https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/

    4. Liane said : “National Ambulance Resilience Unit (NARU) personnel were present in all three accidents (Skripals, Dawn, Charlie). Is that a coincidence ? Hard to believe.”
       Yes, hard to believe.
       I don’t know if it was noted on BlogMire, but NARU is an anti-terrorism agency :
       “The work of NARU helps ambulance services remain prepared and equipped to respond to major, mass casualty incidents involving terrorism in the UK.”
       (https://naru.org.uk/overview/threat-level/)
       And note that the page links to MI5.
       How could they know immediately that the Skripal case involved “terrorism” ?

       1. Inquirer, indeed, it´s all very odd.
          Lots of questions… for example :
          1. The paramedic who left the helicopter and did not return.
          a) Did he manage to catch up the ambulance that transported Sergei ?
          That would mean Mark Urban´s timing is wrong.
          I believe he accompanied Sergei to the hospital.
          b) If not, who collected him ?
          c) Why was the helicopter so late ?
          d) Did the ambulance crew at the bench wait for this paramedic ? Who ordered it ?

       2. Inquirer, you are suggesting that because NARU reponds to terrorism incidents, and they responded to the Skripal incident, that this means someone knew ahead of time that the Skripal incident was planned and NARU were involved.

          To help test that hypothesis, it would be useful to know how many and what type of incidents has NARU attended in 2017/2018/2019. Essentially, we want information to help us work out whether NARU respond only to terrorism incidents (in which case their attendance at the Skripal incident is suspicious), or whether they respond to any medical incidents (in which case them attending the Skripal one was a coincidence)

          1. Yes, SayLess, you are right, it would be useful to know precisely what type of incidents NARU attended in 2017/2018/2019. Perhaps better “enquirers” than me will find interesting informations ?

             1. Many questions answered here

                https://naru.org.uk/

             2. Incident Response Unit (IRU)
                Incidents involving Chemical, Biological, Radiological or Nuclear (CBRN) materials or other Hazardous materials.
                https://naru.org.uk/what-we-do/the-interoperable-capabilities/

                1. Thanks Anonymous and Liane. It seems that NARU deals with “major incidents”. I don’t know if NARU was on the scene immediately when the Skripals had their seizure. In the affirmative, how did they know immediately that the Skripal case was a “major incident” ? Same question for the hospitalization of Dawn Sturgess…

                2. In fact, I see that Anonymous had already asked my questions here :
                   http://www.theblogmire.com/in-memory-of-dawn-sturgess/

    5. I don’t see how Ian Parsons could be in NARU. The only job description for him that I’ve seen is Lead Paramedic with SWASFT. The logo on his uniform is indeed different to that on other SWASFT employees, but it says ‘NHS Ambulance Service’ – that was introduced a couple of years ago as part of a cost-cutting measure by making uniforms the same for all regional ambulance services.
       https://i.ibb.co/XC8Tz8K/BBC-Ian-Parsons.jpg
       http://emergencyservicestimes.com/new-national-ambulance-uniform-will-save-nhs-3-4m/new-nhs-ambulance-service-crest/
       http://emergencyservicestimes.com/new-national-ambulance-uniform-will-save-nhs-3-4m/

       It’s also unlikely that the Wiltshire Air Ambulance logo in that Daily Express image is from NARU. It’s probably an old photo from the time when Great Western Ambulance Service ran Wiltshire Air Ambulance (until 2011).

    6. Liane, please could you post the pics showing the South Central Ambulance Service Ambulances

       Thanks

       1. Here :
          https://www.spirefm.co.uk/news/local-news/2622250/incident-at-amesburys-archers-gate/

          1. Thanks Liane

             As you know SJ are not reliable with their update times and dates but it seems there was a big fuss on the evening of the 30th and it appears a Major Incident was declared and NARU most likely got involved

             Incidently a South Central Ambulance Service (SCAS) Incident Support Vehicle was photographed early on outside the Mill re the Salisbury Incident, the same (or similar to the SJ SCAS vehicle) was also photographed outside Prezzos when they had their Novi hoax.

             For sure a decontamination system was brought in from Swindon by the Fire Brigade on the 30th

             https://twitter.com/skwawkbox/status/1015222698052608002

             An assortment of clips (not all relevant)

             https://www.gettyimages.co.uk/videos/amesbury?phrase=amesbury&sort=mostpopular

             https://www.gettyimages.co.uk/videos/amesbury?sort=mostpopular&phrase=amesbury

             https://www.gettyimages.co.uk/photos/amesbury-england?mediatype=photography&phrase=amesbury%20england&sort=mostpopular

             1. Anonymous said :
                “it seems there was a big fuss on the evening of the 30th and it appears a Major Incident was declared and NARU most likely got involved”
                Then NARU’s participation in transporting Dawn Sturgess to hospital would not be abnormal. One of my arguments is thus falling.

                1. Involved with transporting Dawn would be highly unusual given the story we havre been given but if Charlie was given a Nerve Agent antidote at the scene then you would be surprised if Naru was not involved and surprised further to find out that Dawn and Charlie were not tested for nerve agent poisoning until 3 days later

37. Quick question – in what direction does the Sun rise in Amesbury during the month of June?

    1. Well at the end of June, the Sun should be setting in the west and since Charlie’s front door faces WSW, the front door (and the whole of that courtyard) should be in direct sunlight in the evening… but rather oddly… in the video… it isn’t.

       For reference, the camera is facing SSE and we are looking at a row of houses facing NNW.

       1. Check the paving tiles in the Sky video around 16 secs – they are parallel to the front of Charlie’s house i.e. pointing SSE to NNW.

          Now check the image of Dawn again and line up the shadow of the gurney with the line of the paving tiles. The shadow of the ball-handle is just behind the male AA para and it looks to me like the shadow of the gurney is almost the same as the the line of the tiles, which would make it some time before solar noon – which fits the official narrative.

    2. Same as everywhere else but Charlie’s gaff is on top of a hill so you may get odd shadows late in the day, repeat late.

       1. I know light can bend around corners, but you need a lens for that – AFAIK there are no lenses surrounding Charlie’s gaff. Look again.

          1. Their were lots of lenses (including reflective) (vehicle windows), the video was taken from within a flat looking onto the small white car outside Charlies flat.

38. It is 1984, well it seems to be in some places.
    Now you are a threat if you ask questions..

    https://spectator.sme.sk/c/22269077/opposition-politician-labelled-a-security-threat-due-to-questions-about-skripal.html

    1. The charges were dropped, it seems :
       https://spectator.sme.sk/c/22273603/charges-against-olanos-security-expert-dropped.html

39. Dear Blogmirers,

    Here is the ‘Team Photo’ for emergency workers meeting with Savid Javid (H/T Brendan):
    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dhk2XO2WkAE7pDL.jpg:orig

    Here is video of Charlie being loaded into the Ambulance:
    https://news.sky.com/video/novichok-victim-loaded-into-ambulance-11426545

    Can anyone identify in the Team Photo’, any of the 2 police or 2 paramedics seen in the video?

    I will hold back on my comments until a few of you have had a chance to take a look.

    1. I should have added the image of Dawn with the paramedics too. Here is one:
       https://news.images.itv.com/image/file/1576807/stream_img.jpg

       The ‘headless’ para at the top is the silver haired chap standing next to Sajid Javid in the Team Photo but where are the 2 AA paras?

    2. Paul, respectfully, why are you still engaged in this debate when you have access to an informed ‘friend’ who can explain everything to you? Surely you could just write one big comment explaining everything from A-Z. For what it’s worth, all your friend has told you is that Sergei has flown to Moscow – not sure why he can’t give you more of the juicy bits. As much as I like you, I think your friend is either telling porkies or you’re trying to throw us off the scent. Other than that I enjoy reading your comments.

       1. We are all here for our own reasons, on the basis of your comment, it would appear that one of your reasons is to try to goad me… My friend has provided other details and I have previously posted some of the information I obtained from the same source – for example, my friend was the first to suggest that Yulia had ended up in the hands of the US military… something which others are now (finally) beginning to consider.

          As I have said elsewhere, I really don’t care whether anyone believes what I say or not. It is not important to me in the least. If you don’t like what I write, just ignore my comments. Simple!

          When you say: “I think your friend is either telling porkies or you’re trying to throw us off the scent” – kindly provide some supporting evidence (anything will do) that would explain why you think that.

          Lastly, why have you put that comment here? I was asking for people to help try to identify the people in the photo…

          1. Paul, My reason being here is that I suffer from mild autism and I hate loose ends. I don’t have the time or desire to come on here everyday to find out the truth so I want a somewhat plausible explanation that can help put my mind at ease. And I think it’s selfish for somebody who has insider information not to just tie up the loose ends instead drip feeding random truths or even half-truths and just watching us scramble helplessly to piece things together. Anyway I will stop addressing any comments towards yourself if it brings about a sense of unease.

             1. You didn’t explain why you think I am “trying to throw people off the scent”.

                There is a big difference between ‘having information’ and ‘having people believe it’.

                Re-read the comments by ‘Remora’ (one on this thread and 3 on the previous thread from August) as far as I know, absolutely everything he said is true (down to the very last detail)… but not everyone here will agree with that.

    3. “Here is video of Charlie being loaded into the Ambulance: … ”

       Ooooh, I’d not given it that much thought but Charlie is not unconscious – he moves his left hand more than once, as they struggle to load his stretcher into the ambulance. It’s interesting because the entire focus of the emergency responders is on the loading of laden stretcher, rather than on the immobilised patient.

       So: seriously unwell but maybe not as ill (at that stage) as were either of the Maltings victims.

       1. It is rather amusing how they don’t seem too worried about their ‘patient’ isn’t it? Compare with the female AA para tending to Dawn in the still image (sadly, Dawn was probably dead by then). They even manage to get the gurney in the wrong way round, then take it out and try it the other end first…

          1. There’s a guy wandering around with large damaged shoes and a stick somewhere off screen…

    4. Some screenshots from the Sky video, to let people compare with the group photo:
       https://ibb.co/Jr6JyW4
       https://ibb.co/ch8vJVn
       https://ibb.co/DbrGsVn
       https://ibb.co/8KW2Rv2
       https://ibb.co/Zd5Lrnv
       https://ibb.co/xJFsz1B

    5. The air ambulance paramedic in Amesbury looks like the guy with the short beard next to Keith Mills in two of the photos of the Salisbury meeting with Javid. The guy at the meeting was wearing the a Naru emblem, the same as on Ian Parsons. Does Naru employ AA paramedics?

       1. Take a look at the guy in the first of your images above – the really big guy, with his hazmat suit completely open at the front (not much use wearing it like that). Look at his hair style… and his darker toned skin. In the video, it looks like he is ‘in charge’… but he also leads the gurney the wrong way into the ambulance. Could he be the male AA para in the image of Dawn?

          1. Perhaps… He too seems to wear a shoulder pad…

             1. Implying???

                It could be a shoulder brace – if he dislocated it and is recovering.

                It could be a shoulder pad used to deaden the recoil from a powerful sniper rifle.

                It could be … lots of things.

                It could also be that he works out a lot and is very muscular.

                1. Cascadian said : “Implying???”
                   Implying that there is one more element of resemblance. What is the problem ?

          2. I can’t really identify the hazmat guy because of his mask, but the only person in the group photo that he looks like is Ian Parsons. Similar hair and large build.

             I’m fairly sure I can identify the two police officers but I won’t say until everyone has had a chance to look. All I’ll say for now is that they’re both missing from the other photos of the meeting with Javid. One might possibly have his face blocked by someone else but the other one doesn’t seem to be there at all.

             1. Ian has a receding hairline – the ‘big guy’ seems to have a full head of hair. Just look at the size of him:
                https://e3.365dm.com/18/07/2048×1152/Ut_HKthATH4eww8X4xMDoxOjA4MTsiGN_4353621.jpg

                I can’t spot either of the police officers – they look younger in the video than anyone in the ‘team photo’ .

             2. Sorry, I meant the other hazmat guy with very little hair, on the left in your image. I think Liane has identified them all (see post above from today).

                1. I have seen Liane’s post but I don’t think she identified them all correctly.

40. We discussed about “another couple” who allegedly consumed fentanyl in the shopping Centre (Maltings) at the same time as the Skripals had their seizure, which was cited to explain that fentanyl had been found there. We couldn’t find the sources anymore. Here are two links :
    [QUOTE]
    First reports suggested traces of the opiate fentanyl — a synthetic toxin many times stronger than heroin — had been detected at the scene.
    But that was later linked to unconnected incident involving another couple coincidentally in the shopping centre.
    [/QUOTE]
    (https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5733372/ex-russian-spy-sergei-skripal-poisoned-salisbury-feared-life-cops/ )

    [QUOTE]
    Passers by and paramedics assumed the duo were high on fentanyl, a super strength painkiller causing thousands of deaths among drug addicts, but this was later linked to an unconnected incident involving another couple in the shopping centre.
    [/QUOTE]
    (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5467051/Was-Russian-spy-poisoned-Zizzi.html )

    I tend to think that there was really fentanyl, but I wonder if there were really (and ” coincidentally”) two couples…

    1. There were two responses, one about 4:15 and another about 10 minutes later we were led to believe there was only on response.

       “They were at Bourne Hill police station in the city centre when the call came in at 4.15pm. “It was a medical tasking for two persons: a male and female slumped on a bench in Maltings shopping centre,” said Holloway.

       “We responded on lights and sirens,” Collins said. “It only took us two minutes to get there. I drove through the pedestrianised area and over the bridge. The female [Skripal’s daughter, Yulia] was on the floor on her side. There was a member of the public, who turned out to be a doctor, helping her, maintaining her airway. I believe if that doctor hadn’t done that, she would have died.”

       https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/dec/14/we-did-our-best-police-who-rushed-to-skripal-scene-tell-of-shock-and-pride

       However the police have stated in a response to a complaint that the first police arrived on the scene at 4:24

       1. Could it be that the hospitalized man and woman were actually under the influence of fentanyl? There would then be two possibilities: 1 ° the Skripals were under the influence of fentanyl and were hospitalized; 2 ° the hospitalized couple were not the Skripals.

          By the way, we read here :
          https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6762159/Novichok-files-reveal-minute-minute-Salisbury-poisoning.html
          [QUOTE]
          5.00pm
          Two ambulances carrying Sergei and Yulia are racing to Salisbury District Hospital, sirens blaring. Sergei has remained in a rigid sitting position, so it has been hard to get him on to a stretcher. In the back of one the ambulances, paramedic Ian Parsons discusses with colleagues what could be wrong with them. Their low blood pressure, respiratory arrest and tiny pupils point to an opioid overdose.
          In the city centre, 38-year-old Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey is looking around the cordoned-off area around the bench but can’t see anything suspicious.
          [/QUOTE]
          Could it be that Bailey’s long re-education away from his colleagues was intended to help him forget that he had found fentanyl at the scene?

          1. From the DM link (@12:02) here is the tent that was set up just outside the Mill on the Maltings riverside walk, something that needed to be preserved / hidden was located at this spot

             https://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/newpix/2018/03/06/21/49F05E2800000578-5467051-image-a-22_1520370356448.jpg

    2. The Clinical Services Journal also said it was Fentanyl – until they changed it:

       https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DbvQmnIX4AEDcU0.jpg

       1. Yes, it was when you quoted it below that I decided to look carefully for a source about the other couple”.

    3. Well done, Inquirer, I knew I’d read something about another incident – although I knew that I recalled few details (because none seemed to be available) and I definitely never thought of it as a fentanyl incident.

       What I did notice was that ‘the shopping centre’ was mentioned and I still have no idea as to whether Salisbury really does have a shopping centre, rather than the shopping areas in the city centre; that was what made me think that it was another incident.

       1. The Wiltshire Council officially calls The Maltings a “shopping centre” :
          https://www.facebook.com/WiltshireCouncil/photos/the-walkway-in-the-maltings-shopping-centre-salisbury-has-reopened-to-the-public/1945011272184165/

          Here :
          https://www.visitwiltshire.co.uk/salisbury/shopping/shopping-centres
          we read “Salisbury is home to three main shopping centres (…) The Maltings shopping centre is located by Salisbury’s Central Car Park and is home to Sainsbury’s, The Works and Superdrug as well as several independent retailers.”

          In view of the context, it seems likely to me that the shopping centre mentioned by the Sun and the Daily Mail is the Maltings.

          1. Fair enough, Inquirer, in Salisbury / Wiltshire maybe shopping opportunities are defined differently.

             OTOH my nearest town, which is about twice the size of Salisbury (and nor does it have city status, as does historic Salisbury), is purportedly a major shopping destination with a disturbing number of shops and most of them are not in one of the two main shopping centres. For which reason, it’s better avoided imo.

41. MYSTERY SOLVED !
    Together we are strong, fellow Blogmires !
    The NARU paramedic who attended both incidents (Salisbury & Amesbury) is IAN PARSONS !
    Parsons attended the meetings with Theresa May on March 15, 2016 and with Sajid Javid on July 8, 2016.
    At both meetings he wore the NARU logo at his uniform :
    https://ibb.co/1XxvZzD

    Ian Parsons also appeared in the BBC Panorama “Salisbury Nerve Agent Attack – The Inside Story” at 3:18 with the NARU logo ! But we missed it :
    https://oload.fun/f/SLcz3MSMj0o/Watch_%282%29.mp4
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9l2u-RBDsME

    1. Ups – BBC Panorama not available any more…
       Here is a screenshot of Ian Parsons :
       https://ibb.co/Vqm8vmz

       1. Here’s the SWASFT Logo

          https://www.nspa.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/South-Western-Ambulance-Service.jpg

          1. A wider shot here but what air ambulance service is his oppo with

             http://tmssmagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/86879/1200.jpg

             1. That is Keith Mills of WAA. Here is his car being shrink wrapped and towed away:

                https://www.metro.news/novichok-victim-wakes-from-coma-as-police-seize-car/1137988/

                I wonder why he was there… he is not in the image of Dawn being loaded into an ambulance and even the official story does not have any AA there for Charlie

                1. This is from SDH’s Twitter. It is supposed to be all the people involved meeting with Javid.

                   “Home Secretary Sajid Javid MP today visited Salisbury to thank @SalisburyNHS @swasFT @DWFireRescue @wiltshirepolice & @WiltsAirAmbu staff involved in the recent incident in Amesbury.”:
                   https://twitter.com/salisburynhs/status/1015904922959785984

                   In the image we have of Dawn with the 2 AA paramedics, there is a 3rd man. You can find him standing on Javid’s left hand side in the team photo. He is also 2nd from left in the 3rd image (behind the woman in glasses) and he is 2nd from right in the fourth image.

                   We know that para did attend – but where are the other 2 AA paras we know about? And why is Keith Mills there?

                   1. Standing next to Javid:
                      https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dhk2XO2WkAE7pDL.jpg

                      1. Here is a better image:
                         https://cml.sad.ukrd.com/image/690351-780×520.scale_type-center_crop.scale_type-center_crop.jpg

                         From:
                         https://www.spirefm.co.uk/news/local-news/2628138/novichok-incident-home-secretary-visits-salisbury/

                      2. Higher resolution here:
                         https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dhk2XO2WkAE7pDL.jpg:orig
                         https://cml.sad.ukrd.com/image/690351-1200×1200.jpg
                         Click on those image to zoom in (works in my browser anyway).

                         He looks like the SWASFT guy in Amesbury alright:
                         https://www.thetimes.co.uk/imageserver/image/methode%2Ftimes%2Fprod%2Fweb%2Fbin%2Fa465590c-83af-11e8-b7ab-42d55e61ad8f.png?crop=667%2C1000%2C0%2C0
                         https://ibb.co/dbj8Gx2

       2. From something still on YouTube:

          https://ibb.co/jZcCzgy

42. “The credibility of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons is on the line after a series of devastating leaks from whistleblowers has shown that the UN body distorted an alleged CW incident in Syria in 2018. The distortion by the OPCW of the incident suggests that senior directors at the organization were pressured into doing so by Western governments.”

    https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2019/12/20/why-western-media-ignore-opcw-scandal/

43. My name is legion.

    Perhaps someone could explain what really happened at Salisbury district hospital on 4th March 2018 and the days following it.

    1. The answer is no member of the public can, the question that flows from that answer is why?

    2. I think what happened on 5 March at SDH is actually more interesting. The Clinical Services Journal reported on an ‘incident’ at SDH on Monday morning, it was quickly withdrawn and downplayed. Often the truth sneaks out in the early stages before control has been fully exerted to stop ‘mistakes’ from happening. I think it is very unlikely that the CSJ would have posted a story that had not been properly sourced.

       This is the original version:
       https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DbvQmnIX4AEDcU0.jpg

       And this is the revised version:
       https://www.clinicalservicesjournal.com/story/25262/response-unit-called-as-salisbury-hospital-declares-major-incident

44. 2 big stories today, both related to the Skripal affair

    1) Merkel goes on the offensive re Nord Stream and

    2) Julian Assange in Westminster Magistrate’s Court

    On first glance they don’t appear related but they are elements of each at the heart of the Salisbury debacle.

    The first apparently successful the second not, but nothing is as it seems.

    As mentioned on many previous occasions and most recently by Paul a little way below the Wiltshire poisonings had many elements and facets, one of the most bluntest was the assault by the Anglo-American secret army aka II / IfS on the long term goal to discredit Russia, dis-empower and weaken economically.

    The project was doomed from the start for several simple reasons; Russia has grown too strong, the people coordinating the assault are too thick and paranoid and possibly the most important, the global public have moved on and are now thoroughly disenfranchised from the delusional mantra West Good, East Bad.

    The public have lost confidence in their Western leaders and political systems.

    A major part of the Wiltshire farrago was to relaunch a the demented campaign to halt Nord Stream but a significantly important part was to silence Skripal.

    One thing the US will not tolerate is US secrets being exposed, they will go beyond punishing offenders, the rule is to destroy them. That is why Assange is being tormented to death and any politician in the UK, Australia or Sweden that attempts to introduce the Law into proceedings will be dealt with swiftly and severely.

    But Spain has opened a bear trap and it looks like the Assange baiters have stepped into it.

    Times are changing; the corrupt political systems of the US, UK, France and Germany are decaying fast. The US nuclear threat is no longer tenable, Russia has more of them with superior guidance, rocketry and EWCM’s.

    Blackmail, bribes and destabilisation are still useful tools but public are getting weary of the mega wealthy wanting even more from the poor through the OBAMA industries; Oil, Banking, Armaments, Medicine and Aerospace.

    I sense a turning tide but it took many generations to get here it will take many more to correct the drift.

    1. https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2019/12/20/assa-d20.html

       https://sputniknews.com/world/201912201077664915-merkels-response-to-us-nord-stream-2-sanctions-tantamount-to-declaration-of-war-on-trump—bild/

45. Another article:

    https://www.rferl.org/a/bulgarian-poison-probe-russian-spy-chief-snovichok-attack-skripals/30334479.html

46. Paul, is your friend who’s a “spy” aware of what ‘really’ happened? He’s either unable to share this or in fact he doesn’t know and it genuinely was some clandestine black ops unit involved in this whole mess and perhaps not even many people in the UK goverment / foreign office are awaren of what really went down.

    I still sometimes wonder if maybe we are over thinking things and P&B really did try to poison skripal? Im by no way a fan of bellingcat but the info that they published regarding the German poisoning, does seem to suggest the Russians were responsible for this. Whether it was morally right or wrong is another matter since the ‘victim’ was a criminal as well – But it shows a lot.

    1. I am pretty sure that a lot of people know what really happened, including the UK MSM but they are just not going to print it. There are several journalists who have written articles that absolutely contradict each other, but they have not posted any correction notice or explanation for the change of story. I have tried writing to a few of them to ask which version was correct – they never reply. They know the truth, they just don’t want you to know the truth.

       My friend was not involved but has access to information and has been kind enough to answer a couple of my questions.

       What happened in Salisbury was the culmination of all sorts of ‘black ops’, it was not a single event. Think of it like the FA Cup – all sorts of things happened in earlier rounds and you cannot explain the whole competition just by reference to the final. Sergei had been planted in the UK and was still working. Whatever happened on 4 March, they don’t want you looking at what Sergei was really up to, or that the 2010 ‘spy swap’ was (I think) a total farce and certainly nothing like we have been told.

       I believe the same is true of events like MH370. It is simply not credible, with modern monitoring , that a plane can just vanish. The people who sold the cargo don’t want their role known. The people who bought the cargo, the same. The people who destroyed the plane to stop the cargo getting to the buyer certainly don’t want their role known. It just suits everybody that it remains a ‘mystery’ – but it is not a real mystery, lots of people know exactly what happened… they just don’t want you to know. Rolls Royce certainly knows what happened to it, they have real time monitoring of their engines all over the world. Very early on RR was reported to have said that the engines went through a normal shut down but all trace of that has now been removed for the internet.

       1. Paul, as always a very eloquently and mysterious reply 🙂

          With regards to MH370 I remember reading somehwere that the the ‘cargo’ you speak of were some Chinese microchip developers for weapons systems. Explains a lot.

          Regarding Skripal – just to broadly summarise; Skripal was still active and the plan, which you claim.was successful, was to extract him back to Russia and then a fake skripal / actor was poisoned? Hmm. The only thing I’m struggling to buy about that was that a lot of witnesses saw him on the bench up close so surely they would have made a fuss if the guy on the bench was visibly different than the pictures released by the media.

          But if that is the case, then they must be keeping this extraction secret from the public otherwise there would be no need for these short phone calls to Victoria.

          I don’t know, I think we’ve gotten ourselves down a conapiracy rabbit hole.

          1. The MH370 cargo was supposed to be a command and control unit the US ‘lost’ in Afghanistan:
             http://internationaltimes.it/mh370-murder/

             I think you are wrong to say that there were “a lot of witnesses” – Freya Church was the best witness and she was 100% sure the couple she saw on the bench was the couple seen in the CCTV. Ollie Field also said the woman on the bench was blonde.

             Of course there is a ‘conspiracy’ but it is not we who have created it. There is a criminal conspiracy involving many senior figures in the UK who have lied repeatedly and tried to destablise relations with another country! So far, 2 deaths have come from their criminal actions. They belong in prison.

47. One of the most notable things about 5th September 2018 was missed by many, there is good reason for that, there had been an information dump, that day, by the Met police regarding the 2 Russian suspects and the CPS had obtained EAW’s on the back of evidence unearthed.

    The Met statement was very detailed and very flawed, we were told the suspects had stayed in a hotel which had been tested positive for Novichok (4 months earlier) but it wasn’t much Novichok so the police decided to leave it open for business as normal, the staff and management were not told of the dramatic discovery. Then we were told the details of which trains suspects had caught during their deadly mission, however it transpired that it was not possible because some trains had been cancelled. And then the perfume bottle that we were told the suspects had used to spray the door knob of the Skripals home was also the same as that found by Charlie Rowley 4 months later which sadly led to the death of Dawn Sturgess; that too was untrue because the perfume was sealed in thick plastic, the police forgot to add that fact, it was not possible for it to have been the same bottle as used in Salisbury.

    And why use a counterfeit perfume bottle and not a genuine brand? A genuine brand bottle would be far more robust and less likely to leak than a cheap counterfeit. The answer of course was the counterfeit was manufactured in Russia and sold through wholesalers in Russia and Ukraine.
    The police later tried to plug that hole by then saying it wasn’t a cheap counterfeit bottle it was instead an extremely expensive, precision engineered copy of a cheap Russian counterfeit. So why wasn’t it an extremely expensive, precision engineered copy of a real brand? Because there waould be no link to Russia.

    There were many more ludicrous lies in the police statement of 5th September but its the one that Mrs May repeated in the HoC that slipped by most of us;

    “I can today tell the House that, based on a body of intelligence, the Government have concluded that the two individuals named by the police and CPS are officers from the Russian military intelligence service, also known as the GRU.”

    Mrs May accepted that they were probably travelling under aliases but she didn’t know what their real names were.

    https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2018-09-05/debates/DEBE4D29-C179-48A5-837D-BF1AA880652C/SalisburyUpdate

    It did not slip by the Russian contingent on the UNSC the representative said;

    “Emphasizing that the real names of the two suspects identified by the United Kingdom are unknown, he said it is, therefore, impossible to know if they work for the GRU. In addition, British authorities failed to provide his delegation with crucial information about the suspects, including fingerprints obtained when they entered the country.”

    https://www.un.org/press/en/2018/sc13488.doc.htm

    And there you have it another May gaff, Q.How could she know who they worked for if she didn’t know who they were? A. The same way she knew where the “Novichok” came from when Porton Down didn’t know if it was Novichok or even a Nerve Agent (High Court Submissions).

48. Are the British Authorities making any effort to arrest those responsible for the Salisbury and Amesbury poisonings? I only ask because in a police statement from September this year they said;

    “As previously stated, two men known as ‘Alexander Petrov’ and ‘Ruslan Boshirov’ are wanted by UK police after the Crown Prosecution Service authorised charges against the pair, linked to the attack on Sergei and Yulia Skripal and Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey. We believe they were using aliases and European Arrest Warrants and Interpol Red Notices remain in circulation for the two men.”

    http://news.met.police.uk/news/update-on-the-investigation-into-the-novichok-attack-in-salisbury-382683

    A quick search on Interpol’s Red List does not come up with any results for the accused (in their passport or Bellingcat names)

    https://www.interpol.int/en/How-we-work/Notices/View-Red-Notices

    1. “Skripal” doesn’t appear in the Yellow Notice section either

       https://www.interpol.int/en/How-we-work/Notices/View-Yellow-Notices

49. Now that Boris Johnson is firmly in place as Prime Minister, it might be worth taking a look at his role in creating the official narrative of the Skripal case in March 2018. Of particular interest is that he appeared to be the first senior UK figure to hint at the door handle story, and that this tells us something about the timeline of the narrative.

    On 18 March 2018, when he was the UK Foreign Secretary, Boris spoke to Andrew Marr on the BBC about Russia’s alleged nerve agent programme. The same day, the Foreign Office issued a press release that mentioned that interview:

    “The Foreign Secretary revealed this morning that we have information indicating that within the last decade, Russia has investigated ways of delivering nerve agents likely for assassination. And part of this programme has involved producing and stockpiling quantities of Novichok.”
    https://www.gov.uk/government/news/investigators-from-chemical-weapons-watchdog-to-arrive-in-uk

    There’s no mention of door handles or training manuals there, but part of it is highlighted to show the remarkable similarities to some things that the UK National Security Advisor, Mark Sedwill wrote weeks later, on 13 April:

    “During the 2000s, Russia commenced a programme to test means of delivering chemical warfare agents and to train personnel from special units in the use of these weapons. This programme subsequently included investigation of ways of delivering nerve agents, including by application to door handles. Within the last decade Russia has, produced and stockpiled small quantities of Novichoks under the same programme.”
    https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/699819/Letter_from_the_UK_National_Security_Adviser_to_the_NATO_Secretary_General_regarding_the_Salisbury_incident.pdf

    It’s therefore clear that Boris Johnson was talking about the same intelligence report on 18 March, but Sedwill’s letter added the detail of “application to door handles”.

    It’s not believable that this additional bit of info was overlooked in mid-March and only became known after BoJo’s interview. It’s all part of the same story that was told one step at a time – BoJo fed the first part of it, the Mirror leaked the door handle story on 24 March, and then it was decided that the media would accept it as fact, so it was made public on 29 March. Sedwill’s letter gave more details (of the Russian programme) a couple of weeks later.

    Craig Murray wrote in his blog about BoJo’s interview and the press release on the same day (18 March). He said that – from his own experience as a former senior Foreign Office official – the ‘information’ on the alleged nerve agent programme must been cleared two days before, at the latest:

    “If this information comes from MI5 or MI6, there is a process of inter-departmental clearance that has to be gone through before it can be put in the public domain – even by a Minister – which is known as “Action-on”. I have been through the process personally many times when working as head of the FCO Section of the Embargo Surveillance Centre, monitoring Iraqi arms acquisitions. It is not, unless actually at war, a Saturday night process – it would have had to have been done on Friday.”
    https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2018/03/boris-johnson-issues-completely-new-story-on-russian-novichoks/

    So if Craig Murray is right, and if (as seems very likely) BoJo and Sedwill were talking about the same intelligence report, then the door handle story was conceived by 16 March.

    1. I would say that the door handle story was pushed to the government by 16 March, but the story had to be conceived by far earlier. The public was shown the CCTV footage of Petrov and Boshirov walking near the Shell garage on the Wilton Road. One way or another, P&B were lured there to enable the Met to claim that they were “on their way to” Skripal’s house. (As you perhaps remember, Rob discovered another CCTV camera on the Shell garage which covers the route in the direction of Skripal’s house but the footage from that camera was never shown to the public:
       https://www.theblogmire.com/the-salisbury-poisoning-one-year-on-an-open-letter-to-the-metropolitan-police/

       What I mean is that the door handle story was conceived before the 4th March, even well before, as a special operation had to be developed and performed to lure P&B to Salisbury and the Wilton Road.

       1. It is quite possible that P&B were lured to Wilton Road, in which case the plan must have been conceived before 4 March. But that plan only placed them close enough to Sergei’s house – it gave no clues as to how they allegedly poisoned the Skripals. There was no hint of the the door handle until two weeks later, and the d.h. story was officially announced as fact a week and a half after that.

          Anyway, the fact that door handle story is physically impossible suggests that it was only chosen later on out of desperation, only because all alternative theories were even more unlikely.

          1. Hi Brendan,

             Absolutely. If the door handle theory had been conceived prior to the incident, we would have seen it introduced much earlier in the narrative, it would have actually made sense, and we would have seen CCTV of Petrov and Boshirov within a week or so “in the vicinity of Sergei’ house”. The fact that they scrabbled around for more than two weeks before the idea was first mooted; the fact that when it was mooted it was impossible; and the fact that it was six months before they showed the two alleged culprits all point to the fact that it was conceived as a desperate afterthought by desperate people trying to cover their tracks.

             What were they covering? The clue is in the back-to-front timeline between Zizzis and The Mill. It is indisputable that the Skripals visited the restaurant then the pub. All the early witness statements prove that. It is therefore indisputable that the Metropolitan Police timeline that they were in Zizzis from 14:20 to 15:35 is false. From this, one can easily deduce that there has been a concerted attempt to divert attention away from the Mill, where the Skripals actually were between around 15:00 and 15:30. But because something happened there that was not in the original plan of those who concocted this scheme, attention needed to be diverted. And it was diverted in the first instance to Zizzis, but when that proved problematic, attention had to be diverted further afield — hence the door handle.

             My best guess is that the Skripals were supposed to have been in Zizzis until around 15:30, and then were supposed to have walked through the Market Walk to the Maltings – a male and a female with the female carrying a large red bag – but instead, either with Sergei’s foreknowledge or without, he was unexpectedly called to the Mill an hour before – hence his agitation and his very quick meal. Meaning that he went to the Mill and was in there at the wrong time. The “fake” couple then walked through Market Walk at around the same time, but in the aftermath it was realised that this no longer fitted with the fact that Sergei had left the restaurant “an hour before he was supposed to”.

             What happened at the Mill? Not sure, but whatever it was meant that the original plan was scuppered, and a new one had to be thought up. Why not the door handle of his house a couple of miles away and 2-and-a-half-hours before. Why, we can even get experts like that Hamish guy to vouch for its plausibility. He’s an expert after all.

             Petrov and Boshirov? Not sure why they walked up the Wilton Road, but not half as puzzled by that as I am by the Met’s decision to publish images of them on their jaunt through the city afterwards. If they’d just published the Wilton Road CCTV, it would have made their case seem (at least on the surface) to be much more watertight. Perhaps there are some good guys at the Met who insisted on the other stuff being published, in order to awaken the scepticism of some.

             But I’m reasonably sure that if the Met published CCTV of the two men on the Saturday, far from showing them staking out Sergei’s house, it would show them going into the city centre, firstly checking out the Maltings and also the Mill Pub and its car park. And I think if they published CCTV of the two men on the Sunday at around 1:40-1:45, it would show them in roughly the same place, with the Skripals in close proximity.

             Rob

             1. Rob, think about this :
                When the Met decided what pictures to publish, they knew about the perfume bottle. To blame it on P&B they had to show them coming from a direction where the perfume bottle allegedly was disposed. They wanted to kill two birds with one stone : P&B near Skripal´s house and near the disposal site.

                1. Yes, I can kind of see that, Liane. But I actually don’t think they made very much of it. On the Panorama programme, for instance, where they showed the footage for the first time, I don’t recall them inviting viewers to believe this as showing the men having returned from dumping the substance. My recollection is that they invited viewers to believe that there was something inherently sinister about one of the men taking pictures from a bridge and smiling. I’ve never been able to look at smiling tourists taking pictures around Salisbury in quite the same way after seeing how sinister it is 😉

                   1. I think the Catherine Street charity shop bin was Charlie’s idea. The Met knew it would be ridiculous to show P&B anywhere near the bin. It would not have been credible that P&B disposed of the bottle on 4 March only for Charlie to find it there at the end of June.

    2. Brendan, an excellent point.
       I have always thought that Johnson and Aitkenhead are and were behind the Novichok lie.
       What has perplexed me in the last 18 months is the lack of a liberal, anti Boris journalist having a go at the HMG false narrative.
       Only 30% of the UK electorate voted for his party.
       The Guardian is full of journos who slam him.
       Why does Simon Jenkins et al not dig for the dirt?

50. Hello,
    My name is Macbeth, and I am a new reader to this exciting Blog.
    I am trying to catch up, and hope as many of you as possible can reply to my questions.
    My first question is:
    If Sergei and Yulia are alive why have we not heard them thank their rescuers?

    1. Macbeth, my name isn’t John, but I do come from a place bearing the name of my moniker.

       “If Sergei and Yulia are alive why have we not heard them thank their rescuers?”

       Not entirely true – a video of an interview with Julia was released by Reuters. Clues in the background of the interview location suggest that the location was within the bounds of RAF Fairford which also suggests (no more than that) that Julia is held by some group associated with the American government.

       The whereabouts of Sergei are unknown but it has been suggested that he was extracted by the Russians and is therefore being held (voluntarily or otherwise) incommunicado by some group associated with the Russian government.

       One thing is certain (IMHO), if either or both of the Skripals had expired as the result of their being poisoned by some form of nerve gas in Salisbury, then we would have been subjected to many lurid descriptions, with supporting photographic evidence (think Litvinenko here) plastered all over our print, television and internet media.

       So (IMHO), it is very likely that they are both still alive, but held incommunicado by state actors because to do otherwise (i.e. let them speak) would badly undermine various geopolitical intrigues which those state actors are engaged in (think access to and control of oil and crucial minerals required to support technological innovations, etc. here).

       1. Them pronoun

          1.

          used as the object of a verb or preposition to refer to two or more people or things previously mentioned or easily identified.

          “I bathed the kids and read them stories”

          1. All hail, Macbeth …

             ‘Them’ is useful but in the case of the Skripals=Sergei+Yulia it’s probably essential to think of it as an each, either and/or both situation, rather than as an Ant’n’Dec or Pinky’n’Perky duo.

             As noted, Yulia appeared without her father in May 2018 in an interview conducted by an American news agency, rather than via the British state broadcaster. The voice of Sergei has apparently been recognised as bona fide, on a telephone call to Russia – but this was not reported iirc in the first instance by either of the news agencies previously mentioned.

             My personal view is that wherever either or both of them are, they won’t appear in public again – not least because the identity and appearance of each has been changed by now. I write this but am aware that a presenter on the BBC Today programme has mentioned on at least two occasions something that can be summarised as ‘at least one British citizen died at the hands of Russia, in Salisbury’; and also that the respected editor of the FT said, in a televised interview with Putin, that a man died either during or as a result of the incident in The Maltings – and I wonder what they (think they) know that I/we-Joe-Public don’t.

             BTW I am assuming your name refers to The Scottish Play rather than a TV series starring Robert Carlyle and Wee Jock. Do let us know, it’s amazing how very quickly misunderstandings can arise!

             1. If you ask me, you’d be best off having a word with the King.

                1. Tsk no, not when he’s away shapeshifting …

       2. “The whereabouts of Sergei are unknown but it has been suggested that he was extracted by the Russians and is therefore being held (voluntarily or otherwise) incommunicado by some group associated with the Russian government.”

          Why didn’t you Cascadian say who had “suggested” this idea?

          It is Paul who claims that “a knowledgeable source” told him that Sergei had flown from London to Russia on the 5th March. The purpose of such an absurd claim is to confuse readers of this blog and to turn some of them away and make others waste their time discussing meaningless topics.

          1. When you accuse others of doing what you yourself are doing, it is called ‘projection’. You are not very good at it because you always get too personal.

             Bizarrely, you once accused me of being a spy when I revealed information you KNEW to be true and you had no idea how I had found out what you knew. Well I am not a spy but some of my friends are and the person who gave me the information about Sergei is one of them. That person gave me the information in the absolute certain knowledge that I would never disclose his/her identity because we are useful to each other.

             Whether you believe it or not is so inconsequential to me, I will say no more about it but whenever you try to distract people from the truth, I will always call you out.

             1. Pathetic.

                1. Well done Milda, you proved my point – ‘projection’.

                   BTW you still have not answered my question to you below: you said that Yulia’s passport picture was out of date, so the police needed help in identifying her. How do you know this? What is your source? How do you know that Yulia did not have a recently issued passport?

                   If you want to avoid being accused of misleading people, you need to answer these questions.

                2. Dear Milda, what is your problem?

                3. Here Milda, this was where you said I was spying:
                   http://www.theblogmire.com/to-trust-the-met-or-to-not-trust-the-met-that-is-the-question/#comment-16349

                   You never did explain how YOU knew I was right… what was your connection to DailyShocker? It was also interesting that very soon afterwards, DailyShocker vanished… website shut down… no more comments here. Why was that? I think you should tell the readers since you are so keen that I should not mislead anyone.

                   1. “DailyShocker vanished… website shut down… no more comments here. Why was that?”

                      Maybe, you scared him? And maybe he received threats from your colleagues? I guess you know better.

                      1. Milda you KNEW that my information was good and you failed to hide your own tracks then and now. My information about what happened to Sergei is also good – in fact I would say it is very good… but to repeat I really don’t care whether you admit it or not, my only interest is that you do not mislead people.

                         So tell us about Yulia’s passport. How do you know it was an old picture?

                         1. It is not good to feed the troll. So I will answer the question above with a big reluctance. Paul is asking: “How do you know it was an old picture?”

                            I do not “know” this. I just deduced this from what is publicly known.Even when Sergei Skripal’s name was made public, Yulia was referred in the news as “an unknown woman” – up to noon of the 6th March. But Wiltshire police had her passport, which was found in Sergei’s house in Yulia’s travel bag. In the interests of brevity, I will give the link to the recent discussion (several comments in this thread) which included the theme of Yulia’s passport:
                            https://www.theblogmire.com/an-update-on-the-inquest-into-the-death-of-dawn-sturgess/#comment-32897
                            This article by The Telegraph of 6 March tells us how Yulia’s identity was established:
                            https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/03/06/first-picture-daughter-poisoned-russian-spy-fighting-life-hospital/
                            “Friends of Ms Skripal confirmed the identity of the daughter of the Russian spy, who police believe was poisoned while out in Salisbury, and that she is in hospital.”
                            So, having Yulia’s passport, why was Wiltshire police unsure of her name and was seeking confirmation from people who knew Yulia?

                            Let’s recall Yulia’s photographs which the MSM took from her social media accounts and reposted many times. We see three different images: 1) a somewhat plump, round-faced girl without make-up, in spectacles, with mousy/blonde hair and a casual hair-do; 2) a round-faced, dark-blonde girl, with a nice make-up and beautiful hair (in Yulia’s Facebook, this photo was posted in 2013); 3) a slim girl, with a slim face and reddish-brown hair (a series of photos posted in 2016). Yulia looks differently in the photos 1,2 and 3. But there is a fourth image, of Yulia in 2018, whom we see in the Moscow airport video of 3 March and in the Reuters-recorded video of 23 May. In 2018 Yulia was slim like in the photos (3), but had sandy-blonde hair, which made her look differently from (3).

                            So, given that Yulia had different looks over some period of time, I made the conclusion that the difficulty in identifiying her was due to her passport photo where she looked differently from what she looked in March 2018.

                            A question may be raised: Why didn’t police compare the finger prints of Yulia and the holder of the female passport found in Skripal’s house? Maybe, police lost some time pursuing a wrong track. My guess is that at first police tried to find the holder of the passport. I remember that soon after the 4 March incident there were some vague news reports about “another incident in the Maltings” involving a woman. Later, I tried to google for those reports but the key words were insufficient to recover them. However, one other commenter here (now I am not sure who: Denise, eleanor, Marie?) also remembers that there was some vague information about “another incident.” Maybe, police thought that the body of the third person, the holder of the passport, was somewhere nearby but not in sight.

                            So, I deduced that the passport photo was old. But now I realized that there is an evidence that it was old, this is, taken several years prior to March 2018.
                            See this article by the Moskovsky Komsomolets (MK) newspaper, of 25 March 2018:
                            https://www.mk.ru/politics/2018/03/25/otravlenie-sergeya-skripalya-my-nashli-strannogo-boyfrenda-yulii.html
                            MK journalists talked to some of Yulia’s friends in Moscow. Friends mentioned that Yulia’s British visa was near expiration. Google-translate the following:
                            Кстати, мартовский визит в Туманный Альбион был запланирован — у Юли заканчивалась виза, она хотела напоследок навестить отца.
                            Google-translation is not good, but understandable:
                            By the way, the March visit to Foggy Albion was planned – Julia was ending her visa, she wanted to visit her father in the end.

                            Yulia, who lived in the U.K. in the past and had a father who was an ex-agent of MI6, certainly had a long-term visa. No shorter than a 5-year one. Thus, her photo in the passport and her photo on the visa were at least 5 year old.

                            To finish with the troll’s questions, let’s look at the following:
                            Paul says:
                            December 18, 2019 at 11:36 pm
                            Here Milda, this was where you said I was spying:
                            http://www.theblogmire.com/to-trust-the-met-or-to-not-trust-the-met-that-is-the-question/#comment-16349

                            You never did explain how YOU knew I was right… what was your connection to DailyShocker? It was also interesting that very soon afterwards, DailyShocker vanished… website shut down… no more comments here. Why was that? I think you should tell the readers since you are so keen that I should not mislead anyone.

                            ***********************

                            I had no idea who DailyShocker or Jason was. I just put two and two together.
                            Maybe you Paul will explain why you or/and your colleagues were spying on that person? Did he do anything what you and your colleagues call “a threat to the national security”?

                            1. Milda,

                               May I politely request that you “knock it off”. I have sometimes sat back in amusement as you and Paul have had it out with one another, but I think it is getting out of hand with accusations like this. I have appreciated many of your comments (as I have appreciated many of Paul’s), and some of them have certainly helped me in my thinking on this case. But I really don’t think it wise or beneficial to continue slinging mud around.

                               Best wishes,

                               Rob

                            2. On the whole thank you.

                               Whatever sort of visa Yulia had, I am sure it would not have been a 5 year visa because that would mean it was issued in mid 2013 when Yulia was still living in the UK. At that time it is likely that she would have had a residence permit. Since Yulia returned to Moscow in 2015, the visa would have been issued some time after that. Which means we are none the wiser.

                               As for “I just put two and two together”- LOL! Absolute nonsense! The only information other readers of the blog had was the name ‘DailyShocker’. I then called him ‘Jason’ – nobody could possibly have had a clue whether I was right… but you did! You knew I was right and jumped in with both feet to call me a ‘Government spy’!

                            3. I should have been more attentive. If I had just looked attentively at Yulia’s Facebook account, I would have seen that she worked in Holiday Inn in Southampton in 2014:
                               https://www.facebook.com/julia.skripal
                               Thus, Yulia could not have a 5-year British visa in 2018. But so what? Maybe, she had a 3-year visa. Or her friend who told MK that Yulia’s visa was near expiration mixed things up and in fact it was Yulia’s passport which was near expiration. For instance, Yulia mentioned it in passing (certainly, it was not an important topic for discussion) and later the friend just forgot what exactly was going to expire, Yulia’s visa or passport.

                               The facts are that 1) policemen found Yulia’s passport in her travel bag in Sergei’s house; 2) in the evening of 5th March, when Sergei’s name was made public, Yulia was still “an unknown woman”; 3) Yulia’s looks are different on photographs of different years; 4) police needed confirmation of Yulia’s identity and got it confirmed only in the morning of 6th March, with the help of Yulia’s friends (see The Telegraph). Taking into account 1,2,3 and 4, I made a conclusion that in early March of 2018 Yulia looked differently from her looks on the passport photo. That’s why Wiltshire police was not sure about Yulia’s identity until her friends confirmed it.

                               Briefly, I already explained what I think of Yulia’s passport photo here:
                               https://www.theblogmire.com/an-update-on-the-inquest-into-the-death-of-dawn-sturgess/#comment-32897
                               Quote:
                               “According to The Telegraph’s report of March 6, the police identified Yulia with the help of Yulia’s friends. My guess is that Gulnara and her husband were shown Yulia’s photo taken in hospital. The police needed confirmation that the woman found with Sergei in the Maltings was Yulia, because on the passport photo Yulia looked differently from what she looked by March 2018 – we can see from the many photos published by the media that Yulia’s looks changed significantly over some period of time.”

                               So what for did Paul ask me “How do you know it was an old picture?”?

                               Meanwhile, Paul did not answer my question about DailyShocker. I will rephrase it this way:
                               Why did you Paul do research on DailyShocker?

                            4. Simple, I make it my business when people come here to mislead…

                            5. I am not surprised that you Paul quickly found my comment posted one week after the previous one and not as a reply to your comment.

                               (Your comment of December 19, 2019 at 6:43 pm has no Reply function, so I had to use the Reply function of my own comment.)

                            6. CTRL+F “December 27”

                               Gives you all today’s comments.

    2. Hello new reader Macbeth,

       I feel obliged to respond to you just so you don’t get upset when people don’t reply to you like I do 😉

       Nice new username btw 😛

51. Apparently skripals are still in the UK according to ambassador Lori:

    https://m.gazeta.ru/social/2019/12/17/12870962.shtml

    1. If that is true, I will eat my hat!

       “The Russians who were affected by the Salisbury poisoning were given an invitation from the Russian embassy to meet, but the Skripals did not want to accept it” – that is not how it works. Russia is entitled, under international treaties, to have access to the Skripals (how otherwise are we supposed to know that they actually do/don’t want help) but HMG is refusing to abide by its international obligations… because they do not have control of either of the Skripals.

    2. Dear Anonymous London,
       I would really like to reply to your post.
       Indeed, this is my reply.
       I neither speak or read Russian.

    3. This part of the Russian article is something new (for me, in any case) :
       [QUOTE]
       Last month, the German Prosecutor General’s Office and the Federal Criminal Office launched a preliminary investigation into the poisoning of former GRU colonel Sergei Skripal and his daughter Julia in the British city of Salisbury, according to the publication Spiegel. The case is code-named “Novi.”
       As stated in the note, German investigators found that in 2014 allegedly GRU officers Alexander Petrov and Ruslan Boshirov, whom London accuses of poisoning, spent three days near Frankfurt. Also, law enforcement officers do not exclude the possibility that Boshirov and Petrov may have connections in Germany.
       [/QUOTE]
       (Google translation)

       1. I’ll bet that the case files are “chok” full of cases with the code name “novi”.

       2. Some powerful people in Germany are just trying to construct a connection between the Skripal case and the Berlin park killing in August. Both attacks are supposed to be the work of the same assassination squad that is sent all over Europe. This team “serves as a tool for a broad-based campaign by the Kremlin that aims to destabilize and weaken Europe.”

          https://www.spiegel.de/international/world/how-russian-agents-hunt-down-kremlin-opponents-in-europe-a-1300091.html
          (another article mentioning “Novi”, in German) https://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/berlin-mord-im-tiergarten-verfassungsschutz-warnte-2017-vor-gefaehrdung-a-1299991.html

52. Everyone just replies to Paul, Duncan and a few select others. It’s like an exclusive clique who mutually adores each other.

    1. You have made about 20 comments on this topic and I can only count 8 where you have not got a direct reply, sometimes more than 1 reply – so that is a better than 60% reply rate. I didn’t bother to count my own ‘reply rate’ but I bet it is nowhere near 60%… my goal here is to pass on information I have found, I am not too worried about whether people reply or not, I am even less worried about whether people ‘like’ what I write.

       Keep posting!

    2. I know what you mean, Anonymous London: I seem to be routinely ignored, except when I’m not. Ignored, I mean.

       One thing I have realised is that, even when there is no reply, this blog thread and the comments are read and that imo is far more important.

       I try to read them all but admit that navigation can be difficult when new contributions are appearing all the time. The number of posts has increased by 10, since I last browsed here, but only 7 of them carry the December 18 timestamp. So I’ll have to go through all the pm posts of December 17 to identify the last three. Sigh.

       This ‘thought’ doesn’t warrant a reply but I did read your grumble, just as I think I have read most, if not all, of your other contributions.

       1. It’s a conspiracy, that’s what it is.

          1. Cripes, a snack for my Inner Paranoid … I suppose I ought to thank you for that!

       2. Eleanor,quantity not quality..
          I will do an experiment.
          I will post under a different name, and we can measure the replies and activity.
          Give me some time to come up with a new name, then I will test the water.

          1. Just call yersel’ Anonymous and then you’ll be undetectable amongst the assorted anonymii here.

             Don’t chose Spartacus or we’ll know it’s you. Or me. Well, anyone who can’t resist is likely to render the experiment results inconclusive.

             Perhaps Rob could start a Season of Festive Frivolity thread …

53. Blogmirers, John Helmer has a new piece on the significance of Sergei’s phone calls made on 4th April, 9th May, and 26th June of this year.
    I don’t know why this has become a new issue, and I honestly can’t remember Blogmire discussion on these calls.
    Anyway if Paul, Liane, or any other avid reader can shed light on the calls, and just as importantly the relevance of these posts to the grand Skripal scheme, I will pass our collective thoughts onto John.
    As Rob and others have pointed out, we have not seen Sergei and Yulia together, or two of them sharing a phone when Sergei is calling Russia.
    Implying that they are not together and possibly one or the other is not a willing “rescued person”
    from the threats of the outside world.

    1. Duncan, A very useful recap by John to which I don’t have a great deal to add.

       I believe that there are a couple of us here, who have spoken with people who knew Sergei very well and they have also confirmed that it is Sergei’s voice. I was told it is exactly the same voice i.e. not sounding affected by any surgery to Sergei’s throat. It is common for people who have had the surgery (said to have been) performed on Sergei (particularly after several weeks with a tube) to have a permanent change to the quality of their voice (eg a hoarseness, weakness, or whispering) quality after the tube is removed. It is not apparent in Sergei’s voice.

       More intriguingly, why were all these calls reported by Russia and not the UK? Surely a recording of the call should have been headline news on BBC… shouldn’t it? As far as I am aware, apart from a couple of reports in the MSM (the DM and Mirror did report it) there has been no official response at all. If Sergei is under control of HMG, they must have known about it but then did nothing. I for one, don’t buy that.

54. Gulnara,

    Apologies for rehashing this, but I can’t get my head around the “how and why” of her involvement.
    Paul and Liane and the other researchers can separate fact from conjecture.

    GULNARA

    1) Did she fly to the UK (with or without breakfast cereal) on Saturday March 3rd?
    If so, but not on Yulia’s flight, but a later one that still gave her enough time to be contacted by Yulia and make a trip to the grocery store.

    2) Did she meet Yulia on Sunday?

    3) If she did, then this would be after the cemetery visit, when the phones were switched off, and somewhere near Salisbury. A journey by car, for both parties?

    This all cannot be coincidental, and in the grand scheme of all that happened/did not happen that weekend, must be significant.

    1. The important thing for me in this puzzle is how was Gulnara’s involvement identified?

       Did she go to the police and report her contact with Yulia and the strange request?

       Or did the police / ss trace the text / phone call?

       If the latter then Buckweat and Bay Leaves are code.

       And why / how did the story make it into the press (a heavily controlled and primed press)

       1. Anonymous.
          Indeed.
          Going with the HMG version of events. (Bear with me)

          “Yulia, you and your dad have been poisoned, has anyone given you anything recently?
          Anything from Russia, maybe delivered by a Russian.”

          If Yulia believed the narrative, then she would have ratted out her friend, and she must have met her on Sunday.
          What friend would make a 200 mile round trip to deliver breakfast cereal?
          Gulnara phones Yulia, excitedly on Saturday morning.
          “I have the Buckwheat, see you tomorrow.”

          If Yulia did not inform the police that the meeting with Gulnara took place, then why not?

          If the meeting took place, and Gulnara was interviewed, then how could Gulnara be eliminated from the inquiry so quickly?
          She was not the women walking through the mall with the red bag, was she?

          1. Duncan,

             My view is that the whole ‘buckwheat and bay leaves’ story is hiding something else. Since Yulia only arrived in Salisbury on Saturday evening, it must suggest that if Yulia met Gulnara, that can only have been on Sunday morning. It would be possible for Gulnara to travel from the airport straight to Salisbury (we have no idea which flight Gulnara was on or what the purpose of her visit to the UK was) but it must be more likely that Yulia and Sergei drove to meet her. Perhaps they met her at (whichever) airport.

             We don’t know what S&Y did after 09:15 on Sunday until around 13:15, when we have CCTV of Sergei’s car. A four hour gap would have allowed them to make a trip to meet Gulnara.

             If you look at the images of Gulnara, she is rather short and always has long dark hair… I think she is certainly not the woman in the CCTV (who I think is taller and older).

             1. Thanks Paul.

                https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5918813/Nerve-agent-victim-Yulia-Skripal-intends-soon-return-Russia.html
                She is pictured in this article with Yulia. If that indeed is her. Secret agents have access to wigs, I have been told by a former spy.
                I know UK snow is nothing compared to what Moscow endures, but this meeting/Buckwheat just seems so implausible.
                “Father, we are meeting Gulnara to recover the breakfast cereal, so we must switch off our phones on Sunday morning.
                We can’t leave the Buckwheat in the car, so we must put it in the attic and make sure we touch the door handle on the way out.”

                This will of course all be cleared up in the upcoming BBC Docudrama
                “The Skripals – victims of a cereal killer”

                1. Progress! The UK reports seem (as usual!) to have been taken directly from reports in the Russian press. This extract is from MK on 25 March, a week before The Sun published its ‘Exclusive’ (what does that even mean when they just copy one week old stories from foreign papers?) in the UK on 1 April:

                   “Yulia was previously in the UK in November 2017. Sergei Skripal, as usual, had asked her to bring him buckwheat and bay leaves. For this March visit, Yulia was busy and did not have time to collect the groceries for her father. So she asked a close friend who, with her husband, was also planning to fly to England, but on March 6, to bring spices to her father later.

                   On WhatsApp, on March 4, right before the poisoning, Yulia’s girlfriend, the leading logistics specialist of one of the medical companies, the same girl who was entrusted with the delivery of bay leaves to Sergey Skripal, spoke to Yulia. At about 13.20 Moscow time, Julia wrote that she was feeling fine, the weather was fine, she was going for a walk to the center.

                   The girlfriend, by the way, has already been questioned by the English cops.”
                   https://www.mk.ru/politics/2018/03/25/otravlenie-sergeya-skripalya-my-nashli-strannogo-boyfrenda-yulii.html

                   I am guessing but it looks to me like the source is probably Gulnara herself – who else would know about the WhatsApp messages?

                   The idea that the porridge was ever considered as a route for poisoning seems to be an invention (for which read lie) of the UK MSM – it is clearly impossible if Gulnara and her husband did not arrive until 6 March. Which (if true) also rules out any meeting between Yulia and Gulnara on Sunday morning.

                   If Yulia really had a standing order for ‘buckwheat and bay leaves’ – it is probably nothing to do with groceries.

                   1. Duncan, Here are two more images of Gulnara:

                      https://cont.ws/uploads/pic/2018/10/1363687-11045.jpg
                      Notice she has exactly the same sun glasses as the DM image.

                      https://static.mk.ru/upload/entities/2018/07/04/articlesImages/image/2f/23/23/05/a51db53b2b535b313a5c513999613119.jpg

                   2. “ leading logistics specialist of one of the medical companies” – that phrase just hit me. Didn’t Petrov & Mishkin (or whatever their names) claim to be involved in sports nutrition / supplements? Since Putin claimed they are citizens, or at least were in a civilian capacity when they came to the UK, maybe they were all involved in some shady trafficking business of dodgy pharmaceuticals – that being Skripal, the two Russian guys and Yulia’s best friend. Better yet, what if western intelligence lured Petrov & Mishkin to the UK claiming to want to buy some ‘supplements’ and Yulia and/or skripal were responsible for the delivery?

                   3. Thanks Paul,
                      With Moscow 3 hours ahead of the UK, that WhatsApp call on the Sunday morning, March 4th might be significant.
                      Gulnara might not have been the source. If the UK has hold of Yulia’s phone, which must be the case, they could check the phone and see the WhatsApp conversation.
                      That would then lead them to identify and interview Gulnara, but when did that interview take place?

                      1. The call/message was 10:20 GMT – which might indicate that those of us who have argued that the most likely time for the phones to be switched off was the afternoon, might be correct.

                         Even if the UK had Yulia’s phone, I doubt the police would be briefing a Russian newspaper on the contents of the phone. Also who else could have told the ‘buckwheat and bay leaves’ story? I think that is all from Gulnara.

                         No idea when the police interview took place, my guess would be Tuesday 6th, when Gulnara and her husband arrived – interesting that she came with her husband, possibly a holiday rather than a business trip. She was back again in the UK in June (or so we are told). The interesting thing about the 6th is that it was the day Yulia was named; The Telegraph broke the story just after mid-day on 6th, so how could Gulnara have known before she arrived… unless she was already in touch with the police.

                         We are still none the wiser about how Gulnara was supposed to get the ‘groceries’ to Yulia, or why Yulia would have asked her to do it if Yulia knew that she would be ‘gone’ before Gulnara arrived. Were the ‘groceries’ actually for someone else perhaps?

                         A final curiosity, Yulia met Gulnara in 2015 so they had only been friends for about 3 years. I am intrigued that Yulia was using Gulnara for powers of attorney (instead of getting a lawyer or other professional) and that Gulnara agreed to do it… odd for friends of such short acquaintance. It meant considerable trouble and expense for Gulnara… I suspect her role is far more involved than we realise.

                         1. Paul, possibly true.
                            The cereal and the leaves could be a code.
                            On my Android WhatsAPP app, if the phone is unlocked, then the WhatsAPP conversations are all visible, so any and all of my conversations are visible to someone who has my phone and unlocked it.
                            Obtaining Yulia’s fingerprint to unlock, if she protected the phone that way, would not be too difficult if she was in a coma.
                            I just can’t see the request to bring the forgotten items as reasonable. especially with snow around on Saturday and Salisbury being quite a distance from London airports.
                            When do we think Gulnara found out that her friend Yulia had been attacked?
                            When the UK police found her as a contact in Yulia’s phone?
                            The police somehow knowing that Gulnara was in the UK, or missed calls from Gulnara to Yulia’s phone,

                            “Hey Yulia, it’s Gulnara, I have the buckwheat and bay leaves, I am driving down to Salisbury, Why are you not answering my calls?”

                            1. Duncan, I know what you are referring to with Whatsapp but my point is that the UK police would not have shared that information with a Russian newspaper. MK got the story elsewhere and the most likely source must be Gulnara.

                               I have difficulty with your other questions because I do not believe for one second that ‘Yulia’ was attacked or was in SDH…

                            2. It is so simple. Yulia was very busy prior to her departure for London. According to MK, at night of Friday March 2 Yulia was in the town of Podolsk where she left her dog Noir in a dog hotel (for up to 18 March). At around 9 pm, Yulia called from Podolsk her friend Diana, who was also the manager for the renovation of Yulia’s flat, and said that she would not manage to bring her the agreed sum of money that night. (If I correctly remember, Yulia said that Stepan would bring the money later.)
                               Because of her being busy with many things, Yulia failed to buy buckwheat and bay leaves for Sergei (apparently, he wished to get the kind to which he had accustomed in Russia and which seemingly was not available in the U.K.) So Yulia asked her best friend Gulnara (a photo of Yulia and Gulnara together can be seen in Yulia’s Facebook), who was to fly to London on 6 March, to buy buckwheat and bay leaves and bring them with her. Apparently, Yulia was planning to meet up with Gulnara in London. It would be strange if Yulia, having a two-week holiday in the U.K., would have planned to spend all that time in Salisbury, without spending a couple of days in London.
                               On Monday, March 5, Gulnara, still in Moscow, heard TV news of Sergei Skripal found ill (or poisoned, I am not sure now what first reports could have been about) and of a woman found with him. As Gulnara and her husband had air tickets for Tuesday, March 6, they flew to London. Upon arrival, they either came to a police station in London or perhaps travelled to Salisbury to find out what had happened to Sergei and Yulia. According to The Telegraph’s report of March 6, the police identified Yulia with the help of Yulia’s friends. My guess is that Gulnara and her husband were shown Yulia’s photo taken in hospital. The police needed confirmation that the woman found with Sergei in the Maltings was Yulia, because on the passport photo Yulia looked differently from what she looked by March 2018 – we can see from the many photos published by the media that Yulia’s looks changed significantly over some period of time.

                            3. Sergei’s name was not released in the UK until 6pm GST (9pm Moscow time) on Monday 5th, so it is very unlikely Gulnara would have heard this before she left Moscow (when was it reported in Moscow – do you know?) – especially if she had an early flight on 6th. It would have to have been a VERY early flight if The Telegraph published a story about Yulia’s friends by 12 noon. Is that even possible?

                               “apparently, he wished to get the kind to which he had accustomed in Russia and which seemingly was not available in the U.K.” – do you have a source for this, I have not seen one? What is the difference between Russian types of buckwheat and bay leaves sold in Moscow and the same brands sold in London?

                               “Apparently, Yulia was planning to meet up with Gulnara in London” – do you have a source? Again, I have not see one.

                               “The police needed confirmation that the woman found with Sergei in the Maltings was Yulia, because on the passport photo Yulia looked differently” – Yulia passed her driving test in England so must have had a recent driving license issued in Moscow in 2015 or later. Would that not have had a picture?

                               Do you know Gulnara’s full name?

                            4. https://www.vedomosti.ru/politics/articles/2018/03/05/752812-bivshii-sovetskii-shpion-tyazhelo-zabolel-posle-otravleniya
                               The Russian news story above is timed 5 March 2018,18:23 MSK. The Vedomosti newspaper provided the link to the BBC piece in English. But the BBC Russian service might have published the Skripal info earlier than BBC in the U.K. Anyway, even if Gulnara had heard/read about Skripal after 9pm MSK on 5th March, she had plenty of time to get worried about her friend and to think about going to police to find out what had happened and what the Skripals’ health condition was. Gulnara and her husband had tickets to fly to the U.K. on 6th March, so they had not do something special to get to London. Given the timing of The Telegraph’s story (about noon 6th March) on Yulia’s identification by her friends, Gulnara and her husband went to police in London, not in Salisbury. The Telegraph had a “well-placed source”
                               – see this story where they mentioned it:
                               https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/03/05/alleged-former-russian-spy-critically-exposure-unknown-substance/
                               So as soon as Yulia’s identity was confirmed by “her friends” (according to The Telegraph), the well-placed source conveyed that info to the newspaper. Just good work by The Telegraph, nothing special.

                               The link below is to the Moskovsky Komsomolets (MK) article of 25 March 2018:
                               https://www.mk.ru/politics/2018/03/25/otravlenie-sergeya-skripalya-my-nashli-strannogo-boyfrenda-yulii.html
                               This MK piece is the source of the buckwheat story and lots of other information. In March 2018, MK had not yet made public the names of Yulia’s friends; Yulia’s boyfriend Stepan was named there “Stas”. However, at later stages of the Skripal saga, MK revealed that Yulia’s “buckwheat” friend was Gulnara, her “renovation” friend was Diana and her boyfriend was Stepan.
                               In the MK article of 25 March, there is such a phrase:
                               Подружку, кстати, уже допросили английские копы.
                               The Google translation:
                               “The girlfriend, by the way, was already questioned by the English cops.”

                               That was said about Yulia’s friend with buckwheat. It is easy to put two and two together and figure out that Gulnara went to police upon her arrival to London in the morning of 6th March. It’s just natural for a close friend.

                               Now about buckwheat.
                               Paul, quoting Milda:
                               *****************
                               “apparently, he wished to get the kind to which he had accustomed in Russia and which seemingly was not available in the U.K.” – do you have a source for this, I have not seen one? What is the difference between Russian types of buckwheat and bay leaves sold in Moscow and the same brands sold in London?
                               *******************

                               As Sergei had asked to bring him some produce from Russia, it is apparent (what I said) that shops in the U.K. offer some different kind of that produce, not the one Sergei had accustomed to in Russia.
                               MK:
                               “Сергей Скрипаль, как обычно, просил привезти ему гречку и лавровый лист.”
                               The Google translation:
                               “Sergey Skripal, as usual, asked to bring him buckwheat and bay leaf.”
                               (“leaf”, not “leaves”, because of translation shortcomings)

                               It just means that Sergei, in his 60-s, had liked certain food he had accustomed to since his childhood and he preferred certain kinds of the produce he had back in Russsia.

                               If MK had not mentioned “buckwheat and bay leaves” on 25th March 2018, the public would not have known about this small part of the Skripal saga. Did two Russian journalists (the MK article was signed by two names) conspire with the Met to make up this story?

                               Paul, quoting Milda:
                               *******************************
                               “Apparently, Yulia was planning to meet up with Gulnara in London” – do you have a source? Again, I have not see one.
                               **************************************************
                               Yulia and Gulnara are close friends. Yulia planned to stay in the U.K. until 17 or 18 March (she left Noir in the dog hotel in Podolsk for up to 18 March). Gulnara had a plan to stay in the U.K. for some time beginning 6th March, perhaps through the next weekend. Given those plans, it was just natural for close friends to wish to spend some time together while both were in the U.K.

                               Paul, quoting Milda:
                               **************************
                               “The police needed confirmation that the woman found with Sergei in the Maltings was Yulia, because on the passport photo Yulia looked differently” – Yulia passed her driving test in England so must have had a recent driving license issued in Moscow in 2015 or later. Would that not have had a picture?
                               **************************
                               Yulia might have forgotten to take her driving license to the U.K. (Or thought that she did not need it there.) In the above article, MK quoted Yulia’s “renovation” friend, who said that Yulia had called her around 9pm from Podolsk:
                               Она пожаловалась: мол, не успевает собрать вещи.
                               The Google translation:
                               She complained: they say, she does not have time to pack things up.
                               (“they say” is due to translation shortcomings).

                               As for Yulia’s passport, it was in her white (or greyish) travel bag we see in the Moscow airport video. In the Maltings, Yulia had a red bag (thanks to Rob and the “ducks” boy mother for this information). Her passport was in her travel bag at Sergei’s home. Thanks to Yulia’s social media photos reposted by the MSM many times, we can see with our own eyes that Yulia’s looks changed significantly over some period of time. It is understandable that the Wiltshire police had some difficulty in establishing Yulia’s identity with certainty on the 4th-5th March.

                            5. Something odd has happened with timestamp of the Vedomosti article.

                               This is the first saved version:
                               http://web.archive.org/web/20180305222452/http://www.vedomosti.ru/web/20180305222452oe_/https://www.vedomosti.ru/politics/articles/2018/03/05/752812-bivshii-sovetskii-shpion-tyazhelo-zabolel-posle-otravleniya

                               It is timedstamped at 21:23 (MSK) and was saved at 22:24 (MSK)

                               At that time, the link to the BBC article was to this version, which was saved at 18:14 (GMT):
                               http://web.archive.org/web/20180305181431/https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-43295134

                               I think the 18:23 (MSK) must be wrong – which means the news only broke in Russia around 9:30pm on 5 March.

                               As for Yulia’s passport: do you know when it was issued? I have no idea, so it is just as likely that it was issued recently and had a current picture of Yulia, as it is that it was an old passport.

                               I know that the Telegraph article speaks about ‘Yulia’s friends’ but I am quite sure that by Tuesday morning, the Cassidy’s would have been able to provide any confirmation of identification that the police needed.

                               If you want to reply, I suggest you start a new thread as this one is now very long.

                            6. Paul seems to claim that on the 5th March Gulnara went to bed before 9pm and did not even check on the web news next morning, though she was highly likely to hear/read news of the 4 March incident in Salisbury during that day (5 March). Given that Salisbury is a small town, Gulnara should have felt at least some small worry about Yulia (for instance, when incidents or terrorist attacks happen in certain place, we try to contact our friends who live or stay there) and tried to contact her. As Yulia did not answer, Gulnara, naturally, got very worried (I hope that Paul will not demand a “source” for that). So she certainly followed all the Salisbury-related news closely. If Paul wants to say that Gulnara arrived to London on 6th March being unaware of the incident with Sergei and Yulia, well Paul, go ahead.

                               Generally, all the “buckwheat” fuss in this thread is much ado about nothing. Just read (Google translate) the MK piece I quoted in my comment above.

                            7. You are such a fool Milda! That post is just inane drivel. Why do you do it?

                            8. I do not ask you Paul why you keep pushing one absurd topic after another. I know that you are a government troll.

                            9. I am very happy to leave it to others to decide whether they agree with you or not. BTW which government do you mean?

                         2. Does no one wonder at the cost of this packet of Buckwheat and some Bay leaves?

                            That’s the shop cost of the items plus the cost of the airline tickets (hundreds of pounds sterling for a short notice booking) plus the transport costs in the UK.

                            A bit extravagant is an understatement. Does Sergei also own a Rolls or perhaps a Bentley??

                            IMHO, such an elaborate scheme to transport some cereal and veg. is simply not believable.

                            1. Cascadian, Gulnara´s trip to London was planned long before. It was NOT for bringing Buckwheat.
                               I agree with Milda that it is most likely that Gulnara and Yulia wanted to meet in London.
                               I also agree with Milda that Gulnara knew what happened to the Skripals when she arrived in London. That´s why she contacted the police to get more information and the allowance to visit Yulia in hospital.

                               My theory still is that Sergei wanted to go back to Russia and Yulia was there to help him.
                               It could well be that Gulnara and her husband wanted to help Yulia to fix things (sell Sergei´s house and car, send his valuables to Russia and so on) after Sergei´s arrival in Russia.
                               So, the Buckwheat story could have been just a distraction.

                            2. Liane, I also think that Gulnara knew before she left Russia but not from the MSM. There is a clue in the MK piece of 25 March:

                               “On March 4 in the evening, when the whole world became aware of the poisoning of Julia Skripal and her father, Stanislav came to the foreman without warning, threw part of the repair money (Julia left them) onto the shelf and said: “I was not here!”.”
                               https://www.mk.ru/politics/2018/03/25/otravlenie-sergeya-skripalya-my-nashli-strannogo-boyfrenda-yulii.html

                               That is impossible isn’t it? On the evening of 4 March NOBODY was supposed to know anything. It was only 24 hours later that Dominic Casciani told “the whole world” that it involved Sergei Skripal…

                   4. Moscow time GMT+3hrs

                      Yulia messaged at 10:20 she was about to walk into town.

                      That makes more sense

55. After reviewing the available evidence it appears to me that there were two responses to the Maltings incident on the 4th March 2018.

    The first was in response to a “silent call” from a person unknown. There is no CCTV footage of the police and paramedics responding to this call and it is my belief the responders were not regular emergency service staff. The Air Ambulance was alerted to this response.

    The second response was about 10 minutes later, police and paramedics arrive very quickly, CCTV of the police and paramedics arriving was genuine but initially (on the 9th March 2018) the MSM were telling us these responses were to the first 4:15 call. Time stamps were removed from the clips and footage of an ambulance car arriving was cleverly manipulated to show it arriving at around 4:15 whilst in fact it arrived at around 5:15.

    The deception was deliberate.

    My theory is the first response was intended as an emergency drill to crisis actors (an extension of toxic dagger).

    However when real casualties were identified at the scene the next alert was made and confusion has reigned ever since.

    1. Which could well be the reason for the refusal of the FoIA concerning ambulance times, on grounds of “National security”. The whole story is simply a lie.

       1. The police formal statements said the first call was about 4:15, there was no mention of a Silent Call, the MSM then told us the police arrived at 4:15, running paramedics at 4:16 and ambulance car at 4:18.

          Then CCTV from Jennys was published on the 9th March that confirmed these “facts”

          The actual facts turn out to be that Collins and Holloway arrive at 4:24/4:26 and arrive within 2 minutes of the alert (The police station is less than half a mile from the Maltings scene}.

          The ambulance car on CCTV said to have arrived soon after the 4:15 call actually arrived at around 5:15.

          The police responded to a complainant that the first police were on the scene at 4:24, the police car caught on Jennys CCTV said to be the first in timestamped 4:26.

          Yes they lied.

          1. If, as you suggest, the first 5:15 call was actually part of Toxic Dagger, the public would have already been excluded from the area – which would explain why not a single image from a mobile phone has ever been produced.

56. New evidence (third release) of the OPCW’s warmongering in Syria from Wikileaks:

    twitter.com/wikileaks/status/1206003435868438528

    Peter Hitchens latest column, covering the latest release:

    https://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk

    Alt-media has been talking about this for a long time – please go back and read this piece of disinformation from The Guardian. Does anyone still doubt on which side the MSM sits:

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/dec/18/syria-white-helmets-conspiracy-theories

    1. IF and it looks proven that the OPCW management colluded with political forces to falsify in order to provide justification for the US, UK and France to bomb Syria then several things should flow from this and urgently;

       1) An Independent criminal investigation withing the OPCW to determine the veracity of the claims and if confirmed the prosecution of those involved.

       2) A Independent investigation into what Boris Johnson (as Foreign Minister) knew before the bombings and when he became aware that the OPCW claims were being challenged. What steps were taken by HMG to investigate the alleged fraud.

       3) At what stage were the UK’s Secret Security Services Mi6 aware of the facts of what actually occurred in Douma.

       4) A Independent criminal Investigation into Bellingcat for inciting an act of war
       Bellingcat Report released 4 days after the alleged False Flag Incident
       https://www.bellingcat.com/news/mena/2018/04/11/open-source-survey-alleged-chemical-attacks-douma-7th-april-2018/

       1. April 7 – Douma “Attack”

          April 11 – Bellingcats’s Report with evidence and conclusions that Assad was responsible

          April 14 – US, UK and France bomb Assad targets

          April 21 – OPCW Inspectors first visit to one of the sites.

          Remember it is Bellingcat that has provided evidence that the two Russian tourists in Salisbury were GU agents, the UK authorities have never produced any evidence to show those two men were not who they said they were or that they worked for the Russian GU.

          If the OPCW is found to be corrupt then the rest of the Wiltshire poisoning Hoax falls apart, the presence of Novichok Weapon in Salisbury and Amesbury is now just as much in doubt as a Chlorine Weapon being present in Douma. Just because the OPCW and Bellingcat saying so doesn’t make it true.

          They have been exposed and one of the main protagonists has just been elected Prime Minister of Great Britain, it doesn’t get much worse – but surely will.

          1. How long will Peter Hitchens be allowed to write for the MAIL ON SUNDAY ?
             It seems his newest article is suppressed :
             The Penalties for Telling the Truth – an article about the intimidation and apathy which followed my publication of leaks from the OPCW
             By PETER HITCHENS FOR THE MAIL ON SUNDAY
             https://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2019/12/the-penalties-for-telling-the-truth-an-article-about-the-intimidation-and-apathy-which-followed-my-p.html

             A good thread by Caitlin Johnstone :
             “A member of the FFM team has been suspended from his post and escorted from the OPCW building in a less than dignified manner.”
             https://twitter.com/caitoz/status/1206003952338104322

    2. Peter Hitchens’ column in the Mail on Sunday links to First Things, but the link is incorrect. The correct link is
       https://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2019/12/in-praise-of-telling-the-truth

       Now, what did Peter Hitchens exactly reveal about OPCW ?

       1. The latest piece from Hitchens, discussing the Wikileaks information, is here:

          https://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2019/12/fresh-evidence-that-un-watchdog-suppressed-report-casting-doubt-on-assad-gas-attack.html

          The first link I gave was an index to all Hitchens articles – this article is third on the list (at the time of writing).

          1. Thanks, Paul.

       2. “one of the most gruesome tyrants in the world”

          How does Hitchens get away with statements like that? Or is it just used as a shield against those who would otherwise just dismiss his reports?

57. Feeling confused?

    There’s a reason for that:
    https://off-guardian.org/2019/12/15/the-art-of-doublespeak-bellingcat-and-mind-control/

    1. That is an excellent essay and one that should be required reading in every secondary school in the land, of course it never will be because of its content.

       The State School System is where it begins; the uniform, the bounds of hairstyle and footwear, the discipline, the subject content and most importantly when you have learned compliance you are then taught how to think (not learn).

       Gottlieb identified the trick as the very best salesmen often do. There is no need to control the mind if you can get the mind to control itself for your benefit. In salesmen terms you don’t try and sell, you get the buyer to buy.

       But the adolescent mind needs coaching and reinvigorating throughout its life’s journey and therefore the gifts of Common Purpose, NLP, the BBC, Integrity Initiative, institute for Statecraft, the MSN etc etc are bestowed on us by the Controllers so that we never forget how to think.

       Its a lot easier for everyone that way but only beneficial in wealth terms to the Controllers and it shall ever be thus until the plebs / goys / serfs break free of their self inflicted (State Aided) Mind Control. This election may well have spurred that shift.

       1. Then how fortunate I must have been to have not attended much in the way of secondary schooling – I was hardly ever then and refused a school certificate when I left at 15 years old. Life was tough at first, but I eventually switched on and subjected my myself to a rapid programme of education focusing on the subjects in which I was interested (mainly relating to maths, physics and other technical subjects). I’ve always had trouble with authority and that may be due to the reasons you mention.

58. Wasn;t it Gulnara and he husband who formally identified the Skripals, for the Met, while they were in SDH and still in comas and the story then was that they were about to die?

    1. Apart from it being extraordinarily unlikely that the Skripals were in SDH, why would the police need someone to identify them? The OPCW relied on photo ID. In any case, there were people like Ross Cassidy already in Salisbury who knew both of them very well and how would Gulnara have known Sergei? Gulnara might have known Yulia but Sergei left Russia in 2010 so she can’t have met him very often.

       I know what you are talking about but I fear it is another anecdote for the ‘nonsense’ pile.

59. Far from leading a quiet life in Salisbury, Sergei clearly hit the ground running. Apart from using one random Turkish taxi driver to return to #47, 40-50 times in the next 7 years, Sergei was buying Russian sausages and pickled cabbage, once or twice a month near Waterloo:
    https://twitter.com/se1/status/1017715000490758144?lang=en

    Which makes me wonder: if Sergei was a regular visitor to a Russian shop near Waterloo, why was Yulia supposed to bring him buckwheat and bay leaves from Moscow? Sergei could buy them any time he wanted on any of his trips to London. We are told Yulia forgot to bring the groceries and Gulnara brought them instead… how is that possible? Which flight was Gulnara on? When and how did Gulnara deliver them to Yulia? Did she take them to Salisbury? Did Yulia meet Gulnara on Sunday morning? Did Sergei have a late breakfast on Sunday? Why was Gulnara “interrogated” by Scotland Yard? Is the whole ‘buckwheat and bay leaves’ story nonsense as well?
    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5946251/russian-spy-sergei-skripal-poisoning-claims/

    1. Paul,
       It seems too contrived that Yulia’s friend would be involved in such an effort for such a trivial request.
       1) 200 mile round trip after Yulia phoned her to say “bring the cereal” in bad weather conditions in the UK.
       2) London with a large Russian population must have a store that sells this, and as you mention, Sergei was picking up supplies there anyway.

       Something not right, but as usual, in Salisbury it is never as it seems.

       1. Thing is Duncan, it is just too easy to find things that are ‘not right’ when all we get are soundbites. Gulnara was also the person who (we are told) sold Yulia’s car etc. so her role in the whole affair is probably much more than we have been led to believe.

          Then there was this from April 2019:

          “Russian sources have confirmed that agents detained Yulia’s friend, known only as Gulnara”
          https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1114166/russia-news-yulia-skripal-sergei-skripal-novichok-attack-salisbury-vladimir-putin

          Looks like Gulnara has been interrogated by the Brits and the Russians… Americans next perhaps?

    2. More things that are plausible, on the surface, and don’t make sense, in context.

       That Yulia ‘forgot’ to buy inexpensive groceries for Sergei, to whom they were important, seems unlikely. He’s her father, she’d prioritise such errands even if she realised they could have been bought here and even if it was at a premium price.

       Were Sergei to have mentioned such items to the proprietor of the Russian shop, he was a frequent enough customer for buckwheat, bay leaves and whatever to have been stocked. Polish shops provide goods from home for their Polish clientele, why wouldn’t a Russian specialty deli do the same?

       And then, after Dawn dies, the shop shuts down. An imbalance between too few paying customers and too much of the wrong kind of interest, maybe.

       So it’s not about the goodies from home per se, nor about the shop as a trading establishment per se. But it might be about something Yulia couldn’t or daren’t bring with her because she comes with the Skripal tag.

       Or, put another way, I agree with Duncan and Paul; maybe not in detail but certainly in the direction of travel. It’s curious that the direction goes from ‘Sergei clearly hit the ground running … ‘ to the significance of Yulia in this saga.

       1. The owner of the Corner Shop that Sergei frequented on Wilton Rd actually did offer to stock Sergei’s favourite Russian treats but bay leaves are so abundant in the UK the whole yarn appears specious, but why?

          I think the key to that is how did the request become known and why was it made public.

          The other aspect I have mused on and indeed did make inquiries in Russia with no success was did Yulia go to the hairdressers on the morning of the 3rd, is that why she was in a rush and forgot these items? (ie had she changed from blonde to reddish brown that morning)

          1. These ‘one off’ stories must be cover – somebody knew something so a silly story was put out to deflect. Same with Abigail McCourt and her award: she was saying too much at school, so a silly story was published to cover for what she had been telling her friends.

          2. In some earlier thread here on The Blogmire, someone (Milda, I think) wrote that possibly Yulia had delayed her trip from Moscow so that she could spend Stepan’s birthday with him. Well, Milda-I-think (and, if not, apols to Milda) knew when Stepan’s birthday was and iirc it was a milestone birthday for him.

             Again iirc his birthday was earlier that week, and it’s likely that she had her hair done for that date rather than on the Saturday of her flight. OTOH if her intention was to change her appearance, then doing it on the day she left Russia makes sense – hah, in which case her appearance can’t have entirely match her passport photo.

       2. Yulia knew that things were planned for Sunday afternoon, so as you suggest, maybe Gulnara was bringing something Yulia did not want to risk carrying – in which case, the Skripals spent Sunday morning on a trip to meet Gulnara after the 9am cemetery visit. This would explain why the Skripals were up so early and why the cops “interrogated” Gulnara. Sunday morning would have been the only possible time for Yulia and Gulnara to meet. Obviously ‘buckwheat and bay leaves’ are not what it was about.

          1. This is no more than a speculative thought but maybe Yulia didn’t know that things were going to happen specifically on Sunday afternoon, or she didn’t know until she arrived and spoke to her father.

             Maybe she then realised she had to get an urgent message to Gulnara, that she needed to personally meet her trusted friend urgently (the use of ‘urgent’ twice is intentional) and a plausible pretext either had to be found. It might have meant that something needed to be brought out of Russia, or something significant told to Gulnara that mustn’t be intercepted in a phone call; there might be any number of reasons but the matter was both sensitive and (here I go again) urgent.

             That being so, Yulia may not have known of her place in her father’s plan until after she met him at Heathrow. In fact, she may well have brought buckwheat and bay leaves with her, for all we know.

             About that snowy trip from Heathrow back to Salisbury: were father and daughter privately and quietly conferring in the back of Ross Cassidy’s vehicle, after which Sergei needed to have a private word with Ross* and that was the reason why Mo went with Yulia into 47CMR to check the shower (run the water, and maybe a private chat between Mo and Yulia as well).

             * I absolutely concede that Sergei may only have wanted to give Ross some duty free fags’n’vodka, there may have been no nefarious reason.

       3. Alleged photo of Gulnara here and Stepan (where does he sit in this mystery?)

          https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5918813/Nerve-agent-victim-Yulia-Skripal-intends-soon-return-Russia.html

          1. Gulnara has a passing resemblance to this notorious Gulnara (now in jail for disobeying house arrest order)

             How weird if it were the same person

             https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/624/media/images/72295000/jpg/_72295064_gulnara-x-3.jpg

             https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-47468741

             1. According to the Express article I linked above, Yulia’s friend ‘Gulnara’ is from Kazakstan:

                “She was arrested at Moscow airport by members of the Investigative Committee as she returned from her homeland in Kazakhstan.”

                1. That info may not be sound… Interesting comment (and thread) here:

                   https://www.theblogmire.com/the-salisbury-poisoning-one-year-on-an-open-letter-to-the-metropolitan-police/#comment-27101

                   1. I think we know everyone’s surname in this strange mystery except possibly Tim Atkins’ so why is it that Gulnara’s surname has not been published?

                      1. According to this article, Yulia and Gulnara met at the US Embassy in Moscow, where they worked as telephone operators:
                         https://www.mk.ru/politics/2019/03/25/podruga-predstavila-dokazatelstva-sergeya-i-yuliya-skripal-zhivy.html

                         This article has another image of Gulnara and also has quite a lot to say about Stepan Vikeev:
                         https://www.mk.ru/social/2018/07/04/novyy-rakurs-dela-skripalya-yuliyu-v-britanii-navestila-podruga.html

                         1. On 18 March, The Sun ran a story that Yulia had worked in the US Embassy:

                            “…it emerged yesterday that Yulia worked in the US Embassy in Moscow.”
                            “…her newly-disclosed role at the US Embassy, where she worked in the information centre, …”
                            http://web.archive.org/web/20180318110320/https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5838665/boyfriend-of-poison-victim-yulia-skripal-was-russian-secret-service-agent/

                            This was subsequently updated:

                            “An earlier version of this article reported that Yulia Skripal had worked in the US Embassy in Moscow. The Embassy has contacted us to say that they have no record of her having worked there, and so the article has now been amended.”
                            https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5838665/boyfriend-of-poison-victim-yulia-skripal-was-russian-secret-service-agent/

                            A similar story appeared in the MailOnline. They added:

                            “A spokesperson of the US Embassy to Russia told MailOnline: ‘The US Embassy to Russia has no record of Ms Skripal ever working there.’ ”
                            https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5514907/Sergei-Skripals-daughter-Yulia-dating-secret-service-agent.html

                            On 11 April, Viktoria said:

                            “Yulia worked in the visa center of the US embassy in Moscow.”
                            https://sputniknews.com/russia/201804111063422503-yulia-skripal-political-asylum-unlikely/

                            If Yulia did work at the US Embassy, it was likely to have been before she moved to the UK in late 2010.

                            This is from the LinkedIn profile of Gulnara Razieva:

                            Operator of call centre
                            Teleperformance Russia
                            Aug 2010 – Nov 2010

                            Moscow, Russia

                            Project “US embassy information centre” – consulting people about American visas both in Russian and English languages
                            https://ru.linkedin.com/in/gulnara-razieva-75781b43/en
                            .
                            .
                            “Call centre”,”information centre”, “visas”, “US Embassy”… all seems to fit. Curiously, this Gulnara (who appears to be of a similar age to Yulia) has not updated her profile since May 2018, until then she seemed to do so regularly…

                            Maybe one of friends in Russia could do a bit more digging and see if it is the same person.

                            1. Sorry, should have added that the company Gulnara worked for was Teleperformance Russia – which still has a role assisting in visa enquiries for the US Embassy in Moscow. See here:
                               http://plgallery.ru/proletarskii/uehala-iz-rossii-v-portugaliyu-ceny.html

                               The fact that Teleperformance Russia is a company working for the US Embassy, rather than being part of the Embassy itself, would explain why the Embassy said it had no record of Yulia having worked there.

                            2. This is the original article to mention Yulia’s connection with the US Embassy in Moscow – but it is not clear who the source is:

                               “Yulia got a job at the US Embassy Information Center. Then she worked in the metropolitan branch of Cambridge International School. True, the trial period did not pass there – the level of sales left much to be desired.”
                               https://www.kp.ru/daily/26807.7/3842344/

                               This is the best image I can find anywhere of Yulia and Gulnara together:

                               https://cont.ws/uploads/pic/2018/10/1363687-11045.jpg

60. 2007 Assassination Plot – Smearing Poison on a Door Handle

    https://www.veteranstoday.com/2019/03/04/integrity-initiative-the-sinister-chain-of-events-leading-up-to-salisbury/

    Georgian oligarch Badri Patarkatsishvili, died from an apparent heart attack in 2008. American spy agencies are said to have intelligence suggesting he was murdered, and while predictably none is presented in the article, Patarkatsishvili was provably subject to at least one assassination plot prior to his death — and it certainly wasn’t Russian in origin.

    In 2007, covert recordings revealed three Georgian national security service officials had plotted to kill him ‘Georgia’s Richest Man’ at the behest of then-President Mikheil Saakashvili. In one recording they debate the best means of execution, an official suggesting they use a poisonous substance which will “kill a person two hours after touching it. You smear it on the door handle,”

61. This is a comment that got blocked yesterday, edited here to get past WP’s filter:

    Christopher Steele reported in his dossier about Trump and urinating pros**tutes in the Moscow Ritz-Carlton hotel. The only reason that that was made public was because Steele convinced US intelligence agencies to take it seriously, which led them to brief both Obama and Trump about it, prompting the press to report leaks about the story.
    However the main source for those stories said that they came from rumours and jokes from people drinking beer:

    [p.187 of report/ p.224 of PDF file of Horowitz report] “The Primary Sub-source was questioned again by the FBI beginning in March 2017 about the election reporting and his/her communications with Steele. The Washington Field Office agent {WFO Agent 1) who conducted that interview and others after it told the OIG that the Primary Sub-source felt that the tenor of Steele’s reports was far more “conclusive” than was justified. The Primary Sub-source also stated that he/she never expected Steele to put the Primary Sub-source’s statements in reports or present them as facts. According to WFO Agent 1, the Primary Sub-source said he/ she made it clear to Steele that h’e/she had no proof to support the statements from his/her sub-sources and that “it was just talk.” WFO Agent 1 said that the Primary Sub-source explained that his/her information came from “word of mouth and hearsay;” “conversation that [he/she] had with friends over beers;” and that some of the information, such as allegations about Trump’s sexual activities, were statements he/she heard made in “jest.” ”
    https://www.justice.gov/storage/120919-examination.pdf

    In spite of all that, Steele told the bosses of Fusion GPS (who hired him to compile the dossier) that he took the sources of the peegate story very seriously:

    “That the FSB bugged hotel rooms in Moscow was an open secret, known to western diplomats and spies. Still, Simpson and Fritsch were stunned. After reading the report, Fritsch exclaimed: “What the f**k?” Simpson said: “I know.” Steele assured them the memo was credible. It drew on seven sources, including (…) two witnesses from inside the Ritz.”
    https://www.theguardian.com/books/2019/nov/28/crime-in-progress-glenn-simpson-peter-fritsch-review

    1. Despite the fact that the source expressed serious doubts to the FBI as early as March 2017, and said that the pee-gate story was literally a joke, the then FBI boss, Comey said this the following year:

       “I honestly never thought these words would come out of my mouth, but I don’t know whether the current President of the United States was with prostitutes peeing on each other in Moscow in 2013. It’s possible, but I don’t know”
       https://twitter.com/CNN/status/984763083649437701

62. Bill Browder has filed a complaint with the German Press Commision against der Spiegel magazine for “gross journalistic malpractice in their reporting on the Magnitsky story”.
    http://russian-untouchables.com/rus/docs/Response%20to%20Der%20Spiegel%20Article%20on%20Magnitsky%20Case%20-%20Copy%20sm.pdf

    His complaint is based on four alleged flaws in der Spiegel’s article:

    Claim 1. “Magnitsky Was Not Murdered”

    Browder shows images of injuries to Magnitsky’s wrists as evidence that he was beaten in custody. However Magnitsky was forced to wear handcuffs, which could easily have caused those injuries if he moved his arms too much while he was in distress.

    Browder also refers to the “closed cerebral cranial injury” mentioned in Magnitsky’s official death certificate. However, those words have a question mark after them, and anyway if it was ‘closed’ it means it was a past injury.

    What Browder ignores is the words that come immediately after that:
    “No signs of a violent death detected” !!!

    That’s clear to see in the translation of document, which he provides a link to
    http://russian-untouchables.com/rus/docs/2009%2011%2016%20Death%20Certificate%20(original%20version),%2016%20November%202009%20(ENG).pdf

    Claim 2. “Magnitsky Was Not a Lawyer”

    Amazingly, Browder admits that Magnitsky was an auditor and tax advisor, but still calls him a lawyer. He even claims that “Magnitsky identified himself as a lawyer”, quoting words from Magnitsky where he did not even use the word ‘lawyer’.

    How can Browder say that, especially after admitting in the past that Magnitsky never went to law school (as reported in the Spiegel article)?

    He says it’s because Magnitsky gave legal advice on tax law and represented clients in court! If that’s right, then all auditors and tax advisors can pass themselves off as lawyers. Well I’m not a lawyer, but I suspect that anyone who tries that could risk getting themselves arrested.

    That’s a very unwise position for Browder to take, especially in Germany where the correct qualifications are considered very important for any job title.

    Claim 3. “Magnitsky Did Not testify Against Police Officers”

    Browder refers to Magnitsky’s testimonies about the police officers, as if der Spiegel had ignored them. In fact, the article does mention those testimonies from 2008 and explains that Magnitsky did not appear to uncover any wrongdoing by the police officers in question:

    “Magnitsky does indeed mention the names of the two police officers nearly 30 times and describes their role during a search. But at no point does he make a concrete accusation against them personally. In a second protocol of a statement made on Oct. 7, Kuznetsov and Karpov are not mentioned at all.”
    https://www.spiegel.de/international/world/the-case-of-sergei-magnitsky-anti-corruption-champion-or-corrupt-anti-hero-a-1297796.html

    Browder quotes part of another testimony from 2009, but he leaves out Magnitsky’s words,”I believe that” at the start:

    “I believe that Kuznetsov and other law enforcement officials that have entered into a conspiracy Kuznetsov and other law enforcement officials who have entered into a conspiracy with him could have been involved in stealing (…)”

    His use of words “I believe that” and “could have been” are not a sign that he had any hard evidence against anyone.

    4. Browder takes der Spiegel to task for not talking about who benefitted from the $230ml fraud.

    He points the finger at – but does not name – Vladlen Stepanov, “husband of Olga Stepanova, the tax officer who approved the illegal tax refund” because he “received $11.7 million at Credit Suisse”.

    Browder ignores Vladlen Stepanov’s statement that he has been divorced from Olga since 1992 and that they live apart and have separate lives. Stepanov also said that he had been involved in multi-million dollar real-estate projects for many years.
    https://www.barrons.com/articles/SB50001424053111904210704576357422636443958

    Browder makes mainly the same points in a video about his complaint against der Spiegel. It’s worth watching just to see him tell bare-faced lies to the camera. He doesn’t bat an eyelid but he must be really desperate that he doubles down on his lies after they have been clearly exposed.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llJ9IMSXbxc

    1. The second link (to the death cert) got broken up somehow (maybe because of the comma). Try copying and pasting the whole URL manually to see the page.

63. British Monarchy Attempts to Overthrow Trump:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bU_X_nhtCNM

    https://thegrayzone.com/2019/12/11/jeremy-corbyn-faces-russiagate-smear-campaign-before-uk-vote/#more-17822

64. From an award winner:

    Gp Capt Davies, whose military career began 30 years ago at the Air Training Corps in Hawarden, said “to be in command of the taskforce in Salisbury was a challenge but a fantastic one”.

    “This one really hit home how important it was for the UK, it really was a mission that couldn’t fail.”

    He said the nature of decontaminating the city made it “a very, very different challenge”.

    His team needed “novel techniques” to decontaminate 12 sites as places such as pubs had different surfaces and “each one has got a different property that the agent can bond with”.

    “So almost every single site had multiple decontamination methods put onto it,” he added.

    So, is it conceivable that the City Hotel management were unaware of the intense decon procedure?
    How did Salisbury locations which were not visited by the Skripals or DSB require to need decontamination?
    For a substance which was unknown to the UK prior to the Salisbury deployment, the clean up team seemed to know a lot about it’s bonding properties.
    A secret detail which I can now reveal to the Blogmirers is that Novichok does not bond to bread or coconut hair doormats.

65. Who is Steele´s Primary Sub-source, mentioned in the Horowitz Report ???
    I did some digging (forget what I wrote before !) :

    Footnote 388 in the Horowitz Report :
    “… all of the information attributed to Person 1 came from a single, 10-to-15-minute telephone call between the Primary Sub-source and Person 1.”

    “Person 1” is most probably Glen Simpson !
    “Primary Sub-source” is most probably Sergei Millian !

    Why I came to this conclusion :
    Steele Report 80, 95, 97 and 102 all contain information from Person 1.
    That means a 10-to-15-minute telephone call fed 4 Steele Reports !
    It most probably was a call between Glen Simpson and Sergei Millian.
    Simpson spoke with Steele several times. Each time Simpson provided Steele with additional information from this 10-to-15-minute telephone call.

    To find this out, I compared the sources of these four Steele Reports.
    Steele Report 95, 97 and 102 mention only ONE source !
    So this source has to be the “Primary Sub-source” !

    This is said about the “Primary Sub-source” in the 4 Reports mentioned by Horowitz :

    – In Steele´s Report 80 he calls Person 1 “a trusted compatriot” and the Primary Sub-source appears to be “Source D, a close associate of Trump who has organized and managed his recent trips to Moscow”.

    – In Steele´s Report 95 he calls Person 1 a “compatriot” and the Primary Sub-source “Source E, an ethnic Russian close associate of Republican US presidential candidate Donald Trump”.
    Report 95 ONLY mentioned “Source E”, none other source !
    But in Report 80 appears a “Source D, a close associate of Trump who has organized and managed his recent trips to Moscow”.
    It seems “Source D” and “Source E” are the SAME !
    In Report 80 “Source E” is called “a senior (western) member of staff at the hotel”.

    – In Steele´s Report 97 he says : “Speaking in confidence to a trusted associate in late July 2016, a Russian émigré figure close to the Republican US presidential candidate Donald Trump´s campaign team”.
    ONLY this “émigré figure” is mentioned in this report !

    – In Steele´s Report 102 he says : ““Speaking in confidence on 9 August 2016, an ethnic Russian associate of Republican US presidential candidate Donald Trump discussed…”
    ONLY this “ethnic Russian associate” is mentioned in Report 102 !

    Let´s summarize what Steele himself said about the Primary Sub-source :
    Report 80 : “A close associate of Trump who has organized and managed his recent trips to Moscow.”
    Report 95 : “An ethnic Russian close associate of Republican US presidential candidate Donald Trump”.
    Report 97 : “A Russian émigré figure close to the Republican US presidential candidate Donald Trump´s campaign team”.
    Report 102 : “An ethnic Russian associate of Republican US presidential candidate Donald Trump.”

    So we are looking for an ethnic Russian émigré figure who was close to the Republican US presidential candidate Donald Trump´s campaign team. He has organized and managed Trump´s recent trips to Moscow.

    This excluses Halper and Zaslavskiy.
    But it perfectly matches Sergei Millian !!!
    He is an ethnic Russian émigré figure and he was close to Trump´s campaign team”.
    When he became an American citizen, he changed his name to Sergei Millian.
    Millian is the president of the “Russian-American Chamber of Commerce”.
    Millian worked for Trump on the “Trump Hollywood Project” in Florida as his official broker.
    Millian knows Aras Agalarov, who organized the Miss Universe Pageant in Moscow.

    July 26, 2016 Sergei Millian was interviewed by ABC NEWS (25 pages) :
    ABC NEWS : So Trump likes Russia because there´s money to be made there?
    Sergei Millian : He likes Russia because he likes beautiful Russian ladies. And he likes talking to them of course. And he likes to be able to make lot of money with Russians, yes correct.
    https://www.scribd.com/document/387262982/Sergei-Millian-Interview-With-ABC-News#fullscreen&from_embed

    In Kathleen Kavalec´s handwritten notes Sergei Millian is mentioned as “operator”, together with Carter Page and Paul Manaford.
    November 21, 2016 Millian was the topic of an email exchange between Kathleen Kavalec and Bruce Ohr :
    OHR : “Kathy, I hope we can get something going here. I may have heard about him from Tom Firestone as well.”
    KAVALEC : “Just re-looking at my notes from my convo with Chris Steele, I see that Chris said Kukes has some connection to Serge Millian, an émigré who is identified by FT [Financial Times] as head of the Russian-American Chamber of Commerce. According of what Chris said to me in early October, Millian has apparently “disappeared,” i.e., left the U.S. And hasn´t been seen recently.”

    Mueller Report
    Millian´s contacts with George Papadapoulos are mentioned in the Mueller Report at page 94, 95, 102, 103.
    It was Millian who reached out to Papadapoulos and offered him contacts to Russians. He claimed he had “insider knowledge and direct access to the top hierarchy in Russian politics”.

    April 19, 2019 Millian tweeted :
    Now, as “Russiagate” is over and feeling totally exonerated by the recent report, let the inquisitive minds find the truth about the “#Pissgate” creators, a lovely couple, GS/CS [Glenn Simpson and Christopher Steele], who organized the smear campaign against the #President, #Millian, the team or are they #untouchable?
    https://twitter.com/SergeiMillian/status/1119146257694330881

    Was Millian framed for a 10-to-15-minute telephone call with Glen Simpson or did he really distributed dirt on Trump and tried to entrap Papadapoulos ?
    Durham will find the answer.

    1. Isn’t all that covered in this 19 Jan 2018 article (by what appears to be an anti-Trump journo)?
       https://www.businessinsider.com/sergei-millian-michael-cohen-glenn-simpson-fusion-gps-2018-1?r=US&IR=T

    2. It says here that Millian is indeed Steele’s ‘Source D’ as well as ‘Source E’, and also that he’s Horowitz’s ‘Person 1’: https://dailycaller.com/2019/12/14/fbi-counterintelligence-dossier-source/

       The Horowitz report also says that those three names are of the same source . See p.163 (“Source E … referred to hereinafter as Person 1”) and footnote 344 on p.191 (Source D = Source E).

       It’s still not clear who Steele’s Primary Sub-source is, but Horowitz indicates that it’s none of the above because the Primary Sub-source was in contact with Person 1 (p.110, p.247, p265).

66. Eliot Higgins interviewed for BBC’s HARDtalk:

    iPlayer:
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m000cb74/hardtalk-eliot-higgins-founder-of-bellingcat

    Podcast:
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/w3csy9fb

    1. And never once was he pushed hard enough to be forced to request that the interviewer orally massage his gonads.

       1. It’s the BBC innit, an organisation that never forgets who its’ paymaster is but nonetheless conveniently forgets that ultimately it’s the taxpayer who underwrites the paymaster.

67. Yulia Skripal interviewed on US air force base [RAF Fairford] in the UK [2018] – Link to John Helmer

68. It looks like Gina Haspel, as CIA’s Station Chief in London in 2016, was one of the first to be informed of Australian diplomat Alexander Downer’s story of “Russian dirt” on Clinton from Mifsud via Papadopoulos. It must be someone high up in the CIA in London since her job title and organisation are blacked out:

    [p.51 of report/ p.85 of PDF file of Horowitz report] https://www.justice.gov/storage/120919-examination.pdf
    (European city = London, FFG = Friendly Foreign Government = Australia) “On Jul 27 2016 the USG official called the FBI’s Legal Attache (Legat) and [Blacked out] in the European city to her office and provided them with the FFG information.”

    1. Another comment of mine about the Horowitz report got blocked, apparently because the filter detected some words in a story about Trump having fun in a Moscow hotel.

    2. I see moonofalabama has this comment:
       “The FBI has used the Steele dossier to gain further FISA application even after it had talked with Steele’s ‘primary source’ (who probably was the later ‘buzzed’ Sergei Skripal) and after it had learned that the allegations in the dossier were no more than unconfirmed rumors.”

       Any idea why he asserts this? MOA is one of those analysts who is usually vindicated further down the track, but I haven’t seen any fresh evidence for his view on Skripal.

       https://www.moonofalabama.org/2019/12/the-fbi-pushed-by-john-brennan-lied-to-the-court-seven-times-to-spy-on-the-trump-campaign.html#more

       1. begob, the FBI interviewed Steele´s ‘primary source’ in January 2017.
          For sure it was NOT Skripal !
          The media is still claiming it was a Russian source.
          But I´m quite sure this isn´t true. And I think this source was interviewed in the US.
          I´ve two names in my mind : Stefan Halper or Ilya Zaslavskiy.
          If Skripal played any role in the Dossier, it would be delivering (faked) foreign intelligence from one of the countries he visited.

          1. For sure it was not Skripal, Liane. But it was undoubtedly a Russian. Lindsey Graham, who chaired the Horowitz hearing in the senate today, knows the identity of this person, as he has seen the unredacted report. He referred to this person on numerous occasions as Russian.

             Rob

          2. Then it´s Ilya Zaslavskiy, who is Russian but lives in the US. He is like Browder very anti-Putin and engaged in many think tanks.
             Rob, I think that all parties in this game have an interest to keep the “evil Russia” narrative alive.

             1. Possibly, possibly not. More likely to be someone you’ve never heard of, I think, Liane.

                Rob

    3. And Brendan you forgot FWW = FBI whitewash

69. There is something very odd about the IG’s report into the FISA scandal published yesterday. If you read the report, it looks like the name ‘James Comey’ appears 149 times. If you search for the word ‘Comey’, however, it does not appear in the document!

    For some reason, a font has been designed where an ‘r’ next to an ‘n’ looks like an ‘m’! Search for ‘Corney’ and you will find all 149 examples of ‘James Corney’.

    The good news is that you don’t actually need to read the report itself. A search just using ‘Corney IG report’ will produce enough results for you to see this is true.

    What is going on?

    1. OCR

       1. I thought about that too – problem is that elsewhere in the document, ‘m’ does appear correctly placed. It is only when it spells Comey that the problem exists… Also if you do a DuckDuckGo search on “James Corney FBI” you will find a lot of results not just in the last 2 days.

          It is as if somebody did a word search in the document and replaced Comey with Corney… if you enlarge the type you can also see that the ‘r’ in Corney, is different from other ‘r’s in the document – the top curl has a longer tail than normal.

70. How many mistakes are media allowed to provide in one sentence ?

    Quote : „A similar crime committed in the United Kingdom last year sparked an international crisis when suspected agents with the Russian military intelligence agency GRU conducted an attack on former Russian spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter using the Russian neurotoxin Novichok.“
    https://www.spiegel.de/international/world/how-russian-agents-hunt-down-kremlin-opponents-in-europe-a-1300091.html

    Let me count :
    1. There is NO similarity between the Skripal case and the Khangoshvili case.
    2. There is NO proof that Boshirov and Petrov attacked the Skripals.
    3. There is NO proof that Boshirov and Petrov are GRU agents.
    4. Sergei Skripal was not a „former Russian spy“, he at best was a double agent who worked for MI6.
    5. Novichok is NOT a „Russian neurotoxin“. It was developed in the former Soviet Union, which includes for example Ukraine and Georgia.

    5 mistakes in one sentence is a remarkable result, DER SPIEGEL ! Try to outdo that.

    1. Der Spiegel repeats the story that ‘Unit 29155’ is Putin’s secret assassination squad. It ignores the fact that Unit 29155 has been known as an army firing range for more than fifty years.
       https://www.moonofalabama.org/2019/10/top-secret-russian-unit-that-destabilizes-europe-is-a-well-known-small-arms-training-base.html
       The ‘members’ of that unit could therefore just be former soldiers who do not necessarily even know each other.

       If we believe der Spiegel and Bellingcat, the Kremlin sent eight members of this unit to Bulgaria to kill someone but the guy survived. That’s even more incompetent than in Salisbury – what a waste of plane fares!

       Last week the Times also reported about the same team of hit men. The full article is behind a paywall, but we can see the first sentence – which reveals that those innocent-looking Russian tourists on skis are not what they seem. Where’s James Bond when you need him?

       “An elite unit of assassins from Russian military intelligence used French Alpine resorts as a base for operations in Europe, including the attempt to murder Sergei Skripal in Salisbury”
       https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/russian-assassins-hid-out-in-alpine-ski-resorts-w53nlrp0t

    2. Good point, Liane.

       The Criminal Code of Germany recognises three offences (punishable up to imprisonment), you can google the info: Insult (Art. 185 of the Criminal Code), defamation (Art. 186) and slander (Art. 187).

       It puzzles why Russia has never challenged any of the lies about the Skripals case in the courts, it would take just one successful case for the ‘journalists’ to stop indulging in the fabrication of fake facts. There must be something that holds the Russians back, they may have been involved, not poisoning the couple, but trying to smuggle the old man back to Russia.

       The German MSM isn’t the only one presenting the poisoning as fait accompli, and the Russians as the villains, reading our MSM one often comes across throw-away sentences saying the same, the repeating of the lies reinforces them, turns them into accepted truth, it’s only thanks to the internet that the chance of correcting them exists.

    3. Since we speak of the Khangoshvili case.
       Germany expelled two Russian diplomats, giving as reason that Russia did not cooperate enough in the elucidation of Khangoshvili’s murder. But which Russian agencies were asked for help by Germany? I have not read the answer to this question anywhere.
       According to the Anadolu Agency
       ( https://www.aa.com.tr/en/europe/russia-urges-germany-to-use-channels-on-criminal-cases/1665143# )
       [QUOTE]
       Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said Thursday he was unaware what Germany meant by “lack of cooperation,” as it expelled Russian diplomats for the murder of a Chechen asylum-seeker in Berlin.
       Speaking on the sidelines of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) ministerial meeting in Slovakia, said Germany should use special channels on criminal cooperation with Russia.
       “We have channels with Germany for law enforcement agencies to communicate, including on issues relating to violations of the legislation of a country, these channels should be used,” he said. “If our German partners claim that Russia did not cooperate enough, I do not know on what they base such assessments.”
       [/QUOTE]

       If I’m not wrong, not a single Western mainstream media quoted Lavrov’s comments.

       1. Inquirer, Germany did what the UK refused (but Russia demanded from the UK) : They spoke with the Russian ambassador in Berlin – twice.
          They asked him to open the channels Lavrov mentioned.

          In the Skripal case I´m sure that the Kremlin has nothing to do with.
          In Khangoshvili´s case I´m not that sure.

          Interestingly Putin himself provided the reason, why Russia would want Khangoshvili to be punished. He said :
          “In Berlin, a warrior was killed, who was wanted in Russia, a bloodthirsty and brutal man. The murderer had been a bandit and one of the organizers of the attacks in the Moscow metro in 2010.
          The Russian side has repeatedly asked its German counterpart to extradite this bandit and murderer. Unfortunately, we have not achieved mutual understanding.
          We have to help our German colleagues.”

    4. @ Liane Theuer,

       Q: “How many mistakes are media allowed to provide in one sentence ?”

       R: The SC in the US has unequivocally ruled, ‘News doesn’t have to be true.’

       Thus ‘mistakes’ can be endless, although when something isn’t true [at least in my book of life], it’s a lie [regardless what color it’s given].

       1. Mistakes can and do occur but when they happen in politics and they are not corrected, retracted or clarified then they certainly become lies.

71. http://johnhelmer.net/the-skripals-under-us-control-at-a-usaf-nuclear-bomber-base-in-fairford-gloucestershire/

    ????????????????

    1. John is saying both S&Y went to Fairford – I think it was only Y. He also has them going there after SDH – I think that is just wrong!

       1. I have posted this previously:
          https://anonfiles.com/7133y5Efn9/adsbex-map-carpark-odstock-with-plane-finder-track_bmp

          It is the track of the AA after it left Sainsbury’s car park. The transponder was switched on over Bourne Retail Park. The AA then flew a loop around London Road cemetery before heading back in the direction of SDH. The transponder was switched off again at 17:17pm.

          33 minutes later, the transponder was switched on and shows the AA flying overhead SDH at 1600 feet and at 93 knots. 33 minutes is just enough time for the AA to have flown to Fairford, dropped off its passengers and returned to fly overhead SDH, after which it returned to its base.

       2. Paul,
          Fear not, no doubt the chopper trip with Yulia will be a key part of the upcoming BBC Docudrama.

          My sources close to the production team tell me it will feature early in the first episode, shortly after the duck feed.

          1. Who have they cast for the US agent that was picked up at Distillery Farm? Can I apply for an audition? I have a similar hairstyle!!

             1. It’s usually Tom Cruise.
                He even played Jack Reacher.

    2. It was pointed out a long time ago that Yulias interview was at Fairford. Somebody even pointed out the exact location on a map.

    3. This is interesting stuff. I didn’t know Fairford was an emergency landing site for
       Space Shuttle flights when doing a Spy orbit.
       Sound like a good location for Skripals if only Yulia.
       Sorry for a random comment.

72. Another excellent piece from Caity Johnstone:

    “A Newsweek journalist has resigned after the publication reportedly suppressed his story about the ever-growing OPCW scandal, the revelation of immensely significant plot holes in the establishment Syria narrative that you can update yourself on by watching this short seven-minute video or this more detailed video here.

    “Yesterday I resigned from Newsweek after my attempts to publish newsworthy revelations about the leaked OPCW letter were refused for no valid reason,” journalist Tareq Haddad reported today via Twitter.

    “I have collected evidence of how they suppressed the story in addition to evidence from another case where info inconvenient to US government was removed, though it was factually correct,” Haddad said. “I plan on publishing these details in full shortly. ”
    https://medium.com/@caityjohnstone/journalist-newsweek-suppressed-opcw-scandal-and-threatened-me-with-legal-action-7f85f490e610

    In his column today, Peter Hitchens laments the total lack of interest from the MSM into his own revelations of last week and promises that there is more to come.

73. I see that Norman Baker, former Lib Dem MP, has written an article in today’s Mail Online on the inconsistencies in the Skripal saga, and saying that it is total nonsense. It is refreshing to see that the Mail is becoming more openly prepared to publish the reasoned views of sceptics. However Norman Baker appears to fall into the trap of believing previous questionable narratives of nefarious Russian activities with little evidence other than the fact that security services pronounced their guilt. Maybe he felt he had to take that position to make his comments regarding Salisbury more credible to those who believe the mainstream narrative. But at least his latest analysis makes the right noises.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7767285/NORMAN-BAKER-says-weve-fed-pack-lies-Salisbury-poisoning.html

    1. He even manages to lump Gareth Williams into his list of ‘Putin’s crimes’! That would be a case of ‘despite the evidence’.

       “The Sun on Sunday newspaper quotes an intelligence source as saying Mr Williams had obtained sensitive documents regarding former US president Bill Clinton.

       “The Clinton diary hack came at a time when Williams’s work with America was of the most sensitive nature,” the source is reported to have told the newspaper.

       “It was a diplomatic nightmare for Sir John Sawers, the new director of MI6 at the time.”
       https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/mi6-spy-who-was-found-dead-in-bag-had-hacked-secrets-files-about-us-president-10479355.html

       Baker also has Sergei off to a prison in Siberia… a romantic notion I know, they all go to Siberia don’t they, except Sergei’s prison (if he ever actually went to one) was south east of Moscow.

       Nevertheless, as you say, generally “the right noises”.

       On a personal note, good to see you here again.

       1. Paul

          Thanks for your kind words. I do continue to keep tabs on what Rob and you and others are exchanging comments on but only add to discussions if I feel I can offer anything particularly constructive. But, be assured, I’m always here in the background nodding ‘sagely’ in reaction to the commendable research and analysis that everybody on here offers. 🙂

    2. Even his comments about the Skripal case are full of errors, which are too numerous to mention. Almost every sentence is incorrect in some way, and the few valid points that he makes get lost in the middle of all of the errors. It’s a pity that Baker or the Mail didn’t get someone with knowledge of the case to proof-read his article first. Bellingcat or someone might now come along and ‘debunk’ this piece as if it represents the arguments against the official narrative.

       1. The Mail are often used as controlled opposition. The played a key role in ‘debunking’ the very real and genuine child abuse scandal by reporting fictitious allegations which when discredited allowed the baby to be thrown out with the bathwater.

    3. You might be interested in these links re Litvinenko:
       https://www.moonofalabama.org/2018/04/operation-hades-a-model-for-the-novichok-case-.html
       http://www.fecl.org/circular/3301.htm

       This one is particularly similar to the Salisbury poisoning, it reads like the same script:
       http://technit.blogspot.com/2006/12/alexander-litvinenko-and-polonium.html

       This shows just how far the US will go – even against it’s own people:
       https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods

       1. Random but I was drunk last year around 3 am in London after a night out and started talking to a russian guy who was well built and had the appearance of a military or ex military guy. This was not far from RU embassy So might have worked as security there, gru, diplomatic protection, who knows..::

          Anyway I started blabbering on about the skripal case and he told me the Americans did it.

          Unfortunately my bus came so I didn’t have a chance to press him on exact details.

    4. Indeed, the right noises. At least Baker is leaning in the right direction when it comes to Salisbury.
       The Daily Mail article seems to have only one comment.
       I would have thought even his challengers would have jumped in by now.
       Rob, can you do an exclusive interview with the first “mainstream” politico type who has doubted the HMG version?

       1. I could interview him – I`m often in Lewes where he has lived for years. Occasionally see him around Brighton and Lewes. What do you suggest we should ask him?

74. Fellow Blogmirers,

    I wanted to reply to Anonymous recent post, and also make a general comment on John Helmer’s article where the FOI from the MOD.

    Note the MOD response came from “Head Information Rights Team” at Whitehall no less.
    I believe it is incorrect to dismiss her vagueness as simply her lack of inquiry fortitude.

    Anyway, I did want to respond to Anonymous as there are several inaccuracies in this post, and I feel if they are not corrected then there will be a possibility of the thread going in a wrong direction.
    Here are selected parts of Anonymous’s post and my comments:

    “Well this is something that will hopefully be explored at Dawn’s Inquest.”
    Duncan: Don’t build up your hopes. Ridley has still to determine the scope of Dawn’s inquest. It is highly likely that none of the Amesbury events will be included.

    “The timescales and metabolic rates / mechanisms of this specific Novichok passing into the blood via the skin, airways and eyes are most complex to determine particularly in Charlie’s case where he received an antidote at the scene.”
    Duncan: What makes you think that? I have seen no published data on Absorption, Metabolism or Excretion of Novichok in any literature.

    “In the Skripals case they were initially treated for recreational drugs overdose, so their blood became adulterated at an early stage.”
    Duncan: Rubbish. Blood is not adulterated. If Naloxone was administered as opioid overdose may have been suspected, that is of no consequence. If Skripal had a glass of wine at the Mill Pub, then by your definition, the blood is “adulterated” with ethanol.
    Similarly, atropine as an antidote does not adulterate the blood, and more importantly does not chemically react with organophosphates.
    Novichok stops the enzyme which our body makes which breaks down Acetylcholine into its component parts Acetate and Choline.
    Fluids build up, and if untreated lung fluid will cause drowning.

    “If a pure molecule of the specific Novichok was discovered in the blood it needs to be explained how this is possible, if metabolites were detected then it has to be shown that the metabolite belonged to the specific Novichok and not a “related compound” or “closely related agent”.”
    Duncan: Why would molecules of Novichok not be present. There is no such scientific term as a pure molecule. All molecules are pure. If Novichok or any other compound was detected at sub picogram level, then this amount of Novichok would be “pure”.

    “Once environmental samples were discovered and tested it is far easier to identify the specific chemical but, in this case, DSTL were still unable to determine from the environmental samples precisely what the chemical was according to High Court submissions from DSTL.”
    Duncan: Possibly, but the key here is why was the chemical not named in the final report that the public could read? One we know what it was, was there a worry that we would head to the local hardware store and make some?

    “So it is a wonder that after testing the adulterated and aged blood samples taken from the Skripals sometime between 4:15pm on the Sunday and 7:45pm on the Monday, that DSTL were able to say emphatically at that stage what the chemical was or how Mrs May and Mr Johnson knew where it had originated.”
    Duncan: A very important point. The analysis of the blood, the subsequent naming of the “Novichok” and the sanctions that followed, were all based on blood samples that the Ministry of Defence could not even determine which DAY the blood was taken.

    1. Typo. Apologies.
       My comment on Ridley was meant to state that he may decide not to consider any Salisbury event.
       He will focus on Amesbury, and hopefully how did Dawn die.

       1. I have a question about the samples sent to the OPCW labs. Why on earth would they add BZ to a sample, surely that is deliberately contaminating a sample?

          If, as the OPCW tried to make out, it’s part of normal procedure, you have to assume they did the same with the Sarin in Ghouta in 2013 and Douma. I don’t see the point of deliberately contaminating a sample, it defeats the object.

          Would the more sensible conclusion be, that the BZ being present, proves the chemical weapon used in Salisbury, that TPTB are trying to hide, actually originated from US/UK sources.

          1. It’s a control sample.
             A blank sample is spiked in order to show the lab procedure will work for a real sample.
             External Quality Assurance.
             The labs do this all the time.

    2. Isn`t John Helmers`s article right to raise concerns about the chain of custody for the blood samples tested at DSTL. The OPCW only had custody of splints from the DSTL after the DSTL had already done their tests and not from the time they left the ward at SDH. I`m still not clear if OPCW took any blood samples of its own at SDH where in theory it could have been more assured of a full chain of custody. Its final summary report suggests that it did, but its couched in rather vague terms

    3. “…..in Charlie’s case where he received an antidote at the scene.”

       I would like to note that the antidote story is unbelievable. Imagine that the fabled “commander” did give an antidote to Charlie. But then he concealed that from SDH doctors. Furthemore, the “commander” was not by himself at Charlie’s place. There were other paramedics there. Did they all conspire to conceal the administering of an antidote to Charlie? Unbelievable. The antidote tale, publicized one year after the Amesbury incident, was apparently intended to provide an explanation as to why Charlie had not died. Just washing his hands would not have saved Charlie, as his story implies that he inhaled the “Novichok” spray.

       Also, if there had been Novichok in Amesbury, Dawn’s inquest would have been held long ago.

75. And the awards keep on coming. I think anyone who was in a 50 mile radius of Salisbury on March 4th has got one now.

    This award winners words are curious, “ridiculous incident” and “did that really happen”

    Group Captain Jason Davies said:
    “When asked what his thoughts on the investigation are now, he said: “The amazing thing about defence is that we are trained to make sure that we can turn our skills to whatever we may face, when such a ridiculous incident happens.

    “You still pinch yourself to think: did we really do that – did that really happen on British soil?”

    https://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/news/18085039.military-commander-led-salisbury-decontamination-team-receives-obe/

    1. Ridiculous

       “foolish or unreasonable and deserving to be laughed at:”

       https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/ridiculous

76. Have I missed this?

    Has anyone posted this piece by John Helmer before?
    http://johnhelmer.org/british-defence-ministry-document-reveals-skripal-blood-evidence-is-missing-fake-chain-of-custody-makes-novichok-evidence-worthless/

    1. Interesting article by John Helmer. The reply from MOD to the Sturgess FOI request on the timings of the Skripal blood samples seems to suggests that MOD Porton Down would normally expect to have the timings and would be prepared to reveal them, but have somehow they have been lost. If they accept that it is in public interest for these timings to be made known, then why did they not just contact Salisbury Hospital patient information dept. to confirm the timing?. Maybe a FOI directly to Salisbury Hospital would be justified – I cant remember if a blogmirer has already tried. Normally this information is covered by patient confidentiality rules, but think in this case a public interest argument could be made. Cheekily, one could also just phone up Salisbury Hospital and tell them MOD forgot to ask them for the info could you supply them with it.!

    2. Lol no, Cascadian, it was only published yesterday – but thanks for alerting me/us!

       Peter Beswick has previously linked to the responses to his own FOI requests, so some here will have seen some of the content without having yet read John Helmer’s thoughts.

       1. I’m Welsh, Eleanor. We observe the antics of the English from afar and with studied bemusement.

    3. I have a strong suspicion that DSTL faked the test results, or maybe even the test samples. Nonetheless I think that John Helmer is reading too much into the failure of the MOD (the ministry in charge of DSTL) to say when exactly the samples were collected. They were collected in SDH, and DSTL does not necessarily need to have all of SDH’s documents.

       ‘Chain of custody’ does not mean that everyone knows what everyone else is doing. DSTL is only responsible for its own part of the chain, from the time when it received the samples from SDH. The information on when the samples were collected should be sought from SDH or from whoever oversees the chain of custody (the Met or the counter-terrorism police).

       1. Brendan.
          The NHS have blood draw protocols.
          Date and time are mandatory.
          If you really believe that the MOD could not get that specific information from PHE or SDH you are mistaken.

          1. Duncan, I don’t doubt for one second that the he NHS has protocols to record those times and dates. That doesn’t mean they have to pass all records on to DSTL. And the MoD does not see itself under any obligation under the FoIA to ask for information from the NHS.

             1. Well this is something that will hopefully be explored at Dawn’s Inquest.

                The timescales and metabolic rates / mechanisms of this specific Novichok passing into the blood via the skin, airways and eyes are most complex to determine particularly in Charlie’s case where he received an antidote at the scene.

                In the Skripals case they were initially treated for recreational drugs overdose so their blood became adulterated at an early stage.

                If a pure molecule of the specific Novichok was discovered in the blood it needs to be explained how this is possible, if metabolites were detected then it has to be shown that the metabolite belonged to the specific Novichok and not a “related compound” or “closely related agent”.

                Once environmental samples were discovered and tested it is far easier to identify the specific chemical but in this case DSTL were still unable to determine from the environmental samples precisely what the chemical was according to High Court submissions from DSTL.

                So it is a wonder that after testing the adulterated and aged blood samples taken from the Skripals sometime between 4:15pm on the Sunday and 7:45pm on the Monday, that DSTL were able to say emphatically at that stage what the chemical was or how Mrs May and Mr Johnson knew where it had originated.

                The Time span that DSTL gave, for the blood samples being taken, means DSTL did not have a clue as to the time from the original poisoning, indeed it was not known for nearly three weeks later where the initial poisoning took place so the length to poisoning was unknown.

                DSTL did not know where the blood samples were taken (at the bench scene, in the ambulance, in A&E or on Radnor ward), by whom they were taken or what therapeutic drugs or media had been introduced into the patients before the samples were taken.

                Nor do DSTL know what opportunities there were for the samples to became contaminated.

                The fact of the matter is that if DSTL did not know over two weeks later (High Court Docs) then they did not know at 8:00am on Tues 6th March what the specific chemical was.

                At best it was a guess that had the potential to spark World War III at worst is was at outright Lie.

                https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/539751/response/1327639/attach/html/3/20190312%20FOI2018%2015985%20Novichok%20Samples%20Rev.pdf.html

                https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/sshd-v-skripal-and-another-20180322.pdf

                1. Thanks Anonymous. Do we know if the OPCW ever took/supervised further bloods from the Skripals which I think was the purpose of the court hearing? Also the OPCW`s own guidelines on the collection of samples suggest that it either should do the sampling itself or directly supervise the process. So if OPCW did not take or supervise any further blood samples itself then it seems to be relying on blood tests from DSTL which don`t meet its own criteria. Also, has anyone asked SDH about the timings of the samples sent to DSTL? I had a quick look on their FOI requests last year but didnt spot anything

                   1. The sole purpose of the OPCW’s sampling was to acquire DNA evidence.

                      The OPCW were given splits from the original blood samples taken from the patients, they then linked the patient via DNA to the original samples taken somewhere by someone at sometime.

                      1. Thanks for clearing up this point. Ive been trawling through old threads to find this out and I dont think Im the only one to be bit confused. So it seems, apart from DNA tests which presumably could be done with a swab, the OPCW are relying soley on blood tests taken by SDH phlebotomists, which they themselves did not supervise. Did they get the splits direct from SDH phlebotomy or DSTL which coutd possibly have been tampered with?. So, we need to make a further FOI request ot SDH about the timings. They cant argue patient confidentiality since we already know its in the public domain – well they probably will!

                         1. Ive just re-read the court papers – the OPCW were specifically given permission for the blood tests to identify substances in the blood and not just to check their DNA. So presumably the OPCW checked both their own samples and those from DSTL, and ran a comparison? The OPCW report is vague in this regard. Apologies if this has been covered in previous threads – I have tried.

                            1. From the Court papers

                               “The TS intends to obtain new blood samples, obtain and test some of the samples already takenandundertake DNA testing to match the new and existing samples. The OPCW TS has well established procedures dealing with obtaining samples, use, preservation and storage, maintaining chain of custody, confidentiality and destruction. If the OPCW results differ from UK tests the UK national authority will be able to share them with clinicians to inform medical treatment.”

                               From the OPCW report

                               “6.The team requested and received splits of samples taken by British authorities for delivery to the OPCW Laboratory in Rijswijk, the Netherlands, and subsequent analysis by OPCW designated laboratories. This was done for comparative purposes and to verify the analysis of the United Kingdom.”

                            2. From the Court papers

                               “2.The fact of their exposure to a nerve agent has already had significant consequences on the wider domestic and international stage which I need not go into for the purposes of this judgment. However central to the application before me is the fact that on 14 and 16March 2018 the UK government issueda formal invitationto the Director-General of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) to send a team of experts to the United Kingdom ‘to assist in the technical evaluation of unscheduled chemicals in accordance with Article VIII 38(e).’ This in effect is to independently verify the analysis carried out by Porton Down. In order to conduct their enquiries the OPCW wish toi)Collect fresh blood samples from Mr and Ms Skripal toa)Undertake their own analysis in relation to evidence of nerve agents,b)conduct DNA analysis to confirm the samples originally tested by Porton Down are from Mr and Ms Skripal,ii)Analyse the medical records of Mr and Ms Skripal setting out their treatment since 4 March 2018,iii)Re-test the samples already analysed by Porton Down.”

       2. As far as I can gather from the OPCW`s own executive summary report, point 4, on Salisbury, doesn`t the full chain of custody refer to its own collection of blood from Sergei, Yulia, and PC Bailey, for which it sought a court order, and not the DSTL samples –

          “4. The team was able to collect blood samples from the three affected individuals under full chain of custody for delivery to the OPCW Laboratory and subsequent analysis by OPCW designated laboratories, and conducted identification of the three individuals against official photo-ID documents.”

          In reference to the splits it says “6. The team requested and received splits of samples taken by British authorities for delivery to the OPCW Laboratory in Rijswijk, the Netherlands, and subsequent analysis by OPCW designated laboratories. This was done for comparative purposes and to verify the analysis of the United Kingdom”.

          Also “7. The team was briefed on the identity of the toxic chemical identified by the United Kingdom and was able to review analytical results and data from chemical analysis of biomedical samples collected by the British authorities from the affected individuals, as well as from environmental samples collected on site”. So, it looks as though they had two lots of samples, one of their own, one from DSTL, compared them and then gave their verdict.

77. Here is an interesting video I have not previously seen from Australia:

    https://www.facebook.com/7NEWSsydney/videos/2031291396894983/

    Early on the presenter is filmed outside Zizzi’s just at the time that the police were inside.

    A second interesting item is seen between 39 and 43 seconds – Sergei Skripal caught on CCTV around 2004. Compare how much younger he looks in that video than the pictures that were supposed to be taken at the time of his arrest, also in 2004.

    1. Here is the video of Sergei’s arrest and trial:

       https://www.ft.com/video/a448b1e6-77d5-4d61-987d-fae110e49c3c

       Look at the very top of his head when he was arrested (3 seconds in), no hair at all. Two years later at his trial, his hair is slightly darker and some of it has regrown!

       1. The word ‘officially’ has two recognised definitions:
          1) with the authority of the government or other organization; and
          2) in public and for official purposes but not necessarily so in reality.

          Which version of “officially” is Valery Morozov using in this video (from 1 min 5 secs):
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oRkaU3Y-Op0

          “Who is Skripal… some man who officially betrayed the country. That’s all.”

          Without the word ‘officially’, the meaning would have been very clear but adding that word has made it ambiguous.

          Did Skripal ever really betray Russia? If so why was he (from 16 seconds):
          “…working in cyber security and every month going to the Embassy to meet military intelligence officers”?

          What was Skripal really doing in the UK?

          1. A useful article from August 2018, it recounts the official narrative but is filled with quotes and comments that do not appear elsewhere:

             https://www.gq.com/story/russia-spy-poisoning

             Section 6: “Some Analytical Work” is particularly useful:

             “They [Morozov and Skripal]had run into each other in December [2018], Morozov recalled when I met him at his home. Both of them were waiting for trains out of London, and they’d stopped in at a grocery store, not far from Waterloo Station, that specializes in delicacies imported from Russia.

             Skripal said something that day about his own line of employment that would only later seem significant… during their December encounter in the shop, Morozov said, Skripal claimed to be doing consulting work in “cyber-security, intelligence, some analytical work.”

             This was a surprise. It made me recall a conversation I’d had with a Salisbury taxi driver, Mehmet Beykanoglu, who said that over a period of about seven years, he’d taken Skripal home from the train station to Christie Miller Road “maybe 40, 50 times”—so often that Beykanoglu knew his address by heart. Beykanoglu’s cab queued with others at the station, taking random fares, which suggested a much larger number of such journeys undertaken by Skripal over the same period. Beykanoglu believed his fare, wearing a suit on most occasions, was returning from employment in London: “I asked, once, and he said he worked for the government. I wish I’d asked which government.”

             The owner of the Waterloo shop, Mohsen Najim, said Skripal would sometimes drop by after traveling abroad. “He said, ‘Oh, I’m working for a company; they send me everywhere. They need my experience.’ ” In May, responding to reports that Skripal had traveled to the Czech Republic to help instruct intelligence agents there, the Czech foreign minister, choosing his words, said such a visit would certainly have been useful—“logical.” When I consulted Robert Hannigan about all this, he said it didn’t sound so unusual. Once spies re-settle, “they’re free individuals. They can do what they want. And bear the risks, too.”

             1. What??? 40-50 trips with one random taxi driver over a 7 year period?

                Firstly, that tells us that Sergei did not wait to start work when he arrived in the UK, he just got straight down to it – he was not some random ‘former spy’ who happened to end up in the UK! He was sent there to do a job.

                Secondly, just how many trips to London did Sergei make? Morozov told Channel 4 (in the linked video above) that it was once a month to meet military intelligence officers. That sounds like an under-statement if there were 40-50 taxi trips with one random taxi driver over 7 years (approx 6 trips per year) then half of those monthly trips would have been completed, purely by chance, in the same taxi.

                If we assume that there were just 4 taxis in Salisbury that usually waited at the station and Beykanoglu was typical, the Sergei was traveling to London twice a month. If it was 8 taxis, then Sergei’s trips were weekly – for 7 years!

                Sergei was quite clearly up to something that involved military intelligence – why did Morozov specify “military intelligence officers” and not just “intelligence officers”?

                1. “The Russian Embassy told the programme: “We are not aware of any contacts between Sergei Skripal and any of the Embassy staff.

                   “As we have previously said, Mr Skripal was not on the consular register.””
                   https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/fellow-russian-exile-claims-poisoned-12146023

                   Possibilities:
                   1) The Russian Embassy was being economical with the truth;
                   2) Sergei was meeting Embassy staff but the spokesman did not know about it;
                   3) Sergei was meeting with military intelligence officers at the Embassy but those people were not accredited and/or on the consular register i.e. spies;
                   3)

78. The New Timeline

    4:03 Freya Church leaves work and encounters a stricken couple on a bench.

    Col Alison McCourt and her daughter arrive at the scene and deliver first aid, a number of witnesses gather around before, during and after the McCourts place the female onto the ground into the recovery position, at least one of the witnesses assists by wiping vomit from the female victim’s mouth with a tissue.

    4:16 A “Silent Call” is received by the emergency services followed by a verbal call at an unspecified time.

    4:24 PC Alex Collins and Sgt Tracy Holloway arrive on the scene followed within a minute or two by the first paramedics. Paramedic Ian Parsons attends.

    4:28 Further police units tasked to keep back onlookers. PC Alex Way and Escort Officer Janet Bald attend.

    c4:35 Patients taken from the scene in road ambulances to hospital

    c4:45 The victims arrive in A&E at Salisbury District Hospital. Mark Urban who spent time interviewing doctors and staff at the hospital for the BBC’s Newsnight programme said in his book that the victims journey through A&E took about half an hour and they arrived in the Intensive Care Radnor ward within the “Golden Hour” from the emergency services first being called.

    4:48 Police cordon off the immediate area. CID arrive at the scene.

    4:53 The Air Ambulance arrives, a paramedic gets out of the aircraft but does not return. PC Alex Way drives to the helicopter and speaks with the pilot.

    c5:10 The Air Ambulance takes off

    1. 4:18 Air Ambulance receives emergency call.

       As Patrick M. notes below, that is not how it works. Who made the on-scene assessment that the helicopter was going to be needed?

       1. Timestamp in this video shows paramedics running at 4:28 (were these the first?) 25 minutes after Freya had seen the pair or did Col McCourt make the call to summons the AA

          1. Sorry forgot to add the Sky video clip Police car at 4:28 GMT followed seconds later by running paramedics

             https://news.sky.com/video/cctv-shows-ex-spy-just-before-attack-11282995

             https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/poisoned-russian-spy-daughter-seen-12156418

             In the Mirror clip (right at the end) we see the same camera “camera 6” but on this occasion we don’t see the timestamp that we see in the Sky clip.

             What we see is a Time Bar at the bottom of the screen and the cursor when the ambulance car goes by is in the middle of the the time bar.

             The time bar runs from 17:00:00 to 17:29:59, so from 5:00pm to 5:30pm, the time bar cursor indicates that ambulance car passes at c5:15pm.

             I assume the Mirror clip is a phone video recording of Jennys CCTV Monitor and the Sky clip if the raw electronic footage but I cannot understand why the digital time stamp does not appear. I also assume that the timer in the Mirrors recording is stuck in BST

             Unfortunately the actual timings are a matter of National Security so we have to guess sometimes.

             It could be though that an ambulance car did attend at around 4:15 which seem to suggest that there may have been two incidents or one managed by two different groups of people

             1. This photo is an interesting screenshot

                https://ibb.co/cCKk7QT

                It shows the 3 people in Market Walk at 16:08 (Sky video) with the timebar in a correlating position but unlike the Mirror video this one runs from 16:00 to 16:30

                https://www.dailymail.co.uk/video/news/video-1645210/Video-CCTV-shows-Russian-spy-daughter-mysterious-woman.html

                So what was an ambulance car doing going to the scene at 17:15 (Mirror clip)

                1. Here is a screenshot from The Mirror video showing the timer at the bottom starting at 17:00 (just like you said) position marker in the middle of the bar so approx 17:15:

                   https://anonfiles.com/Ndfe70Dfnd/Screenshot_199_png

                   Clearly an ambulance arriving very late but we are probably not allowed to know why for reasons of national security.

                   1. The ambulance seen arriving at 17:15, could well be this one, photographed only a few minutes later:

                      https://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/resources/images/7485578

79. This is a cracking article about Le Mesurier. Best bit is from Peter Ford, the ex UK ambassador to Syria: FCO, British military/SS, debt, money-laundering, connections to OPCW, connections to head-choppers, burning people alive.

    1. https://www.sott.net/article/425092-A-case-of-the-MSM-working-hard-to-keep-their-lies-straight-The-death-of-White-Helmets-James-Le-Mesurier

    2. Probably had dirt on our blond Great Leader and was defenestrated.
       No arcane poisons needed.

80. We spoke of the Khangoshvili case in Berlin. According to the Guardian, Germany will make it a case against Russia :
    [QUOTE] Germany’s chief public prosecutor suspects Russian intelligence agencies to be behind the killing of a former Chechen insurgent in Berlin and plans to take over investigations into the case, various German media outlets have reported.
    (…)
    According to a report by Der Spiegel on Tuesday, Germany’s highest general prosecutor in Karlsruhe decided to take on the case after forensics experts identified the assassin as the same person, Vadim Krasikov, who was sought over the murder of a Russian businessman in 2013.
    [/QUOTE]
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/dec/03/germany-suspects-russian-agencies-zelimkhan-khangoshvili-chechen-exile-killing

    See also :

    Der Spiegel 03.12.2019 08:05
    https://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/tiergarten-mord-generalbundesanwalt-verdaechtigt-moskau-als-auftraggeber-a-1298249.html

    Des Spiegel 03.12.2019 13:16
    https://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/tiergarten-mord-russischer-auftragskiller-identifiziert-a-1299465.html

81. MESSAGE TO LIANE

    Is this your document?

    http://images.shoutwiki.com/acloserlookonsyria/b/b6/SKRIPAL_-_BENCH_UPDATE.pdf

    If so, where did you get the information about the silent call?

    Silent call
    Wiltshire Police answer to Duncan Carmichael´s complain : The incident was reported at 16:16 hours on the 4 March 2018 by way of what we term a silent 999 i.e. A call on 999 with nothing said to the operator.

    John Helmer said the info came from you. Thanks Liane.

    1. This is where it gets confusing, in response to a complaint the police are reported to have stated that;

       At 16:16 a “silent call” was made followed sometime later by a spoken call

       At 16:24 the police (Collins & Holloway) arrive – (Col McCourt is already treating the casualties)

       …

       But newspaper reports were saying the 999 call was made at 16:15, police arrive at 16:15 followed by running paramedics at 16:17 and an ambulance car at 16:18.

       It is also reported that police were at the scene before the 999 call was made.

       Who made the “silent call” and why?

       1. Police car arriving at 16:28

          https://ibb.co/zXpPYgB

       2. They [PC Collins & Sgt Holloway] were at Bourne Hill police station in the city centre when the call came in at 4.15pm. “It was a medical tasking for two persons: a male and female slumped on a bench in Maltings shopping centre,” said Holloway.

          “We responded on lights and sirens,” Collins said. “It only took us two minutes to get there. I drove through the pedestrianised area and over the bridge. The female [Skripal’s daughter, Yulia] was on the floor on her side. There was a member of the public, who turned out to be a doctor, helping her, maintaining her airway. I believe if that doctor hadn’t done that, she would have died.

          https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/dec/14/we-did-our-best-police-who-rushed-to-skripal-scene-tell-of-shock-and-pride

          1. From Bourne Hill police station to the Maltings via Market Walk is less than half a mile, 2 minutes is easily do-able with blues & twos.

       3. As one of my several alternatives to counting sheep, contemplating that Silent 999 call has been deployed from time to time.

          Not so much as the Who? but the Why?

          Firstly, not many in the UK would be aware of how to do it but, apparently, one needs to key 55 after the caller has connected to the operator. Help here:

          https://www.devon-cornwall.police.uk/contact/silent-999-calls/

          Secondly, using the Silent 999 process seems intended to protect a caller whose safety physical well-being is at immediate risk rather than simply making an anonymous 999 call, as seems to have been the case in The Maltings.

          Thirdly, and as anyone who has made a 999 call knows, the procedure feels like it takes forrrrrrevvvvveerrrrrrr given that the call relates to something urgent.

          It seems like that Silent 999 did several useful things: it reported that there was an incident, it probably enabled the triangulation of the location, and (assuming that the caller was actually at the bench) it provided an open line recording of what was being said at The Bench, to complement the cctv footage.

          Who made the call? My preferred hunch is that it was one of the McCourts, not least because Col McCourt did not want to reveal her identity at the scene – it had to be someone with enough presence of mind to make an emergency call using a barely known method (I’m entirely disregarding the notion that any of the McCourt family was or is the victim of domestic abuse). Remember that a full minute of open 999 call recording has taken place before the operator progresses the call; however the Silent 999 may not have actually been dialled via 999 at all …

          … and finally, who’s to say that at least one of the umbrella bearers, who shielded the scene from public view, wasn’t also committing the incident to smartphone video? FWIW they may have been the male McCourts.

          1. eleanor, I agree with all you´ve written.
             Besides the McCords there is the possibility that Nick Bailey made the silent call. Maybe he didn´t use the official way because his mission was secret. Maybe he shadowed the Skripals.
             So many lies about Bailey´s actions…

             1. DSNB may well have alerted the emergency services, via whatever means – that’s also a distinct possibility. Given that he was the first responder (originally), but he wasn’t there (officially), it would make sense that it was him. But all he had to do was to call in and say something like ‘ … I’m just leaving The Maltings now and (use innocuous code word or code phrase)’.

                All the official story admits is that the emergency services were alerted before the first 999 call proper was made, and that contact was allegedly via a Silent 999. Once that is admitted, who is to say how many “Silent 999s” or other alerts there really were, and by whom and to whom. Because the emergency services had been summoned, and despatched, before the first 999 call from a concerned member of the public dialled just three digits.

                A silent 999 isn’t much help if the caller is moving away from the incident.

    2. The air ambulance time is absurd. 3 minutes after first call air ambulance is tasked! The system just doesn’t work like that.
       One theory I have is the Russians far from trying to kill Sergei actually administered the antidote.
       When the emergency services attended the pre-arranged execution they were unexpectedly met with a survivable incident.

       1. That’s an interesting idea Patrick. According to Wikipedia*, one of the two Russians, Alexander Petrov was a doctor and so he could have quite easily been there with an antidote. The Russians would have had to of had prior warning of the attempt and prior knowledge of the chemical to be used. It’s possible.

          Alexander Petrov’s real name may be Alexander Mishkin.

          *Phillip Cross’ Wikipedia, the dubious Western propaganda operation has this: “Alexander Yevgenyevich Mishkin (Russian: Алекса́ндр Евге́ньевич Ми́шкин) is a doctor in the Russian General Staff′s Main Directorate (also known as GRU)”

    3. @Anonymous-1, yes, it´s my document.
       To be honest, I don´t like to answer questions of people who prefer to stay anonymous.
       By the way – the answer obvious. The source is Wiltshire Police.
       We have discussed the silent call already in an earlier Blogmire thread.

82. More on the activities of the Spiez lab, by Tom McTague of the Atlantic.

    https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2019/12/britain-russia-nato-disinformation/602836/

    What he describes below seems to be a spiking of the collected sample(s) with BZ.
    He uses the ambiguous phrase “into the batch”.

    That is completely different to having an additional “blank” sample, to which has been added BZ.
    It is inconceivable that the practice described below would be used, when the point of the analysis is to determine what the chemical is.
    At this stage it could not possibly be known that the deployed nerve agent was NOT BZ.
    Adding BZ to a sample already containing BZ would severely compromise the whole job.

    “And yet the article was entirely misleading. Spiez was indeed one of a small number of international centers chosen by the OPCW to confirm the conclusions reached by Porton Down, and it did find a different toxin from Novichock. But that was part of the process: After receiving samples from the Skripal poisoning from the U.K., the OPCW, following protocol, added a new substance into the batch for quality control—a test, in effect, to ensure that Spiez’s and other laboratories’ results were accurate. If they did not find the added element, then whatever else they found could not be trusted. The toxin added by the OPCW was a derivative of BZ.”

    1. The Speiz lab saga can run and run, Duncan, unless someone who actually took the samples, delivered them to the lab, collected the results speaks out, we can never know for certain, the organisers of the charade can always wriggle out of any aspects they’ve overlooked, someone like you discovered.

       The best yardstick for the Skripals’ affair is the centuries tested, infallible, Roman cui bono.

       One would have to be entirely brainless to argue Putin had anything to gain poisoning the pair, the other side was the one that benefited handsomely as the passage of time has shown.

       1. Baron, I agree.
          However, apart from Peter Hitchens and Craig Murray, where is the media inquisitiveness?

          A debacle that could bring down Boris, but not even the liberal media take an interest.

    2. If there’s no details about the chain of command, then the TAV team could have handed all their samples to Porton Down first, under the auspices of Professor Tim Atkins, he of the phone call on
       3rd July 2018 to Chief Constable Kier Pritchard:

       “On 3 July I was watching the England match against Colombia in the World Cup when I got a call from Professor Tim Atkins. I was aware there had been an incident in Amesbury. The lead theory was that Dawn Sturgess and Charlie Rowley had been exposed to a bad batch of drugs. Professor Tim said ‘Paul, I’m 75% certain this is Novichok again’. I declared a second major incident.”

    3. This is where we really need another OPCW whistleblower to confirm whether adding a control substance is indeed standard practice or not.

83. Salisbury now racking up the release of CCTV images to identify crime suspects.
    It’s a trend.

    https://www.spirefm.co.uk/news/local-news/3000293/cctv-released-as-police-investigate-theft-from-salisbury-store/

84. Why is everyone getting so obsessed with OPCW? What difference does it makes if it was novichok or BZ? We should spend more time concentrating of what really happened and ‘who dunnit’. I have mental health issues and I have sleepless nights until this is solved. Why can’t some whistle blower just spill the beans.

    1. “Why can’t some whistle blower just spill the beans.”`

       Answer: because they have a life and don’t want to sacrifice their, and their dependents, comfort for the sake of revealing some truth?

       And people get obsessed about OPCW and other supposed gatekeepers because if they are not independent arbiters of the truth who can we trust? Compromised gatekeepers need to be revealed as such, if only to make the wider populace aware of and angry enough to protest about the mendacity of those who seek to control us.

85. MoA keeping up the pressure on OPCW.

    Organization for the Prohibition of Contrary Websites.

86. I wonder whether it could be that the adjournments of Dawn’s inquest have something to do with the OPCW’s Syria leaks. Maybe, TPTB are not 100% sure that there will be no leak from the OPCW if they press on with the “Novichok evidence” in Dawn’s case.

    1. I think that is very likely Milda. MI56 would have known for some time that there was discontent, about the accuracy of reports, among the foot soldiers at OPCW. They would be extremely worried about a leak from inside the OPCW, revealing what really was found in Dawn’s blood samples. So the inquest would be fraught with danger for them.

       1. This also may explain why no charges have been laid re Dawn’s death

87. From the Moon.

    According to Lavrov this is what the Spiez Laboratory originally sent to the OPCW:

    “Following our analysis, the samples indicate traces of the toxic chemical BZ and its precursor which are second category chemical weapons. BZ is a nerve toxic agent, which temporarily disables a person. The psycho toxic effect is achieved within 30 to 60 minutes after its use and lasts for up to four days. This composition was in operational service in the armies of the US, the UK and other NATO countries. The Soviet Union and Russia neither designed nor stored such chemical agents. Also, the samples indicate the presence of type A-234 nerve agent in its virgin state and also products of its degradation.”

    The above is what Lavrov claims the Swiss lab reported.
    Very damaging to the HMG case if true.
    How will we know if it is true?
    Why would the Spiez lab mot simply report what they did intially find?

    1. About the OPCW rules for testing laboratories : there was an OPCW document on Internet, but it is now only available by the Google cache :
       https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:KA3Bbn2EPdoJ:https://www.opcw.org/index.php/documents/opcw-site-and-site-analysis-samples+&cd=1&hl=fr&ct=clnk&gl=be

       In this document, we read :
       “Re-packaging with:
       (a) one authentic sample from on-site
       (b) one control sample containing Scheduled chemicals
       (c) one blank sample containing no Scheduled chemicals”

       What was the “scheduled chemical” : BZ or Novichok ?

       1. Inquirer, please see my response to Liane.

    2. Duncan, I hope I interpretet it right :
       „BZ and its PRECURSOR“
       Does „precursor“ refers to a metabolic effect ? That would mean Spiez Lab tested the blood samples.

       „… A-234 nerve agent in its virgin state and also products of its degradation.“
       YES – Spiez Lab must have tested the blood samples !
       But Spiez Lab does not say if BZ and Novichok were found TOGETHER in one of the samples !
       That would be important to know.
       How is it possible to find A-234 in its virgin state 18 days after the exposure ???
       This would only be possible if Spiez Lab was given blood samples 1 taken shortly after the exposure AND blood samples 2 taken on March 22.
       Blood samples 1 would contain the virgin state and blood samples 2 the degradation.
       Blood samples 3 would contain only BZ or, if an original sample was laced, BZ and Novichok.
       The control sample was prepared by the OPCW Lab. But they didn´t say how it was done :

       Quote OPCW :
       The Technical Assistance mission carried out by the Secretariat is over. However based on the outcome of this mission in relation to the identity of the toxic chemical used in Salisbury, the Organisation will need to consider some follow up actions.
       The precursor of BZ that is referred to in the public statements, commonly known as 3Q, was contained in the control sample prepared by the OPCW Lab. This chemical was reported back to the OPCW by the two designated labs and the findings are duly reflected in the report.
       https://www.opcw.org/sites/default/files/documents/EC/M-59/en/ecm59dg01_e_.pdf

       Note : The OPCW follow up actions never took place.
       Why not ? Why the OPCW thought it was necessary ?

       Quote : BZ has a half-life of three to four weeks in moist air and it is extremely persistent in soil and water and on most surfaces.
       BZ inhibits glandular secretions, leading to a dry mouth and foul breath. Hyperthermia is due to elevated body temperature secondary to inhibition of sweating and inability to dissipate heat. Mydriasis. Urinary retention.
       https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3-Quinuclidinyl_benzilate

       This all are NOT the symptoms displayed by the Skripals !

       Only the OPCW has all the information. If they ask the right questions they could find out how they were fooled by Porton Down.

       1. Hello Liane,

          Looking at the old (2010) Polish paper on OPCW sampling and testing protocol, there would seem to be no spiking of the original sample.

          As has been pointed out by many comments in the Moon article, spiking makes no sense.
          The Polish paper implies that what is submitted to the lab would be:
          1) A real sample for analysis.
          2) A prepared synthetic sample which is the same matrix as 1, i.e plasma, water, coconut mat etc, which has been spiked with a compound similar to, or identical to, the compound to be determined in sample 1.
          3) A third sample, known to be free of chemicals of interest, which can be used in what is known as a matrix blank.
          So, for example a coconut matt which it is known is free of chemicals of interest.
          The point of sample 2 is to show that the lab can extract and measure similar compounds which may be present in sample 1.
          Sample 3 would show that no spectra of interest was present in the sample matrix.

          Precursor and metabolite.
          No scientist would confuse these terms.
          Metabolite requires metabolism. That is digestion or inhalation has resulted in a chemical change.
          Degradation and metabolism are very different too.
          Air and water exposure, usually result in hydrolysis, which is a type of degradation.
          The term “precursor” is also quite specific.
          This would be a chemical when mixed with another chemical results in the formation of a third chemical.
          If “precursors” of BZ were found in the control samples, that would be quite likely.
          This simply means that the BZ spike contained some of one of the chemicals used in the synthesis of the final BZ material.

          1. Thanks, Duncan.
             If the Skripals were poisoned with BZ, the blood sample would contain the BZ itself or the metabolite. But NOT a precursor of BZ. Right ?

             1. It’s a maybe.
                If the precursor was stable, and the human body did not metabolise it, or excrete it, then it would be detectable.
                It has two phenyl rings that are held together by one carbon atom, and I would imagine that there would be several stages in the production of the final compound, or getting two precursors synthesised that are then combined to form the final chemical.
                If there was not 100% reaction, which is quite common then one or both of the precursors would be present.
                If the precursor material cannot easily be removed, by distillation or some sort of clean up extraction, then it is easier and safer just to leave it there.
                95% BZ is almost as effective as 100% so why bother, especially if purification is dangerous in terms of exposure or explosion.

88. I am not attending, but it would be interesting to hear how some of the SDH heroes coped, and what the acetylcholine levels were, and when the test were actually carried out on the 5 victims.
    Especially poor Dawn.

    http://mailer.gs1uk.org/interface/external_view_email.php?AY86307844382050253939866352623&varId=

89. My lack of language skills are hampering me but there is a story emerging regarding the activities of a Slovak opposition politician and senior figure at their MoD

    “Jaroslav Nad’ is Director General of the Defence Policy, International Relations and Legislation Department at the Ministry of Defence of the Slovak Republic, a position he has held since July 2010.”

    From what I can gather he has been asking questions that some think he should not have been asking.

    “Opposition politician labelled a security threat due to questions about Skripal

    Head of military intelligence filed two cases against Naď, the opposition politician sees revenge behind it.”

    https://spectator.sme.sk/c/22269077/opposition-politician-labelled-a-security-threat-due-to-questions-about-skripal.html

    1. Which is ironic because there are 650 MP’s in the British Parliament that should be prosecuted for not asking questions.

       1. Charges have now been dropped but it is very interesting. Slovakia decide not to expel and Russian diplomats last year.

          https://www.tasr.sk/tasr-clanok/TASR:20191129TBB00272

    2. Could it be that Jaroslav Naď asked for the secret OPCW report (as the German opposition did, but was not allowed) ?
       Could it be that Jaroslav Naď as member of the Slovak Defence Ministry knows that his country has stored Novichok from Soviet Union times (as the Czech Republic did) ?
       Could it be that Jaroslav Naď leaked information to Russia ?
       Could it be that Jaroslav Naď identified the formula as belonging not to Russia, but another former Warsaw Pact state (Slovakia, Czech Republic, Ukraine) ?

90. Denise re your moonofalabama link, there are some good links in the comments. It’s amazing how many times MI5 & MI6 are mentioned:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=np_ylvc8Zj8
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_D2l7kDtVKY

    Another one is this from Elena Evdokimova which shows Boshirov’s passport photos at age 14, 32 and 37:

    https://twitter.com/elenaevdokimov7/status/1046318522610016256

    The last one is the best – “After a thorough investigation, we discovered that Eliot Higgins is a donkey.”:

    https://twitter.com/elenaevdokimov7/status/1047329583412916224

    Looks like this is the real Chepiga:

    https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9F%D0%BE%D0%BF%D0%BE%D0%B2,_%D0%90%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BA%D1%81%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B4%D1%80_%D0%92%D0%B8%D0%BA%D1%82%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B8%D1%87

    1. The article is incorrect in stating that the effects of BZ are similar to those of fentanyl or “Novichok”. They are in fact opposite. Eg. opioids and nerve agents such as saurine and “Novichok” cause the pupils to dilate, whereas BZ causes them to constrict. BZ has been used as an antidote to choline esterase inhibitors in vitro and choline esterase inhibitors have been used as an antidote to BZ. They antagonize each other. So the emergency room staff would immediately know the difference. It is also inconceivable that the OPCW would spike the Skripal samples with BZ. They would not use any chemical that could actually be present in a sample as the internal standard; they would not mix quality control samples into the actual samples. So how did BZ and “Novichok” get into the Skripal samples and make it through the chain of custody without elicitating many questions? The most likely sinario is this: The Skripals arrive comatose in the emergency room and the doctors treat them for obvious opioid toxicity. A few hours later the police, MI6 and Porton Down scientists arrive to inform the hospital staff that the Skripals were actually exposed to a nerve agent and their only hope is to use a classified antidote drug based on BZ that Porton Down has been developing. The Skripals receive infusions of the antidote for a month and remain in a BZ induced stupor so that the supposed “Novichok” can be cleared from their systems. During this treatment some of the antidote is spiked with a small amount of real “Novichok” which is from a highly purified form used as a laboratory standard not as a warfare agent. The presence of BZ stops it from poisoning the Skirpals but it allows OPCW to draw samples from the Skripals that contain “Novichok” and its metabolites, but not its precursors which would be present in the military grade agent (or even breakdown products that would have been present if they had been contaminated by an external source of “Novichok”. When the laboratories ask the OPCW how come the samples have BZ present? the British rep. says that its part of the classified antidote and it must remain secret because “we don’t want the terrorists to find out about it”. Most of the lab managers go along with this and the lame story about it having been used as a quality control agent is put out as cover, when one of the techs in the Swiss lab who is out of the loop talks to Lavrov. By the way, the UK gov was probably telling the truth when they declared that the Skripals were poisoned by a chemical nerve agent developed in Russia. The Russians used a volatile form of fentanyl, possibly mixed with ketamine to incapacitate Chechen terrorists at the Dubrovka Theater seige in 2002.

       Posted by: Toxicologist | Dec 1 2019 10:35 utc | 56

       1. Nice one, Anonymous-1, except.

          Toxicologist was called out on his statements about the effects of BZ and issued a correction which you haven’t submitted.

          Who are you?

       2. “Eg. opioids and nerve agents such as saurine and “Novichok” cause the pupils to dilate, whereas BZ causes them to constrict.”

          Wrong way round! Opioids constrict and BZ dilates.

          I’ll leave the rest for Duncan…

          1. Until Duncan clocks in you can have some bedtime reading from Chris Timperley of Porton Down who just happened to be Chairman of the OPCW when the Wiltshire poisonings took place.

             The same Chris Timperley who pushed for Incapacitants to be reclassified as Nerve Agents after the two incidents.

             https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Christopher_Timperley

             Note the work on BZ as an antidote

             1. Which article is that? Searching for ‘BZ’ I get zero results on the link. There are 3 articles about testing antidotes on mice but they don’t appear relevant…

                1. Sorry must be another paper but I thought it was mentioned in one of those possibly re oximes and qnb.

                   Bottom line is it is an “unknown” substance to us but not to Tim Atkins and Chris Timperley

       3. Paul has already taken up this point, but may I as an ignorant layperson ask ‘Anonymous 1’ to provide some support for his statement that “..opioids and nerve agents such as saurine and “Novichok” cause the pupils to dilate…”? This statement seem to contradict what I have read elsewhere. And could somebody who knows about these things clarify the actual effects of BZ?
          Thanks as well to all those Blogmirers who have not given up on exposing this disgraceful example of rogue-statery by the gangsters who run the UK, and thanks to Rob for hosting this important, indeed viatl investigation.

          1. Sorry about the typos: ‘seems’ and ‘vital’. Too late at night.

          2. Bz takes several hours to take effect and lasts for a long time also the symptoms vary greatly from one person to another.

             Opioids work quickly but what was used on the bench people and in Amesbury was not a 4th generation military grade nerve agent, it was a Incapacitant, probably a newcomer or as the Russians might say a Novichok

          3. Coldish, you said :
             [QUOTE]
             may I as an ignorant layperson ask ‘Anonymous 1’ to provide some support for his statement that “..opioids and nerve agents such as saurine and “Novichok” cause the pupils to dilate…”? This statement seem to contradict what I have read elsewhere.
             [/QUOTE]

             This statement was made here :
             https://www.moonofalabama.org/2019/11/opcw-manipulation-of-its-douma-report-shines-new-light-onto-the-skripal-novichok-case-.html.
             by “Toxicologist” in the comments. He later corrected himself.

             Toxicologist was called out on his statements about the effects of BZ and issued a correction

       4. Anon 1
          Where is this Toxicologist Article? The use of a actetylcholine esterase inhibitor as some sort of therapy to be used on a patient that is showing symptoms of acetylcholine esterase inhibition seems like a very strange treatment.
          The anecdotal comments in your post from the “British rep” seem like complete rubbish.
          If “Toxicologist” is a Blogmire poster, then please identify the article.

          1. It’s on MoA, Duncan: https://www.moonofalabama.org/2019/11/opcw-manipulation-of-its-douma-report-shines-new-light-onto-the-skripal-novichok-case-.html.

             Just search for ‘toxicologist’

    2. Anonymous-1 : why do you say that Попов, Александр Викторович (Aleksandr Viktorovich Popov) is the real Chepiga ?

91. Peter Hitchens has met an OPCW mole:

    https://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2019/12/this-is-peter-hitchens-mail-on-sunday-column-i-stood-outside-the-safe-house-in-a-road-i-cannot-name-in-a-major-europ.html

    1. It was only when the OPCW became compromised that the Salisbury Incident became possible

       1. Maybe Peter could investigate the DM as well! It was the DM that started the story about Sergei being unsteady on his feet in The Mill:

          https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5483879/Sleepy-cul-sac-house-Britains-biggest-crime-scene.html

          Half way down the article, is a heading
          “Father and daughter pictured on CCTV only moments before collapse”
          This is a complete fabrication! There is no way the DM didn’t know that it is not the Skripals!

          Below that is another heading:
          “Spy looked unsteady on feet as he drank in pub ”
          by Claire Duffin and Inderdeep Bains

          As we have previously discussed, that was also a complete fabrication but it included a comment that was important for TPTB:
          ‘It was strange, but it makes you wonder now if the poison was starting to take effect then.’

          That comment was copied by nearly all other MSM outlets, you might almost think it was a conspiracy…

          The importance of this piece for TPTB is that it contradicted the earlier reports from employees at The Mill saying ‘everything was normal’! TPTB did not want a ‘normal’ Sergei leaving The Mill.

          1. I read Peter Hitchens regularly and don’t recall him ever writing anything about the Skripal case. I have a suspicion he doesn’t believe HMG and is keeping his powder dry.

92. Moon of Alabama has just posted this: OPCW Manipulation Of Its Douma Report Requires A Fresh Look At The Skripal ‘Novichok’ Case

    https://www.moonofalabama.org/2019/11/opcw-manipulation-of-its-douma-report-shines-new-light-onto-the-skripal-novichok-case-.html

    1. Thanks for the link, Denise.
       I posted the following comments on MoonOfAlabama :
       [QUOTE]
       Here :
       https://www.opcw.org/sites/default/files/documents/EC/M-59/en/ecm59dg01_e_.pdf

       the OPCW says :

       “This chemical was reported back to the OPCW by the two designated labs and the findings are duly reflected in the report.”

       So, if I understand correctly, the OPCW asked two (and only two) laboratories to analyze samples and these laboratories both found BZ. It would have been better for the credibility of the OPCW that at least one laboratory had not found BZ: this would have made it easier to believe that the sample, as originally taken from the Skripal, contained no BZ.
       If the OPCW added BZ to all the samples to be analyzed, it became impossible for the OPCW to know whether the samples, as taken from the Skripal, contained BZ or not. Is it likely that the OPCW acted in this manner ?
       [/QUOTE]
       I would be interested in comments. Are the premises of my reasoning and the reasoning itself correct?

       1. In the first paragraph of the opening statement (in the document you linked), it says:
          ” …the Organisation received the results of the sample analysis conducted by four designated laboratories.”

          In the ‘Concluding remarks’ (on the 3rd page), it is noted:
          “This chemical [BZ] was reported back to the OPCW by the two designated labs and the findings are duly reflected in the report.”

          I read that as meaning that there were 4 samples in total. 2 samples contained BZ as a control but the remaining 2 samples didn’t.

          1. Thanks,
             , Paul, you are right. My argument was incorrect.

             1. It is far better that we all share ideas as you did and then think about them, than that we keep quiet when something looks wrong. I think the OPCW concluding remarks could have been much better drafted, by explaining it was 2+2 and should have avoided the confusion they created.

             2. No, Paul is NOT right !
                Two labs tested an unknown number of blood samples (Spiez and another one).
                Two labs tested an unknown number of soil samples and other swabs.

                1. OK, I’m confused.

                   I believe Duncan stated from his research and knowledge that samples were sent to three labs?

                   To me, it would seem logical and necessary to send each type of sample to at least three labs – this seems necessary because how otherwise can the results be disambiguated when one lab produces a result which disagrees with another?

          2. @Duncan – does the OPCW’s explanation make any sense?

             Why would the OPCW add anything to 2 samples, the idea of a ‘control’ is nonsense!

             1) If OPCW sends 4 samples to 4 labs and they all give the same answer, isn’t that the ‘control’? How does adding ‘something’ to two of the samples improve the answer?
             2) Would the OPCW not risk contaminating the evidence by adding an extra compound? How could they have known that adding BZ was not going to cause a reaction that would destroy the evidence – or create other compounds that would confuse the result?

             1. Paul, I need to re-read the Moon article and think more.
                It makes no sense to spike field samples with BZ or anything else, when initially you are staring with a true unknown.

                As you know, I have always thought that BZ was used on the Skripals immediately after they left the Mill Pub.
                When PD or the OPCW reference labs add anything, especially another nerve agent to a field or biological sample, it makes no sense if the point of the analysis is to find out what the unknown “nerve agent” is.
                The most obvious reason is that the “unknowm” may have been BZ in the first place.
                Continuing with that logic, how did any of the labs know that the agent used was NOT BZ?
                Mass Spectrometry does need or is benefited by the addition of any chemical.

                1. Paul and Duncan : Paul’s questions are discussed on the Moon of Alabama page, comments 76, 79 a.s.o. There are perhaps some interesting elements.

                   1. Thanks Inquirer. I think they are worth copying here:

                      From comment 76:
                      “It was never especially plausible to believe the Brits inserted some “control” agent into the samples. Obviously the first reason is as others have noted, you have just broken all chain-of-custody and integrity of sample rules, rendering any results highly questionable. But on a more basic level, this is simply not done. The control is sending the samples to three independent labs–THAT is the control. Assuming they all come back with statistically identical findings, you have your answer. The only time you would inject a new agent into a sample might be in a general, quality control testing sample send to one lab, to see if that lab correctly analyzes and reports what you already know to be in your test sample. But you would never do such a thing with an evidentiary sample from a criminal case…that’s just absurd.”

                      From comment 79:
                      “…the OPCW probably does periodically check its testing labs by sending them pre-made samples, but that would *not* involve tainting real samples from alleged chemical attacks.

                      I mean, get real: by definition the samples taken from the site of alleged chemical attacks contains an *unknown* substance, so the OPCW would not know if that substance is chemically-reactive to BZ. So they can’t just stick a syringe into the vials and inject some BZ into them.

                      But, equally, they can’t put new vials containing BZ into the packages that were sent to the labs. That would mean the OPCW can and does break the seals on those packages. And if they can do that to *add* vials then they can also do that to *substitute* vials.

                      You go in the field.
                      You collect samples.
                      You seal and label those samples.
                      You then put them into sealed and labelled packages.

                      If the OPCW adds *anything* to those packages between field sampling and test laboratory then the results of those tests are invalid, and the integrity of the OPCW as an organization is shredded.”

93. Anyone see the documentary on Porton Down screened on BBC4 recently? It it we are shown part of the manufacturing process for VX gas, a few ml of which we were reminded, would kill literally 1000’s of people if released in an urban setting. Now we were told that the nerve agent ‘used’ in Salisbury was even more potent than VX yet no one died. How anybody cannot see this tale for the nonsense it is is beyond me.

    1. Two scientific studies concluded that Novichok is likely “substantially” less toxic than VX :

       Lars Carlsen, “After Salisbury Nerve Agents Revisited”, Molecular Informatics, 25 novembre 2018,
       https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/minf.201800106

       Hanusha Bhakhoa, Lydia Rhyman et Ponnadurai Ramasami, “Theoretical study of the molecular aspect of the suspected novichok agent A234 of the Skripal poisoning”, Royal Society Open Science, vol. 6, n° 2, 6 février 2019, https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/full/10.1098/rsos.181831

94. Steele Dossier – CIA – Stephan Halper – Sergei Skripal – Vyacheslav Trubnikov
    How is this connected ?

    Stephan Halper most probably was a source to both, the Steele Dossier and CIA´s John Brennan.
    Read this twitter thread by Svetlana Lokhova, who was smeared by Halper to be a honeytrap to Gen. Michael Flynn :
    https://twitter.com/RealSLokhova/status/1199417658766172161

    Was Sergei Skripal part of the Steele – Pablo Miller – Halper – Dearlove – Andrew Woods circle ?
    I collected some facts to support this thesis :

    July 30, 2016: Chris Steele told DOJ’s Bruce Ohr that a former head of Russian Intelligence informed him they had Trump “over a barrel”.
    But how did Chris Steele came across such world-shattering intelligence ?
    Coincidentally in June 2016 Sergei Skripal met a select group of intelligence officers in Estonia :

    Paul Wood, BBC :
    And the former MI6 agent [Chris Steele] is not the only source for the claim about Russian kompromat on the president-elect. Back in August [2016], a retired spy [Skripal ?] told me he had been informed of its existence by “the head of an East European intelligence agency”.
    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38589427

    Ellen Barry, NYT :
    Mr. Skripal, a veteran of Russia’s military intelligence agency, the G.R.U., apparently traveled widely, offering briefings on Russia to foreign intelligence operatives, according to European officials, who spoke only on the condition of anonymity. He met with Czech intelligence officials on several occasions and visited Estonia in 2016 to meet with local spies.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/14/world/europe/sergei-skripal-spying-russia-poisoning.html

    Mark Urban in his book page 190 :
    Piecing Skripal’s travels together I found out that he went to the US in 2011 and the Czech Republic in 2012, and there were a couple of visits to Estonia. In the summer of 2017 our interviews had been interrupted by a week-long trip that he had made to Switzerland to talk to their federal intelligence services.
    I have heard it said also that Skripal had been talking to the Ukrainian security service, the SBU, though not apparently in Ukraine itself.
    http://lander.odessa.ua/doc/The%20Skripal%20Files%20by%20Mark%20Urban.pdf

    Luke Harding, Guardian :
    In June 2016 Skripal travelled to Estonia and met a select group of intelligence officers there, the New York Times reported on Monday.
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/may/14/sergei-skripal-briefed-european-intelligence-services-reports-say

    But there is more :
    Steele started his Dossier with a report dated June 20, 2016. He claimed that his sources included a “senior Russian Foreign Ministry figure” (Source A) and a “former top level Russian intelligence officer still active inside the Kremlin” (Source B).
    Steele’s sources A and B spoke to “a trusted compatriot”, who passed the information along to Steele (or Steele’s informant, which could be Halper or/and Sergei Skripal)

    Steele named sources A and B to US State Department’s Kathleen Kavalec:
    Vyacheslav Trubnikov and Vladislav Surkov.

    General Vyacheslav Ivanovich Trubnikov was Director of Foreign Intelligence Service for Russia between 1996 and 2000.
    In 2000, he was appointed First Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs and Special Representative (with the rank of Federal Minister) of the President of the Russian Federation in CIS.
    From 2004 to 2009 he served as Ambassador of the Russian Federation in India.
    He is a member of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences, International Institute for Strategic Studies in the UK and of the Russian Union of Journalists.
    He is also a member of the Advisory Board for the European Leadership Network (ELN).
    This top intelligence officer allegedly was the source for the claim that Putin was personally directing the pro-Trump effort. NO WAY TRUBNIKOV LEAKED THIS ! It´s a lie !

    Skripal´s initial role in the GRU was in its First Directorate, which focused on spying in Europe.
    In 1999 or 2000 (there is some debate on the date) he quit the GRU.
    In December 2004 he was arrested for spying.
    For sure Skripal knows Trubnikov !

    Stefan Halper had a number of contacts with Trubnikov. He arranged for him to visit intelligence seminars at the University of Cambridge in 2012 and 2015 on Halper’s invitation. Trubnikov appears as someone Halper claims to “interview” and pay in summer 2016, but he didn’t.
    Most probably Halper shared with Brennan fabrications about Trubnikov, which originated in Steele and/or Skripal !

    Early August 2016, a courier arrives at the White House with an envelope from Brennan personally. It’s marked „for eyes only“ to be shown to just four people: President Obama, and his three senior aids. Inside was an intelligence bombshell, a report drawn from sourcing „deep inside the Russian government“ that detailed Putin’s direct involvement in a cyber campaign to disrupt and discredit the U.S. presidential race.
    This Brennan „bombshell“ most probably had it´s origin in Steele and Halper, who both presented Trubnikov as the source.
    Because two days before Brennan brought his bombshell intelligence to Obama, Steele was telling Bruce Ohr about the same “intelligence” and the “sources” described as A and B in his Dossier : Vyacheslav Trubnikov and Vladislav Surkov.

    The one thing we know for sure about the Dossier is that it was unverified. FBI´s Comey said that in congressional testimony.
    If Brennan actually had his own high-level Russian government sourcing, then the dossier would have been corroborated. It would not be dismissed as unverified; it would be touted as matching up with the “intelligence bombshell” independently known to the CIA.
    The record shows that Brennan was promoting the Steele dossier, not own CIA findings.
    If Sergei Skripal had only a tiny stake in the dossier, that was reason enough to silence him !

    Here you can read an interview with Trubnikov where he speaks about the Skripal case :
    Trubnikov: „I regard MI6 professional standards way higher than those at the CIA. Just look at how accurately the British use their resources… What has the Skripal case got to do with the British intelligence. The Brits themselves fail to have a clear understanding of what happened to Skripal.“
    Question: „And you? Do you have full understanding of it?“
    Trubnikov: „Well, in what I consider to be the most important – yes.“
    Question: „And as a professional, you have no more questions left as to what happened?“
    Trubnikov: „No questions. And not about what actually happened, but how unprofessionally the rather disgusting plot was carried out. Smells strongly of the alleged murder of a journalist in Ukraine [Babchenko].“
    Question: „Are you saying, it was provocation?“
    Trubnikov: „Yes, it was. With an objective to aggravate tensions between Russia, the UK and the West as a whole.“
    Question: „And how do you see Skripal’s role? Innocent victim?“
    Trubnikov: „Who’s innocent? Skripal’s innocent? He got into this situation himself. He made his own choice – working for them. Yes, we let him go. But before that he had served most of his sentence, was stripped of ranks and awards, though not of his citizenship, mind you.“
    Question: „Well, yes, he was exchanged. And western media wrote that the attempt to poison him also broke an unwritten rule that exchanged agents remain unharmed, is that so?“
    Trubnikov: „No, that is not so. There has never been such a rule, or agreement – after we exchanged agents, you don‘t harm ours, and we don’t harm yours. There’s never been this kind of agreement. At least to my knowledge. I know nothing of such ‘deals’ and I think they were impossible.“
    https://inforos.ru/en/?module=news&action=view&id=70926

    Note that Trubnikov hints to the CIA behind the Skripal poisoning !
    This makes perfect sense considering Brennan´s role in the Steele Dossier !

    How well informed Trubnilov is, he proves in the same interview dated July 3, 2018 :
    Question: „I am still waiting for Trump to start doing something to support what he said about normalizing relations with Russia.“
    Trubnikov: „He could have well started doing something, but the trouble is, they wouldn’t even let him build a team of his own. State Department officials who were working on Russia walked out on him – some out of fear, others – out of hate.
    They are trying to impeach him. If he provides no grounds for that they shall try to drive him to a state when he resigns or decides not to run for the second term.“

    1. With all my respect for you, Liane, I have to say that I do not agree with the idea that Skripal was involved in the fabrication of the Steele dossier. Skripal could not know anything useful for the dossier, and Steele did not need Skripal’s help at all – he had other resources, including his own fantasy. With regard to the texts you quoted above, I can’t agree that “[f]or sure Skripal knows Trubnikov.” Skripal served in GRU, which is a military intelligence agency, while Trubnikov headed SVR, this is Foreign Intelligence Service. SVR was formed after the collapse of the USSR as a new incarnation of KGB’s intelligence department. In fact, KGB was divided into SVR and FSB. GRU had been on bad terms with KGB/FSB for long. So, Skripal knew that SVR was headed by some General named Trubnikov but it was highly unlikely that they were acquainted. The more so that Skripal held a mid-level rank in GRU. By the way, Steele’s dossier claims that the Trump file in Russia has been handled by FSB. Again, it was highly unlikely that Skripal, being ex-GRU officer, could have had any sources in FSB.

       Apart from the above, I see a fundamental reason as to why the Salisbury poisonings were not an attempt to silence Skripal as an unreliable accomplice in the Steele conspiracy. If the silencing had been the case, the murder would have been arranged in a “quiet” manner. Some accident would have been staged; of course, no family members would have been damaged. The media would have talked about the Kremlin’s possible involvement for a couple of weeks and then the accident would have been forgotten.

       What we see in fact has been a huge global scandal with massive diplomatic expulsions and sanctions against Russia. An exotic poison was allegedly used. Skripal’s daughter was poisoned too (!) Her poisoning would be unnessary and counterproductive in the case of silencing Skripal, but it is very useful in the case where a hype and hysteria are needed. I see it as a false flag operation.

       1. Milda, I highly respect your answer.
          My speculation is : Skripal could have met Trubnikov at the intelligence seminars at the University of Cambridge in 2012 and 2015, if he was invited, too.
          Or he could know Trubnikov because him being the Director of Foreign Intelligence Service for Russia between 1996 and 2000.
          At that time Skripal worked outside of Russia. But maybe the Foreign Intelligence Service did not include the GRU.

          1. Liane,
             Yes, in principle Skripal could have met Trubnikov at the intelligence seminars in 2012 and 2015. However, I do not see how such a meeting could have produced anything useful for the Steele dossier.

             As for their being acquainted before Skripal’s arrest, I have to repeat that that was highly unlikely. The Foreign Intelligence Service is SVR, formerly part of KGB, it did not include the GRU, which is part of the army. GRU has been on bad terms with KGB/FSB.

95. Anonymous of 26 August said:
    “You give the impression that you know more than you are saying but give no reasons for not giving details.

    Why not say who you think the Russian pair were on the bench, which town they lived and why they won’t be seen again?

    Not to say would indicate to me that you don’t know and your input is more attention seeking diversion than speculation”.

    Don’t make unfounded assumptions. I know, but am not now in a position say more. You are free to believe what you like. By asking for their names you could be seeking confirmation of intelligence you already possess, but have not disclosed. If so, I am now prepared to state that they lived in a small English town of name beginning with the letter B. This should be sufficient to authenticate my credentials. Revealing more, when names of these two Russians have not been published would be too dangerous.

    Blunderbus on 26 August said:
    “We must put ourselves in their position.”

    Perhaps Remora ARE in their position. They might be an offshoot of Integrity Initiative, trying to mislead us”.

    Possibly, but we are strongly opposed to the II and all it stands for.

    Inquirer on 27 August said
    “I may be naive, but at first glance I do not see any reason to suspect Remora. We are all reduced to choosing what we believe and what we do not believe”.

    Thank you. “Attention seeking diversion” is not our game.

    Anonymous said
    “The answer is very simple they were not responding to a drugs incident they were playing out a CW exercise in an urban environment that is why the Chief Nurse of the British Army was present and it was safe enough to take her family with her to watch the performance and even join in.”

    Very true. Donnelly, Lafayeedney, Dalziel, Madeira, Dearlove, Finnen, Sedwill, Miller, Steele, McComb, Bretton Gordon, Kaszeta, Aikenhead, Higgins and many more are implicated in this criminal hoax.

    1. Hi Remora, IF your credentials are verified, what are you proposing / hoping to come out from this contact?

    2. “a small English town of name beginning with the letter B”… sounds like you have the A to Z of what happened… do you want to compare notes?

    3. So was Yulias scar fake? It looked genuine at first glance. Somebody mentioned on here that her Reuters interview was at RAF Fairford where the USAF are based. So is she effectively being held hostage by the US or was she somehow complicit in this hoax? So many questions and so much confusion.

    4. Remora,

       You name a number of people as being in on the incident. I have no idea whether your claims are accurate or not, but some of the most interesting you could have named are not on the list. I refer to major British politicians, such as May and Johnson. I presume that it is your view that whatever happened, it was something that was confined to various intelligence operators, and the politicians were then fed their lines in the aftermath, rather than any of them being actually complicit.

       Rob

96. About award winning Senior Principal Statistician at DSTL Porton Down, Philippa M. Spencer.

    Philippa was named “Woman of the year” and won another award for “Outstanding Contribution to Defence” at the Women in Defence awards. The award ceremony was held at Guildhall in London on November 19. Her award was presented by DSTL chief executive Gary Aitkenhead.

    “Phillippa was involved in the clean-up of Salisbury following the Novichok incident, where she applied statistical modelling to determine whether locations or vehicles were safe to use.”

    Now to create a computer model to determine if locations or vehicles were safe, you need accurate information on what occurred and exactly when it occurred. Philippa knows it all. She knows exactly what happened and when. She knows the true order of Mill, Zizz’s or Zizzi’s, Mill, she knows what happened behind the Mill, She knows what NIck did and when. She knows why number 47’s roof had to come off because she recommended that.
    She know who really went to Salisbury hospital and exactly when and she knows the helicopters movements and the personnel it transported.

    She had to have been told the truth or the model would have been useless because the first rule of computer modeling is garbage in garbage out.

    My theory is that all this information had to be gathered not to protect the public from the made up novichok but to protect TPTB from being exposed. TPTB most likely used BZ on March 4th and as the Russians have claimed, it had another substance added to it. This most likely can put its manufacture down to one place, Porton Down. If this came out their game would be up.

    TPTB are petrified of one thing and that is the whistleblower. All these awards are to try and sure up people so that their consciences wont get the better of them and talk publicly.

    We need a Skripal whistleblower to expose their merciless, lawless, murderess activities. The only way to rein in the security services is for public opinion to turn against them. The Skripal hoax being exposed may be the way to do that.

    Philipa’s email is pspencer@mail.dstl.gov.uk

    1. „… she applied statistical modelling to determine whether locations or vehicles were safe to use.”

       So WHY Philippa M. Spencer did not order all the vehicles that were at Skripal´s house in the first days to be tested at Porton Down ?
       Answer : She knew these vehicles could not have been in contact with Novichok !

       1. Forgive me if this is old hat, but I assume one of the blogmirers has already developed a list all the vehicles, buildings etc involved in the incidents, and their locations, timings and whether they were cleaned/destroyed by the authorities. Might give us a clue as whether this points to a random distraction or there was a pattern to the exposure to the “stuff” whatever it was.

97. Bellingcat’s methods seem to include fabrication of evidence. This is a case related to Salisbury, the alleged poisoning of a Bulgarian arms exporter by Russia’s GRU. This article exposes Bellingcat’s twisting of the facts:

    https://twitter.com/dgaytandzhieva/status/1200100843627991043

    The journalist is taking them to court.

98. DAC Haydon is the police officer that is running the Skripal Inquiry, he went on the BBC’s Panorama programme to tell us about the gotcha moment when the two Russian suspects were identified.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7734337/Met-police-officers-decided-against-launching-probe-Virginia-Roberts-trafficking-claims.html

    1. This from November following the police statements regarding the suspects, note the lie regarding the pefume bottle being used in Salisbury despite it being sealed in thick plastic

       https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/nov/22/i-was-petrified-officer-poisoned-by-novichok-tells-of-emotional-battering

       But this from June and the police don’t know the time the door handle was sprayed yet they were aware of the suspects in April and had raided the City stay hotel in May. The police had the CCTV of the suspects in Salisbury in June but they were still not confident of the timings.

       https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/jun/06/skripal-attack-police-close-in-on-time-poison-was-used

       Haydon caught out telling porkies

       1. Not just lying, he is promulgating a hoax! The Guardian article also has images of the ridiculous white plastic copy bottle the police made – they are all complete and utter idiots!

          They claim they are “there to serve”… ‘serve who’ though?

          1. They serve the same people that moved in Savile’s circle, the system is so corrupted it is beyond repair.

             1. “Dean Haydon, Senior National Coordinator @terrorismpolice received the Queen’s Police Medal yesterday. Royal recognition for his distinguished service” (Feb 2019)

                https://twitter.com/terrorismpolice/status/1093805116912791552

                Royal Recognition for his distinguished service! He covered up the crimes that the Queens son has been associated with and then went on the cover up the Wiltshire poisonings Hoax.

                If is Distinguished Service then God help us all.

                1. I suppose it shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone given that the woman in charge at the Met got the job because of the part she played in the 7/7cover up.

                   1. She is also part of the insidious Common Purpose crowd.

                   2. A man died due to her indecision that day.

       2. The door handle dosing had to fit into the time window that the two GRU super assassins were actually in Salisbury, of course.
          But, after the cemetery visit, there does not seem to be any indication as to when, or if, the Sripals returned home.
          We have the brief video of Sergei’s car heading into town, but we don’t have sthe starting point.
          Maybe the phones were not turned off, and the Met actually do know the Sunday morning locations, but that information clashes with the fantasy story.

99. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-43297638

    “A number of emergency services workers were assessed immediately after the incident – and one remains in hospital.”

    Was this DS Bailey?

    1. Was DS Bailey involved in the “other” drugs related incident in the Maltings that day?

       1. Anonymous, you said :
          [QUOTE]
          Was DS Bailey involved in the “other” drugs related incident in the Maltings that day?
          [/QUOTE]
          As I already said, I’m very intersted in this “other” drugs related incident in the Maltings that day (and I’m not sure that this “other” incident is really another one), I remember that the press talked about it, but I find no source about it in my files. Perhaps you can give a source ? Thanks in advance.

          1. The idea that there was another drug-related incident probably comes from a false description of the Skripals in an early report in the Salisbury Journal. The SJ reported within hours that the ‘fentanyl’ victims in the Maltings were “a man and a woman, aged in their late 20s to early 30s”. This was not a separate incident but somehow got transformed into one in people’s minds because of the different details.
             https://web.archive.org/web/20180305003702/http://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/news/16064166.LATEST__Two_in_hospital_after_medical_emergency_at_Maltings/#comments-anchor

             My suspicion is that the fentanyl couple in their late 20s to early 30s was invented because the police panicked and wanted to keep quiet about Sergei because he was a spy from Russia. Maybe they got orders from above to hide the facts. But later they might have realised they could not make the Skripals disappear completely without them being missed, so they publicly identified them.

             1. Thanks for the answer, Brendan.

          2. Don’t know for sure, Inquirer, but I suspect that the second couple story is the result of a kind of journalistic Chinese whispers – in the same sort of way as there’s a journo saying that ‘ … the girl was airlifted out’ and, if any female was airlifted out, that girl then morphed into Yulia.

             Non-journo numpty moi is similarly guilty of making assumptions and connections because (based entirely on what was reported), I somehow had DSNB being the carrier of contamination from the bench scene to 47CMR and to wherever else he went after that. I’m not so adamant now but nor am I sure I was wrong either.

             1. Thanks for the answer, eleanor. If I remember correctly, the story of the second couple appeared in the following context: “Yes, fentanyl was found at Maltings, but it had been used by another couple.” Unfortunately, I can be wrong. I would not want to implant false memories in the minds of my fellow commentators.

                1. I too thought I recalled, early on, being aware of at least a report of another incident – also a couple, also drugs related – but could never find it again. So I concluded that whatever I had read(?), had since been removed. A second incident might have explained why the air ambulance landed in the vicinity but allegedly not to provide support for The Maltings incident.

                   Thanks for confirming that I didn’t imagine it!

100. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/52626.htm

101. Where did award winning and life saving (from novichok) Senior Principal Statistician Philippa Spencer work before DSTL? Answer: As an analyst for British American Tobacco, probably the worlds largest manufacturer of those life saving products, cigarettes and vaping devices.

     And where did DTSL head Gary Atkinhead work before DTSL, apart from Motorola? Answer: Sepura PLC. Manufacturer of TETRA encrypted, secure hand held radios. The same type of radio that was recovered from Dawns flat in Salisbury and known to be used by security services in the UK. In a position like that he must have had direct contact with MI56.

     “Gary Atkinhead previously held senior global positions at Sepura and at Motorola Solutions, where he had commercial responsibility for sales, services, operations and product management.”

     https://uk.linkedin.com/in/phillippa-spencer-58962840

     https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/nov/27/us-vaping-backlash-dents-british-american-tobacco-revenues

     https://www.gov.uk/government/people/gary-aitkenhead

     1. Surely the TETRA device was left by the SS after they searched the flat, or even when they planted the perfume bottle (if it ever existed in reality)?

        1. Dawn didn’t actually have a flat, it was just a room in John Baker House. As far as I recall, the rooms there are 100-120 square feet. The search of Dawn’s room was on 13 July, a few days after the police said they had found a bottle in Charlie’s flat. The first pictures of the radio were published on 14 July.

           1. Sorry, getting mixed up with Charlie’s flat. Still think the SS left it behind after they searched her room.

              Still think the perfume bottle was either planted by the SS in Charlie’s flat after they were both taken to hospital, or more likely never existed. The whole story is just too ridiculous to be true.

              Same goes for the door handle and the load of rubbish about Rus and Alex.

102. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=97MWOERY_dE

     Luke Harding pre-psychoactive drugs. Edward Snowdon was “probably the greatest journalistic source ever.”

103. One more award ? Phillippa Spencer, who works in Porton Down :
     https://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/news/18059543.dstl-scientist-phillipa-spencer-recognised-women-defence-awards/

     “More recently, Phillippa was involved in the clean-up of Salisbury following the Novichok incident, where she applied statistical modelling to determine whether locations or vehicles were safe to use. “

     1. Well done to the lady.
        The spreadsheet must have suggested that Novichok transfer from the door handle to the roof rafters was entirely plausible.
        Possibly the same series of algorithms that indicated that swab removal would suffice at the City Hotel, but the cleaning staff were obviously not exposed to the world’s most dangerous nerve agent, so no testing required.
        Sadly, the table at Zizzi’s had to be put down, as it was not as fortunate.

        My own view was that the doormat might be a hot zone, but I don’t get access to the super computing power at Porton Down.

     2. Since the cars sent to the Maltings on 4th March were later disposed of, we can conclude that Phillippa’s statistical model determined that those vehicles were not safe to use. In contrast, it must have determined that the vehicles sent to Sergei’s house were safe to use, since they are still in use.

        That begs the question: How come the statistical model determined that cars had less chance of contamination if they were at the location where the nerve agent was allegedly sprayed? The front door handle was literally dripping with the stuff, if we believe what both Deborah Haynes and Mark Urban wrote about it being found at the foot of the door. And the whole house, including roof, had to be ripped apart to make it safe again.

        So what information was fed into the statistical model that was good that Phillippa won an award for it? I suppose a FoI request about that would not be very successful.

        1. And why was DS Bailey’s home uninhabitable when PC Collins and Sgt Holloway’s were fine?

           Probably the sane reason the duck boys and Sam Hobson could go two weeks without being tested.

           It was all down to the computer model – “the computer says no”

     3. „Her analysis was used among healthcare workers in Sierra Leone during the Ebola outbreak…“

        Pure coincidence :
        Lt Col Alison McCourt, originally from Llandrindod Wells, who was the commanding officer of an ebola treatment unit in Sierra Leone during the crisis.
        https://www.bbc.com/news/av/uk-wales-33435467/ebola-medal-for-lt-col-alison-mccourt-from-mid-wales

104. At last!
     For more than 19 months we have pleaded for CCTV footage to help identify suspects and bring more witnesses forward.

     https://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/news/18059371.recognise-man-cctv-appeal-shoplifting-incident/

     Perhaps shoplifting is considered a “bigger” crime in Salisbury.
     A lot more effort than trying to identify the deadly Novichok attackers.

     1. There is more.
        It is now a flood of CCTV images.
        https://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/news/18056280.bilking-incident-byron-burger-salisbury/

        Could the duck feed be next?

105. There are loads of stories about whistleblowers in the last few days. I suspect that it’s no coincidence that so many of them appear together around the same time – that way, none of them gets the scrutiny it deserves, and the genuine whistleblowers are ignored:

     – US officials who claim that Trump put pressure on Ukraine to undermine Joe Biden (as if Biden had any real chance of becoming President).

     – John Sweeney, the “BBC whistleblower” (according to the Times), who claims that the BBC and Panorama are too soft on Russia!!!
     https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/bbc-whistleblower-bosses-suppressing-russia-stories-lwzn2pm9x
     https://www.johnsweeney.co.uk/?blog=blogs/archive/2019/11/24/john.sweeneys.letter.to.ofcom.aspx

     – Sergei Magnitsky, who has often been described in the mass media as a “whistleblower lawyer” since his death ten years ago this month. But this week, der Spiegel reports what many of us knew for years – that he was just an accountant for the dodgy Bill Browder. So far only published in der Spiegel’s German edition, and also reported in Deutsche Welle’s Russian website, but still it looks like Browder is now considered toxic and disposable.
     https://twitter.com/BenjaminBidder/status/1198135796877930496

     – The anonymous OPCW investigators who raised concerns about the report about the alleged chemical attack in Douma, as discussed here lately, and published by Wikileaks.

     – Julian Assange, who helped real whistleblowers expose very important information. The fake Swedish rape charges against him have been dropped after nine years, and dozens of doctors have publicly expressed serious concern for his health.

     1. The film, The Magnitsky Act Behind the Scenes, is highly recommended. It was made by Andrei Negrasov who started out believing in Bill Browder and wanted to tell the Browder story but, as his research deepened, he realised Browder was a fraudster and his story took a different turn. Worth watching if you can afford $5US, you can buy it from this site: http://www.magnitskyact.com/

     2. See some of the things that the self-styled “reluctant whistle-blower” John Sweeney tweeted about Julian Assange (who works with real whistleblowers):
        https://twitter.com/i/moments/1024359542304505856

        That nasty piece of work makes headlines as a ‘whistleblower’ just for calling for even more propaganda from the BBC.

        Assange, on the other hand, is airbrushed from the news – because it is now undeniable that he was been cruelly punished for nearly a decade, just for doing journalism – and not for the fabricated sex crime in Sweden. The mass media completely ignores him now because it’s the easiest thing for it to do, rather than try to explain the inconvenient truth.

     3. The revelations by the OPCW investigators are treated with the same silence by nearly all of the media. But it was at least mentioned by Tucker Carlson on the right-wing Fox News, so there is some glimmer of hope.

        Peter Hitchens wrote about that today:

        “Trump’s Syria missile strike was a scandal
        But almost nobody dares say so”
        (…)
        “Why is this? Is it possible that many in the media, just like many in politics, had invested so much in the original outrage that they now could not bear to find that there was, in fact, no proper evidence of the thing they had blazoned on their front pages and shouted in their bulletins? They had been furious and righteous and condemnatory. And now they were left without any proof that the thing had even happened.”
        https://spectator.us/trump-syria-missile-strike-scandal/

     4. Der Spiegel’s Magnitsky article is now available in English. Quite long but worth reading.
        https://www.spiegel.de/international/world/the-case-of-sergei-magnitsky-anti-corruption-champion-or-corrupt-anti-hero-a-1297796.html

        This looks like the beginning of the end of the Browder/Magnitsky myth, not because the article is well written (which it is) but because it appears in the MSM. The question that remains is why this is happening now after the media kept the fake ‘whistleblower’ story going for ten years. My guess is that there is some new irrefutable evidence against Browder, but we’ll have to wait and see.

        1. I can be wrong, but I have the impression that the German Deep State becomes less hostile to Russia. In the Khangoshvili case, the Berlin prosecutor’s office has so far avoided accusing Russia.

106. http://freewestmedia.com/2018/04/11/skripal-affair-real-reason-is-capture-of-200-sas-soldiers-in-ghouta/

     Americans did not expect the pilots of the Russian SU-34 or SU-27SMZ to execute 30 sorties per day and meticulously wipe out all British and US military instructors. This convinced tens of thousands of rebels to end their struggle.

     On March 17, 2018, some 200 US special-forces operators were killed, according to Chinese intelligence. The situation in East Ghouta was different from Aleppo in that Aleppo “was like a pudding stuffed with raisins” while in Ghouta a large group of British instructors were also caught trying to escape the Russian encirclement “dressed as women”.

     Satanovskiy noted that the British SAS soldiers often disguised themselves as women in Afghanistan too. Some 200 were caught by Russian military police trying to flee Ghouta. The British government opened diplomatic channels to Moscow right away in order to reach an agreement and at the same time launched the Skripal affair when the US effort to save them failed.

     1. I agree that East Ghouta was a major factor in the Skripal hoax. Imagine the seething rage MI6 and the MOD, watching 200 SAS be captured in female clothing and then the bowing and scraping to Putin, that must have gone on, to get them released and bused to Israel. The MI6/MOD hatred of Putin would have been and still is palpable.

        MI6/MOD had to set up some outrage up to get Trump to bomb Damascus into oblivion as revenge. That false flag outrage was the Skripal hoax. They forgot or miscalculated that Trump didn’t want and still doesn’t want World War 3. Trump doesn’t have arms factories to profit from and war is really bad for the worldwide hotel business.

        This comment under Anonymous-1’s Freewestmedia story above shows the gigantic political problem, of their lies about who was really fighting Assad (to steal his oil), the East Ghouta SAS capture would have caused as well.

        “Russians killed 200 Yanks and Syrians captured 200 Brits.
        Where do you think the required political posturing would lead if those politicos were forced to face their publics with that?”

        1. Just to clarify the date discrepancy above, this is from (the dubious) Wikipedia:

           “Between 4 and 21 February 2018, the Syrian-Russian bombardments killed 346 people in Eastern Ghouta. … After the end of the siege, tens of thousands of people have been unlawfully interned by the Syrian Government forces in rural Damascus, including Ghouta.”

           1. “unlawfully interned” above. Dont you just love Phillip Cross’ work at Wikipedia lol

        2. http://freewestmedia.com/2018/04/11/skripal-affair-real-reason-is-capture-of-200-sas-soldiers-in-ghouta/

           “Satanovskiy has studied the situation in East Ghouta, Syria, based on recent material gathered by Chinese analysts and translated into Russian by the Russian Sinologist Maksim Kazanin.
           Kazanin himself is a famous Russian Sinologist, and author of studies on China for Russian mass media.

           According to the analyst, the UAVs (Unmanned Aerial Vehicles) used in the area to attack Russian bases had Chinese processors and the Chinese could get hold of all the navigational data.”

           So you can see why the US/UK are so bothered about Chinese technology. You just can’t help laughing, just imagine if there was a WW111, the US/UK would probably by giving away their co-ordinates without even realising it.

107. https://www.activistpost.com/2019/11/wikileaks-douma-docs-expose-opcw-doctored-syrian-weapons-report.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+ActivistPost+%28Activist+Post%29

     https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZ0UgJRPhxw

108. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7722531/Lorry-driver-accused-deaths-39-Vietnamese-migrants-container-pleads-guilty.html

     Is it worth casting the Blogmire critical thinking process over this incident?

     1. It’s called Taking The Rap for the other people who organised the smuggling ring to bring migrants, from a poor part of Vietnam hit by flooding in the past few years, and duped by a scam offering them what they were told was decent work for decent pay, into Britain to do work that they wouldn’t otherwise touch with a 10-metre barge pole. .

109. https://www.sott.net/article/424529-Leaked-Email-Proves-UN-Report-on-Poison-Gas-Attack-by-Assad-Was-Falsified-to-Justify-US-Attack-on-Syria

     1. Perhaps we could try to refute these critics from Bellingcat about the email of the second OPCW whistleblower :
        https://www.bellingcat.com/news/2019/11/25/emails-and-reading-comprehension-opcw-douma-coverage-misses-crucial-facts/

        1. Instead of “critics”, please read “criticisms”. Sorry.

        2. They’re not called Bellingcrap for no reason.

           1. Anonymous-1 said : “They’re not called Bellingcrap for no reason.”
              That is not a refutation.

           2. For those who read German, there is a reply to Bellingcat here :
              https://www.heise.de/tp/features/Bellingcat-verteidigt-OPCW-Abschlussbericht-4596476.html

        3. Good piece by Caitlin Johnstone debunking bellinghoax:

           https://medium.com/@caityjohnstone/narrative-managers-faceplant-in-hilarious-opcw-scandal-spin-job-6710730cda01

           1. Interesting. Thanks, Paul.

110. More evidence, if it were needed that Bellingcat is a security services stooge

     https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2019/11/25/8-russian-agents-linked-to-bulgaria-poisoning-bellingcat-a68306

     1. 4 days after the Douma incident Bellingcat was able to produce an in depth report that showed it wos Assad wot dunnit so Mrs May bombed Syria

        https://www.bellingcat.com/news/mena/2018/04/11/open-source-survey-alleged-chemical-attacks-douma-7th-april-2018/

111. Its wonderful to see two whistleblowers come forward with details of the corruption at the OPCW but where are the whistleblowers for the Skripal hoax.

     Come on there must be someone at one of these: Wiltshire Air Ambulance, South Western Ambulance, The builders at number 47 and Nick’s houses, The taxi company at the helicopter landing site, the many eye witnesses at the bench, the staff at the Mill, Zizzi’s, Snap Fitness, Salisbury Hospital, the Wiltshire Council CCTV department and all the journalists who have had their stories suppressed by editors under D notices.

     And there there are the less likely ones like Porton Down, Winterbourne Gunner, the Met Counter Terrorism, MI5, MI6, GCHQ, all the MOD personnel. It just needs one person to come forward.

     Where would you go if you had information about this, I guess Wikileaks or Craig Murray who is trying to get an honest documentary made about this? Any other thoughts?

     1. Denise, apologies for beating the same drum.

        If the “UK secret squad” sprayed the Skripals with BZ as they left the Mill Pub, and then had their own covert team at hand, then there would be many involved who acted properly and completely unaware of the scheme that was unfolding.
        It is quite possible that DSB was exposed to BZ just to get his acetylcholine esterase levels lowered.

        Yulia came to the UK with the news that she was going to be married in Russia, and Putin himself had agreed that Sergei could return for the wedding, or if Sergei decided, to move back permanently.

        The UK secret squad would not allow this to happen.
        The rest we know.

        The GRU squad were sent over to the UK with the full knowledge of the Russian State, They were there to be seen and observe, not to act or get involved, and certainly NOT to go to Sergei’s house.
        They probably met the Skripals on Sunday morning, where we have the missing hours and the phones switched off.

        1. If it all went to plan and ” the “UK secret squad” sprayed the Skripals with BZ as they left the Mill Pub” then:
           1) why was there a police cordon in the car park of The Mill?
           2) why was the place of attack moved to #47?
           3) why were the events of Monday 5th and Tuesday 6th so shambolic? On Tuesday 6 March, the entirety of the UK press said the CCTV couple was “the Skripals”. And
           4) why was there a police search for [something?] that ended up with #47’s roof being replaced?

           Just for good measure, why was Amesbury necessary at all? Surely, if all had gone to plan on 4 March and the “UK secret squad” were victorious, the story could have been completed without any further ado?

           1. Paul,
              From my hypothesis, here are my answers.
              1) That was the location of the spraying, there was residual BZ there, the public had to be kept away. Another “victim” found there, would not fit the plan.
              2) The “Secret Squad” had to make the attack dastardly as possible. As the GRU agents had already left Salisbury, they could not be placed at the Mill. So it had to be the cemetery or the last place the Skripals were before their car journey on Sunday afternoon.
              3) The UK services lead the world in shambolism, We are the current Olympic and World record holders.
              4) To spread the fear. This shows how dangerous the world’s most lethal nerve agent really is. Unless you are a 65 year old diabetic man.

           2. The “UK secret squad” were obviously banking on the Skripals dying. The on thing they weren’t banking on is a 16 year old girl raising the alarm with her parents, as everyone else just walked by.

              Moving the attack site to 47 is just a deflection technique. The area where the attack actually took place is heavily covered by CCTV. “UK secret squad” being caught on CCTV – that’s why it was all seized and nobody’s seen sight of it since.

              1. Anon 1
                 No, the Skripals were not meant to die. BZ would not kill them. The operation was to show how bad the Bad Russians could be on UK soil, AND the fantastic heroism and resilience of the UK services.
                 It had everything:
                 Hero daughter of the army chief nurse.
                 First responders diving in, without fear.
                 DSB a hero, simply by breaking into a home.
                 The awards for all the agencies, etc.
                 The whole city pulling together to overcome the adversity of having a pub and a restaurant closed.

                 If you research further you will see that a Mr. R. Slane of Salisbury is one of only 3 Salisbury residents not receiving an award.

                 The other two were on holiday during that period, but their resilience has been confirmed.

                 1. The witnesses said Yulia was much worse than Sergei and one of the first responders said if Alison McCourt hadn’t got there when she did, Yulia would probably have died.

                    The truth is, we don’t actually know what the “stuff” was, as Peter Beswick correctly calls it. From what the Russians say, it was BZ plus something else.

                    1. Very unlikely to be BZ because of the time BZ takes to cause symptoms plus the large variability in symptoms from one person to another from the same dose.

                       Most likely a newcomer incapacitant knocked up in a lab near Salisbury and given the name Novichok

                       https://fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/doctrine/dod/fm8-9/3ch6.htm

                       It is also quite possible that two different chemicals were deployed in Salisbury and Amesbury despite what Porton Down and the OPCW say.

                       BZ supresses sweating and drives the body temperature up, Charlie is reported to be hot and sweaty when he returned home from the Church BBQ at 3:00pm so he took a shower and he then started to behave oddly to an extent that Sam his friend called an ambulance.

                       The onset of Charlie’s symptoms appear to have been rapid so the initial 3:30 time that Basu gave for the ambulance being called appears more realistic than the revised time Basu then gave of 6:20pm.

                       We were then told on the first anniversary of Dawn’s death that the ambulance Commander who attended Charlie recognised the symptoms of Nerve Agent poisoning and administered an antidote, the Commander alerted his colleagues to the danger but apparently did not allert the police officers who helped Charlie into the ambulance.

                       “The commander went to Mr Rowley’s address in person, where the paramedics put on protective clothing when the scale of the threat became apparent.”

                       https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/07/08/novichok-victim-charlie-rowley-saved-anti-nerve-agent-drug-never/

                       “Novichok paramedics suffering headaches and eye problems as service reveals staff are concerned over long-term health effects”

                       The problem for the authorities is the lack of consistency in their lies, from what we have been told we can’t determine what chemicals were deployed in Salisbury and Amesbury, and having the OPCW confirm what Porton down said it was is utterly meaningless now the Douma scandal has been exposed, what we can be sure of though is it was Not a 4th Generation Military Grade Nerve Agent because of the number of fatalities and casualties were so few.

                       Tim Atkins lead scientist at Porton Down on Panorama;

                       “We identified the material was a nerve agent called Novichok, its one of the most dangerous substances known, its quite unique in its ability to poison individuals at very low concentrations”

                       1. From the Telegraph link

                          “Yesterday, Mr Darch said the actions of the paramedics had been the difference between life and death.

                          “The crew that attended Charlie took a particular course of treatment – when that wasn’t effective, they suspected that it may be nerve agent,” he told The Guardian.”

                          So lets be clear hear, paramedics arrived at the scene and treated him presumably for drugs overdose. Charlie was a long term drug addict and on a methadone programme, he had picked up his methadone earlier that day from the Chemist in Amesbury.

                          When Charlie did not respond to the paramedic’s treatment for a drugs overdose, they decided it could be a nerve agent that was responsible and treated accordingly. That saved his life.

                          But Charlie was not tested for nerve agent poisoning until 3 days later.

                          1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9tHIm5pWz3A

                             https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RFqZ0CSh0lU

                             Sam wasn’t given a blood test until 2 weeks later

                             1. AC Basu formal statement 9th July (page 11 of 20), up to the 9th July Basu had been maintaining that Charlie’s ambulance was called a 3:30

                                “The next morning, at 10:15 on Saturday, 30 June, the South Western Ambulance Service was called to Charlie’s address, where Dawn had been taken ill. Charlie was present with her at that time and Dawn was subsequently taken to hospital.”

                                “At around midday on Saturday, Charlie visited Boots the chemist on Stonehenge Walk in Amesbury and he returned to his house around half an hour later.”

                                “At 1:45pm he went to the Amesbury Baptist Centre on Butterfield Drive and again returned hom eat around 3pm.”

                                “Just over three hours later, at 6.20pm, Charlie was also taken ill. The ambulance service was called
                                back to his address and he too was taken to hospital.”

                                https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/539707/response/1334627/attach/html/4/attachment.docx.html

                             2. From the above “What do they know” link (last page) police Q&A planned responses to journalists

                                “9 March 2018 response to a newspaper inquiry

                                IF ASKED: Why was a detective sergeant (Nick Bailey) a first responder?
                                He attended the initial scene in the town centre.

                                IF ASKED: It’s been suggested DS Nick Bailey was contaminated at Skripal’s house. Did he go to the house? Can you confirm he definitely went to the Maltings?

                                He was a first responder to the initial scene in the town centre. We are not discussing further.”

                                Nobody except the police suggested that Bailey was contaminated at the house – this was the beginning of the door handle nonsense. Police were present at the house a 5:00pm, the police and Bailey say he attended at midnight.

                                On the 9th of March the door handle story had not been decided upon, clearly the story now is Bailey was not a first responder at the bench scene. Why that volte face by the police?

                                The only reason is I can think of is Bailey was contaminated near to the bench because he was involved in whatever skulduggery was taking. place

                             3. page 12 of 20

                                “Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey, a Wiltshire police officer who was amongst the first to respond to the incident, also fell seriously ill after being exposed to the nerve agent and was admitted to hospital on 6 March.”

                                PHE’s advice

                                “I can offer the following clarification. PHE has given upper limits in our
                                published advice as these are the most useful for clinical staff to use; in that we can give absolute reassurance that if a person has no symptoms, and the last possible point of exposure was more than 12 hours ago, they will not go on to develop any short or long term health problems.”

                                https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/539752/response/1336403/attach/html/2/1065%20IR%20Novichok.pdf.html

                       2. There are several reasons why it cannot be anything like BZ, not least of which is that the OPCW confirmed the chemical used was not previously on their data base and a new category had to be created for it.

                          You caused me to recall the prank phone call (Russian prankster posing as the Polish PM, phoned Ahmet Uzumcu of the OPCW) – Uzumcu said:

                          “Our laboratories found that the toxic chemical which was used was of a high purity. That means according to our experts that it could not be done by say a terrorist or organized crime or individuals, but rather should have been done by real experts who had experience in this field. This could only be done in full-fledged facilities or laboratories. It could not be done [just] anywhere.”

                          This would rule out any ‘toxic chemicals’ produced industrially, I read it as Uzumcu saying that it was a sample produced in a very specialised lab. There is simply no reason to produce a ‘high purity’ sample of BZ.

                          The whole of the call can be found here:
                          https://sputniknews.com/europe/201804231063838115-opcw-chief-prank-phonecall/

                          1. BZ does not produce pinpoint pupils – it dilates them instead:

                             “Decreased cholinergic stimulation of pupillary sphincter muscles allows a-adrenergically innervated pupillary dilating muscles to act essentially unopposed, resulting in mydriasis. In fact, the cosmetic effect of mydriasis in women who applied extracts of deadly nightshade topically to their eyes explains the name “belladonna” [beautiful lady] given to this plant.”
                             https://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/intro/cw-incapacitating-bz.htm

                             Some interesting info about BZ’s symptoms and treatment:
                             http://www.nbcnews.com/id/3340693/t/bz-its-history-symptoms-effects/

                             Note (from above link):
                             “The U.S. Army ultimately abandoned its use because of its unpredictability” – not exactly ideal for a ‘hit and run’ attack…

     2. One thing I can tell you is that Freya Church never said anything about a red bag, because there wasn’t one. Neither did she say it was the man in the CCTV, what she did say was “it was the man that’s been on the news”.

        The press MADE IT UP when they quote her as saying there was a red bag and it was the man in the CCTV, that’s why she now refuses to speak to them – because they are LIARS.

        1. “The man that’s been on the news” WAS the man in the CCTV! Freya said this around 11.00 am on 6 March and EVERY UK MSM outlet was saying at that time, that the CCTV WAS the Skripals. Freya had just attended a press conference where the PA had shown everybody the video of the couple and she had spent the morning telling everyone that was who she had found on the bench!

           You are falling for TPTB’s trick and replacing your later knowledge with what was being said at the time.

           If you don’t believe me, then please find ANY press article published on the morning of 6 March that has a picture of the CCTV couple and does not say it is the Skripals, or ‘believed to be the Skripals’.

           You will find the original versions of the articles at: web.archive.org

           1. We had it confirmed. 2 questions:

              Q1. Was there a red bag?
              A1. No

              Q2. Did she say it was the man in the CCTV with the woman with the red bag?
              A2. No – it was the spy that was on the news.

              1. Who is “we”?

                 “the spy that was on the news” – those were not Freya’s words and as I have already said, the “spy in the news” WAS the man in the CCTV. To believe otherwise means what Freya told the press was garbage! It makes no sense and cannot be made to make sense! Cain Prince was very clear in the Telegraph – he said that the man in the CCTV was the person Freya had seen “on the bench, just outside”.

                 Your above comment does not resolve the problem at all, it simply makes it more confusing. Please elaborate as it is a VERY important point.

                 I am not interested in the red bag – just in what Freya actually said!

              2. Anonymous_1, I think you are wrong :

                 “Witness Freya Church, 27, who later spotted the pair ‘slumped’ and ‘passed out’ on the bench, said the couple pictured in the CCTV images released today were ‘100%’ the people she saw slumped on the bench on Sunday.”
                 ( Khaleda Rahman and Rory Tingle and Mark Duell and Paul Thompson and Tim Stickings and Richard Spillett for MailOnline and Chris Greenwood and Ian Drury and Tom Payne and Claire Duffin For The Daily Mail,
                 “‘He KNEW it would end badly’: Family of ‘poisoned’ Russian spy fighting for his life alongside his daughter after Zizzi ‘assassination plot’ reveal he ‘knew from the first day he wouldn’t be left alone’ “, Daily Mail, 6 mars 2018,
                 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5467051/Was-Russian-spy-poisoned-Zizzi.html

                 1. I agree with you.

                    “Shown the CCTV footage of a couple walking past the gym towards the bench just 15 minutes earlier, Ms Church said it was “definitely them, 100per cent.””
                    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/03/06/did-treacherous-past-russian-colonel-finally-catch-salisbury/

                    Speaking about the CCTV, Cain Prince, the gym manager, told The Telegraph: “Freya, one of our employees, left here at 4pm and saw them on the bench just outside.”
                    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/03/06/kremlin-denies-involvement-poisoning-russian-spy-uk-anti-terror/

                    I honestly don’t know how much clearer it has to be!

                    1. Note that both The Telegraph articles were from Tuesday 6 March and so was the DM article, linked by Inquirer.

                       On 6 March, every newspaper in the country said the CCTV couple was the couple on the bench and most of them called that couple “the Skripals”. The BBC had said that Sergei Skripal was a spy, so, ‘the spy in the news’ was the man in the CCTV!

                       1. And it wasn’t just the UK papers.

                          From ‘Time’:

                          “A journalist shows CCTV footage on a mobile phone showing a man believed to be Sergei Skripal, and woman who were later found unconscious, on March 6, 2018 in Salisbury, England.”
                          https://time.com/5187431/sergei-skripal-russia-spy-salisbury/

                          1. Even made it to Manchester

                             https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/uk-news/salisbury-russian-spy-skripal-zizzi-14373551

                             1. That is an excellent example!

                                The article is headed:
                                “Russian spy investigation: CCTV ‘shows Sergie Skripal and his daughter’ moments before suspected poisoning in Salisbury”

                                And the caption on the CCTV image is:
                                “A journalist shows CCTV footage on a mobile phone showing a man and woman who were later found unconscious”

                                Once again, it is an article from the morning of 6 March (before they started to twist the story) the papers simply reported what Freya and others had said at the press briefing.

                                The CCTV couple was the couple Freya found on the bench.

        2. And another thing, you are not correct in saying that Freya didn’t mention a ‘red bag’!

           “She had a red bag at her feet. He was gesturing at the sky, doing some kind of movements with his hands.”
           https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/03/06/first-picture-daughter-poisoned-russian-spy-fighting-life-hospital/

           Once again an article from the morning of 6 March, when the press was still being honest!

           Why did you say: “One thing I can tell you is that Freya Church never said anything about a red bag, because there wasn’t one.” – when that is demonstrably not true?

           1. The red bag – thoughts and observations

              Aiden’s mum said Yulia had a red bag

              The red bag in Thom Belk’s photo does not look like the Snap Fitness CCTV bag, in Belk’s photo it looks more like an orange Sainsburys bag

              Wouldn’t the ambulance crew have taken the females bag with them?

              1. https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/moment-police-ordinary-uniforms-probed-12149096

                 1. I think you are right, the ambulance crews would not have left property just lying on the ground. The red bag would have gone with the patient.

                    I do not think that the ‘red bag’ in Tom Belk’s picture is even red. It looks more orange to me and I suspect it is a Sainsbury’s bag.

                    Also don’t forget the masked woman was seen with a large ‘coloured’ bag in the Pret shop at 3:35pm. This fact was edited out of the DM story within 30 minutes of first appearing. I have spoken with someone who has confirmed that the bag seen in Pret was in fact a large RED bag. I also contacted the named witness (Mr Mark Francis) and asked him directly if the bag was red; he refused to say anything.

              2. ““She had a red bag at her feet … ”

                 Freya may have said that, she may even have meant that but all that may be a fact (or not) is that ‘there was a red bag at (or near) her feet’.

                 After all, that same Telegraph article also states that ‘said she left work at 4pm on Sunday and saw Mr Skripal and a younger woman on the bench’; whereas, at the time Freya saw the bench couple, she was entirely unaware of the word ‘Skripal’, let alone the backstory.

                 This is the only version I have noted, with Freya in her own words, and of course there are no name nor, sadly, any reference to a bag. It’s dated 5 March and I do hope that the BBC haven’t some kind of mischievous update to include the video clip itself; it must have been late afternoon, as the street lights are already on (I wonder: did Freya’s work roster mean that she finished work at 16:00 on both the Sunday and Monday):

                 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-43295193/salisbury-russian-spy-incident-eyewitness-describes-couple

                 Freya also says ‘ … an older guy and a younger girl’ and I remain bemused that Freya, age 27, describes the female, whom we are told is Yulia and then aged 33, as a ‘girl’. But now I think about it, to describe Sergei, age 66, as an ‘older guy’ when most might describe him as an old man. She’s noticed an age discrepancy between the two, and that might tell it’s own story. And no mention, at all, of anyone in the vicinity of the bench.

                 1. “Freya may have said that, she may even have meant that but all that may be a fact (or not) is that ‘there was a red bag at (or near) her feet’.”
                    – the only point I am making is that Freya did mention a red bag.

                    “Telegraph article also states that ‘said she left work at 4pm on Sunday and saw Mr Skripal ”
                    – the article was published just after noon on 6 March. By that time the name “Skripal” was known and it is the Telegraph journalist who has inserted it into the story.

                    “Freya also says ‘ … an older guy and a younger girl’ ”
                    – that is a very interesting observation! We have discussed previously the use of the term ‘girl’ but I think you are right that Freya is simply using the terms ‘guy’ and ‘girl’ as a substitute for ‘man’ and ‘woman’. In which case the term ‘younger girl’ is not an absolute description, it is simply noting the fact that the two people were not of the same (or similar) age; the ‘guy’ was older and the ‘girl’ was younger.

                    1. Freya is only reported as having mentioned a red bag, is she actually quoted as doing so? I have linked the only tv interview with Freya that I can find, so that her own words can be heard; and at best it’s only an edited clip.

                       Overall, I tend to agree, Paul, that Freya was describing a male and a female, with the male being noticeably older than the female. Whereas and only imo, I would have described the fuzzy mystery couple as a male and a female of about the same age but, if pressed, that the male was the older of the two.

                       In the earlier discussion here, I expressed some incredulity that Freya, six years junior to Yulia, would describe Yulia as a ‘younger’ ‘girl’. But if her comments only indicated a male older than the female with him, then I will have to think again … I suppose I shall have to thank Paul for that, and once again agree with him!

                       1. Now I have to agree with you Eleanor! I have also thought that the idea that the woman was in the 30s didn’t wash but I would not have said they were the same age. It is extremely hard to find a still image that is half decent but this one will do:
                          https://assets.bwbx.io/images/users/iqjWHBFdfxIU/ikBzeNLHqGyQ/v1/1000x-1.jpg

                          If that was all I had to go on, I would have said that the man is mid 60s and the woman is mid 40s. I haven’t previously mentioned this because of the problem of Freya’s description of a ‘younger girl’.

                          Here is the video (again):
                          https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=18&v=icyHxcfrgNQ&feature=emb_logo

                          For what it is worth, his posture is very upright (ex military?) her hair style is quite distinctive: brushed back off her forehead, short and ‘very’ blonde (I bet that is not her natural colour!)

                          1. Being no expert on this sorta thing, I’d say that the mystery female is 43+/-5 years (and I don’t mean she’s 43, simply that it’s the mid-point between late 30s and late 40s). Mystery man I’d place as 50+/-5 years. Certainly not 60s and I wouldn’t make them father and daughter either

                             This would coincidentally make them the right sort of age to have been Charlie and Dawn too, but I don’t think it’s them.

                             But, and here’s the kicker, if Freya saw the mystery couple at the bench, then it’s problematic to hear them described as an older male with a younger female – because in this instance even Freya might not have described this female as a younger girl (because however you and I look at the image, we both seem to recognise that this blonde female is not in her early 30s.

                             Paul, Boris Johnson notwithstanding, I suspect that most adult females enhance their blonde look (in some quarters it’s almost bad manners not to have your hair coloured and downright uncouth not to wear make-up). The mystery hairstyle looks to me like it’s a swept back bob, with a fringe; that being so, it would have been pinned back with a slide or a comb. Have to ‘fess up that I might be imagining the fringe.

                             Is now the time to mention again that I don’t think this mystery couple is looking up at the SnapFitness camera, which was mounted at ceiling level, but maybe at someone who was standing below it or at least at the entrance to the gym?

                             1. Eleanor, you just solved a mystery! We know that the camera takes in the door of the gym as well as a view across the covered walkway – we know this because the CCTV of Freya leaving shows her walking through the door. So why have we only ever seen the CCTV of this couple without the gym door also being in the shot? What we are looking at, is a cut down version of the CCTV (left side only)… someone didn’t want us to see the doorway.

                             2. Eleanor & Paul,

                                Here is a fuller video of the pair, which shows the door to Snap Fitness as well. I can’t say as they were necessarily looking up at the camera, but there doesn’t seem to be anyone at the door at that time.

                                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KKRd40pQ0lU

                                Rob

                             3. This is longer clip, from the Daily Mail:

                                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KKRd40pQ0lU

                                Whatever or whoever caught the mystery couple’s attention isn’t clear because (if I’m right) then they’re in the dead area directly under the camera housing.

                                Also, check the time counter and how slowly the seconds increment: they’re striding quite quickly rather than strolling (and the stride length of the female suggests this too, she’s having to stretch her stride to keep up with her companion).

                                None of which may be suspicious, or would be thought of as suspicious under other circumstances.

                             4. My bad! Sorry for the false alarm.

                                They both look over and the only things to look at are the camera and through the door into the gym… and it is not just a glance, the woman’s head turns as she walks past.

112. Plugging the book.

     https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/our-russia-dossier-wasnt-dodgy-donald-trump-is-compromised-8scqkvnpm#

     Is the Blogmire running out of steam?
     Are we letting the dark forces win?

113. Worth a read.
     If we ever wondered why Basu gets airtime and Harding et al writes for them, then this will reveal why.

     https://truepublica.org.uk/united-kingdom/how-the-uk-security-services-neutralised-the-countrys-leading-liberal-newspaper/

     1. It’s funny how these people all have similar credentials to varying degress ie

        Wealthy land owners
        Educated at Harrow/Eton/Oxford
        Ex Miliary
        Ex BBC “journalist”

        https://dorseteye.com/why-does-this-bond-villain-ignore-so-many-of-his-constituents/

        It was Charborough House the VIP helicopter went to on the night of 4th March???

        https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Drax?fbclid=IwAR1IUsmIOUm2LuKc9wBfAHgJ3MDAgN0rhtSM3sJibc34innwUn1NezUFgoM

        The odious Oliver Letwin aka Sir Humphrey Appleby

        https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/dec/30/oliver-letwin-a-career-in-gaffes

        1. The helicopter flights around the time of the incident are fascinating – I think Denise did a fair bit of follow up on the details.

           Drax is quite involved with helicopterishness himself, although I don’t think I could find any links to business investments. And, according to his own parliamentary diary, he was up at Westminster at the time of the Skripal incident.

           Your Dorset Eye link goes down the “rabbit hole” of animal rights conflicts in Weymouth. Is something stirring in this country?

        2. Ooh! I wonder it we might be witness to Philip Cross doing a job on him to improve his profile?

     2. Attacks on Edward Snowdon, Julian Assange and Jeremy Corbyn (born in Wiltshire)

        Harold Wilson had the same, there’s loads of it on the MI5 site:

        https://www.mi5.gov.uk/search/wilson?scope=search

114. Peter Hitchens – Mail on Sunday has a good article exposing the OPCW Chlorine attack sham in Syria.
     By the way, Peter seems to be a true investigative journalist. Maybe I will approach him to carry the cause.
     Without doubt their ( UK, France and USA with OPCW at their bidding) duplicitous tactics could have been repeated in Salisbury and Amesbury.
     Both Syria and Salisbury had similar “take away” benefits for Mrs May and the UK “Bad Russia” plan.

     It appears that the lobby to spend more on weapons and protection from dark forces, seems to get the budget considerations.
     Although I did hear Michael Gove this morning on the Marr show, denying that one of our shiny new aircraft free, aircraft carriers would be leased off to the USA.

     1. https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2019/07/15/mainstream-media-hide-skripals-connections-to-russiagate-trump-case/

        LAYER 4
        “There is also reason to question CrowdStrike’s impartiality. Its co-founder, Dmitri Alperovitch, is a nonresident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council, the preeminent Washington think tank [NATO’s PR agency, actually] that aggressively promotes a hawkish posture towards Russia. CrowdStrike executive Shawn Henry, who led the forensics team that ultimately blamed Russia for the DNC breach, previously served as assistant director at the FBI under Mueller.

        And CrowdStrike was hired to perform the analysis of the DNC servers by Perkins Coie – the law firm that also was responsible for contracting Fusion GPS, the Washington, D.C.-based opposition research firm that produced the now discredited Steele dossier alleging salacious misconduct by Trump in Russia and his susceptibility to blackmail.”

        CONCLUSION
        “Masterful. The Obama-Clinton DNC and MI6, and their hired private contractors, worked together to frame Russia for both the Skripal poisonings and the Trump victory.

        And yet, key questions remain unanswered: “How deep were the Skripals involved in making up the fake stories in the anti-Trump dossier for which the Clinton campaign paid more than $168,000. Did the Skripals threaten to talk about the issue? Is that why the incident [their poisoning] happened?” There is the possibility that the Skripals’ poisoning was an inside job, by a contractor, for the UK and/or US Governments.”

115. Over 60 doctors’ open letter to the UK Home Office about Assange:

     https://consortiumnews.com/2019/11/23/doctors-petition-uk-home-secretary-over-julian-assange/

116. Internal OPCW E-Mail

     https://wikileaks.org/opcw-douma/

     1. The e-mail is dated June 22, 2018. It is addressed to Robert Fairweather, Chief of Cabinet, and forwarded to his deputy Aamir Shouket and members of the fact-finding mission to Douma.
        Now the MSM can no longer ignore and suppress the scandal !

        Quote : The revelation appears to be the worst instance of ‘sexing-up’ in support of war since the invasion of Iraq and Tony Blair’s doctored dossiers. A whistleblower has made public the astonishing email of protest which was sent to senior officials at the OPCW. It says that the independent scientists’ official report on the Douma incident had been slashed and censored so severely that it:
        Misrepresented the facts – by leaving out key information;
        Hid the fact that the traces of chlorine found on the site were merely tiny trace elements, in parts per billion, and in forms that could have been found in any household bleach;
        Contained major deviations from the original report submitted by impartial experts, so that it had ‘morphed into something quite different’;
        Suppressed a total mismatch between the symptoms allegedly displayed by victims at the scene, and the effects of the chemicals which were actually found. The symptoms seen on harrowing videos shown at the time of the incident simply did not match the symptoms which would have been caused by any material found at the site.
        This original report, if it had been published as written, would not have supported widespread claims that poison gas was used at Douma on April 7, 2018.
        https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7718627/Sexed-dossier-furore-alleged-poison-gas-attack-Assad.html

        1. Liane, good spot to describe the OPCW report as “sexed up”. We should all expect the media to be publishing articles titled as

           Whitleblowers: OPCW report “sexed-up”

           Who pressured OPCW to “sex up” Douma report, and why?

           Whom is OPCW REALLY working for?
           Sexed-up report challenges OPCW credibility

           1. Sorry, this is not an approved story! TPTB would much prefer you didn’t know about it and the Main Stream Mushrooms will not be reporting it.

117. Does anyone know where Pete Beswick disappeared to?
     I used to like hearing about the information he had gleaned and his drive was a wonder to see.
     Keep in touch Pete.

     1. scooby asked : “Does anyone know where Pete Beswick disappeared to?”
        If he had his reasons to disappear, we will not betray him…

118. Thank you everyone for the replies about the Amesbury Business Park police cordon at the ambulance station there. The ambulance station was at Unit 11 The Beacon Centre, Solar Park; SP4 7SZ Salisbury, Wiltshire. It is currently being prepared for sale by estate agents Middleton and Major.

     So we can assume then, that one of the ambulances that arrived at the bench at either at 4.18 or 4,28 pm was from Amesbury Ambulance Station? We are not allowed to know this though because its a major threat to national security if we do.

     I still believe that the whole massive clean up is to stop anyone finding out that BZ was really used during some portion of the hoax and not the phantom ‘novichok’. The whole hoax would be completely exposed if a trace of BZ was found at any one of the cleanup sites after all their claims that is was ‘novichok’.

     Amesbury Ambulance Station to be sold after novichok attack
     https://www.pressreader.com/uk/western-daily-press/20191023/281642486952192

     1. It would be a good argument if we could say : “There was an immediate massive clean up of places where the Skripals found themselves during or after their visit to Mills, there was also an immediate massive clean up of vehicles used during or after the bench scene, but there was no immediate clean up of Skripal’s house.”
        I would be interested by comments on this argument. (Are the facts I stated correct ?) Thanks in advance.

        1. With one exception, cordons were immediately put up in places where the Skripals were known to have been (Zizzi, The Mill, #47, cemetery. etc.). The idea of a clean-up seems not to have been the initial focus. The police had a ‘party’ in Zizzi and were in and out of #47 in the days following 4 March. Then everyone started wearing protective clothing and removing items from some of the scenes, which then lead to a clean-up.

           The ONLY place where a police cordon was established, that was not somewhere the Skripals went (according to the official narrative), was the car park at the rear of The Mill. When the other sites were handed back following the clean-up (e.g. Amesbury ambulance station in June 2018), there were still 2 that remained sealed – the Skripal house and … the car park at the rear of The Mill.

           Here is a picture showing the Mill car park cordon still in place in November 2018 – I believe that the cordon was removed the following day:
           https://anonfiles.com/b311mcA9ne/photo_2018-11-08_23-00-00_jpg

           1. Thanks for the answer, Paul.

119. https://williambowles.info/2019/05/27/un-report-on-uk-poverty-systemic-immiseration-of-millions-across-the-uk/

     John Pilger’s The Dirty War on the NHS:

     https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTnIOh6yl6Y

120. I found this story some time after the Dawn and Charlie, so called poisoning, had happened in Amesbury, I made a note at the time that it seemed suspicious and it still puzzles me. The story was from the ABC news in Australia, how they got the information out there I dont know. The story was updated on March 8th, 2018 at 12.56 pm, so the original story must have been even earlier than that, much closer to the March 4th event date. The story is still up now.

     The key line that made take notice was this:

     “Police said new cordons had been added near Solstice Park, a business park, in the town of Amesbury near to Salisbury.”

     Remember this was March 8th and not June 30th when Dawn and Charlie collapsed in Amesbury.

     Does anyone have any knowledge or thoughts on what might have happened at Solstice Park, business park in Amesbury, seven weeks before Dawn and Charlie collapsed in Amesbury? Was this the business park that the WAA helicopter flew up to, after it took off from Sainsbury’s car park?

     https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-03-08/russian-ex-spy-and-daughter-poisoned-with-nerve-agent-uk-police/9526192

     1. Amesbury ambulance station is in Solstice Park. It was closed on 6 March 2018 because of fears that an ambulance became contaminated while being used in response to the Salisbury incident.
        https://www.spirefm.co.uk/news/local-news/2521213/emergency-services-called-to-solstice-park/

        But that raises another question: If they were so concerned about possible contamination that they shut down an entire ambulance station on 6 March, why didn’t they immediately do tests on responders at the Maltings scene, for example DS Nick Bailey and PC Alex Collins.

        Bailey had to be driven to the hospital on 7 March. Collins – who searched the Skripals for ID – felt unwell after the incident but apparently wasn’t tested – he only got a phone call on 7 March to hand in everything he had worn on the 4th.

        1. It is a very strange story.

           The ambulance station was closed on Tuesday 6 March and was handed back on 19 June:
           https://www.spirefm.co.uk/news/local-news/2611848/spy-poisoning-amesbury-ambulance-station-reopened/

           But it did not restart services and was still shut during the Amesbury incident.

           In January 2019, it was announced that it might never reopen:
           https://www.spirefm.co.uk/news/local-news/2777614/significant-refurbishment-needed-at-amesbury-ambulance-station/

           https://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/news/17343540.amesbury-ambulance-station-may-never-reopen-after-nerve-agent-attack/

           Denise asked:
           “Was this the business park that the WAA helicopter flew up to, after it took off from Sainsbury’s car park?”

           No it wasn’t. The helicopter took off and flew towards Bourne Retail Park, which was where the transponder was switched back on (for about 2 minutes) – the helicopter did not land there.

        2. PHE have said if you come into with a small dose of this specific Novichok and you don’t develop symptoms within 12 hours then you certainly won’t go onto develop any short or long term medical conditions.

           Bailey entered 47cmr at midnight, we don’t know when he left but 12 hours from then if he hadn’t developed symptoms then according to PHE if it was what the authorities he should have been OK.

           Bailey was admitted to hospital twice.

           If Bailey was poisoned then he could only have been poisoned at the house as he did not attend the bench scene until the action was over.

           It must have been the house but they closed down the cemetery and allowed people to wander in and out of the house willy nilly.

           1. Since there is no story, official or otherwise, that properly explains how Bailey was poisoned, I am strongly inclined to the view that he never was. I think TPTB decided that they needed another victim, to make their story more credible… how could it be a nerve agent if there were only 2 victims? Recall, Bailey’s interview on Panorama was a comedy of errors – ‘pinprick pupils’. I think it is ‘highly likely’ that Bailey’s second hospital trip and hospitalisation was fake (as was Charlie’s), no other plausible reason exists.

              1. https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/539707/response/1334627/attach/html/4/attachment.docx.html

                 “The next morning, at 10:15 on Saturday, 30 June, the South Western Ambulance Service was called to Charlie’s address, where Dawn had been taken ill. Charlie was present with her at that time and Dawn was subsequently taken to hospital.

                 “At around midday on Saturday, Charlie visited Boots the chemist on Stonehenge Walk in Amesbury and he returned to his house around half an hour later.

                 “At 1:45pm he went to the Amesbury Baptist Centre on Butterfield Drive and again returned home at around 3pm.

                 “Just over three hours later, at 6.20pm, Charlie was also taken ill. The ambulance service was called back to his address and he too was taken to hospital.

              2. They were all called in to SDH on 6th March when the agent was identified as Novichok. Bailey was kept in and was receiving visitors the following day, much like Charlie – even his brother said he was OK.

                 1. Collins went off shift. Instinct told him to get changed and he left the clothes he had been wearing in his garage. “I’m glad I did that,” he said. “I was intending to have a shower but I was so knackered I just climbed into bed and fell asleep. I’ve got little kids and they were climbing all over me next day, so the missus wasn’t particularly happy with that when it all came out.”

                    The next evening – Monday 5 March – Skripal’s name emerged and cordons began to be set up in Salisbury around the spots that he and his daughter had visited. Holloway said: “At home you’re looking at the news going: ‘Oh, A&E has been closed, Zizzi has been closed. Bishop’s Mill has been closed. This could be quite big.’ My mum was phoning me all the time.”

                    Collins said: “Got a phone call two days after: ‘All your kit, everything you were wearing that day … can you bring it to the station? Wallet, watch, mobile, everything.”

                    Holloway said they heard that a nerve agent was involved from media reports. “We had both touched the Skripals. When we heard, it was like: ‘Wow, OK, this could be serious.’ But I wasn’t concerned for me. I knew I had touched both patients and if it was going to affect me it would have done by then.”

                    Like most people, the officers feared the Skripals would not recover. “When I heard that Yulia had woken from her coma I was elated,” said Collins. “The fact that both recovered was brilliant. It meant the attackers didn’t succeed. Lives were saved.”

                    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/dec/14/we-did-our-best-police-who-rushed-to-skripal-scene-tell-of-shock-arnd-pride

                    1. Holloway was aware of the 12 hour rule and that comforted her

                 2. Tuesday 6 March was when Urban said Bailey had been admitted – so what had he done in the 12 hours before that… which nobody else had done.

                    Also recall, not only was Bailey sitting up in bed, he said how odd it was that his family members were visiting with no added precautions… but he stayed in for 2 weeks anyway.

                    I suggest that another hoax fits the facts better than the official narrative does!

                    1. What happened was his blood test came back positive from Porton Down, which is where the Novichok came from in the first place.

           2. “I can offer the following clarification. PHE has given upper limits in our
              published advice as these are the most useful for clinical staff to use; in that we can
              give absolute reassurance that if a person has no symptoms, and the last possible
              point of exposure was more than 12 hours ago, they will not go on to develop any
              short or long term health problems

              https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/539752/response/1336403/attach/html/2/1065%20IR%20Novichok.pdf.html

     2. Another local report from the time, for those who (like me) hadn’t seen it before:

        https://www.somersetlive.co.uk/news/somerset-news/military-police-seal-area-near-1309440

121. I got my hopes up when I read the headline.
     I thought that maybe the media were eventually not taking the constant feed from Wiltshire Police and now at last, ask some questions.

     Unfortunately, it was not that type of “hamper”.

     https://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/news/18052260.wiltshire-police-launches-operation-hamper-across-christmas-salisbury/

122. Rob’s been quiet for a while. Possibly on location.

     https://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/news/18051591.bbc-filming-novichok-series-salisbury-rafe-spall/

     I wonder if the duck feed scene is in production?

     1. Anyone fancy dressing up as B and P and taking a stroll through Salisbury?

123. https://williambowles.info/2019/11/16/karma-british-white-helmets-co-founder-dead-in-turkey/

     https://williambowles.info/2019/07/15/mainstream-media-hide-skripals-connections-to-russiagate-trump-case-by-eric-zuesse/

     https://tass.com/world/1083163

124. This photo has troubled me for a while

     https://ibb.co/zXpPYgB

     It is taken from the CCTV in Jenny’s Restaurant and it shows the time (its the one where a man is hiding his face from the police car), this police car was reported to have arrived at 16:15 but the timestamp says otherwise.

     The clocks accuracy could be in doubt as we never got the see the police car, running paramedics and ambulance car from Snap Fitness cctv to compare times.

     But on other footage from the same camera we do not see the time stamp, we sometimes see a time bar at the bottom of the screen that shows a recording from 16:00 – 16:30 and where the cursor is depicts the time.

     The sequence and timings of events was being worked at a very early stage and newspapers were getting only the footage that helped the official story.

     1. There are various images from Jenny’s – variously cropped.

        The 3 people were timed at 16:08:
        https://i2-prod.mirror.co.uk/incoming/article12157185.ece/ALTERNATES/s615b/Skripal-CCTV.jpg

        Daily Mail video (including police car arriving) is here:
        https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/poisoned-russian-spy-daughter-seen-12156418

        The DM video is also available here (and is easier to work with):
        https://twitter.com/Syricide/status/975092630903230464

        But note that what is seen in the DM video has had the bottom cropped compared with the Sky image, which obviously means that the DM version is not the original.

        1. A stationary (supposedly) CCTV camera in a shop that has the ability to zoom and pan ??

           And yes, I understand that some of these images and videos are cropped, but still.

           1. I was thinking exactly the same. but all the angles seem to be the same, so I am pretty sure the video and stills come from the same camera.

              Two things struck me as odd:
              1) the DM video appears to have been cropped to remove the timestamp… not the foreground (mainly floor) but just the timestamp.
              2) the 2 still images cannot have been taken from the video… so where is the original?

              1. Given the resolution quality of the video and stills, isn’t it a video of the cctv footage (just as the Snap Fitness clip of the mystery couple was)?

                 1. Not necessarily – there are video editing tools that can be used to do similar and the quality which results is a parameter used to select output quality.

                    As long as TPTB have the source materials they can play us like an expert squash player plays his not so expert opponent (if you’ve ever played squash against a county champion you’ll know what I mean).

                    All we can hope to do is to identify the inconsistencies in their narrative and rely upon their (I hope their are reading this) ineptitude to reveal more inconsistencies as they try to patch the hole/crack/inconsistency we’ve identified. Like an itch that can’t be scratched we’ll have them searching for suitably sharp edge door frames for ever and a day.

                    1. The secret in Squash is to get the bugger off the T, then at least you can make him run around a bit.

                 2. If you look at the DM or Sun video, from about 30 secs in, it is a video of the CCTV footage but the CCTV footage has already been cropped – what is running on the screen is not the original CCTV footage. The 2 still images posted above still have the date/time stamp, so cannot have been taken from the video we get to see. Those images must have been taken from the original CCTV footage, before it was cropped.

                    1. I see what you mean and note that the earliest reports that I’ve bookmarked, that show the cctv at Jenny’s, date to no earlier than 9 March (so this footage has been published when D-notices were already in effect, and Met CT were leading the investigation).

     2. I think this might be the source of the reported times might have been The Sun:

        “An ambulance first response vehicle drives up at 4.18pm to support colleagues with the spy and his daughter – who were said to be “catatonic” by this stage.

        Cops seized the pictures from a local business yesterday (Fri) – two days after the proprietor told them he had it.

        The timeline…

        4.08pm: Figures that appear to be Sergei Skripal and daughter Yulia are seen walking down Market Walk towards the bench where they were found.
        4.15pm: Police car speeds up the shopping centre at 20mph with lights flashing.
        4.16pm: A hero paramedic sprints towards the victims on foot clutching a first aid bag.
        4.18pm: A first responder vehicle drives up to help colleagues treat Sergei and Yulia.”
        https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5767001/cctv-video-ex-russian-spy-sergei-skripal-daughter-yulia-walking-mystery-woman-before-poisoned/

        The timestamp of the couple at 4:08pm we can confirm (image and Sun timeline the same) but the reported time of the police car is contradicted by the Sky News image you posted… was The Sun just making it up?

        Are there any more images in the Sky series, or just that one?

        1. Freeze the video in The Sun article at 31 seconds. It is a different police car, not the one in the Sky image! The rear windows are a different shape and the yellow and blue panels do not line up the same on both vehicles; the car in The Sun has a yellow door pillar which is missing in the Sky image and the man is no longer hiding in the shadows.

           1. Agreed.

              1. Here is a screenshot at 31 secs to compare with the Sky image:

                 https://anonfiles.com/jcJ8sdB0n8/Screenshot_198_png

                 Is that a police car? The Sky image has the word ‘Police’ along the side of the vehicle, this car does not appear to be similarly marked.

                 The images of police cars seen later at the bench appear to be the same model as the Sky image (and is marked ‘police’).

                 The Sun clearly says that a ‘police car’ arrived at 4:15pm.

           2. That’s not a police car in the Sun and the Mirror, it’s a green and yellow ambulance which arrived at 4:18 pm. The one on Sky is a blue and yellow police car, which Collins and Holloway presumably arrived in at 4:15. The two vehicles were in the Maltings an hour later along with a second ambulance car.
              https://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/resources/images/7485578/

              1. I think you are right that it is an ambulance but both The Sun and the DM appear to identify it as a police car in their articles.

                 The Sky image is timed at 4:28 (also noted in Sky’s caption) and Sky states it was followed by 2 emergency workers – this does not fit into the narrative.

                 The image from the SJ also raises more questions. If 2 ambulance cars and 2 police cars were still there an hour later, after (how many?) ambulances had left with the couple from the bench, is that a normal response to a suspected drugs o/d? It looks like they are running out of space – where had the ambulances that had already gone been parked? It must have been a tight squeeze.

                 1. This is Sky’s video showing the police car arriving at 4:28 and the 2 ’emergency workers’ a few seconds behind it:

                    https://news.sky.com/story/kidnapped-girl-8-rescued-by-police-in-dramatic-bodycam-footage-11865493#spark_wn=1

                    1. Paul, that looks like the wrong link.

                       1. Apologies! This one maybe:

                          https://news.sky.com/video/cctv-shows-ex-spy-just-before-attack-11282995

                       2. Thanks for pointing that out to Paul, Brendan, as I realised but forgot to do so.

                          Another afterthought: that cctv in Jenny’s is clearly marked as CAMERA05 and it’s suddenly occurred to me that ‘where are cameras 01 to 04?’ and are they part of a linked system in Market Walk?

           3. Paul,

              Green and yellow are ambulance car colours. I don’t live in Wiltshire, but generally, that still would be an emergency ambulance car.

              1. I think that’s right Duncan and when you know what you are looking at, the word ‘Ambulance’ is (blurry) on the lower half of the door panel, below the black line. Which is all rather odd because it seems to reverse the timetable that appeared in The Sun and DM:

                 1) ambulance car at ? time;
                 2) police car at 4:28;
                 3) two paramedics/emergency workers at 4:29.

                 Obviously other vehicles might have attended at 4:15 and 4:16 but how many cars turned up? It is getting ridiculous!

                 So why has the order been reversed and what happened between 4:15 and 4:28?

                 1. Possibly because one set of police and ambulance turned up at 4:15 and the regular ones turned up at 4:28

                 2. Thanks Paul.

                    In my version, the BZ spray took place as soon as the Skripals left the Mill Pub.
                    The Toxic Dagger squad then took over, knowing that the Skripals would collapse minutes later.
                    That team were there very quickly, as it was after all their plan.

                    1. But the Skrips left The Mill around 3:25/3:30 – they would have needed help within minutes, certainly much earlier that 4:28… and they were seen leaving The Mill but nobody saw them being attacked (as far as I know).

                       1. I still think Sergei was attacked in the Mill Pub toilets at around 3.15pm
                          but was helped to get away, when he left the pub, soon after that time.

                          “Spy looked unsteady on feet as he drank in pub”

                          https://www.pressreader.com/uk/daily-mail/20180310/281625305816856

                          1. Denise, that DM article is one of the most egregious examples of a fake story being planted in the news. I do not believe a word of it!

                             The initial reports, quoting staff from The Mill, said there was nothing unusual about the Skripals and everything seemed normal. Then, a few days later out comes the DM with Sergei “showing the first signs of poisoning” – a line that was copied exactly by several other papers. I think the early reports are likely to be far more reliable, in which case “everything was normal”!

                       2. The Skrips might not have had anything to do with the bench scene

                          1. I am absolutely sure that the Skrips were nowhere near the bench!

                             You say above: “Possibly because one set of police and ambulance turned up at 4:15 and the regular ones turned up at 4:28” – we know there were at least 2 ambulance cars and also 2 police cars still on location an hour later, so it is very possible that they did arrive in pairs 10-15 mins apart. There were also the ambulances that took the bench couple away, so we are only seeing a small part of the convoy of vehicles that turned up! It sounds rather like overkill for a suspected drugs o/d.

125. https://www.jonathan-cook.net/blog/2019-11-20/capitalism-suicide/

     Definitely worth a read, he eventually gets to the now compromised OPCW.

     Was The Truman Show a modern day 1984?

126. Wikileaks is reporting that Sweden has dropped its (fraudulent!) investigation into Julian Assange:

     twitter.com/wikileaks/status/1196775470920019968

     So why is he being held in isolation in Bellmarsh Prison? The UK has almost achieved third world status… all that’s missing is the sunshine.

     1. I think you know why – it is now assured that Assange will be extradited by the UK (I don’t know why, but that is my reading of it), and so the bogus Swedish rape charge is no longer required as a backup in case Assange gets away from the UK setup.

        The real question is “What has changed?”.

        1. Well, the Orange One on the western Atlantic shore would appreciate a good news distraction from his Blonde One on the eastern shore. Best that it happens while they’re both heads of state, and no troublesome urgent questions in the House need to be deflected.

           Assange is not in Belmarsh because of a sexual transgression, and the Swedish charges having been dropped clears the way for the extradition (and before 12 December imo).

           They’re like a mismatched pair of Staffordshire dogs on the mantelpiece …

127. I would like to know why this message is sometimes returned from The Blogmire:

     Not Acceptable

     An appropriate representation of the requested resource /an-update-on-the-inquest-into-the-death-of-dawn-sturgess/ could not be found on this server.

     1. I did compose a long response, to Eleanor, based on my work experience gained during my career in telecoms, computing and IT, on the Internet protocol and the WEB and about tracking and why it happens and how to (attempt to) avoid it, but when I posted it The Blogmire responded with the above (my previous post).

        I’m not writing it again – WordPress need to sort their site out.

        1. I think it is because the site requires cookies to match session data. It is supposed to make things more secure… it ends up just being annoying. When you refresh the page you get a session cookie but it only stays valid for approx 30 mins – if you don’t have a current cookie, Rob’s server will effectively ‘log you out’ of the session. If you then try to post without a valid cookie, you get the message you noted above.

           If it happens, the ‘quick fix’ is to hit the ‘back’ button on your browser. The comment will no longer appear where you first typed it but you will find it at the bottom of the page in the ‘new comments’ box. Cut the comment then refresh the page, you can now paste the comment where you wanted it and submit the comment. Unfortunately, if you don’t cut/copy the comment at that point and instead post a new comment… the former comment is lost.

           1. “I think it is because the site requires cookies to match session data. ”

              Not to mention all the other cookies that you’ve attempted to block and assorted unsought trackers.

              Cookies … yum, another distraction.

              1. Blame the implementers of the WEB, Eleanor (the chomper).

                 HTTP is derived from SGML, a document markup protocol, it was intended to be a communications protocol and is, for that reason, stateless. So it is quite unable to support the concept of a session – even though sessions are established at the Transport Layer – hence the need for cookies to preserve state. But then the cookie idea has now been hijacked for all sorts of nefarious purposes…

                 1. Sod these bloody memoryless fingers of mine.

                    “it was NEVER intended to be a communications protocol”

                    Tim Berners-Lee’s intent was to provide a way of inter-linking citations, footnotes and document references using hyperlinks in a similar manner to that which was available on Apple devices at the time.

           2. Good answer, Paul.

              I did hit the back button, but got the same message.

              It did take a long time to compose the message – stupid me should have taken a copy just in case, I’ll go and sit on the naughty step for a while.

              1. Hah, I go backwards and then forwards, and invariably find that the lost text is still there. By which time, pressing the Post Comment button result in the comment landing not exactly where I thought it would be.

                 You look forlorn on the naughty step, would a cookie or choux bun help? Cyber, of course, so zero calories.

        2. And sometimes stuff just happens, Cascadian, but I’ve decided that I’m not going to use such instances to nurture the little cell reserved for my Inner Paranoid. For right or wrong, I’m happier for it.

           Thank you for trying to explain – however one of the incarnations of Sod’s Law predicts that, if it took time and was important enough to warrant effort, then the chances are that there will be some kind of system blip, and you will you will underbreathe an expletive that you didn’t save your work (in the ubiquitous file called temp dot whatever).

           To be fair (but why?), everything is far less volatile these days and those heady days of inevitable and frequent system instability can be easily overwritten by the thought of … profiteroles etc.

           1. Ah, yes, Eleanor.

              The profit(erole) motive – the curse of modern life.

128. O/T Something special for techies… a low level flat spin (tail into the wind) is usually regarded as unrecoverable and almost always ends in a crash. Watch this:

     https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=61eJ7hoZhKY

     Someone on your tail shooting at you? No need for high G turns, just fly backwards and shoot straight back! This is just about as far as aerodynamic tech can be pushed. Incredible!

129. I tried to access The Blogmire a few hours ago and got a warning message that the site was insecure.

     Has anybody else had this warning?

     1. Depends which browser you are using and what your own security settings are but it is probably just a warning that the connection is not using the HTTPS protocol. Most sites now use HTTPS but some still use HTTP and browsers will alert users that the connection is ‘not secure’ whenever they visit such sites. To the left of the address bar you may also have a notification telling you that theblogmire is ‘Not secure’ (if you visit other sites there might be a ‘padlock’ icon instead). For normal use of theblogmire it is perfectly OK but I wouldn’t want to connect to any site that required (for example) a password unless it was using HTTPS.

        If this is not your problem and you get the message again, please get a screenshot and post it so we can see what is happening to you.

        1. Thanks Paul,

           I forget the exact wording but I think it implied that The Blogmire had been hacked.

           I will send a screenshot if it happens again.

           I expect you are aware of the “fake” Blogmire site http://www.blogmire.com

           Its “Investigative Dossier” on the Salisbury Poisoning links to Bellingcat.

           1. As Oscar Wilde said: “Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery that mediocrity can pay to greatness.” Rob should be chuffed!

     2. When I use Firefox, it tells me that this website isn’t secure and also that it places cookies and trackers are detected on this site.

        Sometimes, when it’s slow to load, this is more clearly brought to my lackadaisical attention (meaning: the little shield thingy is purple for longer – and I notice it – before it turns black).

        But no passwords and sensitive data are involved and I cross-my-fingers-and-hope that all my other security bits and bobs are armed and on standby, defending the fortress (as it were).

        I figure out that those who want or need to know already know what they want or need, and I can nestle my dull’n’blunt old needle in the haystack of ethernet life … and thus far, it’s worked for me.

        1. “in the haystack of ethernet life”

           It’s those dastardly thick yellow cables you know, and those vampire tapes (shudder!!) are enough to give one the creeps.

        2. Eleanor : as I already said, I got the same message from Firefox.

           1. Auto-update isn’t set on this device, Inquirer, as my personal Techie Powers That Be has decreed that if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.

              Firefox habitually nagging is the softer option. Although once, quite recently, an alert said there was a security update and that was installed without any permission on my part (be silent, Inner Paroid, tssk).

130. Sky (I cannot add the word ‘News’ as it would be untrue) has just published an article about MH17 and the Skripals. To give you a taste:

     “Britain adopted the information weapon – making serious allegations supported by evidence – in the investigation into the attempted assassination of the former Russian double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter in Salisbury last year.”

     It is nauseating guff by the Integrity Initiative’s Deborah Haynes. If you think you can bear to read it, you can find the rest here:
     https://news.sky.com/story/sky-views-evidence-is-a-strong-weapon-when-deployed-against-fake-news-11863240

     1. “Any further allegation against Russia would further damage already dire relations between Moscow and London so perhaps it is a diplomatic or political decision not to reveal more on the Skripal investigation.

        “Or perhaps investigators are waiting until they have sufficient evidence before stepping once again into the information space”.

        Or perhaps they haven’t got any evidence. They certainly haven’t told us about it.

131. There appear to be two different press releases or possibly 3 (the Met’s), one citing “complex legal argument”, one citing the determining of “scope” of the Inquest for the delays. A third reason might be to delay the Inquest so that the new government can deal with the fallout.

     It should be noted that one of the purposes for a Pre Inquest Review (PIR) is to set the scope of the Inquest so to delay the PIR to consider the scope of the Inquest is something of an oxymoron. But if the scope of the PIR is being set (rather than the Inquest itself), as the 2nd press release indicates, then it seems further skulduggery is afoot.

     If a press release was given to Counter Terrorism Command to release then that was a political act, for the press release announcing the delay to be released nearly 3 weeks after the scheduled PIR date had passed is another political act. But what was it that caused the delay in the press releases being released? It seems to me they were fighting over who was in charge. It looks like the Coroner isn’t. Press releases are normally reserved to announce something that is about to occur not something that has, it kind of loses its purpose, a bit like the Coroner.

     It was never going to be possible to keep politics out of Dawn’s Inquest and I think there is a strong possibility that it will be converted into a politicly motivated Public Inquiry but there is absolutely no excuse for whoever is driving this farce to create more upset and distress for Dawn’s family and loved ones. Dawn has been let down and continues to be so.

     ………

     Duncan says:
     November 8, 2019 at 12:16 pm

     The non released Press Release

     As mentioned.
     Dated October 7th
     Created in Outlook October 15th
     Referencing an event due to be held October 18th.
     Released to the media November 6th

     PRESS RELEASE

     In the Wiltshire & Swindon Coroner’s Court
     Inquest touching upon the death of Dawn Kelly STURGESS

     Pre-Inquest Review listed for 10.00 am 18th October 2019

     The Senior Coroner having received submissions on the subject of the scope of the Inquest is of the view that the submissions raise complex legal argument in respect of which the Senior Coroner needs to give appropriate and careful consideration to before handing down a written ruling. This will not be achieved by the 18th October 2019 and as a consequence the Senior Coroner has decided to adjourn the Pre-Inquest Review with the intention of listing an adjourned Pre-Inquest Review hearing date in either December 2019 or January 2020.

     Dated 07 October 2019

     ……….

     Blunderbuss says:
     November 14, 2019 at 3:32 pm
     I made a Freedom of Information request to Wiltshire Council for the Press Release about the Pre-Inquest Review.
     I expected they would send me a pdf of the actual Press Release but, instead, they quoted the text in the body of the email. Here it is:
     For immediate release 6 November 2019
     Pre-Inquest Review listed for 10am on 18 February 2020
     The Pre-Inquest Review touching upon the death of Dawn Kelly Sturgess has been listed for 10am on 18 February 2020 at Salisbury Law Courts, Wilton Road, Salisbury.
     The Senior Coroner decided to adjourn the October 2019 Pre-Inquest review to allow sufficient time to give appropriate and careful consideration of submissions relating to “scope” before handing down a written ruling.
     As always, this date is subject to change and any further updates will be communicated through Wiltshire Council’s Communications, Marketing and Events Team.
     Ends
     I wonder whether this press release has been sent to any newspapers or whether you only get a copy if you know it exists and you ask for it.

     1. 1st press release dated 7th October, the 2nd dated 6th November.

132. About what James Le Mesurier possibly could have testified ?
     Answer : Syria chemical false flags !

     More and more it becomes known what happened in the OPCW behind the scenes.
     Blogmires, please read this article :
     https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/11/15/the-opcw-and-douma-chemical-weapons-watchdog-accused-of-evidence-tampering-by-its-own-inspectors/

     Now we know that it was Ian Henderson himself who went public together with another whistle-blower. Both have first hand knowledge !

     Quotes :
     „They feel dismayed that professional conclusions have been set aside so as to favour the agenda of certain states.“
     “Ian and I wanted to have this issue investigated and hopefully resolved internally, rather than exposing the failings of the Organisation in public, so we exhausted every internal avenue possible including submission of all the evidence of irregular behaviour to the Office of Internal Oversight. The request for an internal investigation was refused and every other attempt to raise our concerns was stone walled. Our failed efforts to get management to listen went on over a period of nearly nine months. It was only after we realised the internal route was impossible that we decided to go public.”
     „The inspector who drafted the original report was furious when he realised it was to be replaced by a doctored management version. He wrote an email of complaint to the OPCW’s director general. The DG was Ahmet Uzumcu, a Turkish diplomat but his chef de cabinet, the man considered to have the most power in the OPCW on day-to-day issues was Bob Fairweather, a British career diplomat.“
     „On July 4 there was another intervention. Fairweather, the chef de cabinet, invited several members of the drafting team to his office. There they found three US officials who were cursorily introduced without making clear which US agencies they represented. The Americans told them emphatically that the Syrian regime had conducted a gas attack, and that the two cylinders found on the roof and upper floor of the building contained 170 kilograms of chlorine. The inspectors left Fairweather’s office, feeling that the invitation to the Americans to address them was unacceptable pressure and a violation of the OPCW’s declared principles of independence and impartiality.“

     Know we know who at the OPCW pulled the strings : Bob Fairweather together with „three US officials“ (most likely CIA).

     Quote : Robert Fairweather took up the role of UK Special Representative for Sudan and South Sudan on 11 March 2019.
     Robert has been a British diplomat since 1997. He has worked in The Netherlands, Switzerland and Nepal. Among various roles in the Foreign & Commonwealth Office (FCO) in London, he worked as Private Secretary to the Political Director and in The Common Foreign and Security Policy Department. He has recently returned to the FCO after 7 years as Chief of Cabinet at the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) in The Hague. He has also worked for the Government of Australia in Beijing.
     Robert started his career in Her Majesty’s Customs and Excise.
     He was awarded an OBE in 2018 for ‘Services to International Relations’. [December 2018]
     https://www.gov.uk/government/people/robert-fairweather

     The fact that a British career diplomat is behind the OPCW cover up in Douma makes it even more possible that the OPCW assessment in the Skripal case casts serious doubts !

     1. Everything about the OPCW’s involvement in Salisbury and Amesbury stinks to high heaven! Right from the start: why was there a court case brought by SDH (that SDH did not then attend) for the collection of bio-samples? Would it not have been: quicker, easier and involved less lying, simply to ask for consent from Sergei’s living relatives in Russia?

     2. https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2019/11/17/the-hugely-important-opcw-scandal-keeps-unfolding-heres-why-no-ones-talking-about-it/

     3. https://thegrayzone.com/2019/10/16/us-backed-crazy-militias-turkeys-invasion-syria/
        http://landdestroyer.blogspot.com/2019/10/us-finally-bombs-french-factory-in.html

        No wonder Le Mesurier topped himself, better that than the crazies he was embedded with.

133. I am not going to comment on the interview itself but why did Prince Andrew give an interview to the BBC and not Reuters? I think the answer is that it was the obvious choice for TPTB… so why did Yulia give an interview to Reuters and not the BBC? I am quite sure that the answer to that question is that HMG/TPTB were not in control of that decision.

     1. Because she didn’t reference the spire?

        This made I larf:

        https://twitter.com/jonathansimons/status/1195829075123867656

        More seriously, because Reuters is not the UK state broadcaster?

        1. It made me laugh too! Very funny.

           Imagine if Andrew had given his interview to Reuters… well you probably can’t because it would never happen.

134. The murderers of Seth Rich have been identified and guess what – they’re two cops.

     1. A link would be helpful. Also, so the story goes, Seth Rich was alive when he arrived at the hospital with ‘non-fatal’ gun shot wounds… the hospital was where he was murdered.

     2. Anonymous-1, you said :
        “The murderers of Seth Rich have been identified and guess what – they’re two cops.”
        What is your source ? Google doesn’t help me.

     3. The journalist who hired a private investigator, also ex-cop, was then run over and shot by the PI but survived.

        Seth Rich’s parents acknowledge that it was Seth and his brother who handed over the leaked emails proving Clinton sabotage of Sanders campaign, but are afraid of looking as though their son inadvertently helped Trump get elected. In order to cover up the sabotage of Sanders campaign, Clinton and co devised the Russia hacked into DNS dbase lie.

        Similarities with Skripal affair – no CCTV or death certificate.

        1. Still no source, Anonymous-1 ?

           1. Here is a link to where the story might have come from, the story is probably not true though Inquirer.

              https://bigleaguepolitics.com/witness-atf-and-dea-agents-killed-seth-rich/

              1. Thank you for the link, Denise.

              2. Having just read the article I think you’re probably correct.

                 Similarities with Skripal case:

                 – No description of what he was wearing at the time, although injuries would suggest shorts and Tshirt.
                 – FOIR refused to say which hospital he was taken to.
                 – Images not showing his current appearance ie full-blown beard and piled on a few pounds, similar to Yulia showing pictures of red hair when she had a blonde bob and was slim.

135. Just who got the award?

     Alongside Wiltshire Police, other agencies who formed the Local Resilience Forum Strategic Co-ordinating Group included: 

     Wiltshire Council
     Ministry of Defence
     DSTL at Porton Down
     Salisbury NHS Foundation Trust
     South Western Ambulance Service
     NHS England
     Dorset and Wiltshire Fire & Rescue Service
     DEFRA
     Public Health England
     Environment Agency

     I’m surprised that Sainsbury’s in Salisbury are missing.
     They provided the car park for both Sergei’s car and the air ambulance.

136. They’re at it again

     https://www.ft.com/content/d01eb9c8-0791-11ea-a984-fbbacad9e7dd

     1. The FT does not allow access from a link but it does allow access directly from Google. Paste this into Google and you can then access the article:

        Five men freed in Russia-Lithuania-Norway spy swap

137. Not so fast.
     More winners.

     https://www.devon-cornwall.police.uk/News/newsarticle.aspx?id=384a08c8-cf95-4845-a68e-4cb8b2638ed7

     1. May I request a KCBE?

        Knight Companion of the Blogmire Elite?

        1. You’ll have to buy the sword to be dubbed KCBE.

           1. Tut, tut, Jen.

              What was it someone said (I have forgotten said it), “The pen is mightier than the sword”: I don’t think that anyone on the Blogmire would dare to argue that the sword is mightier than Rob’s pen.

              Therefore, it seems to me that it would be most inappropriate (IMHO) to deliver Blogmire honours with a sword. And, as has already been demonstrated, Rob has chosen to deliver his honours with a pen.

              1. No offence to anyone here at the Blogmire but, given the way that these awards are proliferated, I’d consider it a great honour not to be gonged at all.

                 OTOH I suppose being profiteroled would be acceptable …

                 1. As it happens Eleanor, I am a pretty dab hand at profiteroles (if I may say so myself). I can do them for you with a vanilla or coffee Crème Chantilly, topped with either chocolate or caramel, depending on your preference. I am quite certain that they are of more essential value than most public awards these days. Not sure how I can get them to you, but consider yourself awarded the CBE (Chomper of Blogmire Eclairs) in spirit if not in actual fact.

                    1. Profiteroles? I thought they were Profitable Rolls or even Profitable Roles.

                    2. That’s a lure too tempting to resist, Rob, and I can resist anything except temptation!

                       Coffee chantilly sounds yummy and a caramel sauce would complement the filling, possibly. However I’d be very happy to be proved wrong.

                       Thank you for this award and I blah blah accept, I didn’t ever expect blah blah and blush at the very thought of receiving cyber choux recognition. I’d like to thank (deep breath) … [an exponential amount of blahing follows] …

                       1. eleanor,

                          If you are a celebrity, you are now supposed to burst into tears.

                          1. Hah! T’was nowt but grititude (sic) in mine eye, Blunderbuss, as my overwhelming sobbing is not a good look. And it’d make even cyber profiteroles tasteless.

              2. Edward Bulwer-Lytton (1803 – 1873), he of “It was a dark and stormy night …” fame, is usually credited as having first written “… the pen is mightier than the sword …” in a play, though the concept it expresses is much older:

                 Beneath the rule of men entirely great
                 The pen is mightier than the sword. Behold
                 The arch-enchanter’s wand! itself a nothing!
                 But taking sorcery from the master-hand
                 To paralyze the Caesars, and to strike
                 The loud earth breathless! Take away the sword;
                 States can be saved without it!

                 https://interestingliterature.com/2015/01/15/who-said-the-pen-is-mightier-than-the-sword/

138. O/T but a good example of what we are up against.

     Last week, The Guardian and several other major MSM outlets, published this:

     “Climate crisis: 11,000 scientists warn of ‘untold suffering’”
     https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/nov/05/climate-crisis-11000-scientists-warn-of-untold-suffering

     So what was the study and data about which 11,000 ‘scientists’ got so worked up? Well, there wasn’t one – it was just an opinion piece that had no new research at all!
     https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2019/11/11000-scientists-just-kidding.php

     But… but… 11,000 ‘scientists’! Well that wasn’t what it seemed either… people went on a web page and then asked others to read it and put their signature on it (recall the old ‘send this to ten of your friends and tell them to send it to 10 of their friends’…). This actually caused a bit of a problem for the ‘authors’ (a lot of ‘non-scientists’ signed it):

     “During our original signature screening process, we attempted to remove all signatures that appeared to be invalid.”
     https://scientistswarning.forestry.oregonstate.edu

     It was then presented as a scientific paper – and was published by the Oxford University Press (no less!):

     “World Scientists’ Warning of a Climate Emergency”
     https://academic.oup.com/bioscience/advance-article/doi/10.1093/biosci/biz088/5610806

     The Guardian swallowed it hook, line and sinker… which they would, wouldn’t they.

     1. Only 11,000 scientists!

        When I mention the Oregon Petition (which disputes man-made global warming) the warmists tell me that 31,000 scientists are not enough:

        http://www.oism.org/pproject/

     2. Well, we now live in a world of Monbiotism, where facts no longer matter, just opinions and feel-good emotion, leading eventually to self doubt, guilt and servitude.
        Awards all round !!!!!

        1. Monbiotism! I like the name.

           Did the Monbiot get his wish: “A few hours after this column is published, I hope to be in a police cell”.

           https://www.monbiot.com/2019/10/20/arresting-destruction/

     3. Thanks Paul. I don’t suppose the real story will get coverage in the press. It’s now out there that “11,000 scientists” were calling for drastic action (including population control), and I don’t suppose the lamestream media will be inclined to walk it back. No, like everything these sorts of people do, the (false) basis has been created, and now subsequent claims can be built upon it, even though the original was fraudulent.

        But it again raises the question I put on my piece about Ms Thunberg. If you have all the data and facts that prove a link between CO2 and rising temperatures, why would you need to keep putting out fraudulent claims, such as the polar bear population myth, suicidal walruses, and this one? I can understand when people sometimes get their facts wrong, but these examples are deliberate deception. I’m surprised that more people aren’t ready to ask why they are so prevalent in this discussion.

        1. It is all about ‘control’ – push a lie and when enough people believe it, raise their taxes!

           I have learned is best not to try to help most people. They will look at you like you are crazy… because they only listen to BBC, CNN, etc.. Try talking to someone who does not understand the Reichstag Fire, Gulf of Tonkin, 9/11, or the Skripal hoax, etc.. If they don’t have the big picture of what is happening to them and how they are being manipulated, or have gone down the self research rabbit hole (as many of us here have) you can’t talk to them about anything without them looking at you with ‘Adam Schiff’ eyes….

           It is depressing but I bet thousands believe that the 11,000 scientists can’t be wrong and that it is wonderful that Wiltshire’s police have done such a fantastic job – they must have done, because they just won a prize!

        2. It’s not just the polar bears and walruses, it’s the data as well. It’s being “homogenised”:

           http://joannenova.com.au/2019/10/who-knew-the-australian-bureau-of-met-just-made-last-summer-hotter-and-history-colder-again/

           http://joannenova.com.au/2019/11/whopper-part-ii-look-what-the-bom-did-to-the-last-three-februarys-in-australia/

           1. There is an excellent comment in your first link:

              “A recent BBC documentary entitled ‘Climate Change – the Facts’, swiftly became known as ‘Climate – Change the Facts’.”

              1. It reminds me of a book title: “Eats shoots and leaves”.

                 The placement of punctuation can completely change the meaning, as in: “Eats, shoots, and leaves”.

                 1. My all time favourite:
                    “British push bottles up Germans”
                    Or should that be:
                    “British push, bottles up Germans”

139. Wait a minute.

     We have another winner.
     https://www.edp24.co.uk/news/operation-moonshot-police-award-london-november-2019-1-6376853

     We are all winners, it’s the new way.

     1. “Operation Moonshot’s incredible results since its 2016 launch have seen it identify, disrupt and catch criminals on the county’s roads…”

        Wow, I bet no other police forces thought of that.

        Still, I was disappointed. I thought they had landed a police car on the moon. There’s a lot of crime on the moon these days.

140. “Wiltshire Police wins world class policing award for its response to Novichok attack”
     https://www.swindonadvertiser.co.uk/news/18037999.wiltshire-police-wins-world-class-policing-award-response-novichok-attack/

     It comes as small consolation – Basu was hoping for an Oscar nomination for ‘Best Story’, but the nomination committee just laughed…

     1. Paul, it is beyond a joke. Let’s form teams with great sounding acronyms. What was the impressive response? It is pathetic.

     2. Rob, can Paul and me get today’s Blogmire awards?

        1. There was me thinking that your comments were all for the love of it, Duncan. But since you ask, you can both have MBEs: Member of the Blogmire Elite. It’s about as valuable as an award to police forces for not solving cases.

           1. Honoured! Thanks Rob. I hope you are not expecting an acceptance speech.

           2. Rob,
              This means so much.
              MBE, wait until my family finds out.

        2. Duncan, I can see the sheer absurdity of it has got under your skin too! They really are a bunch of self-congratulatory c***suckers! For a bit of light relief, try making anagrams from the name ‘Neil Basu’!

     3. So posting two completely unprotected police officers only a few yards away from a door handle we are told is covered in a military grade nerve agent capable of mass death and destruction gets you an award these days does it? This is truly clown world.

141. https://www.aa.com.tr/en/europe/uk-police-arrest-terror-suspect-at-heathrow-airport/1645755

     “A foreign terrorist fighter of British nationality was sent back to London, while seven from Germany were sent to Berlin, according to a ministry statement.

     The issue of handling of Daesh/ISIS members and their families detained in Syria — including foreign members of the terror group — has been controversial, with Turkey arguing foreign-born terrorists should be repatriated to their countries of origin.

     Ankara has said that it will send Daesh/ISIS members back to their countries, but several European countries have refused, saying the terrorists were denationalized.”

     Oh dear!!!!

142. https://twitter.com/jsolomonReports

     Click on the links – they’re VERY illuminating.

143. I made a Freedom of Information request to Wiltshire Council for the Press Release about the Pre-Inquest Review.

     I expected they would send me a pdf of the actual Press Release but, instead, they quoted the text in the body of the email. Here it is:

     For immediate release 6 November 2019

     Pre-Inquest Review listed for 10am on 18 February 2020

     The Pre-Inquest Review touching upon the death of Dawn Kelly Sturgess has been listed for 10am on 18 February 2020 at Salisbury Law Courts, Wilton Road, Salisbury.

     The Senior Coroner decided to adjourn the October 2019 Pre-Inquest review to allow sufficient time to give appropriate and careful consideration of submissions relating to “scope” before handing down a written ruling.

     As always, this date is subject to change and any further updates will be communicated through Wiltshire Council’s Communications, Marketing and Events Team.

     Ends

     I wonder whether this press release has been sent to any newspapers or whether you only get a copy if you know it exists and you ask for it.

     1. “touching upon the death” = very briefly
        “scope” = as narrow as humanly possible
        “before handing down a written ruling” = it’s already written

        = BIG WASTE OF TIME

     2. It’s worse than that Blunderbuss. To paraphrase Douglas Adams:

        “But the Press Release was released…”
        “Released? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find it.”
        “That’s the PR department.”
        “With a flashlight.”
        “Ah, well, the lights had probably gone.”
        “So had the stairs.”
        “But look, you found the press release, didn’t you?”
        “Yes,” said Arthur, “yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying ‘Beware of the Leopard.”

        1. LOL

        2. Rob,
           A road we have been down before.
           Why are the main stream media not touching this obvious cover up of due process?

     3. Update from Wiltshire Council:

        “I can confirm the press release was sent out via email to media outlets”.

        So, why haven’t the media outlets published it?

        1. The SJ posted this on 6 November:

           https://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/news/18018275.pre-inquest-review-death-dawn-sturgess-set-new-year/

           It is also here:
           https://ocm.wiltshire.gov.uk/salisbury/pre-inquest-review-listed-for-10am-on-18-february-2020/

           1. How far can the press go with perverting the course of justice ?
              Her cause of death has not been established.
              This is the duty of the coroner, not the Salisbury Journal, BBC, MET or anyone else.
              It is essential that “interested parties” (assume Dawn’s family and friends) are accompanied by a toxicologist and a good lawyer at the PIR.

        2. Before you can send an e-mail you need to know the e-mail address of your intended correspondent.

           Also, to ensure that your message has reached the intended recipient it is a good idea to mark the message requiring an indication, from the recipient, that it has been received and acted upon.

           I wonder if Wiltshire Council thought to check these things before lobbing their message off into the wild beyond.

           Probably not.

144. https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2019/11/le-mesurier-gets-cross/

145. This looks like a major leak:

     https://www.scribd.com/user/259237201/JohnSolomon

     BREAKING: A large cache of confidential foreign documents have just been leaked implicating Joe Biden, George Soros, Hillary Clinton and Joseph Misfud’s collusion and possible criminal activity in Ukraine.
     https://twitter.com/michaelcoudrey/status/1177370086182551552?s=12

     Download and start digging!

     1. TONIGHT AT 5pm PST: [That is 1am GMT Thursday morning]

        I will be releasing leaked confidential documents from the Ukrainian Prosecutor’s office in regards to Joe and Hunter Biden.

        I intend to show how these payments immediately influenced official US foreign policy for the enrichment of the individuals involved.
        https://twitter.com/MichaelCoudrey/status/1194750788502835200

        1. To clarify:

           It looks like the first link was the initial leak at the end of September 2019 – there is now a further leak which implicates the Bidens and Kerrys (among others), this is due to be released in just over an hour.

           1. Thanks Paul. The pieces of the jigsaw are slowly but surely being revealed. Like Alexandra Chalupa’s 27 visits to the Whitehouse during the Obama presidency, where she met with one Eric Ciaramella – the so-called whistleblower in the current impeachment farce in DC – on numerous occasions. What on earth could she possibly have been doing there?

              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hj3IuVhmv_4

              Nuland. Pyatt. Soros. Chalupa. Brennan. Comey. Clapper. Kerry. Biden snr. Biden jnr. Mifsud. Steele. Obama. And of course Clinton. Whodathunkit that their neo-Nazi backed coup and subsequent corrupt dealings in Ukraine would backfire on them so spectacularly?

              1. “Leaked documents from the Ukrainian General Prosecutor’s office indicate complex money transfers from foreign sources into the control of a “slush fund” owned and operated by Devon Archer, John Kerry Senior, John Kerry Junior, Heinz Jr, and Hunter Biden.”
                 https://twitter.com/MichaelCoudrey/status/1194782001422721024

                 Obviously the MSM will have no time for this. They are far to busy with the Mickey Mouse impeachment hearing at which, yesterday, the ‘star witness’ to the ‘quid pro quo’ allegations confirmed there was no ‘quid pro quo’ and the specific question of ‘exactly which laws did President Trump break?’, was met with a deafening silence…

                 [I believe that ‘Heinz Jr’ is Kerry Sr’s stepson.]

        2. I can see Michael Coudrey ending up on The Clinton Dead Pool List along with Seth Rich.

           https://lasvegas.cbslocal.com/2016/08/10/the-list-of-clinton-associates-whove-died-mysteriously-check-it-out/

146. Today I read there’s a Mossad unit called Ceasera / Kidon who carry out assassinations. I wonder if they were responsible for the skripal affair? Could have been one of the masked men with a tanned complextion.

     1. I’ve also read that ninjas carry out assassinations, and they also wear masks. Maybe ninjas did it

     2. Nothing to do with Mossad, much closer to home, hence no CCTV. Same goes for the Novichok.

147. This confirms what Assad said in his interview with Rafshin on RT, the White Helmets are firing on civilians trying to flee the UK/US backed terrorists in Idlib. Funny how Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the “model prisoner” in Abu Ghraib prison (according to the US) turns up in “moderate rebel” held Idlib.

     https://bsnews.info/white-helmets-and-hala-systems-the-grotesque-militarisation-of-humanitarianism-in-syria/

     When I first posted this at 11.03 am, one of the tweets said Le Mesurier had been living with al-Baghdadi in Idlib since 2015, but it’s been removed:

     https://twitter.com/AmichaiStein1/status/1193835783985205248/photo/1

     Even Turkey call him a former MI6 spy..

     https://www.aa.com.tr/en/turkey/le-mesurier-thought-of-suicide-before-his-death-wife/1643112

     1. This image explains Syria’s problem:
        https://twitter.com/OmerOzkizilcik/status/1191021784402935809

        “Russian and American troops crossing each other’s route in northeast Syria.”

        One is there legally, invited by the Syrian Government… the other is there to steal Syria’s oil. If only we knew which one of them was also funding the White Helmets…

        1. What was it that Trump said?

           4.5million dollars?

        2. This was a factsheet on the government website from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office Statistics updated 1 December 2015: (it’s since been removed)

           https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/factsheet-the-uks-non-humanitarian-aid-response-to-the-syria-crisis–2/providing-non-humanitarian-assistance-in-Syria

           Search and Rescue: £15m
           Security and Justice: £8.2m
           Chemical Weapons: £3.1m
           Moderate voices, Civil Society and Human Rights: £12m
           Media activists: £5.3m
           Assistance Coordination Unit: £5.6m
           Governance and service delivery: £15.1m
           Syrian National Coalition: £3.8m
           Moderate armed opposition: £4.4m
           Impact on the wider Region: £29.3m
           Conflict and Stability Fund: £2.4m (private contractors working from Istanbul to deliver “strategic communications and media operations support to the Syrian armed opposition)

           Total £104.2 million pounds of tax payers money

     2. In the Turkish interview it says they met a “friend” the evening before. I would bet it was a former MI6 colleague who was tasked with eliminating him…could have easily popped something in his drink.

148. Well this is a bit careless… the coup in Bolivia was supported by US mercenaries from Blackwater!

     Check out this video of Luis Camacho at the 40 second mark. On the left of the picture is a mercenary with Blackwater’s skull logo on his breast pocket…

     https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0keB2Sjs3Xc

     1. Careless? Or just blatant indifference to what the rest of the world might think?

        They think they have the upper hand – which leads me to wonder why.

        1. Several sites linking the video and discussing the US’s latest coup, are being taken down… so here is a screen grab in case the video gets removed:
           https://imgur.com/a/odyhlIf

     2. You’re right about Blackwater. This explains more:

        https://thegrayzone.com/2019/11/11/bolivia-coup-fascist-foreign-support-fernando-camacho/

        Funny but Morales got in because he promised to nationalize the water supply because the indigenous people couldn’t afford it. It had been privatised by a previous right-wing fascist regime around the time of Thatcher and Reagan. They might just live to regret it. Probably have the death squads out a la Chile and Thatcher favourite Pinochet.

149. https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2019/11/12/narrative-managers-in-overdrive-after-death-of-white-helmets-founder/

     The nutter Philip Cross should be stopped. Word is he’s an MI5/GCHQ agent.

150. James Le Mesurier, the man behind support and training for the controversial White Helmets ‘Syrian civil defense’ group, has been found dead in Istanbul, Turkey, according to reports.

     The first comment made me laugh:

     https://twitter.com/AmichaiStein1/status/1193835783985205248/photo/1

     1. Check Sibel Edmonds on Newsbud – she alleges that he didn’t fall from his flat window, but from his office window and that there was an altercation prior to it. Also that his face was slashed and both arms and legs were broken.

151. Slightly off-topic but there might be a connection.

     Is there a foreign power behind the demonstrations in Hong Kong? They may have been started off by ordinary Hong Kong people but I suspect they have been infiltrated.

     1. Since the riots began, there has been equipment available for free for anyone willing to take part. Hard hats, gas masks, clingwrap, water bottles – just help yourself! Who is paying for this – hint, it isn’t the students! How is it being stored and brought out onto the streets? How did it get to Hong Kong in the first place? Where did it come from?

        Young people living in the Macau SAR face the same problems as Hong Kong… but Macau has had no riots at all!

        There are known contacts between Joshua Wong (and other student leaders) and the CIA… as there were when he also led the ‘umbrella movement’ a few years ago.

        The riots are being encouraged by teachers and lecturers… especially at the ecumenical schools/universities…

        HK retail sales were down 23% last month and tourist arrivals were down 40%… the damage being done to HK will last for years! The irony is that the students complaining about their future, are destroying and trashing the city they will have to live in.

        China has kept well out of it – their main focus is Taiwan and they will let HK burn to the ground before they are seen to take any action in HK that will hurt them in Taiwan… meanwhile the HK govt is incompetent and has no plan…

        1. Paul,

           Yes, I thought it looked like a Colour revolution.

           1. Here is a picture of Julie Eadeh meeting Wong and others.

              https://www.hongkongfp.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/50041887contentPhoto1.jpg

              Eadeh is the political unit chief of the US Consulate General in Hong Kong. Earlier this year (before the riots started) Wong visited the US…

              More here:
              https://www.hongkongfp.com/2019/09/08/thanks-yanks-no-thanks-us-intervention-hong-kongs-crisis-may-protesters-bargained/

        2. When I was in Hong Kong, the people said how much they liked the British – how nice and polite we are. They knew absolutely nothing about the opium war and how Britain acquired Hong Kong. There was no such thing as democracy under British rule. They also knew nothing of the baskets that used to hand one above the other that were “accommodation” for one person. The British Hong Kong police force were one of the most corrupt in the world.

152. Am I the only one thinking the “Istanbul Balcony Fall” is a lot more effective MO than esoteric, experimental yet easily traceable poisons?
     Given the simplicity it can’t be Russia.

     1. Patrick M,

        I assume you mean this:

        https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/mystery-over-istanbul-death-of-british-ex-soldier-behind-syrias-white-helmets-who-was-named-as-spy-by-russia

        Many of the usual commentators are named in the article.

     2. Mark Urban has deleted a Twitter thread about the death of White Helmets founder James Le Mesurier.
        https://twitter.com/MarkUrban01/status/1193855016408375296
        https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EJFpoapXYAAqxZz.png
        Urban had tweeted about a suspicion that the death was state-sponsored. That came from a friend of his who knew Le Mesurier’s flat well. Small world, that of International Diplomacy, or whatever Le Mesurier, Urban and their mutual acquaintance were all involved in.

        Kit Klarenberg, who captured the screenshot above before it was deleted, points out that Sergei Skripal often traveled to Turkey to secretly meet British spies. Le Mesurier could speak Turkish and lived in Turkey for years before he died there.
        https://twitter.com/KitKlarenberg/status/1193860547374178305
        https://apnews.com/f11b3883f8494d4e882c4adee5f162ec

        1. Obviously Le Mesurier had worried Pablo somehow just as Sergie had.

        2. Of course, the “possible state involvement” in the suspected MI6 spy’s death was by Russia. The thread by Mark Urban can still be seen in Google cache copy.
           https://ibb.co/sRM1z75

           1. I would have thought that Russia could be immediately ruled out Brendan, since we now know that their modus operandi is to use a deadly chemical that isn’t deadly, sprayed on a door handle they didn’t go to, by GRU men who stick around for hours to take pictures and go window shopping.

              1. That’s it !!

                 The balcony railing had novichok smeared on it and, le Mesurier, in seeking to take some night to help him sleep, leaned on it and was overcome by the novichok causing him to fall to his death.

                 Simple really, when you think about it in the establishment manner.

                 1. Simples!

     3. No, but a 30 to 40 foot (three stories) fall is no guarantee of immediate and painless death. His girlfriend’s statement “we took sleeping pills” conveniently allows for intruders doing the deed without her noticing.

        Pure speculation, but he was probably offed because he knew far too much about the UK’s nefarious activities in Syria.

        I wonder how many glasses of Champaigne were quaffed in celebration of his demise, and I also wonder who might have quaffed them.

        1. Le Mesurier was married to his “girlfriend” Emma Winberg (a fellow MayDay Rescue director and a former FCO employee as well, though she is Swedish) at the time of his death. They married in 2018.

153. I had seen this a few weeks ago, but got distracted.
     Apologies if the Blog has covered the topic.
     This was an EU decision to extend the sanctions against Russia.
     https://www.courthousenews.com/eu-extends-russia-sanctions-over-salisbury-chemical-attack/
     Several of the continental media reported it, and it might have got a one liner in the SJ.
     However, upon searching the EU Council press releases and statements, I can’t find the official announcement.
     I wanted to read the reported names of the 4 Russians.
     1) To see who they were.
     2) To see if the aliases were used, and if so why.

     If the real names of Rus and Alex are in the EU document, then one would wonder why the Met are still using the bogus names on the European Arrest Warrants.
     Blogmire help needed, and is anyone able to track the EAW to see if they have been updated?

     1. The EU press secretary was very helpful.
        Here are the names.

        6. Anatoliy Vladimirovich CHEPIGA

        Анатолий Владимирович ЧЕПИГА, a.k.a.: Ruslan BOSHIROV

        Gender: male;

        Dates of birth: 5 April 1979; 12 Apr 1978;

        Places of Birth: Nikolaevka, Amur Oblast, Russia; Dushanbe, Tajikistan

        GRU Officer Anatoliy Chepiga (a.k.a. Ruslan Boshirov) possessed, transported and then, during the weekend of 4 March 2018, in Salisbury, used a toxic nerve agent (‘Novichok’). On 5 September 2018, the UK Crown Prosecution Service charged Ruslan Boshirov for conspiracy to murder Sergei Skripal; for the attempted murder of Sergei Skripal, Yulia Skripal and Nick Bailey; for the use and possession of Novichok; and for causing grievous bodily harm with intent to Yulia Skripal and Nick Bailey.

        21.1.2019

        7. Alexander Yevgeniyevich MISHKIN

        Александр Евгеньевич МИШКИН, a.k.a.: Alexander PETROV

        Gender: male;

        Date of birth:13 July 1979;

        Places of Birth: Loyga, Russia; Kotlas, Russia

        GRU Officer Alexander Mishkin (a.k.a. Alexander Petrov) possessed, transported and then, during the weekend of 4 March 2018, in Salisbury, used a toxic nerve agent (‘Novichok’). On 5 September 2018, the UK Crown Prosecution Service charged Alexander Petrov for conspiracy to murder Sergei Skripal; for the attempted murder of Sergei Skripal, Yulia Skripal and Nick Bailey; for the use and possession of Novichok; and for causing grievous bodily harm with intent to Yulia Skripal and Nick Bailey.

        21.1.2019

        8. Vladimir Stepanovich ALEXSEYEV

        Владимир Степанович АЛЕКСЕЕВ

        Gender: male;

        Title: First Deputy Head of the GRU

        Vladimir Stepanovich Alexseyev is the First Deputy Head of the GRU (a.k.a. GU). Given his senior leadership role in the GRU, Alexseyev is responsible for the possession, transport and use in Salisbury during the weekend of 4 March 2018 of the toxic nerve agent ‘Novichok’ by officers from the GRU.

        21.1.2019

        9. Igor Olegovich KOSTYUKOV

        Игорь Олегович КОСТЮКОВ

        Gender: male;

        Title: Head of the GRU

        Igor Olegovich Kostyukov, given his senior leadership role as First Deputy Head of the GRU (a.k.a. GU) at that time, is responsible for the possession, transport and use in Salisbury during the weekend of 4 March 2018 of the toxic nerve agent ‘Novichok’ by officers from the GRU.

        1. They really are just making it up (just like the Americans do):

           ” On December 29, 2016, President Obama issued an annex to Executive Order No. 13694,1 which authorized sanctions on the following entities and individuals:

           (A) The Main Intelligence Directorate (also known as Glavnoe Razvedyvatel’noe Upravlenie or the GRU) in Moscow, Russian Federation.

           (B) The Federal Security Service (also known as Federalnaya Sluzhba Bezopasnosti or the FSB) in Moscow, Russian Federation.

           (C) The Special Technology Center (also known as STLC, Ltd. Special Technology Center St. Petersburg) in St. Petersburg, Russian Federation.

           (D) Zorsecurity (also known as Esage Lab) in Moscow, Russian Federation.

           (E) The autonomous noncommercial organization known as the Professional Association of Designers of Data Processing Systems (also known as ANO PO KSI) in Moscow, Russian Federation.

           (F) Igor Valentinovich Korobov.

           (G) Sergey Aleksandrovich Gizunov.

           (H) Igor Olegovich Kostyukov.

           (I) Vladimir Stepanovich Alexseyev.”
           https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title22-section9501&num=0&edition=prelim

           Igor Olegovich Kostyukov and Vladimir Stepanovich Alexseyev are the head and deputy head of Russia’s military intelligence agency and have clearly just been added for good measure.

        2. The EU put Petrov & Boshirov (aka. Mishkin & Chepiga) on their sanctions list on 21 January 2019. They’re still on the list in the latest update today.
           (p.46) http://data.europa.eu/euodp/en/data/dataset/consolidated-list-of-persons-groups-and-entities-subject-to-eu-financial-sanctions/resource/3a1d5dd6-244e-4118-82d3-db3be0554112

           But P&B disappeared from Europol’s website eumostwanted.eu about six months ago, and the names Mishkin & Chepiga cannot be found on it either.
           https://twitter.com/elenaevdokimov7/status/1146041377152618496?lang=en
           Does this mean that there’s no longer an arrest warrant for them even though they’re still on the sanctions list?

           1. Brendan,

              That was the point to my question
              EAW with the wrong names still in effect.
              OR

              No current EAWs for the already sanctioned desth squad.

154. The UK government bought his house, but due to the cutbacks at the time, (there are always cutbacks, we are never in a non cutback time) HMG did not heed the advice of the security services.

     If only that £25 had been spent.

     https://www.gogroopie.com/all/bp0rza1d1e/emvc_9095567-3-7110102-qltz6s2z6pzalz5kmz6tyz6pz4ypz62nz1x-2

     A GRU team approaching the door could have been captured, (not captured captured, I mean in a photographic sense) however, I read somewhere, it might have been from Hamish deNoClue, that the GRU had prototypes of the Harry Potter cape of invisibility.

     https://www.hawkin.com/harry-potter-deluxe-invisibility-cloak-illusion?CAWELAID=720016520000020576&utm_source=google&utm_term=&utm_campaign=&utm_medium=cpc&utm_content=s_dc|pcrid|296208166070|pkw||pmt|&gclid=CjwKCAiAqqTuBRBAEiwA7B66hWzhoyvZ7PDiUw6W-EoPInUIEKZURAah4uLNoiEIEHabxdC4TxlMFBoCkIoQAvD_BwE

     1. Blogmirers.
        I would like to apologise for my last post.
        Bellingcat have informed me that other Invisibility Capes are available.

        Investigative open source journalism ( that’s Google to you and me) has found other suppliers of the Harry Potter cape used by the GRU.

        1. Duncan,

           The invisibility-caped crusaders were just a diversion. The Novichok was actually precision-dropped by a Sukhoi Su-57:

           https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_Su-57

           The first bottle of Novichok missed its target and landed in a bin behind some shops but the second bottle scored a direct hit on Sergei’s door handle.

155. “The press are asking questions. Quick, somebody make up a chemically sounding name for a bogus substance.”
     “1234!”
     “Ha ha. Very funny, MI6. Nobody’s going to fall for that.”
     “OK, MI5. What about A234? First letter of the alphabet, same thing really. I use it as the password on my Guardian account.”
     “Better. But is it really going to fool anyone?”
     “I understand Boris is due to visit Porton Down …”
     “Genius! To the helicopters!”

156. A bit of fun!

     Here is video of Sergei being arrested:
     https://www.ft.com/video/a448b1e6-77d5-4d61-987d-fae110e49c3c

     Here is the video of Sergei with his Louis Vuitton bag:
     https://www.thesun.co.uk/video/news/archive-video-of-russian-spy-sergei-skripal-unloading-louis-vuitton-bag-at-airport-and-his-2004-arrest/

     It looks to me like Serge lost a lot of hair between those two videos…

     So the game is: “how old is Sergei”

     I have run several pictures of Sergei through an age guessing app… the results were actually pretty good on the whole. For example, the pictures of Sergei behind bars at his trial, came out at 56 (he was actually 55 at the time).

     I did it with several pictures and it works. Try it yourself:
     https://www.how-old.net

     Why am I doing this? Because the video of Sergei’s arrest has always bothered me… he is struggling but look at the faces of the men ‘arresting’ him – not a flicker of emotion to be seen! Plus, I can’t find a copy of that video before 2018, in fact there isn’t even a still image from the video until 2018… nothing in 2006 and nothing in 2010.

     In 2006, the press were allowed into the court to hear the final day of the trial, until then everything was secret, his 2004 ‘arrest’ only became known in 2006:
     http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4775131.stm

     Back in 2006, the video of Sergei’s arrest did not appear.

     So how old was Sergei at the time of his ‘arrest’? I have tried several still shots and they all come out at 64/65! That would mean the video was made in 2015/2016…

     Now perhaps under the stress of being arrested, someone might look older… but the app does not work that way, it uses biometrics, so a few wrinkles will not make any difference.

     Something very odd is going on… not only do I think the ‘arrest’ video is a fake, so does Microsoft’s app.

     1. What one also finds puzzling, Paul, is the face f Skripal as he’s being arrested, this isn’t a face of a man expecting to spend years in prison, possible with no parol (if he indeed did what he’s alleged to have done), it looks more as if he’s concerned more with his jacket not getting torn or otherwise damaged.

        On a completely different subject but one related to the case is (1) Putin’s reaction on the old man. When asked Putin’s angry, scathing, calling him a scumbag (better translation of ‘podonok’ would be a low life), a spy, traitor to the Motherland (one cannot get more guilty in Russia). This doesn’t convince. If Skripal truly caused a lot of damage to the country, Putin’s answer would be just the opposite, he would try to belittle him, convince the world that Skripal was a low level lucripetous apparatchik, any harm he did to Russia was negligible, he isn’t worth talking about.

        (2) The rather low key efforts by the Russian s to get access to the couple throughout the charade.

        You have any thoughts on it?

        1. I think what Paul and Baron are suggesting is that Sergei never was a traitor to Russia. His arrest was faked to make the Brits think he was. He was then able to go on spying for Russia while pretending to spy for the Brits. I’m just surprised the Brits fell for it.

           1. Once might surmise that arrogance is a form of naivety, the Westminster Brits and the DC swamplife are well endowed with the former.

              1. Cascadian,

                 You may be right but this did give me pause for thought. Am I being naively arrogant myself?

        2. It seems to me that your notions regarding Putin’s reactions reveal a considerable amount of bias in regard to the Russian psyche.

           A person’s cultural background can have a considerable impact on their approach or reaction to circumstances – e.g. UK Northerners and the Welsh are considerably more direct than UK Southerners. So it may be that how Putin, and other Russians, react to Western provocations is cultural and not the result of some evil intent.

           However, if we change focus to the Westminster or Washington, then I would certainly believe in some evil intent (thus revealing my own bias).

        3. Skripals ‘arrest’ video has many flaws – look how ‘gently’ Skripal is being handled. Compare with the images coming out of Hong Kong and how aggressive the police are there!

           I agree with your observations about Putin’s reaction as well – it simply does not sound authentic. On a similar note, very early on, the following quote appeared in many UK MSM stories:

           “A relative told BBC Russia: ‘From the first day he knew it would end badly, and that he would not be left alone’. ”

           Only problem is that I can’t find the original quote on BBC Russia… and all the MSM used EXACTLY the same words… you might think that they had been ‘given’ the line and they all just faithfully copied it. Obviously it was intended to set the scene for HMG to be able to say “Russia, Russia, Russia!!!”

           The Sun even ran a story with that (pretty much) as its headline:

           ‘HE KNEW IT’D END BADLY’ Russian spy’s family says he knew he was a marked man before Salisbury ‘poisoning’
           https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5735539/russian-spy-sergei-skripal-daughter-cctv-salisbury-poison/

           All complete nonsense! It’s called ‘brainwashing’.

     2. Here is an image of Sergei ‘the spy with the Louis Vuitton bag’:
        https://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/newpix/2018/03/05/20/49E54CEC00000578-0-image-a-21_1520280722692.jpg

        Sergei is on the left and the caption is:
        “In Moscow at the time of his arrest he was mocked as ‘the spy with the Louis Vuitton bag’ after grainy pictures showed him at an airport on route on one meeting with his handlers.”

        Well that is an outright lie! At the time of his arrest, nobody knew about it and it was not until his trial in 2006 that his arrest became known!

        The earliest copy of that image I can find is from 5 March 2018. So who released it and why?

        But please do note the full head of hair and compare with the images at the time of his ‘arrest’ when he had suddenly got much thinner…

        The whole story is here (but it is complete nonsense):
        https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5465365/How-Sergei-Skripal-narrowly-avoided-execution.html

     3. Paul’s new absurd topic, intended to confuse and turn away new readers of this blog.

        1. I wish I could find a way to turn off some of the old readers…

157. Paul says:
     November 9, 2019 at 12:11 pm

     “Dawn has been mischaracterized. She grew up as an ordinary middle-class girl and married Andrew Hope who was an executive at QINETIQ (essentially a private research arm of Porton Down)”.

     If this is correct, there is a (past) connection between Dawn and Porton Down. This puts the matter in a new light.

     1. The point I was trying to make, is that whilst Dawn had fallen on hard times, her early life gives us no reason to believe that she was a complete fool. I do not believe that she would have thought the ridiculous bottle/applicator was ‘normal’.

        https://steemit.com/news/@fortified/qinetiq-or-ex-partner-of-new-novichok-victim-works-for-us-uk-defense-contractor-linked-to-porton-down

        1. Paul,

           You said: “The point I was trying to make, is that whilst Dawn had fallen on hard times, her early life gives us no reason to believe that she was a complete fool. I do not believe that she would have thought the ridiculous bottle/applicator was ‘normal’.”

           I think you are right and I’m not disagreeing with what you say. I’m just adding an additional point.

           1. I have always believed that Dawn was targeted because she knew something about the Skripal poisoning. The author of the steemit article (quoted by Paul) seems to believe the same.

158. From April 2018.

     “Sir Mark said Russian intelligence agencies targeted Yulia Skripal’s email account as early as 2013.

     Mr Johnson said her mobile phone had been hacked.

     He told Marr: “It’s quite extraordinary, in the view of the weight of evidence now – Novichok used in assassination attempts on door handles, the hacking of Yulia Skripal’s mobile phone – to continue to deny the likelihood of Russian involvement, a state-sponsored assassination attempt, I think is quite extraordinary and a sort of blindness to reality that I find very, very perplexing.”

     Two points:

     How did the Uk know Yulia’s phone was hacked in 2013?
     (By hacking it themselves?)

     Boris mentions door handles.
     He has never been a detail man, but the plural is quite a slip.

     1. Small point but Sedwill said Yulia’s email account was hacked and Johnson said her phone was hacked. Did they not have the same script? Why would Sedwill not have mentioned Yulia’s hacked phone, or Johnson the hacked email account… or were they both just making it up?

        1. Maybe her email account was hacked via her phone?

     2. Duncan, Johnson’s use of the “door handles” in the above quote does not mean he referred to them in the plural; just in the abstract. For example, if I say “It is terrible that James would use poison to kill people” does mean that James killed more than one person; he may have only killed one person, and the sentence is describing the action in the abstract.

        1. But more than one door handle is involved: you may have forgotten the door handle in the Handbook for Russian Spies, which provided the inspiration for how PnB could contaminate 47CMR.

           Even if Boris Johnson has a copy of the original Ladybird edition, surely it’s time for this to be reissued and including colour illustrations.

           As for ‘hacking’, I reckon he saw or (more likely) heard the word and was cute enough to realise that the context precluded riding a horse.

        2. Thanks SayLess.

           As the words “attempts” and “door handles” are both in their plural grammatical sense, could you explain the Prime Minister’s meaning?

           Was their a second Novichok attack that Boris knew about before Amesbury?
           Maybe he knew through telepathy that another one would happen in June.

           1. Duncan, I think Johnston’s sentence is simply sloppy English. Because 2 people were the target (the Skripals), he may have sloppily refered to that as “assissination attempts” in the plural. Then the plural got incorrectly applied to the “door handle” as he was speaking. This is a typical grammatical innacuracy that can happen while speaking as opposed to writing.

              He might very well have said “assassination attempts in British cities” when actually referring only to Salisbury. If anyone used this phase, noone would assume there was another city where another assassination took place – it’s a clear case of using plurals in order form an abstraction.

              For example, lets say you bake me one cake with lemon icing, and I say “Oh, I love cakes with lemon icing”. Will you wonder where the other cakes are, because I used cakes in the plural?

              1. Sayless,

                 If I said “I love cakes with lemon icing”, it would probably mean (in my opinion) that I have had a favourable experience with more than one cake.

     3. It’s a short form figure of speech. Easier to say door handles than A door handle.

        1. It doesn’t really matter how many door handles because Rob has clearly demonstrated that the door handle story is fake news.

159. When I do a YouTube search for “Dawn Sturgess” and sort by Upload Date, I only get videos uploaded a year or more ago, and only 28 of them. It’s hard to believe there are not more videos, and that none havd been created in the last 12 months. Is this YouTube cencoring their platform and/or deliberately modifying the search functionality, possibly? We know YouTube did that at the reuqest of the NZ govt in relation to the Christchurch mosque shootings.

160. If only Dawn’s inquest was progressed as quickly and efficiently as May’s decision to expel 23 Russian diplomats.

161. Anybody else have suspicious cars outside your house and being followed? Recently I have started posting replies on twitter regarding the skripal / Steele affair and I’m worried the establishment might think that I’m a Russian agent or something.

     1. After I installed the last version of Firefox, the first time I came here on BlogMire, Firefox sent me a message that it had blocked a site that was trying to track me down. I don’t know if it could be a police site.

        1. Websites can use a technique known as “web tracking” – they do not “track you down”.
           Rob, does this site employ any web tracking?

           1. SayLess said : ”

              Websites can use a technique known as “web tracking” – they do not “track you down”.
              Rob, does this site employ any web tracking?”
              Sorry, I trusted Google translate.

     2. You’re probably being paranoid. The govt./security services won’t actually do anything unless we do something. Just posting stuff online won’t spur them into action.

        1. SayLess said : “You’re probably being paranoid. The govt./security services won’t actually do anything unless we do something. Just posting stuff online won’t spur them into action.”
           I only asked the question. You asked another question.

162. Presumably Charlie is the star witness and will be asked many detailed questions about what happened. Don’t think the met would risk that. It was all going so well until he went off-piste with the cellophane – thick like bacon wrapping, needed cutting with a knife – and completely bugg**** the whole story for the met.

     Presumably Dawn’s doctor will have to give evidence, what medication she was on. Don’t think they’d like it coming out in open court she was on antidepressants and still drinking heavily, including over the weekend in question.

     A death certificate must have been issued – what does that say? I have searched but can only find a Barbara Dean Sturgess, died 2018, Winchester, Hants.

     1. Anon-1

        Since Harold Shipman, UK doctors have been reluctant to sign death certificates.
        This means the UK has one of the highest post mortem examinations rates in the world.
        Basically the doctor wants another doctor to agree that death was natural causes and not some nefarious action by the victim’s medical team.
        I cannot imagine under any circumstances that Dawn’s death certificate was completed.
        This indeed might be an issue that the Wiltshire Coroner is caught up in.
        Why release her body for cremation if no one has determined cause of death?

        This might be the “ruling” that Ridley has to hand down.

        1. “The death cannot be registered until after the inquest, but the coroner can give you an interim death certificate to prove the person is dead.”
           https://www.gov.uk/after-a-death/when-a-death-is-reported-to-a-coroner

           Once the death is registered, the final death certificate will be issued.

     2. One problem for the inquest is going to be that the official narrative has Keith Mills of WAA as the paramedic who attended Dawn on the Saturday morning. His car was gift-wrapped and taken away a few days later:

        https://www.metro.news/novichok-victim-wakes-from-coma-as-police-seize-car/1137988/

        Awkwardly, the picture of the paramedics loading Dawn into the ambulance does not include Keith Mills and we are not allowed to know how many ambulances attended Dawn and where they came from… because that information is a national security secret.

        So who will be the witness at the inquest?

163. The non released Press Release

     As mentioned.
     Dated October 7th
     Created in Outlook October 15th
     Referencing an event due to be held October 18th.
     Released to the media November 6th

     PRESS RELEASE

     In the Wiltshire & Swindon Coroner’s Court
     Inquest touching upon the death of Dawn Kelly STURGESS

     Pre-Inquest Review listed for 10.00 am 18th October 2019

     The Senior Coroner having received submissions on the subject of the scope of the Inquest is of the view that the submissions raise complex legal argument in respect of which the Senior Coroner needs to give appropriate and careful consideration to before handing down a written ruling. This will not be achieved by the 18th October 2019 and as a consequence the Senior Coroner has decided to adjourn the Pre-Inquest Review with the intention of listing an adjourned Pre-Inquest Review hearing date in either December 2019 or January 2020.

     Dated 07 October 2019

     1. Thanks man.
        I never doubted you but needed to see it for myself.
        Jesus, this is being kept as quiet as they possibly can, isn’t it?

     2. Thank you, Duncan, and thanks too to Rob for including the text as a blog update.

        Please keep updating!

        I wonder what info the SJ received, to print that the Pre-Inquest Review will be held at the Salisbury Law Courts? Asked rhetorically, of course, and begging the question whether some, on the day and whenever that day is, might go to the wrong court.

        Dawn’s inquest, like Brexit, seems destined for the 12th of Never.

164. The clean up.

     https://www.chemistryworld.com/news/gargantuan-clean-up-effort-after-novichok-nerve-agent-poisoning-laid-bare/4010606.article

     Coincidentally,a Salisbury based scientist.
     The writer seems unaware that the City Hotel clean up was surprisingly efficient and ungargantuan. (new word)
     Some new pictures in this piece, some comments too, which I am mulling over.

     1. This image is interesting:
        https://d2cbg94ubxgsnp.cloudfront.net/Pictures/780xany/6/7/6/501676_rimg0202__applying_a_layer_of_chemical_agent_resistant_material_carm_packaging_to_facilitate_disposal_582666.jpg

        It is taken in the car park of The Mill, immediately in front of the area that was the final cordon.

        Here is a picture taken one year ago today from (almost exactly) the same spot, showing the final cordon – I believe that the cordon was removed the following day:
        https://anonfiles.com/b311mcA9ne/photo_2018-11-08_23-00-00_jpg

        On the extreme middle-right of my image, you can see the corner of the roof which is part of the building on the right of the image from the article.

        According to a plan I have of The Mill, that building is an electricity sub-station.

        If that package came from inside The Mill, there were only 2 ways to get it there: through a small service door in the kitchen and then across the yard; or, through the passage way beside The Mill and then straight across the key area… and the gate to the passage is shut.

        Here is an image of where they were from 20 April, 2018. Outside the door on the left:
        https://anonfiles.com/yc61meAfnc/20_April_5_png

     2. They put a lot of effort into cleaning up non-existent Novichok.

     3. Isn’t the DSTL senior decontamination chemist contradicting himself here?
        “‘In this particular case, we’re talking about an organophosphate that will hydrolyse with relative ease’ says Govan.”
        but
        “Testing in Dstl research labs found that no commercially-available chemical hydrolysis formulation was suitable for this clean-up , explains Govan. Instead, throughout the clean-up, the scientists were testing and then optimising formulations (…)”

        So the Novichok ‘will hydrolyse with relative ease’ but for some reason, not by using anything commercially available. It’s only possible with specially-concocted formulas from DSTL. In that case, it’s not really “with relative ease” as the same senior chemist said before that.

        That’s a bit like how the Novichok was described last year. On the one hand it was “persistent and resistant to weather conditions” (according to OPCW), but it could still be removed with baby wipes or with detergent in a washing machine (according to PHE).

        1. Brendan,

           You said: “That’s a bit like how the Novichok was described last year. On the one hand it was ‘persistent and resistant to weather conditions’ (according to OPCW), but it could still be removed with baby wipes or with detergent in a washing machine (according to PHE).”

           It almost seems like it’s two different substances that they were talking about, doesn’t it? Let’s just say that the public pronouncements about the substance being deadly enough to kill thousands, along with the OPCW’s statement that it was “high purity, persistent and resistant to weather conditions” sound like one substance – a nerve agent – which is what they said it was. Whereas the symptoms of the Skripals and DS Bailey, plus the advice given to the public about how to deal with it (including baby wipes), sound like another substance entirely – an incapacitant, like 3-Quinuclidinyl Benzilate (which fits all the symptoms described by various witnesses at the bench):

           https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/neuroscience/3-quinuclidinyl-benzilate

           Let’s call the nerve agent Substance A, and the incapacitant Substance B.

           So why is it that what actually happened looks very much like it was done with Substance B (incapacitant), yet the authorities talked about it as if it were Substance A (a nerve agent)? But why is it that although they talked about it as being Substance A, the actual advice issued to the public (baby wipes) was something that could only have been applicable if it was really Substance B that was used?

           My latest highly speculative theory, for which I have zero evidence – only that it does start to explain quite a lot – is that something was planned for that day using Substance A, and yet it was sabotaged by someone who caught wind of the scheme, and who managed to swap it for Substance B. There’s a lot more to it than that, but let’s just sum it up in one line: It was The Wrong Substance.

           1. Rob, Isn’t it more likely that they always planned to use Substance B but pretend that it was Substance A to frame Russia?

              Was the whole clean up, car destruction, table incineration, pavers torn up, and roof/window replacement, clothes collected and burned, simply to stop anyone finding evidence that Substance B was really used, not Substance A?

              If anyone was to find any trace of Substance B at anyone of the locations, then their whole hoax would be exposed, with all the political ramifications of that.

              They knew no one was in danger from what they used, Substance B, so the PHE advice to the pubic was in fact correct. They were trying not to cause public panic while at the same time maintaining the hoax that it was ‘Bad Russia’ Substance A.

              1. From what you imply, Rob and Denise, it seems (to me) that TPTB are suffering from the effects of an inconsistent dissemination of the message that was supposed to be passed on by those with a public voice. That or those who were chosen to pass it on were either poorly briefed or unable/incapable/resistant to passing on the party line.

              2. I don’t think so Denise, for a number of reasons.

                 1. The effects of an incapacitant (BZ for instance) simply don’t look like the effects of a nerve agent. And since there was the possibility of witnesses around the bench testifying to what they saw (which did in fact happen) there was always the possibility that real experts would step forward to say, “That ain’t no nerve agent” — or something more technical than that.

                 2. The fact that Substance B was never going to kill the Skripals, whereas we all know that Substance A would have done, just makes them look stupid, and it is why there was an enormous amount of public scepticism about what they were saying.

                 3. The reaction of the authorities in the immediate aftermath suggests a huge amount of confusion and panic on their part. Whatever was supposed to happen went wrong.

                 What I suggest went wrong is that the substance was switched. That someone caught wind of the plot, and that a team of Russians, including P&B, were sent to Salisbury to swap Substance A for B. And by the way, if you follow through this possibility, it then begins to explain how and why a sealed bottle could have turned up in Amesbury weeks later.

                 1. Interesting idea but what if Substance B was the intended substance and Substance A was not thought about until later.

                    If the original plan had been to ‘attack’ the (real) Skripals, to make them vanish as part of a narrative, Substance B would have been fine. That plan went wrong because the Skripals had already gone… so HMG decided to invent a new narrative and rolled out an existing Integrity Initiative plan to have a coordinated kicking out of Russian diplomats around the world. At that point Substance A enters the picture and all the ‘evidence’ is tampered with. The ‘known facts’ of 4 March are merged into a larger narrative – that the rest of the world does not believe.

                    I have real problems believing any part of the perfume bottle story, it just makes no sense. It was not a ‘perfume bottle’ that the police found on Charlie’s kitchen counter (10 days late), it was a ridiculous contraption with a ludicrous nozzle! I do not think it is remotely credible that even the most cursory search of Charlie’s flat would not have focused on it.

                    Ten days after Dawn’s death, 2 things happened: the police said they had found a perfume bottle and Charlie woke from his ‘coma’ (that never was). It was another 2 months before we saw a picture of the bottle… plenty of time for the Met to fabricate it.

                    Do we really think Dawn was so clueless that she would have used the bottle we have been shown? I don’t.

                    1. A brief history of the “perfume bottle”….

                       6 July – Police say they are looking for a syringe or vial

                       13 July – Police statement: “On Wednesday 11 July, a “small bottle” was recovered…”
                       https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/jul/13/novichok-that-killed-woman-came-from-bottle-police-believe

                       15 July –“The nerve agent that poisoned two people in Amesbury was contained in a perfume bottle, the brother of one of the victims has said.” Police refused to confirm.
                       https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-44839805

                       15 July – “The TAV team deployed to the United Kingdom from 15 July to 18 July 2018 to collect biomedical samples …” – but not the bottle!
                       http://beta.opcw.org/sites/default/files/documents/2018/09/s-1671-2018%28e%29.pdf

                       24 July – Charlie Rowley interview – describes bottle (including “cellophane”) but does not mention brand.
                       https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFaGuqHb7f4

                       13 August – OPCW returns “…to obtain an additional environmental sample.“

                       5 September – Met statement disclosing brand and including images.

                       November 2018 – Panorama! Ridiculous white plastic copy of the counterfeit bottle is revealed! (Embarrassingly ludicrous!)

                       Why would the police not have given as much information as possible on 13 July about the bottle? Why did they wait almost 2 months to tell people what to look for and then ask for help? How did they know there were no more “perfume bottles” waiting to be found for all this time? Am I the only one to think it is complete nonsense? Can nobody else hear the buttock-clenching of the police as their lies dribble out?

                       Dawn has been mischaracterized. She grew up as an ordinary middle-class girl and married Andrew Hope who was an executive at QINETIQ (essentially a private research arm of Porton Down). She went off the rails with post natal depression but she was not thick! How many wives of QINETIQ executives would have looked at that bottle and thought “I’ll give it a try”? I think the idea is completely fanciful.

                    2. Paul: “… the Skripals had already gone…”

                       Paul’s routine absurdity.

                       1. Ah, welcome back Milda. Glad to see you have wrestled free from your straight jacket and have come back here to comment…

                 2. Rob, the authorities’ response to the Skripal incident did indeed look unplanned and confused. But that is not necessarily a sign that something had gone wrong in the operation.

                    It could be that the need to ‘disappear’ Sergei and maybe Yulia too) was so urgent that there was no time to construct a narrative beforehand. That could be left until later if the only priority was to stop the Skripals from saying or doing something that was considered extremely dangerous. Maybe Sergei was about to move back to Russia or maybe he was about to reveal something about the Steele dossier, who knows?

                    P&B might have visited Salisbury to help the Skripals put the final touches to their plans. An alternative possibility is that P&B were lured there to provide just enough circumstantial evidence that Russia (and not any Western agency) was guilty. Either way, the details of P&B’s alleged attack could be made up later and should not hinder the operation to stop the Skripals.

                    The extremely secretive nature of the operation might also explain why the authorities had so much trouble constructing a believable narrative. It was so sensitive that very few people were briefed about it, and even senior people could not be trusted enough. The scriptwriters therefore had to start with a blank sheet when they wrote what became the door handle story weeks later.

                    1. Having said that, I think that you could be onto something about the connection to the Amesbury incident. The perfume bottle story is so unbelievable that there must be some reason why the Met presented it as fact. There could be some real connection to the Skripal incident in March, but not in the way that we’ve been told.

                       As I said above about the Skripal incident, the Met had to present some explanation for that, and the door handle story was the best they could come up with. That story was unbelievable, actually impossible, but it’s good enough when the mass media doesn’t question it.

                       But there does not appear to be any motive for making up the official story of what happened in Amesbury months later. If some powerful people wanted to fabricate a connection with the Skripal case, they had months to prepare it and could have done a much better job than the perfume bottle story.

                       1. Brendan, I think they did have a better story but Dawn was going to be the one telling the story and when she died the story died with her.

                          I believe that Dawn was in on the plan for Amesbury and met with MI5 in her room around 2pm on the Friday afternoon (which is when the radio/phone was left behind). She was not supposed to die on Saturday morning. When she ‘recovered’ she was going to tell how she had found [something] and THAT was going to link Amesbury to Salisbury. Charlie was probably not aware of the plan and although they tried to get Charlie to tell a story, it wasn’t good enough… the one Dawn would have told would have been much better.

                          Charlie can’t remember where he found the bottle because in the version Dawn was going to tell, she was the one who had found it [probably somewhere in QEG]. There was no need to involve Charlie in that story, Dawn would have done it on her own.

                 3. I see it differently Rob. I believe that the Skripals poisoning was a false flag operation. Presumably, the organizers of the operation were a group within a special service agency or with connections with such an agency. The idea was to frame Russia. The dichotomy between Substance A and Substance B was preplanned (as I see it). It would be prohibitively risky to use a real nerve agent, as there could be many fatalities. Thus, the organizers chose an incapacitant to poison the Skripals but annouced it to have been Novichok.

           2. Substance A/B?

              I’m in the ‘there was neither’ club.

              We still haven’t seen any of the HD CCTV footage covering central Salisbury 4th March 2018 between 3 and 4.30 which should have picked up the whole chain-of-events.

              Once we see that footage we can make a much more educated guess.

              Do you think we’ll ever see that footage?

           3. Rob, the information available on the incident is limited but it does suggest that Substance B (incapacitant) was used on 4 March and that there was no Substance A (nerve agent) until it was introduced days or even weeks later.

              However, that doesn’t mean that PHE’s advice on dealing with the (non-existent) nerve agent was scientifically incorrect. After days of exposure to mild, damp and sunny weather, Novichok (if it had existed) would have been so degraded that any residual quantities could be safely finished off by wiping or washing with the use of basic houshold cleaning agents.

              I’m no chemist myself, but a number of experts have said that organophosphates hydrolyse (get broken down by water) easily. Even the DSTL senior scientist, Govan said that about the Salisbury “nerve agent”.

              That’s why it was originally assumed that Sergei’s door handle was smeared with Novichok mixed into a gel, which would protect it from exposure to humidity. But later it was reported that it was in liquid form and that it dripped from the door handle.

              It’s therefore very unlikely that there is any nerve agent that is “persistent and resistant to weather conditions”. It’s most likely that this description of Novichok A-234 was simply invented by the OPCW – as a way of explaining how the substance was detected after two weeks of exposure to the elements.

              They didn’t back it up with any scientific data, so it’s probably only based on the idea that “Well, it still had high purity after two weeks on the front door, so it must be persistent and resistant to weather conditions.” It looks like the OPCW was inventing the scientific ‘facts’ to match the official narrative.

165. eleanor,

     Quote from November 5, 2019 at 1:34 pm

     “One contribution here, that I’d long forgotten, was to the effect that a (police) vehicle in an unmarked fleet pool may have replacement registration number allocated to avoid public identification.

     “On this assumption, a pool of around 250 unmarked vehicles may use some identifier system other than the DVLC vehicle registration number, such as an internal fleet number and/or a VIN numbering system being used. That said, there are/were around 250 police vehicles potentially on the roads of Wiltshire in June this year, that weren’t obvious police cars”.

     So some of them were probably keeping an eye on the Novihoax drama and they probably have dashcams.

166. There is TV show on in the UK at the moment about fare dodgers on London Transport.
     They have cameras everywhere and can track users station to station, stop to stop, and their Oyster card use
     But not one photo of The Russians in London?
     As I said before you don’t travel 3 years running to kill someone.
     I think they were dodgy couriers hired by British Intelligence as patsies if and when needed.

167. Fellow Blogmirers.

     John Helmer seems to have caught the coroner’s office in a pincer movement.
     The “communications” team in Wiltshire, (I use the word in its loosest sense) seem to have forgotten their earlier fabrications and failed to realise that when in a hole the shovel is not the implement of choice.

     http://johnhelmer.net/skripal-sturgess-case-coroner-backs-down-new-inquest-hearing-announced-for-next-february-no-new-police-evidence-acknowledged/

     1. johnhelmer.net is down – the article can be found here:
        https://www.therussophile.org/skripal-sturgess-case-coroner-backs-down-new-inquest-hearing-announced-for-next-february-no-new-police-evidence-acknowledged.html/

        Also:
        https://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/news/18018275.pre-inquest-review-death-dawn-sturgess-set-new-year/

        1. Looks like Mossad is busy suppressing the story

        2. “complex legal argument in respect of which the Senior Coroner needs to give appropriate and careful consideration to before handing down a written ruling”.

           Might this “complex legal argument” be that Dawn was not poisoned by Novichok? We’ll never know because her body was cremated to destroy the forensic evidence.

           1. Is there any precedent for the body of a murder victim being cremated before there has been a trial? If I were defending the accused, I would ask for a second post-mortem. This would be impossible so the case would collapse.

              1. The Coroner decided when to release the body.

                 “if an inquest is to be held, then the death cannot be registered until the Coroner’s investigation has been completed. In these circumstances funeral arrangements should not be finalised until the Coroner has authorised the release of the body for burial or cremation.”
                 https://www.nidirect.gov.uk/articles/coroners-post-mortems-and-inquests

                 1. Paul,

                    Did you mean to give us the Northern Ireland page? The GB one is here:

                    https://www.gov.uk/after-a-death/when-a-death-is-reported-to-a-coroner

                    1. Quote: “You cannot register the death until after the inquest”.

                       But can you legally cremate the body before the inquest? Nobody seems to know.

                       I expect that tissue samples from the post-mortem have been preserved, so these could be re-tested. However, this is hardly a substitute for a second post-mortem.

                       1. “But can you legally cremate the body before the inquest? Nobody seems to know.”

                          It’s already in the public domain, including here, that the inquest has already been opened and adjourned. Are you suggesting that the body can’t be released until the inquest is complete? That’s obviously not correct.

                          Indeed, it occurs to me that sometimes inquests are opened and then adjourned as a mechanism to allow the body to be released for burial or cremation.

                    2. My apologies! I hadn’t noticed in was NI – TBH I would expect the rules to be the same throughout the UK though.

                       Here is what ‘Which’ says about it:

                       “In about one in ten deaths, the coroner will hold an inquest into a person’s death…

                       The coroner must release the body for burial or cremation as soon as possible. If they have finished their examination, the body should be released before the inquest. If the coroner can’t release the body within 28 days, then they must notify the known next of kin or personal representative of the reasons for the delay.”
                       https://www.which.co.uk/later-life-care/end-of-life/what-to-do-when-someone-dies/coroners-and-post-mortem-examinations-aus6y7k2hxvd

                       There is a duty on the coroner to release the body as quickly as possible. If the coroner decides he has finished all the examinations he requires, there is no prohibition on the body being cremated.

                       I think you are wrong to say that ‘nobody knows if it is legal to cremate a body before an inquest’ – it is legal but it is entirely up to the coroner.

        3. The SJ reckons that the Pre-Inquest Review will take place at at the Law Courts in Wilton Road, rather than at the Coroner’s Court in Endless Street. I wonder what has caused the venue to be changed, if and when the PIR does take place.

           BTW I understand one of the advantages of there being a public inquiry rather than, or as well as, an inquest is that the coroner can make all or part of the the procedure a hearing in private, for ‘security’ reasons.

           Sorry, Duncan, is there any way you can link the press release please? Ta very much – and I hope you don’t miss this, as the reply is to Paul’s link for what’s in the SJ.

     2. Blogmirers.
        The press release which was only released yesterday is dated October 7th.
        It is an Outlook Word doc that was created on October 15th.
        Local media in Wiltshire received it (for the first and only time) yesterday, November 6th.
        The press release of course refers to the postponed Pre Inquest Request into the death of Dawn Sturgess which was scheduled on October 18th.
        Be clear on this.
        Wiltshire Council issued a press release ( for some reason on behalf of the coroner’s office) on November 6th, letting the media know that an event on October 18th was not going to take place.

        1. But John Helmer says that the press release from October – which originally went astray – mentioned December or January, not February. He says this about a comment about the coroner from the head of Wiltshire Council press office:

           “She now claims that Ridley issued a press release through the Metropolitan Police, announcing that he was postponing the hearing from October 18 to a date in December or January.”

           I can’t help thinking that all this confusion about the details is deliberate, in order to distract people’s attention away from the facts of the Amesbury incident.

        2. I expect you don’t have an answer but why would the local county council be issuing press releases on behalf of the Coroner? Can’t he do it himself? He is supposed to be independent after all!

           It would also appear that the Coroner’s office was lying when they said the release had been sent to the Met… I can think of no good reason why the Coroner would lie over such a matter (I can think of plenty of bad reasons why he would lie though…). If he reads Theblogmire, I wonder if he would like to comment?

           Not a good start to Dawn’s inquest is it?

168. More on Integrity Initiative:

     https://www.moonofalabama.org/2019/11/british-government-disinformation-shop-lost-charity-status-continues-in-new-format.html#more

     https://sputniknews.com/military/201907041076147867-open-information-partnership-integrity-initiative/

     https://www.openinformationpartnership.org/

     1. One of the partners of the Open Information Partnership is Zinc Network, company number 11259840. Zinc Network applied to be struck off the register on 2 November 2019. I wonder why.

        https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/11259840/filing-history

169. New Date.
     Dawn’s Pre Inquest Review has been rescheduled for February 18th.

     1. Could we have a source please?

        1. The Coroner’s office informed me by email.

           1. Duncan,
              Could you post a screen shot of the email (with anything sensitive blurred out)?
              There’s still nothing from MSM about the 18th Oct inquest being binned let alone another
              inquest being scheduled.

              1. Scooby,
                 Trust me.
                 The email exists, I sent it to Rob.

                 1. Cheers Duncan.
                    Rob, is there any reason that the email hasn’t been redacted and posted?
                    There’s still nothing from any media about the inquest being conveniently postponed for the 4th time let alone any further information such as a date for the next postponement.
                    The Amesbury deception has proved to be a bit harder to arrange and organise or they would have white-washed it by now.

                 2. I can confirm that what Duncan is saying is correct. The coroner’s office did confirm to him by email that a new date for the Pre-Inquest Review has been set for 18th February 2020.

                    The cynic in me fully expects that will be adjourned too, but you never know.

                    Rob

           2. Thanks Duncan.

     2. It’s a bit like Achilles and the Tortoise, isn’t it?

        The closer we get, the further away it seems to be.

170. Inquiry Report: The Institute for Statecraft:

     https://www.oscr.org.uk/news/inquiry-report-the-institute-for-statecraft/

     1. From the OSCR report:

        “the charity has ceased to undertake any activity related to the Integrity Initiative, and this is now undertaken by a non-charitable entity having no legal connection to the charity”.

        So, what is the name of this non-charitable entity?

171. Back on topic.

     https://www.radiotimes.com/news/tv/2019-11-04/when-is-the-bbcs-salisbury-novichok-poisoning-drama-on-tv/

     It seems quite incredible that the first picture is of the two suspects.
     What would a QC make of this?
     My clients have a right to a fair trial, not judged and convicted by the media.

172. A bit off topic, but it seems that Jonathan Steele expressed doubts at the BBC about the credibility of OPCW :
     https://consortiumnews.com/2019/10/30/second-whistleblower-emerges-from-investigation-into-douma-chemical-attack/

173. https://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/defence-committee/inquiries/parliament-2017/uk-response-hybrid-threats-17-19/

     Stumbled upon this

     1. Frightening !
        I understand that all this is allready in full swing and I call it disinformation campaigns.
        From the link :
        The UK’s strategy for defending against hybrid threats is impressive but the operational level requires more effort.
        The UK could:
        a)      Create multi-disciplinary teams across the public and private sectors to direct counter-hybrid campaigns on operations.
        b)      Teach counter-hybrid activities on military and civilian staff courses at all levels.
        c)      Run counter-hybrid exercises routinely to develop experience, not just doctrine.
        d)      Involve regional and local authorities in exercises more fully.
        e)      Build public-private partnerships to address propaganda akin to those in cybersecurity.
        f)        Make a stronger investment in information services, especially the BBC World Service.
        g)      Political and media advice as well as military training should be offered to allies.
        h)      Consider regulating information standards more closely.
        i)        Consider reforming electoral law.
        Meanwhile, the UK has historically employed a combination of hybrid means such as NGOs, government funded non-government organisations, media, education, academic religious groups, non-state actors, law-fare, economic leverages and economic sanctions in an effective way.

     2. Something to remember: The biggest strategic threat to any government is the populace it governs.

174. So many trolls on here wasting there time yet nobody can answer what purpose Petrov and Borishov played in Salisbury. Putin is a man of principle and he would have never stated on Live TV that they are two private citizens especially if they were doing government work. So either they were involved in unofficial dodgy business and that’s why Putin shamed them by pressuring them to have a TV interview or I can’t see any other plausible explanation.

     1. IF, Anonymous London, you search a long way back in these threads about the Skripal affair, you will find that many possible scenarios were explored regarding the exploits of B & P, including drug related delivery activities (to local gyms). No part of the official explanation explains what their purpose in visiting Salisbury might have been – there is simply too little evidence to implicate them in any of the official scenarios. The lasting impression is that they chose those two as part of the overall theatre because it would sow even more confusion as to what was going on that day.

        1. BUT it’s still too big of a coincidence that they apparently worked for GRU. As much as I don’t approve of their agenda; i think the information they uncovered to suggest they are, at least former, GRU Officer is pretty convincing.

           Being OCD I have actually Read all the comments from all the Skripal related posts.

           I assumed people here had inside information otherwise it’s pointless guessing.

           Not sure why some MI6/CIA whistleblowers can’t give us something to work with. Or perhaps they have.

           1. If memory serves me correctly, the source that linked Ruslan Boshirov and Alexander Petrov to GRU was Eliot Higgins / Bellingcat. Bellingcat claims to work with open-source material but AFAIK it has never explained how it managed to find information from Russian-language databases that links the two men to Anatoly Chepiga and Alexander Myshkin respectively.

              A possibility is that these databases were hacked by someone who knew what to look for and who then gave the information to Bellingcat. Bellingcat is not exactly synonymous with proper research and fact-finding.

              https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2018/09/boshirov-is-probably-not-chepiga-but-he-is-also-not-boshirov/

              https://twitter.com/elenaevdokimov7/status/1045128892971794432

     2. Please do not insult the other commentators. We are all reduced to guessing and I do not think you brought anything as interesting as the best commentators.

        1. I spoke to Anonymous London, of course, not to Casacadian.

     3. Back when I was commuting to and working in London I was aware of the presence of a company famed for its association with the auditing of various large companies – Anderson Consulting was the name IIRC – but then there was a massive scandal regarding creative accounting which Anderson’s got caught with. Destined to have a serious impact on their business and reputation Anderson’s took the only reasonable course of action – they changed their name and thus the Brand, they became Accenture with a whole new bevy of marketing to generate smoke and obscure their previous association with themselves.

        So, I must ask: Who is Anonymous London? Milda perhaps?

        1. haha! I’m harmless, I just like a good conspiracy so I apologies if my manner comes across as a bit terse sometimes. I’m just very impatient and annoyed when I can’t get to the bottom of something. I once even thought about travelling to the GRU headquarters for them to tell me, off the record, what really happen in Salisbury (I’m sure they know). But now I’m thinking that’s not the best idea.

     4. Anon London,

        In my theory, which I have postulated a couple of times, I believe that Putin simply asked the GRU to send a couple of chaps over to the UK to be there when Yulia told Sergie about her intended marriage AND more more importantly that Putin had agreed that Sergei could safely return to Russia for the ceremony and stay later if he wanted.
        I can’t see anyone lower that the office of Putin who would be allowed to extend this offer to Sergei.
        Rus and Alex were to be there as observers, and no doubt it would be suspected that the UK spooks would be concerned if Sergei returned to Moscow.
        Perhaps the UK would not want the “victory” that Russia may claim diplomatically that their swapped spy wanted home.

175. We talk a lot about the scene at the bench.
     To be better informed, I created a draft of the vehicle locations at the bench shortly after the ambulances have left :
     https://ibb.co/5vsY2wk

     Important to know :
     ALL VEHICLES AT THE SCENE HAD TO BE WASTED !
     NONE of the vehicles at Sergei´s home was taken out of service !!!

     Now everyone can decide for themselves where he suspects Ground Zero.

     1. Presumably any contamination of these vehicles came from the hands and feet of emergency service workers. It is strange that the vehicles were so contaminated that they had to be destroyed but the people (with the exception of DSB) were so uncontaminated that they did not require hospital treatment.

        1. Is it possible that DSB’s job was to go round contaminating police cars in order to stoke up the panic?

           1. Blunderbuss, I think you may be on to something with this suggestion.

              Did he have a chemical to plant on the door handles of Sergei’s car and parking ticket machine? Was Nick at the party in Zizzi’s and contaminated the table there? He was said to have searched Sergei’s house which was later rebuilt because it was contaminated. Did he spill some on himself and then contaminated several police cars? Did Nick loose one of the bottles of chemical somewhere? Was he responsible for the whole hoax needing to be hastily rewritten?

              1. Did Nick contaminate his own house when he went home that night and did HMG have to buy it and decontaminate it and move his family elsewhere?

                 Planting the chemical on Sergei’s car door handles could have been a key part of the frame Russia hoax? Not necessarily to stir up public panic but that would have been a desirable side effect of it, for them too?

                 1. Denise,

                    This is interesting. There was no contamination at Zizzi’s at the time Sergei left but the contamination appeared later. Was this because:

                    a) The contamination was brought in accidentally by the partying police?

                    b) The contamination was put there deliberately to prop up the “Novichok on the door handle of Sergei’s house” story?

     2. Very informative, Liane.
        Ambulance van at position 4 is WD64 LFP , but it’s possibly V, not W at the start.
        https://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/resources/images/7485578/
        https://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/resources/images/7485585/

        My guess for the other Ambulance at 2 is WD15 DNU but that’s almost certainly partly incorrect.
        https://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/resources/images/7485618/

        Images are from the slide show in https://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/news/16064166.two-in-hospital-after-medical-emergency-at-maltings-in-salisbury/

        1. WD64LFP
           SKODA OCTAVIA
           Check another vehicle

           Colour
           Silver
           Fuel type
           Diesel
           Date registered
           29 January 2015
           MOT expired on
           28 January 2019

           The plate beginning with a V is not on MOT system

     3. This is most interesting Liane. This might be a bit of a big ask, but you don’t know when it was that these vehicles were taken out of service and destroyed, do you? I would be interested to know if they were done at roughly the same time, or at various times, and how long after March 4th.

        Also, you say that none of the vehicles at Sergei’s home was taken out of service. What about DS Bailey’s, which he presumably went there on the night of 4th March. Do you know what happened to that?

        Thanks,

        Rob

        1. Source: FOI request to Wiltshire Police
           Reply dated: 3rd July 2019
           Ref: FOI 2019 / 597

           The date in the last column is described as “sale date”. I assume this means the vehicle was sold to a scrap merchant.

           * WX64EBF FORD RANGER MARKED 4X4 16/08/2018
           * KJ15AAX VAUXHALL ASTRA RESPONSE VEHICLE 31/07/2018
           * KO15GMV VAUXHALL ASTRA RESPONSE VEHICLE 01/08/2018

        2. Rob, we still don´t know which car was Bailey´s.
           But the police car KN67 JYZ, that was parked at the emergency entrance of SDH was cordoned off on March 5 and later transported to Porton Down.

           Ford Astra Number 219, licence plate KJ15 AAX + Ford Ranger Pick Up Number 442, WX64 EBF Number 442 + Police car RJ62 NYU were removed on March 11 from Bourne Hill Police Station along with several private cars.
           Police car RJ62 NYU most likely is the car seen on Jenny´s Restaurant CCTV.
           I guess that the personal in this car set up the cordons.

           I checked the date with the answer to the FOIA request Blunderbuss mentioned.
           All police cars seen at Skripal´s house are still in service.

           1. Many thanks for this information Blunderbuss and Liane.

              Rob

           2. “All police cars seen at Skripal´s house are still in service”.

              Which implies that there was no contamination at Skripal’s house.

              1. Baby wipes, Blunderbuss, baby wipes – all the vehicles succumbed to a thorough-but-gentle and fragrant wipe down. How could you have forgotten this innocent antidote to imaginary Novichok?

                 1. Will we still be able to get baby wipes after breakfast, I mean Brexit?

     4. We know that many people were in the area of the bench on 4/5 March; Rebecca Hudson and Tom Belk to name but two (were they tested at SDH?). There were also several police and ambulance crew members there. Worse still. Freya and Olli were there within minutes of (? whatever) but NONE of them were caused the slightest difficulty… one wonders how much (? whatever) Freya took home on her shoes…

        This leaves us with 2 options:
        1) the bench was ‘ground zero’ but the police were negligent in not ensuring everyone who was exposed was properly tested; or
        2) it was all a hoax and the vehicles were destroyed in furtherance of a narrative.

        It is not possible to reconcile the need to destroy the vehicles that were there, with the lack of concern for the people who had also been there.

     5. Other than marks on pieces of paper, or entries in some digital medium, is there any physical and reliable evidence available which documents what actually happened to the (allegedly) destroyed vehicles?

        It seems to me that all the ‘evidence’ we have is at best second and possibly third hand and very possibly of dubious provenance.

        I’m fairly sure that The White Helmets weren’t involved in their disposal, but it might be worth someone’s while to do some checking on the vehicles which turn up in the middle hot spots.

        1. ‘middle’ could be anywhere. I mean ‘middle east’.

     6. Interestingly, according to this FOI request, only one of the two Ford Rangers that attended the bench incident, is shown as having been disposed of:

        https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/fleet_request_59#incoming-1391589

        In theory at least, one would expect every police vehicle permanently withdrawn due to the Novichok incident (at several locations) ought to appear on this list, but I don’t think they are. At any rate, all vehicles decommissioned (‘Date of sale’) between, say, the period 5 March to end 2018 might be considered eligible for such classification.

        For those who aren’t inclined to do the counting, a total of 885 vehicles are included in this filtered list; it’s unclear what has been filtered in, or filtered out, and why. Of these 885, only 639 have vehicle registration numbers listed (on a list compiled during June 2019).

        Similar information might be available elsewhere about the fleets for the other Wiltshire emergency services.

        1. I assume the vehicles whose registration numbers are not listed are unmarked police vehicles. The police would not want the villains to know these numbers.

           1. That makes sense, Blunderbuss, but if it’s true then Wiltshire police seem to run a fleet of around 250 unmarked vehicles.

              If this pattern is repeated throughout the country, then no-one need complain that there’s never a police person in sight (except there probably is, and you don’t realise it; and they’re jobsworthing around on other specific tasks that aren’t frontline policing).

              1. Afterthought:

                 One contribution here, that I’d long forgotten, was to the effect that a (police) vehicle in an unmarked fleet pool may have replacement registration number allocated to avoid public identification.

                 On this assumption, a pool of around 250 unmarked vehicles may use some identifier system other than the DVLC vehicle registration number, such as an internal fleet number and/or a VIN numbering system being used. That said, there are/were around 250 police vehicles potentially on the roads of Wiltshire in June this year, that weren’t obvious police cars.

     7. Somebody made a FOI request to SWASFT, asking for details of its ambulance vehicle fleet. Unlike Wiltshire Police, SWASFT did not release registration numbers but did give a list of vehicle models for each ambulance station.
        https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/fleet_list_2033
        [download spreadsheet] https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/569825/response/1370046/attach/4/FOI%203066.xlsx

        Reg numbers are not really needed here, because the interesting fact is that in May 2019 Salisbury Amb Stn had no Skoda Octavia – which is the model of the two vans photographed in the Maltings in the late afternoon of 4 March 2018. Neither did Amesbury Amb Stn, which had to be shut down for about a year after responding to the Maltings incident.

        This supports Liane’s finding that all vehicles at the bench scene were scrapped.

        1. “This supports Liane’s finding that all vehicles at the bench scene were scrapped.”

           Yeh but no – then the FOI request to Wiltshire Police, made in June this year, ought to have either all or none of the Novichok-scrapped vehicles. Whereas only one of the two Ford Rangers present in The Maltings on 4 March is showing as decommissioned.

           My quibble is of concern that the content of FOI answers may not be reliable (knew that, guv, honest) but it’s not unreasonable to expect internal consistency within a single document. However I do have sympathy for the individual tasked with compiling the fleet list, as it was a concatenation of data from disparate sources (this isn’t obvious in the pdf file).

           However and for those who are curious about such things, Wiltshire Police acquired six 4×4 marked Ford Rangers, all of which came into operational use in February 2015:

           WX64EAF
           WX64EAG
           WX64EAJ
           WX64EAK
           WX64EBD
           WX64EBF (decommissioned 16 Aug 2018)

           WX68GYV was brought into operational use in February 2019, so it’s a possible replacement for WX64EBF.

           This FOI request seems to have been made for reasons not to do with Salisbury or Novichok, so it has proved an interesting resource.

        2. Was there really a second Ford Ranger in the Maltings on 4 March (at position 5 in Liane’s graphic)? I can’t see one in any image from that day, only from the days after.

176. For those who are interested in his career, I see that the report into alleged Russian meddling in the 2016 EU Referendum contains “evidence” submitted by none other than Christopher Steele:

     https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/nov/01/trump-russia-dossier-author-gave-evidence-to-uk-intrusion-inquiry

     That this serial fraudster is still taken seriously after his role in concocting a dossier full of salacious gossip, which has done more to poison the atmosphere in the US than just about anything I can think of, is beyond my comprehension. But there it is.

     1. I believe Dominic Grieve is a committed Remainer so he might want to push the idea that the Brexit referendum was fixed by the Russians.

     2. Even the UK’s National Security Advisor rubbished Steele’s dossier as long ago as early 2017. That has been reported for a while, and was stated last month as part of a legal motion by Mike Flynn’s lawyer, Sidney Powell:

        “The Letter from Sir Mark Lyall Grant to the Incoming National Security Team invalidates any use of information from Christopher Steele, further undermines any “Russia” connection, and is being suppressed (…) It was written by the United Kingdom’s National Security Advisor, Sir Mark Lyall Grant, and hand-delivered January 12, 2017,from the British Consulate to the incoming National Security teamin New York. It was not classified.
        https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592.129.0_1.pdf
        https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/446050-did-brits-warn-about-steeles-credibility-before-muellers-probe-congress

        But the Guardian article, co-written by Luke Harding, rates Steele’s knowledge as high as that of British intelligence agencies:
        Two sources told BuzzFeed that British intelligence found no evidence of Russian meddling in either the 2016 referendum vote or the 2017 general election. However, Steele’s involvement in the committee’s unpublished dossier raises the stakes considerably.

        It’s not surprising that Harding continues to portray Steele as a credible source, since his own book ‘Collusion’ relies largely on reports from Steele.

        1. Thanks Brendan.

           Yes, I became aware of this claim about Sir Mark Lyall-Grant’s letter after seeing The Duran’s excellent programme on the Sidney Powell / Michael Flynn bombshells:

           https://theduran.com/michael-flynn-case-unravels-us-uk-deep-state-entrapment-plan-exposed-video/

           What I find very interesting is that Sir Mark resigned just a month or so after his letter was sent, with the reason given that he was guilty of the heinous crime of “mansplaining” to Theresa May and others (or perhaps he just got fed up of Mrs May’s constant “Botsplaining”:

           https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/top-theresa-advisor-quits-after-9929550

           The idea that he resigned for this reason could only be believed by the most naïve. I wonder whether he was shoved out precisely because he wrote a letter to the US administration effectively calling out Steele as the charlatan he is. He was then replaced by another Sir Mark – Sedwill – who, it seems to me, is probably far more likely to be complimentary of Steele and his circles than his predecessor was.

           Rob

        2. Thanks for the Duran video link, Rob. For anyone who doesn’t have time to watch it all, the discussion about Steele is at about 40 min.

           My suspicion about the timing of Lyall-Grant’s retirement is that he was not removed for writing the letter, but instead in order to prevent any questions to him about it. As a retired private citizen, he is no longer obliged to explain what he previous did as an official. The events of the letter and the retirement were probably staged in order to let the UK distance itself from the Steele dossier, without having to explain the involvement of British spooks in it.

           It’s like the case of the GCHQ boss, Robert Hannigan who resigned three days after Trump became President. Intelligence from GCHQ was central to starting the whole Russiagate story.

           The explanation Hannigan gave for his sudden departure was that wanted to shield GCHQ from negative publicity from a personal mistake he made. He had provided a character reference for a convicted pedophile priest – who was a family friend – who then went on to re-offend. OK, anyone can make a mistake in judging someone else’s character, but the timing of Hannigan’s departure was extremely coincidental. Like Lyall-Grant, he now doesn’t have to answer any awkward questions.

        3. Take a look at Luke Harding’s book “Collusion”.
           Steele apparently handed at least one of his dossier memos (potentially more) to “the” top UK security official, a “former colleague from his days at SIS [MI6]”.
           So, who is it ? CHARLES FARR, the Chair of UK Joint Intelligence Committee (JIC)
           The JIC coordinates the UK intelligence agencies (MI5/6 & GCHQ). The chair has direct access to the Prime Minister. The JIC also maintains “liaison” with foreign intelligence agencies, FBI, NSA, CIA.
           What is the evidence it is CHARLES FARR ? Well, the person that Harding describes could also fit one other role: the UK National Security Advisor. This was Sir Mark Lyall Grant in 2016.
           BUT, he ALSO need to be a “former colleague” of Steele’s at MI6, which Grant wasn’t.
           The only person who fits both is FARR.

           Charles Farr may have as important connections to RussiaGate than Christopher Steele.
           Take a look at some of the attendees of the Global Strategy Forum security conference where he was a participant:
           Alexander Downer
           Sir Richard Dearlove
           Stefan Halper

           Quote : But after Trump’s shock win, Steele decided the claims he uncovered were now an issue of British national security. It was time to approach the UK government…
           The man Steele approached was Sir Charles Farr. He was head of the Joint Intelligence Committee – the body that assess intelligence. He had also been a top counter-terrorism adviser in May’s Home Office. Plus Steele had known Farr for 20 years. He would know what to do.
           Steele and Farr met a week after Trump’s election win.
           After their meeting, Farr reached a conclusion – the dossier had to go up the chain of command.
           Within days, according to well-placed sources, the allegations were shared with the most senior intelligence figures in Britain. MI5 director general Andrew Parker and MI6 chief Alex Younger are both understood to have been briefed.
           https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/05/19/theresa-mays-spy-chiefs-briefed-explosive-chistopher-steele/

           So, what might have happened in the UK behind the scenes ?
           Charles Farr and Christopher Steele (and others) meddled in the US election in favor of Hillary.
           Sir Mark Lyall Grant may have learnt late about it, but he felt the duty to inform the incoming Trump government about his evaluation of the Dossier. That was December 2016.
           Two month later he was fired.
           January 6, 2017 James Comey briefed Trump one-on-one about the Golden Shower part of the Dossier.
           January 10, 2017 Buzzfeed published the whole Dossier.
           Sir Charles Farr died of cancer February 15, 2019.

           By analyzing all the connections, it becomes more and more obvious that the Steele Dossier was only a part of a deceitful plan by several intelligence services in several countries along with politicians, embassy staffers and so on.

     3. Rob,
        It really is 1984.
        We seem to be in this “state thought” soup of the main stream media controlled by the government and we are fed what we are told that we need.
        I voted leave, and I am sure many more millions of us outside the Westminster bubble and miles away from the Metropolitan elite simply voted leave to jab a stick at the establishment.

177. Depending on the time accuracy of the CCTV systems in Jenny’s restaurant and Snap Fitness this appears to be the timeline;

     4:03pm Freya Church leaves Snap Fitness gym where she works, 40m away she encounters a distressed couple on a bench, no one else around.

     Abigail and Col Alison McCourt (just passing by) assist female on the bench to the ground and into the recovery position.

     Jamie Paine becomes involved.

     4:15 The emergency services are called, prior to that call it was reported that a silent call was made from the scene, another report says Jamie Paine made a call to the emergency services.

     4:15 CCTV at Jenny’s Restaurant shows police car driving through Market walk followed at 4:17 by running paramedics followed at 4:18 by Car Ambulance

     Other witnesses who have been reported at the scene,

     Olly Field witnessed the pair before the female was placed on the ground;

     “Olly Field, 30, saw Mr Skripal and his daughter on the bench after leaving a nearby gym around the time police were called at 4.15pm on Sunday.
     “There was some blonde bird laying on an old man’s shoulder doing this hand thing in the air,” he added.
     ”I just thought they were strung-out on heroin. There’s all sorts of homeless running around so I didn’t think too much of it.””

     We also have at various stages;

     Dan Holmes (whilst female was still sat on bench), Georgia Pridham (female sat on bench), shop manager, Graham Mulcock (couple being treated by paramedics), Destiny Reynolds (female sat on bench then lay on ground), Emma Pearson (just as they are lying female down), Meg Edgar.

     Then in the Publicly available video we see Man & Woman (Red Bag), Man with bin bags, man hiding his face from police car, Female walking small dog close to another female and man. There is a report of children being moved away from the scene.

     4:15 arrival of, PC Alex Collins & Sgt Holloway shortly followed by PC Alex Way and Escort Officer Janet Bald, then the paramedics arrive including a “Control Room Commander”.
     Where the paramedics came from we don’t know, we know an ambulance at Amesbury Ambulance station was impounded and the Station closed. One paramedic at the scene was Ian Parsons

     https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/sergei-skripal-poisoning-latest-russian-spy-daughter-substance-police-investigation-home-secretary-a8243746.html

     Pridham, Holmes & Pearson

     https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/mar/08/russian-spy-new-photo-police-sergei-skripal

     Church, Paine, Pridham, Mulcock, Reynolds, “Security Guard”

     “Two police officers helped the pair before emergency services were called at 4.15pm”

     https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5470455/How-poisoned-spy-plot-unfolded-Salisbury.html

     “Police are urgently trying to trace a blonde woman carrying a red handbag seen on CCTV shortly before a Russian double agent was found poisoned.”

     https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/mystery-blonde-woman-red-handbag-12140692

     ….
     It is a busy area, shops were closing (Sunday 4pm) it is a walkway to two major car parks; Sainsburys (where the Skripal car was parked) and Central (where the helicopter landed), lots of people about, then the police arrive and instantly set up a temporary cordon (stuff happens) and then the temporary cordon is removed only for a permanent one to be put in place later
     …..

     What is the stuff that happened?

     1. It’s great to see such a detailed timeline. Thank you Anonymous.

        I’m still looking into the cordons.

        I seem to remember a police officer saying somewhere that he was sent specifically to cordon off the area where the so called Skripals were found. I remember thinking, at the time, why would someone be sent specially to cordon off a run of the mill drug overdose scene.

        Does anyone remember who this police officer was and where it was reported?

        1. It might have gone like this:

           Heard over the special encrypted radio channel being used for Toxic Dagger: False Flag Operation Commander “I’m watcing the live CCTV feed. Why haven’t you got the mannequins in place on the bench to replace the live couple yet? MI56 Fake Ambulance Officer. “We cant take the mannequins out of our ambulance yet because there are too many members of the public here at the scene. Can we get some police down here urgently to erect a cordon to keep the public as far back as possible, otherwise people will see that they are only mannequins.” False Flag Operation Commander “They are on their way”.

     2. Air ambulance called at 4:17… by whom and why… the air ambulance had never before landed in the city for an emergency (it once landed in Market Square on a PR visit)… SDH only minutes away by land ambulance… there was no reason for anyone to call the air ambulance.

        1. Maybe the air ambulance brought the mannequins.

           1. After all, they are used for training paramedics when they are not being used by MI56.

              1. The AA arrived too late (4:53) and people were in the car park when it landed so they would have seen it. We also know that at least one paramedic was seen getting out of the AA and headed to the bench area and that he/she did not return to the helicopter before it took off again.

                 1. Sorry that we me not Anonymous

                 2. According to Mark Urban, who interviewed doctors and staff at Salisbury hospital, the patients arrived at A&E before 4:45pm and were admitted onto Radnor ward by 5:15

                    I believe this to be true, once stabilised and on ventilators there would be no point keeping the pair at the bench until 5:10.

                    So the questions remain;

                    Why was the AA called upon? (and so quickly – before a paramedic’s assessment?). Did Col McCourt request the AA and if so why?

                    Why did is take so long to scramble the aircraft (the WAA website boasts it can scramble in 2 minutes)? Why did it go in the wrong direction? And why when the was corrected by 90 degs did it fly very slowly to the scene? (the WAA website also boasts that the aircraft can reach anywhere in Wiltshire within 11 minutes, it took 36 minutes)

                    If the patients had already been evacuated to hospital, why did the helicopter land?

                    Why did the AA land so far from the scene? Was it actually responding to the bench incident?

                    Where did the paramedic go who did not get back into the helicopter?

                    Why was it widely reported that Yulia was taken to hospital in the AA? And why was it widely reported that the patients were taken from the scene at c5:10pm.

                    Where did the helicopter go after it took off? The transponder shows it exploring the cemetery area before flying towards the hospital (without patients or paramedic onboard) the transponder track then stops for half an hour before the aircraft flies back to base.

                    We are not allowed to know these things because they are Secret.

                    1. What we can deduce with a degree of certainty is that Wiltshire Air Ambulance was involved in the Spy Games being played out in Salisbury that day.

                       1. Not just WAA but the South Western Ambulance Service, NARU, Wilstshire Police, the Fire Service, the Army (Incl Nursing Corps) and Salisbury Hospital.

                          The Skripal Incident was certainly an extension of Toxic Dagger, those with information have been threatened with the OSA, they are all public servants so their jobs AND pensions are at stake along with their freedom.

                          No doubt that they have been told that Russia interfered with what was meant to be an Urban Crisis Exercise.

                 3. Anonymous,
                    We may recall that the intrepid reporter Rebecca Hudson, late of the SJ was at the scene on Sunday afternoon, fortuitously with a photographer.
                    There were pictures taken of the chopper at Sainsbury’s car park, and undoubtedly Miss Hudson saw the occupants.
                    There were some confusing reports, then adjusted edits, deletions, early in the Sunday/Monday time frame about one Skripal being airlifted, the other taken by road ambulance.
                    Anyway, the Tweets and posts were deleted, but Liane had done an excellent job of reconstructing the “OFFICIAL” narrative.
                    Because, I sometimes listen for the dog not to bark, I was intrigued that the Skripals did not have consecutive patient ID numbers at SDH.
                    Implying not only that they arrived separately, but a long enough gap for A&E to admit another patient in between.
                    These patient ID numbers were later quoted in the OPCW reports.

     3. Thank you Anonymous.
        Very detailed and comprehensive.

        Apart from the red bag, would all these people not be expecting some sort of “Salisbury Heroes Award”?

     4. In his interview on BBC and VoA, Jamie Paine said:

        “Someone managed to get through to the services. Police came about five minutes, 10 minutes later.”

        It remains unknown who made the call to the emergency services but if the call was made at 4:15, according to Jamie Paine, the police did not arrive until 4:20 – 4:25, which does not fit with any other timeline.

        1. That’s precisely the point that suggests the “police” and “paramedics” on the scene around 4:15 were not regular plod / paramedics.

           1. That depends on whether Jamie Paine’s evidence is reliable or not. That may just be his ‘script’… I don’t think there is any other report of any sort of police/paramedics arriving so late.

     5. Anonymous, the Daily Mail article is quite intriguing.
        Very specific facts and times.
        I wonder how much is true?

178. “Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.”

     Are we really going to vote these lunatics back in? Conservative or Labour they are both controlled by neocon money. Making the rich richer and the poor poorer.

     The parallels of 7/7 and the Wiltshire poisonings are there to see in plain sight but when you look a bit closure they become grotesquely overt, the lies told had no genuine interest in convincing anyone other that the stupid masses that will vote Tory or Labour at the next election regardless of what harm they have done in recent history, continue to do and are planning to do after the next election.

     Our governments are playing us as stupid fools and the masses are keen to oblige.

     Peter Power in an interview after 7/7

     http://www.julyseventh.co.uk/media/r5.live.peter.power.exercise.mp3

     Channel Four revealing some of the “coincidences” as just that;

     “Given this, the likelihood that one such simulation should fall on the day of an actual disaster is relatively high. Perhaps, who knows, that’s the even case with oft-quoted simulations like the NRO’s. ‘When you hear hooves, think horses, not zebras,’ goes the often-quoted popularisation of Occam’s Razor.

     In the absence of journalistic nous, bloggers would do well to stick by it.”

     https://www.channel4.com/news/articles/uk/coincidence+of+bomb+exercises/109010.html

     Given the absence of journalism (full stop) in 7/7 and the Wiltshire Incidents (apart from repeating the government line) …

     I am now in no doubt that the Salisbury Incident was indead an extension of Toxic Dagger and that the Emergency Services involved were aware. I expect they have been told to keep their mouths shut with the threat of OSA prosecution if they do not. I would go further than that and conjecture that they have been given a hint that nasty Putin caught wind of the Urban Crisis Exercise and sabotaged it.

     But let’s look at the “coincidences”; the passing Chief of the British Army Nursing Corps, the awaiting Porton Down Trained Dorctors at Salisibury Hospital and the mysterious Ambulance Control Room Commander at both Salisbury and Amesbury Incidents.

     And then the similarities of 7/7 and Salisbury; the suspects travel on trains that have been cancelled, the MSM print nothing of these anomalies, contradictions and conflicts, they just publish what they are told to publish, no more no less.

     Then we look to our MP’s and Parliament, they are not looking they are no listening. What about the police? Well they are controlling the Cover Up (badly), the 7/7 brigade got honours (Ian Blair a peerage) and Cresida Dick got promoted to top dog of the MPS (or female equivalent).

     What might Dick, Basu and Pritchard expect? Well if the voters vote out the traitors those police officers can expect very long jail terms.

     How many times in Britain have we seen Full Hazmat suits deployed for a “drug related incident”, cleaning up the pavements whilst their colleagues are partying in the restaurant next door that is so badly contaminated with “nerve agent” that the furniture had to be destroyed?

     Why if fentanyl was suspected were the first responders not sent for decontamination as Temp CC Pritchard said they were? Oh because that turned out to be a lie. And is Full Hazmat Gear now the norm for clearing up at suspected fentanyl cases in Britain? No it’s not, never has been, never will be.

     And what about Bailey being hailed a hero and first responder by Mark Rowley, Kier Pritchard and Theresa May.

     Why can’t we see the CCTV footage?

     “sadly in addition a police officer who was one of the first to attend the scene and respond to the incident is now also in a serious condition in hospital”
     Metropolitan Police Mark Rowley Assistant Commissioner

     https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-43323847 7th March

     It’s no wonder Mark Rowley quit and let the new boy Basu handle the mess on his own.

     As False Flag’s and Hoaxes go this has go to be a shining example of what happens when you employ willing if unfit people to do acts of treachery. Normal people would not have created this ludicrous situation, they would have quit, only the truly disturbed would attempt such an unintelligent Hoax and then keep on to shore up the crumbling Cover Up.

     They failed and failed miserably but the political classes will continue to employ them and not prosecute if the bloody fools in the electorate do not demand the changes needed to stop Britain going to hell in a hand cart pushed eagerly by these monstrous lunatics.

179. This picture seems to show where the cordons were located, in relation to the bench. They don’t appear to be all that far away from it, but I guess far enough to prevent witnesses realising that the people on the bench and ground (in the woman’s case) were really mannequins.

     https://s.abcnews.com/images/International/Skripal-spy-bench-ap-ps-180307_4x3_992.jpg

     1. There is another picture, taken at around 5.00pm, of some of the cordon, on March 4th in the Guardian.

        The Guardian quotes a witness, also at around 5.00pm, saying:

        “The officers had actually lifted part of the cordon and at one point there were two members of the public walking very near to the bench and the bag as well. They started off with quite a big cordon, but did begin to take some of it down.”

        So the initial cordon may have been a greater distance from the bench.

        https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/mar/08/russian-spy-new-photo-police-sergei-skripal

        1. If when the van ambulances arrived they parked either side of the bench then anything could have happened; people in and out, mannequins even. No one could observe the scene

           This tactic was used at the front of Zizzis after a photographer had caught the police and staff partying after the poisoning but no one was wearing any protection, the police were not even wearing gloves. To prevent this scrutiny being repeated two police vans were parked back to back to shield the Windows at the front of Zizzis.

           If ambulances were used for the same purpose at the bench then no more umbrella people were needed to shield the scene from the CCTV cameras and witnesses.

           But we never got to see those van ambulances so we don’t know

180. I was always sceptical about the story of the killing of Osama bin Laden. Now we have another dubious story about the killing of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi on 26 Oct 2019. It appears that he had already been killed five times in 2016/2017. Coverage starts at 11:30

     https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gs7XXv4tHO8

     1. And, at 21:00, his underwear was stolen a few days before he died!

181. Did anybody else watch The World According to Vladimir Putin on channel 4? I’m not sure if was meant to be an anti Russian mocking piece but I think they displayed some honest journalism. It’s almost as if channel 4 were laughing at the fact that people and the media actually like him.

     They showed interview of Mishkin and Petrov; it got me thinking against that they either just have been working in an unofficial capacity or they really messed up somehow; otherwise Putin wouldn’t have asked them to appear on national TV if it was a government sanctioned operation.

     1. “They showed interview of Mishkin and Petrov … ”

        Mishkin and Petrov? Aren’t they, allegedly, one and the same?

        Just as Boshirov has allegedly been identified as Chepiga.

182. Have a look at this actual mannequin used at NARU at Winterbourne Gunner for CBRN training.

     Winterbourne Gunner is where I suspect that the “Ambulance Controller” worked from, who is said to have administered a so called novichok antidote to Charlie at Charlie’s home in Amesbury and also magically attended the Salisbury incident as well.

     It quite likely that these mannequins could have been used at the bench in Salisbury, for at least some of the time for the MI56 false flag hoax.

     Its the second picture down on this NARU Twitter page:
     https://twitter.com/naru_education/status/1052520433705254915

     1. Denise : If I’m not wrong, Paul was the first to consider that mannequins could have been used. I don’t find it absurd.

     2. What I think ‘may’ have happened is that the CCTV couple went and sat on the bench. They started behaving ‘strangely’ and were seen by Freya and others. The police then sealed off the area and kept the public out (which is why there are no pictures and so few ‘real’ witnesses).

        The CCTV couple were quickly transported to SDH (first responders called them the ‘Skripals’ as they had the Skripals ID). Once the CCTV couple had been removed from the bench, mannequins were brought in for the completion of the live action role playing part of operation Toxic Dagger (which is why McCourt was there).

        I am not sure how the witness who saw ‘Sergei’ being loaded into an ambulance in a ‘sitting position’ (i.e. the mannequin) was there to see it… it is a possibility that it was an event that was not supposed to have been witnessed.

        1. It seems PC Collins or Sgt Holloway offered the information

           “The uniformed officers called CID and a duty inspector. They helped get the Skripals into ambulances. Sergei was still rigidly fixed in a sitting position, so it was hard to manoeuvre him on to a stretcher. CID officers attended. “They were like: ‘That’s fine, everything’s OK’, and off they went again,” said Holloway.”

           https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/dec/14/we-did-our-best-police-who-rushed-to-skripal-scene-tell-of-shock-and-pride

           And more children at risk;

           “Within minutes of arriving at the scene, the officers had put a cordon in place. “There were children around,” said Holloway. “We didn’t know what we had. It was an open area. We pushed people well back.””

           Assisting in the initial moments were PC Alex Way and a Prisoner Transport Officer

           https://twitter.com/wiltspoliceCC/status/974424022082613248

           1. Escort Officer = Janet Bald

           2. ‘ CID officers attended. “They were like: ‘That’s fine, everything’s OK’, and off they went again,” said Holloway.” ‘

              This sounds to me, to be way too casual, more like role playing for an exercise, than what a police officer, with real concern about a dangerous situation, would say in real life.

           3. It is always worth re-reading the old articles, there is always something I missed previously!

              “Within minutes of arriving at the scene, the officers had put a cordon in place. “… We pushed people well back.””

              This was a ‘medical emergency’ – why would there be a cordon at all? How often has anyone seen a police cordon (which officer brought the cordon tape with them?) for someone passing out on the street?

              And not just any old cordon: “We pushed people well back.” – What??? Why??? For someone passed out on a bench? At this stage it was just thought to be a drugs/alcohol event; why have the police swooped on it with cordon tape?

              That description fits very well with what I suggested above but for a real ‘medical emergency’, I don’t think it would happen.

              1. ” there is always something I missed previously! ”

                 ” We pushed people well back ”

                 What people? The lack of witnesses – even to the actions of police in excluding people from the scene – has been noted previously.

                 Doesn’t ” We pushed people well back ” suggest that, at the time, there must have been many people present?

                 1. Hmm… all rather odd isn’t it? Freya said nobody was at the bench… Abigail said nobody was there… and the police arrived only 2-3 minutes later. So where did ‘all’ the people suddenly come from that the police had to “push”?

                    Sounds like the construction of a narrative… in fact it sounds like complete BS!

                    1. Well maybe this Paul.

                       *Anther eyewitness, Emma Pearson, said: “I walked past them just as they were laying the girl down. I was going to go and help them, but there were so many people there already. I was worried but they didn’t need more people getting in the way.”*

                       From The guardian March 8th:
                       https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/mar/08/russian-spy-new-photo-police-sergei-skripal

                       1. How is that possible if the police established a cordon within minutes and pushed people back?

                          I don’t know how many of the ‘witnesses’ were genuine but I am quite sure that Jamie Paine (for one) was not! I have no idea whether Emma Pearson is real or fake but prima facie, her account and the account of the police are at odds.

183. This is not original thinking on my part.

     1) Yulia came to the UK to let her father know that she was going to get married and Putin had granted Sergei permission to return to Russia for the wedding.
     2) Meantime Sergei had continued his spy/snoop activities with MI5/6 aware of his involvement with Steele and the dossier.
     The dossier had no value to Putin, but he sent Rus and the team over to watch events.
     Observe but not act
     3) Some part of the dossier made the UK spy chiefs nervous. Maybe GCHQ monitoring Clinton’s email traffic from a non secure server.
     4) The UK were bugging Sergei’s house, and when they heard Yulia’s news, they were forced to act.
     5) That action was to incapacitate the Skripals with BZ and this happened in the Mill Pub, or just as the Skripals left the pub.
     6)A more powerful nerve agent, from PD was wrapped up securely, waiting to be found, during the World Cup finals, to further discredit Russia.
     This was supposed to be handed in as a “suspicious package”, unfortunately Charlie saw it as treasure, and the rest we know.

     Comments welcome as I can defend most of this, but maybe some parts not as well as others.

     1. Duncan,
        I agree with the following:
        – Yulia came to the UK to let her father know that she was going to get married
        – The UK were bugging Sergei’s house
        – [the] action was to incapacitate the Skripals with BZ and this happened in the Mill Pub, or just as the Skripals left the pub.

        I do not think that “Sergei had continued his spy/snoop activities,” except for his giving lectures on GRU methods to NATO intelligence servicemen. I am convinced that Skripal had nothing to do with the Steele dossier because 1) Skripal could not know anything useful for that dossier 2) the dossier contains mistakes and blunders that the Russian ex-GRU officer could not make 3) the dossier could have been easily concocted without any help from any Russian; some pieces of info from the internet, colorful fantasies and perhaps Ukrainian helpers could have done the trick.

        My idea of what happened in Salisbury on 4 March 2018 is a false flag operation.

        1. Milda,
           Thank you.
           Sergei’s European juants seem quite extensive.
           Maybe it was more than NATO servicemen lectures.
           If Steele’s dossier originally was to be sold to McCain and any other Republican candidate.
           Having Skripal as a co-author or contributor would give the piece some credibility even if Sergei knew nothing.
           Putin knew that too.
           Sergei’s efforts were no threat to Russia.

           1. “Maybe it was more than NATO servicemen lectures.”

              There are 29 member states in NATO:
              https://www.eata.ee/en/nato-2/nato-member-states/

              It is a lot of work for intelligence lecturers.

              I am quite unsure that having Skripal as a co-author or contributor to the dossier would give it credibility. McCain or other anti-Trump politicians would have asked questions about that co-author/contributor and found out that Skripal had been arrested in 2004 and deported from Russia in 2010.

              1. Hello Milda,
                 You might be giving US politicians more credit than the deserve based on their track record.
                 I recall once a president inposed sanctions based on fictitious sick children and non dead ducks.

     2. That they (the spy chiefs drawn from privileged backgrounds divorced from the grind of life for the lower classes) would be unable to conceive of a scenario whereby a bin diver would not perceive a found item as “suspicious” but instead would regard it as “treasure”, is no surprise.

        They are probably more out of touch with the modes of thought among the lower strata of our society than our erstwhile politicians.

        I’ll bet that they are rubbish at chess too.

        1. True Cascadian.
           Maybe they thought the more responsible folk who sort out the bin contents after pick up, would alert the powers at be.
           With young Gavin, Aitkenhead and Bojo all involved I would not expect erudite tactical genius.

     3. Duncan said : “6) A more powerful nerve agent, from PD was wrapped up securely, waiting to be found, during the World Cup finals, to further discredit Russia.”
        Yes, there were people who were trying to discredit Russia, but I doubt that Porton Down took the risk of poisoning an innocent victim. For me, Porton Down knew that a drug overdose case could be disguised as poisoning by “novichok” and they waited for such a case to happen.

        1. Inquirer, you seem to exhibit an extreme degree of faith in the laws of probability favouring the mores of Western government agencies who seek to discredit the Russian government.

           How is it that you can assert that a fortunate (for TPTB) drug overdose cases will be likely to occur in that precise location at that precise time on that particular day and during the lead up to the World Cup games in Russia.

           Pascal must be rolling in his grave.

           1. Cascadian, it wasn’t necessary that the second case occurred just before or during the World Cup. There were many drug overdose cases in Salisbury, and also poisoning cases whose victims likely were tested at Porton Down. (I could look for a reference in my files if you are interested.) It is also possible that there was some improvisation and that the opportunity was seized in the flight.
              I’m not afraid of Pascal, I have Occam with me.

              1. Perhaps you could ask Occum what the most likely explanation is for the the perfume appearing with an out of place throat nozzle.

                 If they were opportunists waiting for a random poisoning / overdose to label a Novichok Incident then Charlie’s memory of the throat nozzle should not be there.

                 1. Anonymous wrote :
                    “Perhaps you could ask Occum what the most likely explanation is for the the perfume appearing with an out of place throat nozzle.”
                    As I already said, this sort of nozzle is used as a drug tool.
                    Charlie Rowley’s memory was constructed by suggestions from police and the desire not to be open to prosecution.

           2. To Inquirer and Cascadian.
              How likely was it that Charlie Rowley was the first person EVER in the UK to receive a dose of the OP antidote, Duodote?
              A senior paramedic who went out of his way to respond to the call out for Charlie.
              I am proposing that Dawn’s treatment was not assessed in time.
              However, a paramedic sensed what and how to treat immediately.

              1. Duncan, in the realm of speculation coincidences happen all the time.

                 The last witnessed event involving both Pascal and William of Occam was shortly before the arrest of William following his vicious attempt to slit Pascal’s throat following an argument about unfinished games of chance.

                 As to the the paramedic – I would be at a loss to explain why a Porton Down employee is employed by the ambulance service.

              2. Duncan, you wrote :
                 “How likely was it that Charlie Rowley was the first person EVER in the UK to receive a dose of the OP antidote, Duodote?”
                 Are you sure that it was the first time in the UK ?
                 Here :
                 https://www.meridianmeds.com/products/duodote

                 references 1 and 5 date from 2010 and 2017 :

                 ATNAA (Antidote-Treatment-Nerve Agent, Auto-Injector) [package insert]. Columbia, MD: Meridian Medical Technologies®, Inc.; 2010
                 and
                 DuoDote Auto-Injector [package insert]. Columbia, MD: Meridian Medical Technologies®, Inc.; 2017.

                 Since antidotes againt insecticides were already known in 2010, wouldn’t it be astonishing that they were not used in UK before the Amesbury case ?
                 Now, if you have a good reference, I can change my mind.

                 1. Inquirer, I have now doubt about the existence of the Duodote, and organophosphate pesticides were very commonly used in the past in the UK.

                    However:
                    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/novichok-charlie-rowley-dawn-sturgess-anti-nerve-agent-nhs-skripals-a8996231.html

                    If the article is incorrect, then I stand corrected.

                    1. From the Guardian:

                       Another Salisbury coincidence.

                       “Sturgess sprayed it over her wrists and became severely ill. Paramedics were called to help her on the morning of 30 June and she was taken to Salisbury district hospital.

                       When they were called again to the same flat later that day to tend to Rowley, a lead paramedic who had been present when the Skripals fell ill suspected that nerve agent was again involved. Rowley was given an anti-nerve agent drug that British crews began to carry at the height of the al-Qaida threat but had not used until then.”

                       1. OK, now I am becoming a little bit confused.

                          An NBC course I attended in the late 1960’s covered various subjects relating to Nuclear, Biological and Chemical threats which might be encountered in a war scenario. Items cited included an antidote to nerve agents which was supplied in auto-inject cartridges – you would enclose one in your fist and smack your thigh with it, that would automatically inject a measured quantity of the antidote (atropine) into the muscles there. The aim being to counter the effects of the nerve agent. If it wasn’t working, do it again, or a colleague would do it for you if you had already lost control.

                          The description of the effects of the various chemical agents they informed us of were truly terrifying.

                          My point being that antidotes were issued for use long before Salisbury.

                          I may have the wrong end of the stick, if so, please accept my apology and point me at the hairy end.

        2. Except it didn’t.

184. Its time for answers its time for a properly Independent Public Inquiry

     Journal of the Royal Army Medical Corps – Nerve Agents 2002

     https://jramc.bmj.com/content/jramc/148/4/344.full.pdf

     It explains what should have happened, and if it didn’t then what the first responders might have expected to happen to them;

     Children kept away

     First responders decontaminated

     Antidotes administered

     Col McCourt and her daughter should think themselves very lucky, not just because Abigail won an award but because they are both still alive. Same goes for Jamie Paine PC Collins and Sgt Holloway and hundreds if not thousands of others.

     Actg CC Pritchard said all police first responders were sent to hospital overnight for decontamination, PC Collins (one of the actual first responders) said he wasn’t and didn’t even have a shower when he went to bed that night, Sgt Holloway (the other actual first responder) didn’t wear gloves. Collins’ says his decontamination process involved him being phoned two days later and told to bag up all his kit that he wore that day and take it to the station.

     That no more people, including the duck feed children and the staff and customers at Zizzis and the Mill became ill, is miraculous if not impossible.

     Did Col McCourt not recognise the symptoms that she had been drumming into troops and medical staff during the Toxic Dagger exercise? The two doctors on duty at Salisbury hospital when the patients were admitted, who coincidently had just come off a course at Porton Down focussing on Chemical Warfare, apparently did recognise the symptoms and treated accordingly but blood samples of the victims were not sent to Porton Down until 6:45pm on Monday 5h March.

     And the suspects having departed the UK after a leisurely walk around Salisbury, what had they done with the poison container, the big search for it only began more than four months later after Dawn had died, it still hasn’t been found.

     But Public Health England kept telling us that there was very little risk to the public, and we know why, there never was any Nerve Agent (or related compound) in Salisbury (except at Porton Down).

     The Facts and Science prove this; and if that means a Public Inquiry is demanded where the important “coincidental” witnesses are Called, to have the Facts and Science made known to all, then sobeit. Who might be Called to explain the coincidences, events and reasoning? Col McCourt the two Doctors that were on duty at Salisbury Hospital, the Ambulance Control Room Commander who attended both the Salisbury and Amesbury Incidents.

     What were the victims poisoned with? The Experts can explain how this 4th Generation Nerve Agent can work in the mysterious ways it does.

     Who were the victims at the bench? The witnesses at the bench and CCTV can tell us what colour hair the female on the bench had.

     Why the delays in diagnosing and treating Dawn and Charlie? The Ambulance services, the doctors and Porton Down can answer those questions under oath and in public.

     Just what did Bailey do at the bench and when was he admitted to hospital (both occasions)? He can explain that at a Public Inquiry.

     But is this just a pipe dream? Do we really expect the government now to say OK the truth can come out, this was initially a Hoax to make Russia look bad and for Skripal to disappear?

     No we don’t expect that but I am sure the Coroner does not want to take on these questions because they are far outside his remit but remain a huge public concern. The Coroner is now in a position where he is unable to hear this case.

     The Coroner can ask to have the Inquest converted into a Public Inquiry, he has every good reason to do that, as the Coroner did in the Litvinenko case. But the Minister charged with deciding can say no as Mrs May did when she was Home Secretery. But that decision was overruled in the High Court when challenged and a Public Inquiry was held.

     This is a bigger and more complex case than that of Litvinenko, a Public Inquiry will add delays (it doesn’t have to as Hutton demonstrated re Dr David Kelly) but a Public Inquiry is far better equipped to get the answers that Dawn’s family, Charlie and the general public are demanding.

     As more and more information was dripped out by the authorities so did the likelihood of an Inquest diminish and diminish to a stage that now there is no possibility of the Coroner addressing all the questions that need satisfying.

     The Coroner cannot involve himself in the skulduggery that occurred in Salisbury but it is essential to question those events to start to understand How Dawn died because in that How is a large element of Why she died and only a Public Inquest can address that. But regardless a Coroner is precluded form hearing Intelligence based evidence which makes it impossible for him to hear this case.

     If the presence of McCourt, the two CW trained doctors and the mysterious Ambulance Service Commander had not emerged a Coroner and government would not have the dilemma they do now. The actions of those individuals were leaked ironically to reduce scrutiny, that like most other miscalculations in the Hoax has spectacularly misfired leading to the only reasonable outcome, that of a properly independent Public Inquiry.

     It must be a Statutory Public Inquiry (as opposed to non-statutory) where witnesses are compelled to attend and must give evidence under oath.

     It must have an Independent Chairman and panel that is properly qualified to hear the evidence; Judicial, Coronial, Medical and Scientific Experience, Qualification and Expertise. They must not appoint another Hutton stooge who had no medical qualification or Coronial experience; someone that can deliver answers and not a whitewash.

     The announcement of the Public Inquiry will clash with a general election, Brexit and a new (coalition?) government, if the decision makers think they can get away with another Hutton they should think very carefully it may be more disastrous than Brexit has been for them and that is why the announcement is likely to be after the election but that’s only my guess.

     1. See

        https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201314/ldselect/ldinquiries/143/143.pdf

        Inquests as an alternative

        83. As a matter of course certain deaths in the United Kingdom are investigated by means of an inquest. Where it appears that agents of the State may be implicated in some way in the circumstances of the death, the subsequent investigation, whether that be by inquest or not, must satisfy the minimum requirements imposed by Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights. An inquest is limited to examining who the deceased was; and how, when and where the deceased came by his or her death. An inquiry’s scope is determined by its terms of reference and so can be much wider. We say more about this in chapter 4. The other chief distinctions are that inquests cannot hear evidence in private, cannot make recommendations, and may in certain circumstances have a jury. Juries do not give reasons for their decisions

        92. Where public concern extends significantly beyond a death itself to wider related issues, an inquiry may be preferable to an inquest. If such issues emerge in the course of an inquest, consideration should be given to suspending the inquest and appointing a senior judge as chairman of an inquiry under the Inquiries Act 2005

        112. A decision on a request by a coroner for an inquest to be converted into an inquiry should always be the subject of reasons

        Page 36

        “In the case of the inquest into the death of Alexander Litvinenko, in a letter to the Coroner of 17 July 2013 the Home Secretary (Theresa May MP) set out her detailed reasons for her decision not to convert the inquest into an inquiry. The six reasons included, in summary, that an inquiry was likely to be more costly of time, money and resources, and that international relations would be better served by an inquest.173 This decision was later overturned by the High Court, which expressed concern about each of the reasons.”

        1. “When might a public inquiry be held and not an inquest?

           In some circumstances it will not be possible to hold an inquest and a public inquiry will be more appropriate. This might be where there is relevant intelligence material which the coroner is not allowed to see.

           Opinions are divided on whether, where either route of investigation might be chosen, it is better to have an inquest or a public inquiry.

           The House of Lords Select Committee on the Inquiries Act 2005 concluded that, where public concern extends significantly beyond a death itself to wider related issues, an inquiry may be preferable to an inquest.”

           https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/CBP-8012

           1. “Security sensitive and intelligence material which cannot be disclosed to the coroner

              24.This part of the Guidance is intended to replace previous guidance given by the Chief Coroner which is dated 27th September 2016 and marked confidential. It is the policy of the current Chief Coroner that all Guidance documents should be publicly available on the Chief Coroner’s website.

              25.Statute(13) prevents disclosure of some security sensitive material (including intercept-related material)to the coroner him or herself.In addition to the specific types of material which cannot be disclosed by statute, there is a wider class of security sensitive material which the government treats in the same way as a matter of policy.This policy was described by Cranston J in Secretary of State for the Home Department v HM Senior Coroner for Surrey & Ors [2016] EWHC 3001as “unassailable.”(14)The practical effect of this is that only the fact of the existence of the security sensitive material in a specific case can be disclosed to the coroner.”

              https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Guidance-No.-30-Judge-led-inquests-1.pdf

              1. Problem is that it is not in the interests of HMG or the Met to hold an inquiry… they already know the truth and are keen to make sure nobody else finds out. If there was a single mainstream outlet asking questions about Dawn’s inquest, I might hold out more hope but the public has no idea what is happening.

                 Even if an inquiry is held, I would expect its terms of reference to be very restrictive and who here believes it would really be independent? We have too many examples of rigged inquiries and ‘official reports’… the same will happen here.

185. More jobs for people with 2 GCSEs or less:

     https://www.army.mod.uk/who-we-are/formations-divisions-brigades/6th-united-kingdom-division/77-brigade/

     https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/77th_Brigade_%28United_Kingdom%29

     More interesting news on Orde Wingate:

     https://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/specialseries/2013/05/20135612348774619.html

186. Good job opportunities for school leavers with 2 GCSEs or less:

     https://www.mi5.gov.uk/careers/opportunities/school-leavers

187. Even the ordinary locals in the bars in Malta and Girona think the British were behind the attempted murder of the Skripals.

     1. If only it was that simple.

        Sergei would normally have been classified a Triple Agent, if you consider the US and UK to be on the same side. Which they are not and particularly since the entrance of Trump.

        A Triple Agent is one that is thought to have been turned into a Double Agent but in reality retains loyalty and allegiance to their original paymasters.

        Skripal was very much a hybrid and fitted uncomfortably into any standard nomenclature of the role.

        A “Triple Agent’s” life expectancy is largely determined by his / her continued usefulness to both sides but as Skripal was playing in a 3 Ring Circus his situation was somewhat more complicated.

        It was almost impossible for Skripal to retire, he was owned by several sides but he had had enough and wanted out. Family ties in Russia, his daughter’s impending marriage, the death of his son, his mother’s advancing years and his own failing health also meant his usefulness to opposing sides had also diminished.

        A number of solutions were played out on the 4th March 2018;

        UK1 = UK security services loyal to UK international interests
        UK2 = UK security services loyal to US interests and personal financial gain

        (We saw graphically in the Iraq2 and Dr David Kelly outrages that Mi6 was split. The bosses (Dearlove and Scarlett) were well and truly in the pocket of the US and the rank and file very much against US Imperialism, those divisions have not gone away. Mi5 is equally split between those sympathetic to II / IoS implementation of US Foreign Policy and those that want what is best for the UK)

        The spy games played out on the 4th March

        1) Skripal and UK1 – (On the face of it) Fake Skripal’s death and disappear him

        2) US and UK2 – Have Skripal believe he is to be disappeared but in reality his death would be real

        3) Russia and Skripal (with intel from UK1) – (The plan that prevailed) Go along with fake / real death scenarios but arrange for Skripal’s extraction.

        4) Russia aware of the US / UK2 elements in their plan to demonise Russian in the execution of their enterprise, Russia’s intention was to counter that desire and have largely been successful in that objective also.

        It was no coincidence that the pro US, II / IoS infiltration into MSM, MoD, British overseas Embassies was exposed shortly after the Skripal Hoax

        The US are losing their Disinformation War as they do so many of their wars

        1. So Skripal left the country on the 4th/5th March? I have heard that theory as well. So what role did Yulia play in this? I mean it has been mentioned that her Reuters interview was held at RAF Fairford (which is mainly used by USAF) so either she was captured and is now being either unlawfully or lawfully detained (perhaps a secret espionage trial convicted her) or she was fooled into thinking the Russian side did indeed try to poison her and she was’t aware of the Russian extraction plan. So my loose ends! 🙁

           I’m sure it will all come out sooner or later; in the meantime we keep digging.

           1. Utter rubbish.

           2. One theory is that Yulia is being held hostage in the USA to deter Sergei from revealing any UK/US secrets to the Russians.

188. Random but I was just reading the below timeline documents of the skripal event and it says two different witnesses remember a man with a mask and a separate witness said they saw a woman with a black surgical mask. Could this have been part of the black ops team who could have administered the fentanyl or whatever? Or if it wasn’t Sergei and Yulia on the bench and the substance was just a hoax, then why would they be wearing masks?

     http://images.shoutwiki.com/acloserlookonsyria/b/b6/SKRIPAL_-_BENCH_UPDATE.pdf

     1. “… then why would they be wearing masks?”

        To hide their faces?

     2. This is what I think.

        Masked woman part 1:
        http://www.theblogmire.com/urbans-tale-clears-away-some-of-the-smoke-and-mirrors-in-salisbury/#comment-15032

        Masked woman part 2:
        http://www.theblogmire.com/urbans-tale-clears-away-some-of-the-smoke-and-mirrors-in-salisbury/#comment-15079

        Masked man:
        http://www.theblogmire.com/urbans-tale-clears-away-some-of-the-smoke-and-mirrors-in-salisbury/#comment-15149

        1. Wow, really interesting insight! You are a true detective Sir. The only niggle I have is that the witness mentioned that the man had a dark complexion which would make it unlikely he was a Russian asset (unless he was possibly from the Chechen region); so that leaves the possibility that the ‘minder’ either had heavy face make up which is a technique sometimes used by covert operatives and/or he was a UK1 asset (as named by anonymous above) who was part of the anti-US team who were helping to extract Skripal. The fact the witness mentions that the guy had an ‘aggressive’ look perhaps suggests that they were short on time or something unexpected had occurred.

           1. Since I wrote that, the only significant addition is that I got (what I regard as a reliable) description of the bag seen in Pret… it was “a big red bag”. I am, therefore, fairly sure that the reason Mark Francis went to the police was that he recognised the bag in the CCTV – it was nothing to do with nerve agents or face masks. Obviously the police need to hide the fact that big red bags were ubiquitous in Salisbury on 4 March… otherwise people might start to suspect something.

              Regarding the description of the masked man. I don’t discount the ‘dark complexion’ description but he was walking in the opposite direction to the witness and I wonder how long the witness actually had to observe him… not very long I guess and I don’t think that single point changes much of the overall story.

              The only other thing I can add concerns the description of the masks. I have been told that the woman in Pret was wearing a ‘bicycling mask’, as opposed to a ‘surgical’, or any other sort of mask.

              Regarding ‘anti-US’ team… not sure about that at all. It seems that the US and Russian teams might have been cooperating. For the time being, I think the Russian team removed Sergei and Yulia from the Mill but soon after that, Yulia went off with the US team – and I think that she did so willingly. It is the only way I can make sense of the fact that Sergei allowed Yulia to be involved – the plan clearly needed Yulia to be there and Sergei would not have put her at risk. in fact I would go further and suggest that 4 March was actually ALL about Yulia. There were many other ways for Sergei to return to Russia without involving Yulia, the fact that he allowed her to be involved was not mere chance (and certainly not bad luck!).

           2. Anonymous London, you seem to start reading this blog only recently and thus you may be unaware that over the past year Paul has been pushing lots of absurd stories here. He even come up with the “idea” that the pair on the bench were not the Skripals but mannequins. See
              https://www.theblogmire.com/the-salisbury-poisoning-one-year-on-an-open-letter-to-the-metropolitan-police/#comment-25735
              Paul says:
              March 8, 2019 at 5:08 pm
              Who believes this:
              “The uniformed officers called CID and a duty inspector. They helped get the Skripals into ambulances. Sergei was still rigidly fixed in a sitting position, so it was hard to manoeuvre him on to a stretcher. CID officers attended. “They were like: ‘That’s fine, everything’s OK’, and off they went again,” said Holloway.”
              https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/dec/14/we-did-our-best-police-who-rushed-to-skripal-scene-tell-of-shock-and-pride
              “…rigidly fixed in a sitting position” – what, you mean like a mannequin?
              ‘The bench’ was a LARP scenario at the end of Toxic Dagger! That is why McCourt was there!
              The police cordon kept people away so they could not see anything or take any pictures.
              The ‘female’ wasn’t breathing… because it was a mannequin too!
              HOAX!!

              Milda says:
              March 8, 2019 at 10:17 pm
              I remember you pushed the idea that the people on the bench had been the CCTV couple. Now you are saying that there were mannequins on the bench, not human beings. Congrats.

              Paul says:
              March 9, 2019 at 12:05 am
              Do you still not get it Milda?
              The CCTV couple did sit on the bench and Freya did see them – she was set up as the key witness. Other people also saw them – I am guessing Olie Field was another who was not in on the game because he said the wrong thing about hair colour. The witnesses who only saw them sitting on the bench were probably real but they were all early witnesses. Throw in a handful of fake witnesses working to a script: “then they put Yulia on the ground”, “Sergei was as stiff as a board” etc. and you have all the witnesses you need to keep the MSM happy.
              Soon thereafter, the police arrived and set up a cordon, pushing the public back so they could not then see what happened afterwards. How was the police car on the Jenny’s video able to drive so quickly down Market Walk without knocking over pedestrians? Because the police were already stopping people from getting near to the bench. At that point the CCTV couple stood up and did whatever they did.
              Cue McCourt.
              It was all a hoax.
              It will be very easy to prove me wrong. The CCTV will do it. Why have we not seen it? Why have we not seen a single photograph?

              Milda says:
              March 9, 2019 at 11:49 pm
              “At that point the CCTV couple stood up…” And then, judging from your comment of March 8, 5:08 pm, mannequins were placed on the bench. I wonder whether there are limits to absurdities you come up with.

              1. It is absolutely pathetic how you chase me around, like a little lost puppy, snapping at my ankles. Do you really have nothing better to do?

                 The only person around here who has disgraced themselves is you – which was why you were forced you to apologize a few weeks ago when you went too far and just made up comments I had not posted! You have no credibility with many of us here and your ridiculous attempts to misdirect anyone who comes here to comment is beyond laughable.

                 You might as well stop doing it as you only succeed in making yourself look more foolish (which is quite an achievement!)

              2. Milda, it’s a pity that technology has moved on as rapidly as it has done. Otherwise, I’m sure that some enterprising folk would be able to set up a turntable with a suitably damaged piece of vinyl and submit here a link to the video segment of the result you get when the needle gets stuck.

                 Then you might, just, understand how you sound to the rest of us when you rabbit on about your disdain for Paul and his viewpoint.

                 PS I accept that others on this blog may not share this view of things.

                 1. Are you Paul’s collegue?

                    1. In answer to your question Milda.

                       “Are you Paul’s collegue?”

                       Only in terms of belonging to the same species of animal.

                       I try to not be dogmatic, I suggest that you adopt the same strategy.

                       And if you believe that I belong to some government agency, then you are wrong, I completed my service 40 years ago and abhor the activities that HMG is currently engaged in.

                       1. Sorry Cascadian, I did not mean that YOU are Paul’s colleague. I thought that “c” was someone else. I suggested that “c” is Paul’s colleague because the metaphor about vinyl was too sophisticated, too much effort was put in it. Sorry again for my mistake.

                          1. Was that an insult, Milda?

                             Or maybe not, probably too subtle for a dim Welsh old fart like me.

189. Paul,

     You might not have realised the significance of your recent post.
     From the article:

     “The U.S. government limits work on Novichoks to a handful of defense labs, but academic researchers may now partner with these labs as well as conduct computer modeling or other studies that don’t require the chemicals.”

     This somewhat conflicts with:

     Novichok = Russian State theory from Mrs May.

190. Furious locals?

     https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7612781/BBC-begins-filming-Salisbury-Novichok-drama-starring-Anne-Marie-Duff-Rafe-Spall.html

     I saw that DSB’s parents were displeased.
     Were there any others?
     The incident was not quite on a par with the D Day landings, but can anyone tell me a heroic or even brave action that took place in Salisbury either on that Sunday or in the “clean up” that happened later?

     1. Jamie Paine was heroic and brave! He got novihoax on his jacket and just ‘brushed it off’ – precious little thanks he got… didn’t even make the shortlist for bravery awards.

        One wonders why the BBC thinks there is any need for a dramatisation at all, there are many hours worth of CCTV we are not allowed to see, so what exactly is the point… I’ll bet you a coffee that the BBC will have a red-head on the bench! Not a blond as really happened.

        The whole thing will be like watching 3 hours worth of the Panorama ‘documentary’ [can fiction be a ‘documentary?] where plod was showing off the white plastic ‘replica’ of the £3 counterfeit perfume bottle… the Met’s fake plastic bottle will have cost far more than the real fake.

     2. It seems our “hero” Bailey will not appear in the show :

        Quote : “The show has already come under criticism however, with the parents of Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey hitting out at the BBC’s plans to ‘sensationalise’ the incident.
        ‘This is inappropriately premature for the people of Salisbury and in particular for the victims and their families,’ said the parents in a letter.
        ‘We are all still trying to come to terms with what happened last year.’

        Or will the BBC tell his story without Nick´s permission ?
        Will Games of Thrones’ Mark Addy feature Ross Cassidy ? It´s quite a match :
        https://ibb.co/Nx7hF2N

        1. Liane,
           I can barely conceal my excitement.
           How could Bailey not be the star part?

           What do his parents believe he is recovering from?
           Don’t answer.

191. Today the Russian Embassy in London website reminds us;

     “600 days have passed since the Salisbury incident – no credible information or response from the British authorities”

     https://www.rusemb.org.uk/

     474 days since Dawn died

     482 days since the Amesbury Incident.

     It’s a long time to go without truthful answers.

     In those 600 days we have been given a lot of fiction, lies, obfuscation and disinformation but we have yet to hear the Truth

     Justice Delayed Is Justice Denied

192. “The chemical structure and action mechanism of a top-secret family of nerve agents known as novichoks may soon be exposed through their inclusion into the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) list of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW)”
     https://www.lebanonews.net/En/2019/10/24/veil-of-secrecy-may-soon-be-lifted-on-novichok-nerve-agent-used-to-attack-skripal/

     Also summary here:
     https://science.sciencemag.org/content/366/6464/404

     1. https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2019/10/poison-used-recent-attack-russian-spy-may-soon-be-banned

193. I know, I can’t help myself, it’s a character flaw.

     To Vick Angear, the writer at the Weston-super-mare Mercury.

     “Hello Vicky,

     I read your piece on the online version of the Mercury

     Hopefully you can get to interview the crew and the actors involved in their production.

     I would imagine that one of the most important scenes is what is known as “The Duck Feed” incident.

     You may not be fully up to speed, so bear with me, and I will explain.

     At approximately 1:40 pm on Sunday March 4th, the Skripals feed ducks in Salisbury. During this event, three young boys were also in the area.
     It became a joint exercise and one of the boys actually ate some of the bread that Sergei and Yulia Skripal had brought along.

     This feeding of the ducks was only minutes after the two Skripals had “interacted” with the door handle at home.
     Their BMW was parked at the local Sainsbury’s, and then after the duck feed they ( the Skripals) went onto Zizzi’s restaurant, where subsequently a table was so heavily contaminated with Novichok, that it was required to be incinerated.
     The Skripals later went to the Mill Pub, and this small timeline detail may also feature in the documentary. The Mill Pub followed Zizzi’s.

     How do we know this?

     Well, the parents of young Aiden Cooper, (one of the three boys) was interviewed by the police, so 8 days later, and CRUCIALLY the parents were shown CCTV of the duck feed at the water.

     Unbelievably, this CCTV footage is the only footage of the Skripals which has ever been shown of their events that Sunday.
     Very useful to the team at Dancing Ledge, as it would also show what clothes the Skripals were wearing that day, and that red bag, may or may not be visible.

     One would well imagine that the writers Adam Paterson and Declan Lawn, and chief executive Laurence Bowen, would have this dramatic incident as the focal point of their production.
     It does after all show again the tremendous fortitude and bravery of the Salisbury citizenry.
     The 8 day delay between the incident and the police finally getting round to inform the parents may have to be an accelerated timeline as we movie buffs say.

     I have copied Camille Curry, whom I believe is the agent for Adam and Declan, as they may wish to do additional follow up with Luke Cooper who is Aiden’s father.
     Aiden may want to play the part of himself, and I have it on good authority that the ducks also survived the ordeal but were not available for comment.

     Regards,

     Duncan

     1. Even more excitement.
        The stars have been named and it is reported to be a three parter !!

        https://deadline.com/2019/10/salisbury-rafe-spall-anne-marie-duff-bbc-novichok-drama-1202767870/

        Who will play Aiden Cooper?
        Tom Cruise to play Rob Slane, I think I read.

        1. I was hoping for Colin Firth, Duncan. They haven’t contacted me about it yet, though. For the life of me I can’t think why (not that I would agree to have anything to do with their pantomime).

           1. Rob,
              My Tinseltown connections tell me that Cruise has committed to “Mission Impossible 27, the final chapter.”

              Hugh Grant is being lined up.

              1. Not Grant!!! My wife has an intense disliking for the man. I won’t stand for it.

                 1. Can I be the helicopter pilot? I haven’t got a licence but it can’t be that difficult.

                    1. Can we get Aardman Animations to do it?

                       I love Wallace and Gromit as well as Shaun the Sheep.

                       Dicky the Duck anyone?

                       Perhaps the police should know that the Moon is made of cheese.

                       It’s ben on telly – so I believe itto be true.

                       Just as anaside I hope the police in the tragic incident in Tilbury are preparing to apologise to the truck driver ‘ suspected of murder? ‘

                       Due to an election we now have a veritable smorgasborg of media nonsense heading our way.

                       Prepare for Tsunami of tales for the next months.

                       Nice to see laura has been ‘ re-embedded ‘ for the duration.

                       1. Do you mean Laura Kuenssberg? I can’t stand her. I like Katya Adler though.

                       2. I think it would be better if it was turned into a Sherlock Holmes tale – it could be called The Case of the Duck in the Daytime.

                          1. By Jove I think you may have it.

                             The duck that didn’t quack perhaps ….

                             Where there is an absence of fact where you expect there to be, conclusions can be drawn as demonstrated by Arthur Conan Doyle in Silver Blaze where the dog didn’t bark

                             https://sherlock-holm.es/stories/pdf/a4/1-sided/silv.pdf

                             page 9

                             “Colonel Ross still wore an expression which showed the poor opinion which he had formed of my companion’s ability, but I saw by the Inspector’s face that his attention had been keenly aroused.
                             “You consider that to be important?” he asked.
                             “Exceedingly so.”
                             “Is there any point to which you would wish to draw my attention?”
                             “To the curious incident of the dog in the night-time.”
                             “The dog did nothing in the night-time.”
                             “That was the curious incident,” remarked Sherlock Holmes.”

                             And so it was that the children did not become sick (except in the mind of the chief of the CIA), as it was that no ducks died.

                             But there are many things that didn’t happen that should along with things that shouldn’t but did, sometimes they balance out quite nicely eg.;

                             Bailey was hailed a hero as a first responder (which he wasn’t) but the real first responder heroes, mother and daughter were initially completely airbrushed from the story but a year later flung back in and there are very good reasons for this.

                             Bailey of course had become contaminated at or near the bench, Colonel McCourt’s presence was beyond plausible explanation but Abigail’s school friends could not be relied on to keep their cameo roles secret.

                             The Air Ambulance that went the wrong way and when its course was corrected it flew so slowly that arrived at the scene after the patients had been evacuated to hospital, yet landed anyway. This is expalined by the “plan” having gone terribly wrong right at the outset, Sergei had done a runner. Sergei was not on the bench.

                             No urgency shown to trace the Duck Feed boys even after Novichok had been identified. No urgency because it was known there was no danger to those children, no Nerve Agent ever existed in Salisbury except at Porton Down.

                             No details of what the Skripals wore that day and no images of them shown to the public from the CCTV recordings despite police asking for the public’s help in tracing the couple’s movements that day. This is easy to explain the independent witnesses at the bench would have realised at once that the people on the bench were not the Skripals.

                             The time gaps of the main source of Novichok being discovered in Salisbury (the door handle) and the time it took the police to find the offending container in Charlie’s flat are again easy to explain. The story had to be rewritten, In the Salisbury case the car door handles were to be the offending levers until Bailey became sick. In Amesbury the delay was to shift the perfume bottle find from Lizzy Gardens to a Charity bin. Charlie’s false memory had added that it was not meant to. Charlie knew he had the bottle in his coat pocket he couldn’t remember where it came from but he did know he did not wear his coat to the park the day he visited.

                             And it is so throughout the sorry tale, absence of facts, then their unexpected insertion then the altering of those “facts” all point to a Hoax in disarray and the script being drafted and redrafted on the hoof.

                             1. We also have a ‘dog that didn’t bark’!

                                “Neighbours said officers asked whether they had heard a commotion or Glushkov’s dog barking on Monday when the 68-year-old died.”
                                https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5812914/nikolai-glushkov-daughter-natalia-in-hiding-putin/

                                “The dog was huge and fiercely loyal. I don’t know how his attacker got past the dog,”
                                https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/mar/16/police-confirm-that-nikolai-glushkov-was-murdered-but-why

                             2. Well done Anonymous and so well written too. Sherlock once told me “What one man can invent another can discover”.

                             3. “What one man can invent another can discover,” said Holmes. There is a cab coming to convey you to HM Prison Belmarsh, Mr. Younger. But, meanwhile, you have time to make some small reparation for the injury you have wrought. Are you aware that the Russians have themselves lain under grave suspicion of the attempted murder of the Skripals, and that it was only my presence here and the knowledge which I happened to possess which has saved them from the accusation? The least that you owe them is to make it clear to the whole world that they were in no way, directly or indirectly, responsible for the Skripals possible tragic end.”

                                “I ask nothing better,” said the the head of MI6. “I guess the very best case I can make for myself is the absolute naked truth.”

                                “It is my duty to warn you that it will be used against you,” cried the Inspector Basu, with the magnificent fair-play of the British criminal law.

                                lol

                             4. Yulia posing next the the Dancing Man Brewery Pub in Southampton, just across the road from the Holiday Inn where she used to work.

                                But did you note the name of the villain in the Dancing Men Mystery? A bit close to home don’t you think?

                                https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/5295/production/_100314112_a55dd07c-3f04-4044-adee-3fd414def956.jpg

                             5. https://sherlock-holm.es/stories/pdf/a4/1-sided/danc.pdf

        2. Exclusive images of lead character Detective Sergeant Bailey
           https://img.huffingtonpost.com/asset/58eb827416000020004d9a7e.png
           https://www.bikesure.co.uk/bikesureblog/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/Classic-motorcycles-on-TV-5-768×488.jpg

           No ducks or sheep were harmed in the making of this drama
           https://i.guim.co.uk/img/static/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2009/1/28/1233154426363/Gallery-Heartbeat-Heartbe-008.jpg?width=700&quality=85&auto=format&fit=max&s=8c84fd53a0dbca75ce6b834cf1c74356

           1. I don’t see any ducks. Oh, here they are:

              https://apnews.com/c83675e545ef415d94fa1c69c2a9196b

     2. Seriously, the BBC are flying close to illegality with their fantasy dramas.

        I’m still waiting for the Ofcom judgement on my complaint about their Panorama broadcast in which they perverted the cause of justice in refering to the two Russian individuals as “assassins” when no such proof exists.

        Will they be exploiting the death of Dawn Sturgess in order to promote how very “brave” the bobbies and locals were ? Truly disgusting.

194. The Weston Mercury is reporting the BBC Docudrama being filmed in Weston-Super-Mare

     https://www.thewestonmercury.co.uk/news/tv-crews-filming-bbc-drama-in-weston-super-mare-1-6337816

     The following is a comment submitted but not published;

     “It is believed Dawn and her partner Charlie Rowley – who has since
     recovered – came into contact with a bottle of Novichok which had been
     discarded by the Skripals’ attackers.”

     Just a 4 things wrong with this sentence

     1) Charlie has not recovered and may never fully recover

     2) The evidence submitted by Porton Down in High Court papers suggests that the substance may not have been Novichok or indeed even a Nerve Agent, the evidence says it may have been a “related compound”. So if Porton Down don’t know what it is I can’t see how the Government knew where it came from.

     3) The evidence says it was not the Skripals that were attacked, Yulia had reddish brown hair that day, the female on the bench is said to have had blonde hair by two eye witnesses at the scene.

     4) The police are unable to connect the Salisbury Incident and the perfume bottle found in Charlie Rowley’s flat with sufficient evidence to bring charges against the two suspects in the Salisbury Incident. That is why no charges have been brought in connection with Dawn’s death.

     1. Not only are there no charges in connection with Dawn’s death, there is no news at all about the rest of the ‘team of 6’ who were allegedly involved in the Salisbury incident.

        “The British police believe that he [54-year-old former FSB officer, code-named Gordon, aka Mikhail Savitskishas] already returned to Russia and the British will never have the opportunity to interrogate him. In London, it is believed that a team of six people participated in the poisoning of Sergei Skripal.”
        https://www.svoboda.org/a/29185223.html

        No pictures, no names… in over 18 months, nothing about any of the others!

        So can we suggest who might have been in the Russian team of 6? How about: P&B (whatever they were up to); the couple in the CCTV; and the pair of ‘masked’ people seen in the area. In fact the team was probably bigger than 6. There must have been a driver to collect the pets in the morning and at least one driver to get the Skripals away from The Mill in the afternoon.

        I happen to believe that the early reports of a large team were probably true.

        1. One of the many other things that makes no sense, is the question of how P&B managed to take trains back to London, that didn’t exist and how they managed to collect their luggage before returning to Heathrow.

           Totally speculative but what if their bags were actually waiting in the car/black van that took Sergei to SW London on 4 March? P&B traveled in the same vehicle and were dropped off at or near Heathrow, while Sergei continued to the house in SW London (only a few miles away) where he spent the night of 4 March. Don’t know, just an idea… but it works better than imaginary trains.

           1. Paul,

              Sounds reasonable. Do you have the address of the house in SW London?

              1. lol! Wouldn’t that be helpful! I have a strong suspicion but sadly, zero evidence to support it. I have tried but have drawn a complete blank. There might be a clue in the moving banner at the top of the Russian Embassy website though.

195. WOW !!! Everybody please read this !!!

     José Bustani, First Director General OPCW :
     “The convincing evidence of irregular behaviour in the OPCW investigation of the alleged Douma chemical attack confirms doubts and suspicions I already had.
     My hope is that the concerns expressed publicly by the Panel, in its joint consensus statement, will catalyse a process by which the Organisation can be resurrected to become the independent and non-discriminatory body it used to be.”
     https://timhayward.wordpress.com/2019/10/23/unacceptable-practices-at-opcw-by-jose-bustani-and-international-panel/

     Now the OPCW should come forward with their “irregular behaviour” in the Skripal case !

     1. This story is starting to get some traction and is now appearing elsewhere:

        https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/wikileaks-releases-new-documents-questioning-syria-chemical-attack-narrative

196. https://www.spirefm.co.uk/news/local-news/2975308/drama-based-on-novichok-in-salisbury-begins-filming-this-week/

     Why not film it in Salisbury?

     1. Possibly because locals who might witness some of the scene “re-enactments” might awaken just a little bit and be wont to remark “Wait a minute, I don’t recall that”, or “What about the ducks?”.

        Some of the best fiction is based on fiction.

197. Penetration and exfiltration. Together with careful probing ofcourse.

     1. Wot dus that meen. I’m unedicated.

198. Somebody has just created a Wikipedia article on Pablo Miller and Wikipedia’s chief censor, MartinezMD, is desperately trying to get it deleted.

     https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Pablo_Miller

199. Hi Paul, Can you please tell us more about the crow ladder trap and how you found it at Fairford.

     1. I think the last time I mentioned anything about the traps was back in February:
        https://www.theblogmire.com/shiny-new-thread/#comment-24202

        At that time, we had confirmed that ladder traps had been used at Fairford but because the base has been on a care and maintenance basis since 2010, the traps are no longer in use. I had been told that the traps were located in wooded areas and also in an adjoining quarry (at the end of the runway). You can see in the still images of Yulia that the trap in that picture is very much overgrown and is obviously not in current use. The pile of tree bark on the ground, to the left of the trap, had also taken on a dark colour from lying there for many years and is also now also surrounded by weeds.

        As further evidence of the disuse of the traps (and general lack of on-going bird control) at Fairford, in 2016, a specialist company was called in to remove a raven’s nest from a water tower, close to the runway, at the base.

        I have now had contact with someone who used to work on the base who was able to confirm that the trap seen behind Yulia in the video, is one of the old traps at Fairford, although the area is now much more overgrown than it used to be.

        1. “I had been told that the traps were located in wooded areas and also in an adjoining quarry…”

           The quarry sounds interesting. Is that where the bodies are buried?

200. Just a thought…I was watching a documentary about a section of MI6 called “the increment” who are responsible for assassinations and were apparently involved in Princess Diana’s death (although they wanted to scare her not murder).

     Could they be responsible for skripal and/or Dawns poisoning?

     1. Its “highly likely” (I love that term). One of the roles of The Increment is “clandestine insertion and extraction of intelligence agents”

        https://www.eliteukforces.info/rumours/the-increment.php

        1. “Highly likely” is interesting, it really means “the chances are” but for me, after Skripal, it has come to mean “the following is a HMG lie” lol

        2. One of the ironies of all this Spy V Spy stuff is that very often these murky outfits are not very good at what they do.

           Big mouth ( or was he being helpful in his own self deceiving way?) Donald managed to raise the Saccoolas thing to even greater heights
           of speculation and theory with his intervention.

           On many occasions MI5 and MI6 have cocked up by trying to control the narrative of a particular story.

           Hence the disbelief of many on youtube/Twitter/blogs etc even when on the odd occasion they may be telling a truth but no-one believes it when they do.

           Here’s a question about the alleged Russian assassins which maybe only the spooks might know:

           If the pair weren’t in Salisbury to poison a couple of people – what exactly were they there for?

           They should know by now whether this happened or not and even where it happened.

           CCTV will give a lot of info – we’ve seen none – they’ve seen it all.

           It is intriguing that many CCTV cameras tracked and viewed the two Russians carefully and in some cases High Def.

           They even got some nice shots from a CCTV in a coin shop.

           If I knew you were coming – I’d have baked a cake takes on new meaning if they knew the Russians were coming so we hatched a plot.

           My theory is that the PTB knew these two Russians were arriving and could have acted to a plan.

           Possibly.

           The plan only involved Russians initially, not surprisingly and when two people outside those parameters cropped up at a later date they were stuck.

           The problem with all this spookery is that sometimes, someone ( or some people ) think thety are’ helping things along’ by doing things to
           reinforce the narrative.

           That’s why the cause of Dawn’s death will never be known.

           In fact it could all be buried that deep that even Gavin – Go away and shut up- Williamson didn’t even know about it.

           The spooks don’t tell the politicians about everything they do in Defence of the Realm.

           1. “The spooks don’t tell the politicians about everything they do in Defence of the Realm”.

              Yes, and not only in Britain. I remember, some years ago, the Norwegian spooks built a facility to track Russian submarines without the knowledge or consent of the Norwegian parliament.

              1. I think it was illegal because it undermined Norway’s neutral status.

                 1. https://www.norway.no/en/missions/nato/norway-nato/

                    Norway is a NATO member. Sweden is neutral.

                    1. My mistake.

201. The British state disappears Yulia and Sergei Skripal and our Members of Parliament do not even attempt to question ministers. We are not sliding towards a National Security State, it has long been established, so much so, it is taken-for-granted by the whole of the establishment.

202. Rob,

     You really do live in some sort of Peter Pan world in Salisbury.
     No mention of postponed inquests, comments from officials, deafening silence from the Salisbury Journal and much more.
     But now this:

     https://www.spirefm.co.uk/news/local-news/2974284/salisbury-girl-recognised-for-supporting-cops-on-cordons/

     1. All we need now is to discover that Greta Thunberg was in Salisbury at the appropriate time. Joke.

     2. Why the hell would anyone let an 8-year old anywhere near an area where there might be Novichok?!?!?!?

        I can’t find in the article what this award-winning Margot actually did. The closest I can find is this, which only reports what Margot’s mum says Margot wanted to do (not did):

        “Margot just wanted to go and say hello and have a chat with them”

        I’m curious how often Certificates of Appreciation are given out by police. In this investigation, there have been awards given out left, right, and centre. Hey police, how about only giving out an award when you actually catch the buggers!!!

        1. Why is this coming out now? Did the police on the cordon make a note of Margot’s pleasantries and chat, and decide, after over a year of reflection, that it was indeed worthy of formal recognition?

     3. Jeez, ’twas in January this year that Spire FM reported that Abigail McCourt had been nominated by her mother for one of the newspaper’s Lifesaver awards for helping mum in delivering first aid to Sergei and Yulia Skripal on the park bench in March last year.

        https://www.spirefm.co.uk/news/local-news/2782928/exclusive-teenage-girl-describes-moment-she-found-collapsed-skripals/

        Nothing about whether Abby along with mum Alison needed hospitalisation or 24 hours in a special facility at Porton Down being continuously hosed down with water to wash off all that Novichok contamination.

        Where does Spire FM find these young brave girls?

        1. My memory is going. Maybe I was in Salisbury on the day of the poisoning. Maybe the Novichok is giving me false memory syndrome.

           1. Can I have an award please? I might have done something useful.

           2. Blunderbuss, I am starting to remember some of the details, it’s a bit hazy but I can see some of it now.

              You owe £3.50 for the big ice cream I bought you.
              I was the guy with the “Crimescene do not cross tape”

              Don’t you remember? You had your usual Hazmat suit on and you had your chemistry set with you in a suitcase, ( you weren’t in the suitcase) which at the time I thought was a bit strange.

              1. I am a chemist so I probably had my chemistry set with me. I remember eating an ice cream (Novichok flavour) but I don’t remember anything after that.

     4. “The St Osmund’s Catholic Primary School handed out ice cream to the officers as well as giving them updates on the World Cup”.

        Perhaps Margot was captain of the school’s “ice cream and world cup team”.

     5. The real ‘hero of the hour’ was of course, Jamie Paine. He stayed to help (according to his version) and even got some bodily fluids on himself that he just ‘brushed off’…. he then ‘ran the gauntlet’ and wasn’t checked out at SDH!

        For all that effort and bravado, Jamie didn’t even get shortlisted for an award… the awards went to a school girl who (we are told) said “Oh! Look mum!” (but really because she had been blabbing at school about what had happened on 4 March) and a young girl who was nice to the police (but really because… well just because).

        Shouldn’t Jamie have been given the ‘Freedom of the City’ by now? Or was that all just nonsense too?

203. D Day +3 and still no mention on MSM of DS’s inquest, postponed or not, sine die or not.

     It all strikes me as highly unusual although with the ‘Skripal case’ nothing would surprise me as to media silence and deception.

     Does anyone have any official record of what happened at Salisbury Coroners last Friday?
     Surely, without it this thread is just speculative?

     Helmer, you started the rumour so I think it’s over to you 😉

     1. Scooby.
        Debra Twort of the coroner’s office told me (by email) the her office prepared a press release to be sent to the Met to be “somethinged”
        The “somethinged” is where we get into a grey area.

        Issued? Approved? Embellished? Published?

        The implication was that her communique to the Met was a press release that would be issued by the Met.
        As Rob points out, why would the Coroner’s Office not simply issue their own press release?
        Why would the Met need any content or input from Ridley’s office?

        As the Met have not yet issued this press release, we would have thought the media might have inquired.

204. I suspect somebody is going to blame the result of the 2016 Brexit referendum on Russian interference and then link it to the Skripal poisoning.

205. The re-writing of false history continues apace (the level of fallaciousness intensified)

     (Thank you Brendan for the link)

     Urban ‘fesses up that he (and others) got it wrong

     https://twitter.com/MarkUrban01/status/1174688681875165184

     Part 6 of 7 shows the desperation that they now have in excusing themselves for not warning the public earlier as to the identities of the two Russian suspects.

     Had information and warnings been put out earlier it is possible that Dawn’s death could have been averted

     Part 6 of 7

     “The new edition of Skripal Files considers evidence that the prime suspects’ identities were concealed for months, including from MPs, in the hope that the GRU officers would travel again, and become liable to arrest”

     The “truth” at the time of the release of the information by the Met (5th Oct) was that the information had been withheld because;

     1) there was a fear that there could be a risk to England football supporters in Russia if the information was released earlier and

     2) (This is a double lie). This lie was actually used at the time the information was released (5th Oct), it isn’t a new lie. It wasn’t true then, it isn’t true now.

     The European Arrest Warrant was obtained the same day that the Met put the suspects information out (5th Oct), the CPS announced that in a statement the same day. There could have been no arrest unless the British authorities expected the pair to return to the UK.

     That the British authorities knew the identities of the suspects and did not obtain an EAW earlier is utterly disgraceful and I hope those concerned are called at the Inquest to tell the truth as to why the EAW was not obtained earlier and why the public were lied to.

     The same is true for the City Stay Hotel, the guests, staff, management and owner, how could the police justify, 1) Allowing the hotel to stay open and declare it safe on the day they say Novichok was positively identified to be present in the premises.

     Lies upon Lies Upon Lies. Charlie, Dawn’s family and the public want answers not more Lies.

     The facts

     March 4th Salisbury Incident, the poison container never recovered

     May 4th City Stay Hotel Raided, Novichok Identified but kept secret from public, guests and staff, hotel declared safe and allowed to stay open

     June 30th Dawn and Charlie poisoned

     July 15th World Cup Final

     Oct 5th European Arrest Warrant obtained and MPS make a public statement re the Russian Suspects

     https://twitter.com/MrHarryCole/status/1037321622464737280

     https://www.cps.gov.uk/cps/news/cps-statement-salisbury

     https://web.archive.org/web/20181005041635/http://news.met.police.uk/news/counter-terrorism-police-release-images-of-two-suspects-in-connection-with-salisbury-attack-320534

     ….

     The two fold reasons given for delaying the identification of Petrov and Boshirov are untrue.

     1) “British authorities made a ‘strategic’ decision to keep quiet about the suspects in the hope they’d make one more trip to Europe where they could be caught, according to the paper.”

     2) “Their identities were also withheld over fears that England fans would be targeted in Russia.”

     https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6145813/Naming-Salisbury-Novichok-assassins-delayed-protect-English-fans-World-Cup.html

     “Petrov and Boshirov were known to police as early as April after being caught on CCTV at Gatwick, Heathrow and Salisbury.”

     The World Cup Final was held on 15th July, England last game (3rd place playoff) on the 14th

     So a deliberate delay taken to hand file of evidence to the CPS for them to decide whether to bring charges and obtain a EAW. That process could have been done without alerting the public.

     On the 5th September the Basu made a plea for witness sightings of the Russian suspects;

     https://www.counterterrorism.police.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/ACSO-Neil-Basu.pdf

     The Met repeat the appeal on 22 Nov

     http://news.met.police.uk/news/counter-terrorism-police-continue-appeal-over-salisbury-suspects-334173

     ….

     NB There could be no expectation of the pair being arrested in Europe until the EAW was obtained

     1. LOL. Urban :
        “How police & a UK special forces search team inadvertently spread Novichok through Skripal’s house during the 1st week after the poisoning. Some poison was on the door handle, some had dripped down onto the threshold, where the searchers feet picked it up as they entered.”

        It took Urban (and MI6) 18 month to discover the cocomat at Sergei´s door and come to the conclusion that it must have been sucked with “Novichok”.
        We were talking about it a long time ago.
        Poor Urban – it´s too late to make such ridiculous explanations.

        By the way, could Sergei sue the Wiltshire police to spread poison all over his house

        1. Liane,
           You realise that Skripal’s missing cat, (not the dead one) is looking more like the guilty one?
           Can a cat leap to the door handle?
           Was there a cat flap?

           1. You may be right Duncan

              Macavity the master criminal with mysterious powers is highly likely to have had his paw in this little caper.

        2. Only the Skripls were poisoned, by MI6, no one else was poisoned. Bailey and Charlie were TOLD they were poisoned, that’s different to ACTUALLY being poisoned. The tampering of the blood and other samples was carried out at Porton Down under the supervision of Prof Tim Atkins.

     2. Based on the limited number of Urban’s Tweets I can access, the man needs some psychological support.
        I wonder if he hears voices?

     3. Is this Mark Urban the same Mark Urban who served in the same British Army regiment at the same time as one Pablo Miller who later recruited Sergei Skripal as a double agent in Estonia circa 1995?

        https://www.twipu.com/DocPakistan/tweet/1075736760284528640

        Well, well, well, what a coincidence!

        1. The Royal Tank Regiment, Bovington, Dorset:

           “The Bovington signal course’s director reported that Gaddafi successfully overcame problems learning English, displaying a firm command of voice procedure. Noting that Gaddafi’s favourite hobbies were reading and playing football, he thought him an “amusing officer, always cheerful, hard-working, and conscientious”. Gaddafi disliked England, claiming British Army officers racially insulted him and finding it difficult adjusting to the country’s culture.” [that was when he was at Sandhurst].

           Bovington – last home of Lawrence of Arabia.

           They both liked Bovington.

206. The other murder linked to Skripal has also ‘gone very quiet’.

     “12 September 2019 marks exactly one year and half since Russian national Nikolay Glushkov was murdered in London under mysterious circumstances.

     We regret to state that the British side has failed to provide any meaningful reply to our numerous enquiries. Since April 2018 the Home Office has been ignoring the official request of the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation for legal assistance over Russia’s own criminal case into the death of Nikolay Glushkov. The British authorities have also been silent regarding the Embassy’s repeated proposals to arrange a meeting between the Russian Ambassador and the Met Police Commissioner or hold law-enforcement experts’ bilateral contacts.

     Obviously, the UK is grossly violating the 1959 European Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters, refusing to provide the Russian side access to the investigation into the death of a Russian national. The fact that the British authorities are thoroughly concealing information on the investigation is another example of Britain’s contempt for the legitimate interests of the relatives and loved ones of the deceased, as well as those of the wider public.

     Such an attitude on the part of the UK defies logic. We are dealing with a serious criminal offence, which, in contrast with other known cases, isn`t politicized by the British side, but the investigation is not either transparent or effective. Apparently this is due to reasons disclosure of which would not be favourable to the UK.”
     https://www.rusemb.org.uk/fnapr/6914

     The MSM is an complete disgrace! Absolutely useless.

207. Has anyone come across any official media or gov statements about DS’s inquest?
     It’s like all the media have been told not to give life to the fact and just haven’t mentioned it at all.
     If anyone has some official record about what did/didn’t happen on the 18th Oct at Salisbury Coroners it would be nice as we’re all just pishing in the wind.
     Did it actually get officially postponed for the 4th time and now it’s sine die?

     Have the Russians come back for a reason why Boshirov was at some high-up int officer’s daughters wedding?
     It could be easily explained but nobody is bothering.

     I’m sure if the Russians actually wanted to they could put a complete halt to all these
     ‘conspiracy theories’ about them and the ineptness of their world-class int services.
     It’s almost as though the Russians are happy to draw flak for some unknown (to us) reason.

     1. About the presence of “Boshirov” at the wedding of Averyanov’s daughter, the following comment on Craig Murray’s blog
        https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2019/10/no-inquest-for-dawn-sturgess/comment-page-2/#comment-901775
        gives some links :

        [QUOTE]
        TJH
        October 19, 2019 at 21:52
        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.
        http://archive.fo/0xPwp
        Note the the wedding photographer has taken a picture of the table arrangement and note the Chepiga family.
        https://017qndpynh-flywheel.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/guest_list.jpg
        https://web.archive.org/web/20191012160912/https://www.zvonovawedding.ru/misha-i-sasha
        The hotel venue in Moscow still has the video of the wedding up at following link. The very last video.
        https://seneshal.com/video/
        Fleeting glimpses of Chepiga can be seen at 1:35 and 1:45.
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pc5JY6tAdOk
        [/QUOTE]

        Here :
        https://017qndpynh-flywheel.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/guest_list.jpg
        the 11th name on the right column is “Andreï Chepiga”.
        Here :
        http://archive.fo/0xPwp
        if we say that there are 26 rows with 2 pictures on each row, then on the 19th row from the top (8th row from the bottom), the picture on the left shows somebody looking as “Boshirov”. The image of this man does not seem very well integrated with the rest of the photo, but I would not dare to affirm that it is photoshopped

        1. It’s the apparent complete lack of interest from the Russian side that confuses me.

           They could completely dump all over the UK’s ‘official narrative’ if they so wished but have made no effort to maximise on the very good hand they’ve been dealt.
           Debunking huge parts of the myth would be easy.
           Boshirov/ Petrov (whoever) should explain further their connections just to clear the air but they are by no means Cols in the assassination wing of GU.
           They arrived hours after the Skripals left their house (never to return) and left before the targets apparently dropped.
           There is no evidence that they did anything more than bimble around a cold and wintery Salisbury.

           The UK’s story is ridiculous.
           A show of hands.
           Who’s in the ‘there never even was a nerve agent at Salisbury and Amesbury’ club?

           1. “Who’s in the ‘there never even was a nerve agent at Salisbury and Amesbury’ club?”

              I am.

              1. 5 days in and still no mention of Dawn Sturgess’s coroner suspension on MSM….
                 NOT EVEN RT have covered it AFAIK.
                 What’s the score here?
                 Don’t we deserve an explanation?

           2. I should think if Boshirov and Petrov were to try to explain what they were doing in Salisbury over the weekend when the Skripals were stricken on the park bench, or any connections they have to military intelligence (apart from when they would have had to do their compulsory military service), they’d only end up implicating themselves more in this whole debacle. It’s probably best that they stay out of the whole business and not dig themselves a deeper grave. Likewise the Russian government and embassy should just keep their distance and observe the British narrative fall further apart, and only get involved if there is a chance that the Skripals are still alive, still in the UK and still want to return to Russia.

              1. The reason Russia keeps quiet is because they did have a role on 4 March (but absolutely nothing to do with poisoning anyone) and they do not want to open the box about what they were really up to.

                 It was not the Skripals on the bench (of that we can be 100% sure) and there is evidence to suggest that they both left the UK very soon afterwards (although not everyone here agrees about that).

                 Russia’s role that day was to exfiltrate Sergei, who had been assiduously working for Russia for his entire period in the UK. There are many who believe that Sergei’s earlier ‘trial’ was fake, intended to give him a deep cover – whether that is true or not, there is still no valid reason for Sergei being included in the 2010 spy swap. Something was going on there that will explain why he ended up in the UK; what he was doing in the UK; and, why Russia had to get him out again.

                 Exactly the same applies to MH17 – Russia most certainly did not have anything to do with shooting down the plane but there were other things Russia was doing that day that they do not want to admit. So, for the most part, they keep quiet.

                 HMG’s Skripal narrative is complete nonsense. Everything we have been told about 4 March is untrue – starting with the Skripals being on a bench poisoned with a nerve agent. It is all untrue! Russia is not going to unpick HMG’s lies because those lies are unpicking themselves.

                 Russia will continue to observe (I imagine with amusement) the ridiculous flailing of HMG. From time to time they will throw a spanner in the works – such as the obviously staged phone call from Yulia to Viktoria last year (just as HMG was saying Yulia was at death’s door) and the equally staged voicemail from Sergei earlier this year. How do you imagine that it came to be that Russia released both those recordings?

                 Why also do you imagine that the UK is in breach of its international obligations to allow consular access to the Skripals? Well, if the Skripals are not in the hands of HMG, what else can HMG do?

                 1. When knitting rope it is best to ensure that one has knitted enough, though not too much, as to ensure that the length is sufficient to enable a drop which, while ensuring that the hangee’s neck is broken neatly and cleanly, will not separate the head from the body.

                    Taken from the companion GRU volume to that which provides guidance on how to paste novichok onto door handles.

                    1. I am quite sure that the Russians have the measure of HMG – the rope will neither be too short nor too long.

                       I always appreciate how the Russians manage to say things that, depending on the knowledge of the listener, means two completely different things:

                       “Putin says he does not believe English secret services poisoned Skripal”
                       https://tass.com/world/1069563

                       Option A: Putin is being a statesman and is looking to smooth over the cracks and repair the relationship with the UK;
                       Option B: Putin is having a laugh! He knows that nobody got poisoned with anything anyway and is poking fun at the HMG and their ridiculous narrative.

                 2. Paul:
                    It was not the Skripals on the bench…
                    …there is evidence [what evidence?] to suggest tnat they both left the UK soon afterwards…
                    Russia’s role that day was to exfiltrate Sergei…
                    …the obviously staged phone call from Yulia to Viktoria…
                    …the equally staged voicemail from Sergei…

                    It is useless to ask Paul to add “I think…”/”My theory is…” to his bold statements. So I have to say that Paul’s statements are just Paul’s statements and nothing more.

                    1. In your comment below Milda, you say: “Sergei is certainly not in Russia.”

                       How do you know that?

                       Did you mean to say: “I think…”/”My theory is… Sergei is certainly not in Russia”?

                       What’s good for the goose…

                       As far as evidence is concerned, I now have a 100% positive identification of the crow ladder trap, seen in Yulia’s video… it is at Fairford. Yulia’s video was shot under the control of the US government not HMG. Whether you say that you believe it or not, I really don’t care.

208. Tom Welsh says:
     October 18, 2019 at 9:42 am
     “All the inquest has to do is to find how Dawn Sturgess met with her death. It does not have to say who was responsible”.

     Exactly. It might go like this:

     Coroner: How did Dawn Sturgess meet her death?

     Police person: We don’t know.

     Coroner: Was she poisoned?

     Police person: We don’t know.

     Coroner: Why don’t you know?

     Police person: Somebody cremated the body and destroyed the evidence.

209. I’m Inclined to think that the reason the Russians have not attempted to disprove Bellingcat’s assertion that Boshirov and Petrov are Chepiga and Myshkin is that in the past Boshirov and Petrov would have served in the army, as is required of all Russian male citizens once they reach the age of 18 years. So B and P’s personal details will definitely be in a military database in Russia. What that database (or databases, depending on what the two men did, together or individually) is, maybe the Russian authorities may not even know as it could be quite huge. The Russians cannot say B and P have had no military connection if every man in Russia past 18 years of age has had to do military duty.

     The onus should have been on Bellingcat to demonstrate how it found that B and P are Chepiga and Myshkin. But Eliot Higgins probably won’t reveal how Bellingcat came by such information because it most likely did not come from open sources and Bellingcat claims to use only data from sources that (theoretically anyway) anyone with online access can find.

     1. Jen, you said :
        “The onus should have been on Bellingcat to demonstrate how it found that B and P are Chepiga and Myshkin. But Eliot Higgins probably won’t reveal how Bellingcat came by such information because it most likely did not come from open sources and Bellingcat claims to use only data from sources that (theoretically anyway) anyone with online access can find.”

        I agree with this part of your post. On the other hand, I don’t understand the first part.

        By the way, there are speculations that the “leaks” compromising the GRU could come from rival Russian intelligence services as FSB or SVR :
        https://zloy-odessit.livejournal.com/2914624.html
        but I don’t know what it is worth.

        1. “… What that database (or databases, depending on what the two men did, together or individually) is, maybe the Russian authorities may not even know as it could be quite huge …”

           Reviewing my comment just now, what I should have said in the second sentence of the first paragraph should be:

           “… What that database contains – or those databases, depending on what the two men did, together or individually, contain – maybe the Russian authorities may not even know as any information regarding what Boshirov and Petrov did during their compulsory service respectively could be spread throughout the database/s, subject to security firewalls and therefore either difficult or even impossible to find, extract and verify that it relates to either of those men, or needing a lengthy period of time to do the same …”

           I hope that clears the confusion. I was originally typing very quickly on my smartphone.

210. Excellent summary from Craig Murray:

     https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/

     We look forward to more light.

211. “The Coroner’s Court cannot establish to the requisite standard how Ms Sturgess died, much less the identity of any individual or government that might be responsible”.

     http://archive.is/GJFIA

     Yes, one of the main reasons being that Dawn’s body was hastily cremated to destroy any evidence of what killed her.

212. I would like the writer to throw whatever light can be thrown on the visa process.
     It seems to me very unlikely that Russia sends its agents to get a regular visa. Finger prints high definition photos background checks and so on. Surely that would be the last thing you would do if your agents were upto no good.
     Secondly do we have any idea who who signed the visa. Would it be an MI6 agent. Could it be an associate of Christopher Steele.

213. Checkout my easy-to-read account, ‘The Great British Skripal Hoax’
     https://www.amazon.co.uk/Great-British-Skripal-Hoax/dp/0244192561/ref=pd_ecc_rvi_2
     Get the new edition, as I’ve updated it.
     I asked Rob if he’d like to do a Foreword, but he didn’t want to!

214. “Prosecutors from CPS Counter Terrorism Division have considered the evidence and have concluded there is sufficient evidence to provide a realistic prospect of conviction and it is clearly in the public interest to charge Alexander Petrov and Ruslan Boshirov, who are Russian nationals, with the following offences:”

     And yet they haven’t been charged (AFAIK).

     Moreover, how the coroner be unable to hold an inquest for lack of evidence, such a long time after CPS publicly announced that it had enough evidence to charge Petrov and Boshirov with “a realistic prospect of conviction”?

     All the inquest has to do is to find how Dawn Sturgess met with her death. It does not have to say who was responsible.

     It seems to me that the legal need for an inquest is causing the British government huge embarrassment, which is why it has been postponed sine die.

     Could this be why the body of Sergei Skripal (and perhaps that of Yluia) have never been produced? No body, no need for an inquest.

     1. Clearly no one pulling the strings seriously believes there will ever be any kind of prosecution. Why else would the Metropolitan police have taken part in that BBC Panorama reconstruction which would have been so prejudicial to any criminal trial. Numerous senior officers were wheeled on in front of the cameras declaring Anatoliy Chepiga and Alexander Mishkin completely guilty. If they both turned up at Heathrow tomorrow and surrendered themselves the authorities would have one hell of a problem.

     2. Didn’t Yulia survive and return to Russia? As for Sergei he was still living last I heard, although that was here at the blogmire some time ago.

        1. The last we heard of Sergei was a voicemail message in May:
           https://www.dailymail.co.uk/video/news/video-1931238/Video-Sergei-Skripal-speaks-time-Salisbury-poisoning.html

           The most recent information I have, is that Yulia is in the United States and Sergei is in Russia.

           1. Thanks Paul, that is interesting. So the deadly Novichok didn’t live up to expectations after all. The Russians will be going back to the drawing board in that case. 🙂

              1. One would assume that the Russians were rather embarrassed – no wonder they don’t want to talk about it.

                 Charlie Rowley got it all over his hands on Saturday morning and according to his own account last December, he was sitting watching himself on TV news for a WEEK before he found out that Dawn had died… so that would have been, at most, a couple of days after he was ‘contaminated’ – round about the same time his brother was telling the world Charlie was “fine”.

                 Novihoax sounds completely naff. Probably why P&B chucked it in a bin.

              2. David,
                 I would not advise you to take Paul’s statements seriously. Sergei is certainly not in Russia. Sergei and Yulia are in the UK or in an ally country.

              3. David, Milda wastes lots of time trying to distract people from the truth when they get too close. Ask her why the pets had been removed from Sergei’s house before the police arrived; or, ask her who the blond woman was on the bench; or, perhaps why the air ambulance paramedic who attended Dawn was wearing a GWAAC uniform and not WAA (since the official story only has Wiltshire Air Ambulance attending to Dawn). She also makes futile attempts to attack me – she once accused me of being a “spy”, I still laugh at that.

                 1. Spelling error, she probably me ‘spry’.

                    1. meant

                    2. With regard to Paul, I meant a “troll.”

                       1. Before you post anything else Milda, ponder on this: it is better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubt.

                       2. I think that Paul and Milda are both intelligent commentators, and no trolls.

                          1. I wish Milda would stop attacking Paul and like the rest of us do here, just politely state her case for what she believes happened instead.

                             1. Love often blossoms between ardent foes

                                😉

215. “…However, the officers’ work is always carried out under the authority of the coroner who works independently from both the local authority and the local police force [my emphasis].”

     Strictly speaking, the Met is not a “local” authority or police force.

216. there were similar shenanigans with the st pancras coroner before the litvinenko inquiry. the first coroner was removed after what looked like a kompromat job – claim that he had used his influence to wangle the appointment of his wife. the inquest was postponed and postponed – supposedly because they were waiting for the (unlikely) extradition of lugovoi et al. eventually, it was turned into a ‘public’ inquiry, in which much of the evidence was subject to PII, heard only by the judge (not even by the lawyers for the various parties), and not included in the eventual report.

     1. Yes, Mary. In order to follow the Litvinenko line the MET needed suspects.
        But until now R/B are not accused in connection with Dawn. And I think they will never be. The UK has NO interest at all to ever see the Skripal case at court,

217. This article is being published on several alt-media sites:

     “Earlier this month (October 2019) however, the Coroners Court issued a public statement in which is announced that the inquest into Dawn Sturgess’ death had been adjourned indefinitely.

     This is an extraordinary development. It means in effect that the whole of the allegations made over the preceding 18 months, about the cause of death, the persons allegedly responsible, and all the political and propaganda barrage that went with it has now effectively being abandoned.

     The Coroner’s Court cannot establish to the requisite standard how Ms Sturgess died, much less the identity of any individual or government that might be responsible.”

     https://journal-neo.org/2019/10/16/new-developments-in-the-skripal-case-reveal-it-for-the-sham-it-always-was/

     It is odd that it is so definitive that the statement was issued and appears to quote from it… it was written by an Australian barrister, so maybe it is just wrong.

     [Having just tried to access the page again, it is not now available on neo.org – It is still available on some of the alt sites, so I have archived a copy of it here: http://archive.is/GJFIA%5D

     1. WTF! The archive link above is not what I typed! It should be:

        http://archive.is/GJFIA

        1. From the article:

           “Earlier this month (October 2019) however, the Coroners Court issued a public statement in which is announced that the inquest into Dawn Sturgess’s death had been adjourned indefinitely”

           Very relevant and important if true.
           This is not what the Coroner’s office have been communicating to me.
           Although as Rob explains, the mysterious press release has not seen the light of day.

     2. “Earlier this month (October 2019) however, the Coroners Court issued a public statement in which it announced that the inquest into Dawn Sturgess’ death had been adjourned indefinitely.”

        I’m quite puzzled by this Paul. I can find no reference to such a statement having been released anywhere on the web. And in fact, the Coroner’s Office, when asked about the Inquest, simply stated that they had sent a press release to CTC, who do not appear to have released it. So I’m really not sure where this claim comes from.

        Rob

        1. That is why I mentioned it – my guess is that it is in error and is incorrectly regurgitated from the Helmer article.

           That said, the issue I find most perplexing is why would the Coroner think that he ought to have sent his statement to CTC before publishing it? I cannot think of a single valid reason for this. The fact that the Coroner has not now published the statement that he claims he has written, is even more bizarre – if the Coroner needs CTC’s consent to publish, he is not independent.

     3. James O’Neill could speak for himself, but rest assured his knowledge and understanding of this whole case is substantial and correct. I have also written a fair bit on the Skripal affair, and must note here that I don’t accept that Petrov and Boshirov were anything other than who they appeared to be – a couple of guys lured to Salisbury by MI6, in what I believe was a “gay honey trap”. (or perhaps just a body-building deal). Elena Evdokimova revealed the way in which Bellingcat caught these two guys and their passport details, and I detailed it in an article in AHT – the Framing of Russia (I think, there were several)

        1. I have emailed James O’Neill to ask him if he can confirm the source of his comments.

           1. James O’Neill has kindly replied already:

              “I had read the report that the Coroner’s Court had issued a public statement in a number of places, including both a Russian and a British website. I had no reason to doubt the accuracy of that comment although I had not seen the press release myself.”

218. ‘Petrov and Boshirov walked through the gate at Gatwick whilst their place was in fact still in the air…’

     Rob, is this actually supposed to read… their plane was still in the air…?
     Yet another anomaly with the official script?
     How many is that now?

     1. Thanks. Yep should be plane. Fixed.

        Rob

219. Where is this official communique stating that the inquest has been put off sine die?
     There was no official release (or any media noise) about the January postponement ASAIR either.
     Nothing ‘official’ just Helmer’s piece…and his posts still won’t accept any comments at all.
     http://johnhelmer.net/wiltshire-coroner-cannot-rule-novichok-as-cause-of-death-theresa-mays-skripal-story-fails-bottle-test/

     Not that it is anyway conclusive of anything but what do you all make of Boshirov/Chepiga being at the wedding of an apparent Maj. Gen. in Russian intelligence?

     Why have the Russians been so quiet in what could be explained away in an official release?
     B/C is the same age as the majority of the crowd (incl. bride and groom), maybe he’s a guest of theirs and perhaps it’s just massively coincidental that the bride’s dad is a high-up in GU.

     It’s almost as though the Russian govt are playing along with the vilification of their nation.

     1. I don’t know, but I think there is possibly a big clue about all this in a previous piece by Bellingcat. Here is what they say about The Third Man (great film), Sergey Fedotov:

        “During 2016, he travelled to London twice. His first visit was at the end of March, and he stayed in London six days until 1 April 2016. He returned to London for a four-day visit on 14 July 2016. Notably, or perhaps entirely coincidentally, these two trips were shortly before and after the Brexit referendum.”

        Their connecting it with the Brexit referendum is a red-herring, and even a British Parliamentary enquiry found no evidence of Russian meddling in the Brexit vote. What is more relevant, in my view, is that the first of these two trips was shortly after Christopher Steele first got in contact with Bruce Ohr in the US Justice Department, and just before he apparently began his dossier. Whilst the second was shortly before he handed in the first instalment of his dossier to an FBI agent in Rome. Of course it may perhaps be entirely coincidental.

        1. Sergey Fedotov?
           That would be the man who came in and out of the UK and crossed borders all over the EU all without any decent CCTV footage/ stills being taken of him?
           The only photo of him is of a man who looks absolutely nothing like he’s supposed to look as per his blurry/ layered passport photo.
           https://www.google.com/search?biw=1366&bih=654&tbm=isch&sa=1&ei=zq2pXeiDJsP59QOEur5g&q=sergei+fedotov+denis&oq=sergei+fedotov+denis&gs_l=img.3…125861.131102..131924…0.0..0.245.2920.0j10j5……0….1..gws-wiz-img…….0i30j0i24.iacof-AWCP4&ved=0ahUKEwjootjC5aXlAhXDfH0KHQSdDwwQ4dUDCAY&uact=5

        2. Is Bellingcat a reliable source Rob? I thought it was a disinformation source out of the Atlantic Council. Do you think it strews disinformation amongst irrefutable facts? How does one discriminate?

           1. Hi David,

              No, they are absolutely not a reliable source. However, there are two things one has to reconcile here.

              The first is that Putin called them civilians:

              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66h3B80Gtns

              People will say he was lying, but the reason this seems far-fetched to me is that a few days after he said this, he then had them go on RT for all the world to see. I find it incredible to think he would have said this and then put them on TV if they really were GU (regardless of their role in Salisbury).

              The second is that Bellingcat has identified them as GU, yet the Russians have done nothing to refute this, even though doing so should be fairly easy. All they’d have to do is gather witnesses and compile documents showing where they had worked and who they’d worked for.

              My best guess (and it is just a guess) is that both are sort of telling the truth, and both are sort of being economical with the actualite. That is, they were once in the GU, but left service some time ago. Hence, Bellingcat’s identification of them is correct, but their assertion that they are still in the GU is not. Hence Putin’s claim that they are civilians is correct, but he omitted to mention that they used to be GU.

              As I say this is only a guess, based on the need to explain seemingly inexplicable statements and claims, but if there’s anything in it, it raises all sorts of possibilities.

              Rob

              1. Sorry Rob, but I think Putin was lying about Petrov and Boshirov being civilians.

                 As I wrote in comments to your previous posts, I think that P&B were GRU (GU) officers in 2018, but also had a side job to make extra money and were lured to Salisbury in their moonlighting role.

                 1. Hi Milda,

                    If that’s the case, why don’t The Metropolitan Police and Crown Prosecution Service refer to them using their “real names”? It shouldn’t be hard. They only need to verify the work of Bellingcat/MI6 and reissue the charges under Chepiga and Mishkin. In fact, if the pair really are Chepiga and Mishkin, then they have a duty to do this, and it would be absurd for them to continue to issue charges under aliases when they know their real names.

                    Yet they are silent on the issue, and leave it to Bellingcat and the media to keep repeating the claims. I wonder why!

                    Rob

                 2. Milda, if P&B were trying to make extra money by moonlighting, that would mean they were in Salisbury as ‘civilians’, even if they also had jobs in the GRU.

                    But the alternative scenario is also plausible – that they went there on some mission on behalf of the Russian state, perhaps to communicate with Sergei Skripal. In that case, Putin would have felt comfortable when he lied about them being civilians. That’s because he knew that the UK could not prove him wrong because that would involve revealing the real purpose of P&B’s visit – and that the UK was lying about it being an assassination.

                    The UK’s reluctance to reveal the truth is clear from the fact they don’t even wish to interrogate P&B in Russia despite offers from Russia to arrange that. What kind of murder investigation excludes interrogating the only named suspects?

                    So all that the UK can do is to keep quiet, and let Bellingcat and others make stuff up about the two bungling assassins from the elite Russian unit.

              2. Thanks Rob.

              3. Hi Rob, I tried to get this message to you in my comment, about Bellingcat’s role, please read – https://ahtribune.com/world/europe/uk/skirpal/2519-framing-of-russia.html

                 cheers David.

                 1. Thanks David.

                    I must admit I don’t find it too convincing, though having said that I have not gone into enough detail of what Elena was saying to be certain of that.

                    I would say, however, that if the two men are absolutely not Chepiga and Mishkin then it ought to be fairly easy for the Russians to debunk, simply by having Petrov and Boshirov in the same room as Chepiga and Mishkin — even a few photographs would do the trick if they were worried about putting two GU agents up for interview. Which is the least problematic: having two of your military intelligence guys on film or photographs with Petrov and Boshirov, or having charges of them (effectively all four of them) hanging over them of using a nerve agent on foreign soil?

                    I also recall that a number of villagers where Chepiga and Mishkin grew up were interviewed and many, of not most, seemed to think it was them (sorry, I’m tapping on an iPhone and so haven’t got the links to this right now).

                    Under this scenario, the British would also have had to find two guys who were couriers, and who happened to look like the two guys from the old GU pictures — highly improbable.

                    And also it doesn’t explain why they weren’t photographed nearer to the Skripal house. If the aim were to set them up for that, having them videoed much closer to at the Skripal house would have been easy.

                    I continue to think the most likely explanation is that these guys once were military intelligence, left the service years back, and were working for someone else on March 2018.

                    Best wishes,

                    Rob

        3. Rob: “His first visit was at the end of March, and he stayed in London six days until 1 April 2016. (…) What is more relevant, in my view, is that the first of these two trips was shortly after Christopher Steele (…)”

           March/April 2016 was certainly when the Russiagate operation really got going. The BBC’s Paul Wood wrote in 2017:

           “Last March I was told by someone in the US intelligence community of another alleged tape, about Kremlin money going to Trump’s associates for his campaign. The recording was supposedly made by the Estonian secret service. One of the (many unproven) allegations in the dossier compiled by the ex-MI6 man Christopher Steele is of a meeting his sources say was monitored by the Estonians.”
           https://www.spectator.co.uk/2017/01/will-donald-trump-be-assassinated-ousted-in-a-coup-or-just-impeached/

           “Last April, the CIA director was shown intelligence that worried him. It was – allegedly – a tape recording of a conversation about money from the Kremlin going into the US presidential campaign.”
           https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38589427

           A couple of other related things also happened in April 2016. The Democratic National Committee (DNC) reportedly first found out that its servers had been breached since the previous summer, allegedly by Russian intelligence agencies. Also, Maltese professor Joseph Mifsud told George Papadopoulos that the Russians had thousands of Hillary Clinton’s emails.

           All of these reports, plust the Steele dossier, were used as a pretext for the Trump/Russia investigation.

           Apart from the timing of Fedotov’s trips, there are other connections between Russiagate and the Skripal case that I’ll post about later. They may be just coincidences but there seem to an awful lot of them.

           1. Indeed Brendan. “Fedotov” also allegedly travelled to Rome before flying back to Moscow on 4th March 2018:

              https://www.bellingcat.com/news/uk-and-europe/2019/02/14/third-suspect-in-skripal-poisoning-identified-as-denis-sergeev-high-ranking-gru-officer/​

              And according to some reports also Kiev:

              ​https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/sailsbury-poisoning-mystery-third-russian-13397129​

              In all Fedotov is said to have travelled (amongst other places) to Kiev, Rome, Prague, London twice in 2016 (March and July), and then London in March 2017 and 2018. You also have Mishkin and Chepiga apparently going to Prague in 2014, apparently at the same time as Skripal (too early of course for the “Trump Dossier” but possible connections made), then Mishkin accompanying Fedotov to London in March 2017.

              All these places have Trump Dossier connections. They may of course all be coincidences. Then again they may not.

              Rob

        4. There are a number of connections between the Skripal story and the Steele dossier, mostly involving British Intelligence. For example Pablo Miller was Sergei Skripal’s handler and also worked for Christopher Steele’s company, Orbis.

           Another person linking the two stories is the late Charles Farr, who was head of the Joint Intel Committee (JIC) . Mark Urban writes about Farr’s role in the Skripal case in the recently released paperback updated edition of his book. Unfortunately, without buying the book we can only see what he says about it in this tweet:

           1/7 The ‘Skripal Files’ paperback is out today. Lots of new material including
           (…)
           The key role of Charles Farr, as Chairman of Joint Intel Cttee (JIC) in crafting the UK response to the poisoning. Earlier in his career Farr ran MI6 Russia operations + oversaw the molehunt for Skripal’s betrayer 3/7
           https://twitter.com/MarkUrban01/status/1174688678792323073

           In the case of the Steele dossier, Farr personally went through every detail with Steele before deciding to tell the bosses of MI5 and MI6. The Telegraph revealed that in May this year:

           The man Steele approached was Sir Charles Farr. (…) Steele had known Farr for 20 years.
           (…)
           For hours the pair went through Steele’s explosive memos line by line. Farr would ask questions. Steele would spell out what he knew. After their meeting, Farr reached a conclusion – the dossier had to go up the chain of command.
           https://twitter.com/benrileysmith/status/1130225259775447041

           Steele was not the only central figure in the Russiagate saga who got help from Farr. There was also Alexander Downer, who helped trigger the investigation when he reported what he said he was told about alleged Russian interference in US elections. This rumour – together with the Steele dossier – was used as a pretext by US intelligence agencies to launch an enquiry into allegations of Russian collusion with the Trump campaign.

           Downer’s cooperation with Farr was reported this month by Deborah Haynes of Sky News (and also of Integrity Initiative). Unfortunately Haynes provides very little information, which makes the story hard to check. However, there must be some truth in it since she has very good sources, so it could be considered semi-official:

           Sir Charles Farr, who died in February but was then chair of the Joint Intelligence Committee, assisted Alexander Downer in 2016 after the Australian envoy was allegedly told by an adviser to then-candidate Trump that Russia had damaging information on Hillary Clinton, an informed source told Sky News.
           https://news.sky.com/story/british-intelligence-involved-in-trump-election-probe-sources-say-11825044

           1. The role of the UK in Russiagate was initially reported as being just the passing of intelligence from GCHQ to the USA in 2016 – about intercepted communications between the Trump campaign and Russia. This information was supposedly independent of the dossier, which Steele had not yet begun working on.

              But if those reports about Charles Farr are true, British Intelligence agencies (and possibly government) played a major hands-on role in what turned out to be a campaign to keep Donald Trump out of the White House.

              And the fact that Farr was one of the top people involved with Skripal adds to the strong circumstantial evidence that the two cases are connected. If Sergei Skripal knew too much about Steele and the dossier and could not be trusted, there would be a strong motive – even a necessity in the eyes of some people – to make him disappear.

           2. For very obvious reasons Deborah Haynes wants to go ahead of some facts that will come to light in the near future and Deborah tries to brand them as “ unfounded conspiracy theories”.
              But the foundation is already layed, because Barr and Durham got hold of Josef Mifsud´s two Blackberries. And they are of British origin !
              https://www.scribd.com/document/430459068/Flynn-MTC

              About the connections to Sir Charles Farr please read this excellent thread :
              https://twitter.com/JohnWHuber/status/989243767084503041

              1. The Mifsud/Downer double-act is gradually being exposed. It’s quite possible that they did not know about one another but were two actors in the same play (that was scripted by someone else).

                 Liane, that expression “unfounded conspiracy theories” that you quote from Haynes strangely appeared in an NYT article about the Durham inquiry yesterday https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/19/us/politics/durham-review-fbi-witnesses.html Do those guys write independently of each other, or is most of it written by the same machine?

                 1. Brendan, it´s called “talking points”.

     2. John Helmer’s Web site does accept comments – it just doesn’t publish them! I know from personal experience that John reads comments, and he has sometimes replied to mine by email.

        1. I think, John Helmer is reading the Blogmire.
           Tom, if you have questions post them here.

220. John Helmer wrote an article about Dawn´s inquest :
     http://johnhelmer.net/skripal-update-english-coroner-runs-out-of-legal-camouflage-and-genuine-evidence-for-postponing-inquest-into-dawn-sturgess-death-spokesman-attempts-lying-to-press/

     Quote : „On Friday Ridley attempted to cover up the blocking of the court process by claiming he had issued a press release announcing the inquest postponement through the Counter Terrorism unit of the Metropolitan Police in London.
     “I would advise you,” said Ridley’s spokesman Debra Twort, “that the Senior Coroner issued a press release advising of the postponement through Counter Terrorism. A further date has not been set.”
     No such press release has been issued by the police; Ridley and Twort have refused repeated requests to produce it. Twort has been ordered to lie to the press in order to cover up the collapse of the case of the so-called Novichok murder.
     Coroner Ridley’s inquest is legally required to test the Novichok-in-the-bottle claim by identifying precisely what caused Sturgess’s death; what was in the bottle recovered from the Amesbury kitchen; where the bottle had come from before it reached Sturgess, local police and Ridley in Amesbury.“

     John Helmer had an interesting email exchange with Coroner Ridley.

     Rob, what you and Helmer suspect is spoken out by James ONeill :
     Quote : „The Coroner’s Court cannot establish to the requisite standard how Ms Sturgess died, much less the identity of any individual or government that might be responsible.
     The linking of Ms Sturgess’ death to the alleged activities of two Russian citizens seen in Salisbury on the day the Skripal’s became ill, and the lurid allegations about their alleged activities, have similarly collapsed.“
     https://journal-neo.org/2019/10/16/new-developments-in-the-skripal-case-reveal-it-for-the-sham-it-always-was/

     It happens according to the well-established scheme “Produce headlines with unproven but politically-desired claims and be silent if the case collapses.”

221. First and foremost my thoughts go out to Dawns family. They are the real victims in this mess. Even if it was a simple drug overdose; they have now been implicated in a fictitious scandal. I sincerely hope the Russian side come out with more information; I’m convinced the Russians know the real purpose of Mishkin and Chepigas visit so it would be better for them to admit that “yes they were carrying out surveillance / passing a message onto Skripal” rather than letting the UK public be misled. I wonder what the Russian side has to lose if this is the case.

     1. Imagine the GRU wanted to help Sergei escape to Russia, would they admit it ?
        The Russians don´t know what Yulia and Sergei have told the British.
        Maybe the Skripals are still denying Sergei´s plans.
        Then it would be damaging if the Russians tell the truth.

     2. One suspects it was a ‘simple drug overdose’ – but, NB, the two of them went under within hours, at Charlie Rowley’s home in Amesbury: Charlie Rowley went unconscious that same evening 30th of June – and then they were both taken to Salisbury General Hospital, same as the Skripals, and both remained unconscious for over a week. Charlie came to, with a badly damaged memory, Dawn never did. So the story could not be too similar to the Skripals where both went under synchronously, as a lot of people had found that park bench episode hard to credit.