One of the tell-tale signs that an action or actions are being covered up is that the explanations given for them keep shifting — basically because the ones previously given do not comport with reality. Yet with each new shift, more reality contortions are seen and more questions raised. Objective reality is a kicker, isn’t it?
This is basically what the BBC Panorama programme — Salisbury Nerve Agent Attack: the Inside Story — did. It’s account of Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey is a case in point. Let me once again state that I do not know what Mr Bailey’s role was in the events of 4th March. What I do know with absolute certainty, however, is that the account he gave on the Panorama programme was completely at odds with many previous accounts we have heard from both the media and public officials of high rank. For instance:
- The British Prime Minister, Theresa May, stated a few days after the incident that, “In particular, my thoughts are with DS Nick Bailey, one of the first responders, who remains in a serious condition in hospital.” And the then Home Secretary, Amber Rudd, stated of Mr Bailey that he was “one of the first responders on Sunday, acting selflessly to help others.” It’s all very odd, though, since according to Mr Bailey not only was he not a first responder, he wasn’t even at the bench at the same time that the Skripals were said to be there.
- According to media reports drawing on testimony from Mr Skripal’s neighbours, police arrived at 47 Christie Miller Road at 5pm on 4th March. I assume that they entered the property, or at least tried, as I cannot imagine they just turned up to admire the curtains. Yet according to the Panorama programme, Mr Bailey was the first official to attempt to enter the house, and this was around midnight.
- According to the BBC correspondent, Mark Urban, Mr Bailey approached the front door, but on finding it wouldn’t open “went around to the back of the property, where he managed to gain entry.” But according to the BBC Panorama account, Mr Bailey and a colleague entered the house via the front door. Which BBC are we to believe?
Now I know that we live in days when subjective truth is trying very hard to knock objective truth off its perch, but this won’t do. A=A and A will never = non-A. If Mr Bailey was a hero first responder at the bench when the Skripals were there — as the Prime Minister, the Home Secretary and other officials claimed — then he cannot not have been at the bench when the Skripals were there, can he? His being there as a first responder, and his not being there as a first responder cannot both be true, can they? Like I say, objective reality really is a kicker, and it’s clear that someone’s being economical with the actualité. And yet no one on that programme had the honour to explain why we’d been told something, and were now being told something completely incompatible.
But I want to focus on another attempt at reality bending, which the programme engaged in, and in so doing unwittingly put to rest the cornerstone of the whole Metropolitan Police and Government narrative of how the poisoning occurred. I am referring to the claim that the poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal occurred at the door handle of his house. As far as I am concerned, thanks to the Panorama programme that explanation is now dead, kaput, expired, gone West, shuffled off its mortal coil, and is now pushing up the daisies to join the choir invisible. As dead as a doornail handle is an expression I might find myself using from this time forth.
How so?
Well, first let me preface my comments by stating that the explanation was already on a life support machine before the BBC came anywhere near it. Even before the programme, there were a number of absurdly improbable things that you needed to believe to accept this explanation, including:
- That two highly trained GU assassins would walk in broad daylight down a cul-de-sac, to place the world’s most deadly chemical on the handle of a door, before going into town to do some window shopping.
- That the house, bought for Mr Skripal by MI6, for whom he was still working, did not have CCTV installed around the front door.
- That Sergei and Yulia Skripal were so unaffected after being contaminated by the world’s deadliest nerve agent that they went into town for a meal and a drink.
- That they managed to contaminate a table in Zizzis to such an extent that it had to be burned, yet strangely enough they apparently didn’t contaminate other items or people they came into contact with prior to this, such as the door handle of the restaurant, the door handle of The Mill pub, and — most crucially — the three boys who fed ducks with them, despite reports that one of those boys actually took a piece of the bread from Mr Skripal’s hand and ate it.
- That both Sergei and Yulia Skripal somehow managed to touch the outside door handle upon leaving the house — a thing so ridiculous that even the makers of the Panorama programme couldn’t bring themselves to show it in their reconstruction, instead just showing the actor playing Mr Skirpal touching it.
- That it took investigators more than two weeks to point to the door handle as the location of the poisoning, even though Mr Bailey had visited the house, which therefore made it one of only two places where both he and the Skripals had been, and so one of only two locations where the source of the poison could have been.
- That the Government very conveniently discovered an FSB manual, allegedly describing how nerve agent could be applied to a door handle, just prior to the door handle being claimed as the location of the poisoning.
Add to this that Panorama confirmed the Skripals were at home at the time of the alleged attack, with Mr Skripal’s car in the driveway, and I think it would take a brave or a foolish man — take your pick — to believe that the Skripals were poisoned at their door handle.
But there was much more than this. The programme decided to go overboard on certain claims about the substance used, only to then find itself with the impossible task of trying to explain why it is that we didn’t see what we should have seen if these claims are true. Here, for instance, are five claims about the toxicity of the substance in question — “Novichok” — that the programme made known to its viewers:
“It’s very unique in its ability to poison individuals at quite low concentrations.” – Porton Down Professor Tim speaking about Novichok.
“The Russians called it Novichok. Thought to be 10X more toxic than any nerve agent created before or since.” – Jane Corbin.
“To kill a person, you need only 1mg. To be sure, 2mg.” – Vil Mirzyanov, who worked on the Foliant project.
“The Russians weaponised Novichok for the battlefield. The tiniest dose can be fatal.”– Jane Corbin.
“It’s difficult to say, you know, possibly into the thousands.” – Deputy Assistant Commissioner Dean Haydon when asked how many people could have been killed by the substance in the bottle.
Got that? The takeway points that the BBC wanted you to know are:
- “Novichok” is extraordinarily deadly.
- A tiny dose of just 2mg is enough to produce certain death in a person.
- The two suspects had enough of the substance in the bottle to kill 1,000s of people.
So let’s see how these claims stack up against what actually happened.
A crucial question to ask is how much “Novichok” was sprayed on the door handle? Since we don’t know this for certain, we are going to have to come up with a reasonable estimate, based on two things: firstly, we must give an estimate of how many miligrams of “Novichok” there is in a millilitre, and secondly how much would have been sprayed on the door handle.
On that first point, it is of course impossible to say exactly, without knowing the precise properties of the substance. However, most nerve agents have a liquid density of just over 1,000 kg/m3 (Tabun = 1,080 kg/m3; Sarin = 1,100 kg/m3; Soman = 1,020 kg/m3 ; VX = 1,008 kg/m3 (see here for details)), and so assuming that “Novichok” is somewhere in this range, and taking 1,000 kg/m3 as a conservative estimate, this would mean that in a 5.5ml bottle, there might have been as much as 5,500mg. According to Vil Mirzyanov, this is enough to potentially kill between 2,750 and 5,500 people.
As I say, these are estimates, but it does comport with Deputy Assistant Commissioner Haydon’s claim of there being enough of the substance in the bottle to kill “into the thousands”.
Next up is the question of how much “Novichok” would have been sprayed on the door handle of Mr Skripal’s house? Atomisers generally tend to spray between about 1/10th and 1/15th of a millilitre with every spray. And so even if we assume that the door handle was sprayed just once, if 1ml of the substance is approximately 1,000mg, this would mean that somewhere between 67-100mg would have been sprayed onto the door handle. Enough to kill getting on for 100 people, according to the Panorama programme.
I realise that the calculations I have given are not exact, but actually they don’t need to be. The claim that the Novichok in the bottle could have killed thousands, which was made by the Deputy Assistant Commissioner of The Met, along with the claim made by Mr Miryzanov that 2mg is enough to lead to the certain death of a person, are enough to know that the amount sprayed on the door handle would have been enough to kill dozens of people, and into the hundreds if multiple sprays were used.
But of course it didn’t. So how did the programme attempt to get around this glaring anomaly? Cue Mr Mirzyanov once again:
“Maybe the dose was not high enough. Salisbury was rainy and muggy. Novichok breaks down in damp conditions, reducing its toxicity. It’s the Achilles Heel of Novichok.”
So this is the BBC explanation — and I might add the official explanation since the programme was clearly made with the approval of the Metropolitan Police — for why this most deadly of substances did not kill the Skripals:
- Maybe the dose wasn’t high enough
- Novichok loses its toxicity in damp conditions.
Okay, let’s rip this folly to pieces once and for all.
On the first point, the idea that the dose was too low is impossible. The programme had Mr Mirzyanov assuring us that just 2mg was enough to cause certain death. But of course the amount sprayed on the handle would have been many times higher than this.
And it cannot be claimed that maybe it dripped off onto the doormat. Firstly, part of the Government’s case rests upon the Russians apparently testing “Novichok” on door handles. Well, if it was prone to drip off, do you think they wouldn’t have somehow realised this and eliminated it as a possible method? But much more crucially, Mr Skripal allegedly had enough of the substance on his hand to contaminate so many places in the city that they had to be cordoned off and closed for months. No, the “Maybe the dose wasn’t high enough” claim is utter nonsense, especially coming from Mr Mirzyanov who had already claimed that 2mg of the substance would lead to certain death.
What of that second explanation, that the “Novichok” may have lost its toxicity? Unfortunately for the weavers of the door handle yarn, there are a number of impossibly huge problems with this:
Firstly, the official claim only allows for the “Novichok” to be on the door handle between 12:10pm and 13:30pm – that is, 80 minutes maximum before the alleged contamination.
Secondly, during that time, there was no rain or snow — in fact it was fairly sunny — and so the only thing that the substance would have come into contact with was the air.
Thirdly, given that this substance, which according to the programme was developed for battlefield use, was in contact with nothing more than air for just 80 minutes, can any rational person believe that it was possible in this very short time for oxidation and hydrolysis to occur to such an extent that its toxicity went from having the potential to kill in the tens or even hundreds to killing nobody?
Fourthly, even if there had been some degradation by exposure to 80 minutes in the air(which is absurd), there would still be many milligrams of the substance remaining to kill people.
Fifthly, however according to a statement from the OPCW on 4th May no such degradation took place:
“The samples collected by the OPCW Technical Assistance Visit team concluded that the chemical substance found was of high purity, persistent and resistant to weather conditions.”
Here’s the crux of this matter: The BBC went out of its way to tell us that the substance allegedly sprayed on the door handle of Mr Skripal’s house was so deadly that it:
a) Only needed 1-2mg to kill people and that
b) There was enough in the bottle to kill thousands.
Yet, because it killed neither Sergei nor Yulia Skripal, who allegedly touched it less than an hour-and-a-half after it was applied, the programme then went out of its way to tell us that the reason for this was either:
a) The dose was too low or
b) The substance lost its toxicity due to the damp conditions
But both these explanations are not just highly improbable — they are impossible.
The dose could not have been too low, since the atomiser would clearly have sprayed far more than the 2mg apparently needed to be certain of killing a person. This is also attested by how much Mr Skripal apparently contaminated various places in Salisbury.
The substance could not have lost its toxicity in just 80 minutes in clement weather conditions, such that instead of certainly killing a person with a dose of just 1-2mg, it killed none of those who became contaminated by it. This is also attested by the OPCW claim that more than two weeks later they found a substance of “high purity” and “resistant to weather conditions”, which means that the BBC and The Met are essentially asking us to believe that the substance lost its toxicity in 80 minutes, only to regain it two weeks later.
And so having overreached themselves with the claims of the potency of the substance sprayed on the door handle, and the miniscule amount needed to kill a person, the BBC and The Met have come up with two explanations as to why these claims don’t comport with what actually happened. And yet both of these explanations are utterly impossible, and frankly utter nonsense. As I said at the start, objective reality really is a kicker, isn’t it?
I have remarked many times during these pieces that I am not indulging in some conspiracy theory here. All I have done above is taken the words and claims of certain officials, and analysed them against their own statements, or those made by other officials. And the result is that the idea that the Skripals were poisoned at the door handle of 47 Christie Miller Road by a substance called “Novichok”, which apparently only needs 1-2mg to kill one person, is shown to be an absolute impossibility. As an idea, it is done for, passed on, expired, bitten the dust and bought the farm. As dead as a door handle.
Due Highly Toxic Nature Regarding Novihoax-47 CMR Salisbury.
Could We Please Have Hanger-Type Construction Like Chernobyl?
89 HGVs driving around a disused Airfield in practice for No Deal Brexit.
Why not 90?
UK can launch Missile Attack [Storm Shadow X2] Syria but cant destroy
£20.00 Argos Drone over Heathrow Airport? [Gatwick]
Timings Of Propaganda…Scare The Sheep..[Brexit-Russia]
Dawn Sturgess 16-01-19…Lets See Folks..?
Rob, can we have a new thread please?
You don’t need to write an intro, we just need a new section.
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/amp/uk-england-wiltshire-46792956
You could not make it up.
The roof being replaced.
The ceilings are sound but the roof timbers might have absorbed the deadly nerve agent.
More cost effective than demolishing the whole property.
We need a PD roof toxicity expert.
Where is Hamish deNoClue?
47 CMR Demolition-What For? So dangerous is this property that
Contractors wander around with No PPE-Mong Suites.
If property so contaminated with Novihoax would it not be better
building Hanger type cover over Street-Area?
Very Nasty Stuff Is Theresa’s Novihoax but could push Her Brexit
Fudge through Parliament by demolishing 47CMR………………….
Timings….Awaiting 16-01-19…BS!
Hello, Mark, Happy New Year to you!
The dawn chorus, such as it is, seems to be on the New Thread and Announcement blog including comments on the need to re-roof 47CMR.
Mind you, who’d want to buy the property once it has been fully, fully, fully decontaminated? Unless for social housing etc.
Good Morning Eleanor! Happy New Year to you also. Hope You Ok,Best Wishes!
Drone Attack-2 Heathrow? Show me proof Theresa-evidence!
Almost as good as Novihoax Spraying Drones in-around Salisbury…[Silly MI5 Idea]
Was DS Bailey Hero Pilot-VC-DFC?
Theresa and Her Big NHS Lie….Should get Brexit Vote Through
then She will turn back on it!
Promises are amazing when TPTB want something………………..
Tell UK about DS Bailey and Your Lie In Parliament Theresa!!
https://www.cyberguerrilla.org/blog/operation-integrity-initiative-british-informational-war-against-all-part-4/
WPD Paul Mills and his boss Keir Pritchard need to get their stories to agree post Panorama.
Bailey’s version is different to both.
Here is a gem from the archives:
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/03/08/russian-spy-poisoning-police-officer-struck-rare-nerve-agent/amp/
On the 16th January the inquest into the death of Dawn Sturgess will be re-opened. Her family and friends and the wider public deserve the truth. I hope that the coroner will investigate circumstances beyond the cause of her death.
R.I.P. Dawn.
David, we know already this will go nowhere.
Coroner’s court will adjourn pending criminal investigation.
Cause of death might be revealed, so any toxicology will be interesting.
How and why did the SDH treatment for Dawn not have the same positive effects as Sergei, Yulia, DSB and Charlie?
OPCW await the treatment report.
Help needed.
Paul Mills email address.
He wrote the recent Guardian article.
He is not a Guardian regular with no @guardian address.
If any Blogmirer knows Paul Mills email address can the let me know?
I have Harding, Urban and Morris who of course all written conflicting Skripal pieces.
Then of course Bailey disagrees with all of them.
Mills seems to be a freelancer.
Email should be:
paul.mills@wiltshire.pnn.police.uk
As Liane had pointed out earlier, it seems that he wrote the article, or more correctly spoke the words to the Guardian jouno Steven Morris.
That now means we have:
Bailey,Mills and Pritchard from WPD
Urban, Harding,Morris from the Guardian
Jane Corbin and the BBC team
Mrs May and HMG
All of the above contradicting with each other the events of Sunday afternoon, March 4th.
Also, possibly with a twist of irony, Charlie, Russ and Alex all not telling the truth.
With Basu off the job now too.
Another part of the Russiagate puzzle came to light :
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-12-26/liberal-billionaire-apologizes-russian-bot-disinfo-campaign-tied-hamilton-68
We live in a world where truth doesn´t matter any more. It´s only about „Strategic Narratives“.
Quote : … leading the informational instruments of power, gauging public opinions, countering mis/disinformation, monitoring and reporting on the effects of adversarial messaging,…“
https://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2018/07/how-stop-losing-information-war/150056/?oref=defenseone_today_nl
Note : This post IS adversarial messaging !
Agree Anon.It all A Plan.No foundation regarding Terrorist Action.
Salisbury Anti Russia-Amesbury Setup…..Rubbish-Lies-Hoax.
Theresa planned-activated operation.
Drones another lie from TPTB…..Theresa……[Brexit..?]
Im Ashamed being UK Citizen…Would rather move Russia!
Blowing Northerners Up! Manc Arena….Theresa Murderer!!!!!
Box Matches on Tube in bag—Fizzzzz—Smoke—Crap?
Shocking Attack London…North Where That?
Another climb down. Bailey “one of the first officers” to enter Skripal’s house.
Not the first on the bench and now not the first at Skripal’s house.
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2018/dec/23/people-of-2018-salisbury-poisonings-novichok-police-constable
Indeed,
I am amazed too.
Rob, I also must apologise for not realising how resilient you are.
I don’t really recall how the public came together, but no doubt it was inspired by their elected officials.
So inspiring, that in fact the town needs rebranding.
“The resilience of the communities in Salisbury and Amesbury, and the way the public came together, is humbling. We’re hugely proud of how a small force coped in an international incident. DS Nick Bailey [one of the first officers to enter the Skripals’ home] suffered novichok poisoning and continues to recover, physically and mentally. Nick put himself on the line as all police do. There was a luck factor here. To this day, I’m still amazed more people who responded didn’t become poorly.”
It´s important that the article was written by Paul Mills himself.
But the square brackets suggest that this is an editorial feature and was not said by Mills.
There seems to be a briefing to the media that Bailey’s role should be downplayed.
I was wondering why Mills, after his BBC appearance, still felt the need to put out an article in the Guardian.
Maybe it was this sentence that is important to him :
„The investigation was led by counter-terrorism police. My role, as chair of the strategic coordinating group, was consequence management – local issues, logistics, public health, public confidence, talking to scientists.“
He clearly states that Wiltshire Police had NOTHING to do with the criminal investigation !
Does he want to white-wash himself if it turns out that the Met lied ?
Paul Mills confirms that already on March 4 at 8pm he was informed about Sergei´s background.
The BBC Panorama had this later in the evening.
Another important sentence is this one :
„We were working with the hospital but were also in contact with the Defence Chemical Biological Radiological and Nuclear Centre, just outside Salisbury, for advice on scenes, protective equipment, signs and symptoms, and outcomes for Sergei and Yulia Skripal.“
First Mill confirms that it were really the Skripals in hospital.
Second it is obvious that his superintendent had involved Porton Down from the very beginning.
It must have been Porton Down which gave the advice to decontaminate the bench site.
But why was Porton Down informed at a time when all staff thought it was a fentanyl overdose ?
Did Urban´s claimed ‘Don’t Stop’ flag on the Police National Computer included a note „inform Porton Down if Sergei Skripal gets sick“ ?
Paul Mills should answer the question why Mill Pub and Zizzi were cordoned off already on March 5, but the information of a nerve agent was available only on March 6.
Why was Professor Tim Allan only 75% certain this is novichok again in the Amesbury incident ?
Needless to say, Porton Down’s role in the case leaves some questions unanswered.
Yep. The article makes it sound as if after 8 o’clock and the identification of Sergej Skripal the investigation was no longer (even if not officially) in the hands of Salisbury police. Which is realistic to assume anyway.
So presumably, police at Skripal’s house were Salisbury police on order by Salisbury investigators but on whose orders was Sergeant Bailey at midnight?
And why did they out him publicly as early as March 9?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/03/09/russian-spy-may-have-poisoned-home-police-believe/
“Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey, who is being treated in hospital, was made seriously ill after being sent to Colonel Skripal’s house in Salisbury.
Det Sgt Bailey was one of the first police officers to attend the house in a cul-de-sac a few hours after Col Skripal and his daughter Yulia collapsed in Salisbury town centre.
The admission he was made ill at the house was made by Lord Blair, the former Metropolitan Police Commissioner, in a BBC interview.”
Lord Blair who is not supposed to know anything about the investigation anyway!
The article is “as told by Paul Mills” revealed at the end of the article.
But he will have read it and agreed to it.
The article actually says “As told to Steven Morris”. not “as told by Pauk Mills”
Yes Liane.
What do we have?
Met Terror Team led by Basu quickly taking over an investigation before it was even elevated.
WPD through Mills disowning any involvement other than logistics and liaison.
I thought Basu’s non appearance in Panorama was significant.
He checks all the “politically correct minority in supervisory position” boxes.
Instead we had the middle aged white chap.
£60.000 reward for information leading to conviction of
Gatwick Drone Crew.
No such reward offered for information over Salisbury
and Murder of Dawn Sturgess. Says everything!!
But there may not have been a drone at all:
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/gatwick-drone-latest-police-say-it-is-a-possibility-there-was-never-a-drone-a4024626.html
Indeed! All very strange and planned but as usual
left hand not working with right hand.
Operational Forces Security Services reading from
different song sheet. [World Laughing At UK]
TPTB now claiming a New Breed of Terrorist is
about to start a new campaign against Aircraft.
Scaring The Sheep.
“But there may not have been a drone at all … ”
You may be right:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e0jnlrSmZAE
Yes Elaenor,Planting the drone seed in peoples head-mind.
Latest Government-Security Service Hoax.
All designed-engineered for controlling public minds and scaring.
Since 04-03-18 Salisbury-Amesbury Anti Russia Agenda Ops
that have failed miserably.
I find it strange that UK Terrorist Attacks have been none excitant
or alleged threats nil since 04-03-18?
Little Rumble outside Parliament with Silver Ford-Ambulance following
Police on scene before things happened……….
Drones Are Threat UK Security..Bombs On Board…..
Aircraft-Airports Are Targets……Scare The Sheep!
Strange how TPTB know so much but could not protect
a Father-Daughter in sleepy Salisbury?
Poor Dawn a victim of Theresa May and Her Political Fudging.
Apologise eleanor for miss spelling of name.
My Mistake
There has been a drone incident on or around the Severn Bridge. A chap has been arrested in this incident.
I suspect ‘muggy’ may be a mistranslation of Mirzanov’s words. Panorama I-Player version 33.10-11. sounds like день был дождливый даже den bul dozhdliviy dazhe ‘the day was rainy even’ but I hope a native speaker of Russian will check that out.
Why they didn’t use the word ‘damp’ or ‘humid’ is strange to me as nothing anti-Russian is gained by using ‘muggy’rather than ‘humid’. Was it a Russia native speaker translating with a dictionary, whose work wasn’t read by a native English speaker? For the record the same word vlazniy translates as ‘humid’ or ‘muggy’ and I wonder if a native speaker of Russian was looking in a dictionary.
adjective
влажный
wet, humid, damp, moist, dewy, muggy
and ‘muggy’ rhymes with ‘foggy’ . Elsewhere Mirzanov is translated as saying it was foggy on the day in question, so maybe someone conflated ‘foggy’ with ‘muggy’
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5616859/Novichok-Salisbury-hitman-failed-kill-Skripals-raining.html
A lot of poor translations are due to anti-Russian bias, eg. Putin desrcibed Skripal as podonok. which accurately translates as ‘dregs’ but was widely translated as ‘scumbag’. ‘Dregs’ is dismissive’ but you might want to harm someone who you call a ‘scumbag’. There’s no anti-Russian motive for describing Salisbury as ‘muggy’ rather than ‘humid’ so I think it is likely carelessness.
If Mirzanov’s case is that there had earlier been fog and rain and there was a high relative humidity that rests more closely on the facts. The midday relative humidity for Salisbury on 4th March was 82%, the average for March was 85% whereas Kazan, capital of Mirzanov’s native Tatarstan, had an average of 62% and Nukus in Uzbekistan had a humidity of 63%. It may not have been a particularly relative humidity for Salisbury, but would have been for places that Mirzanov had been in.
There are different compounds under the name novichok and it may be that some are more susceptible to humidity than others. In any event there would be no known cases of it being administered in a gel.
referred from ‘New Thread and Announcement’ comments
I suspect ‘muggy’ may be a mistranslation of Mirzanov’s words. Panorama I-Player version 33.10-11. sounds like день был дождливый даже den bul dozhdliviy dazhe ‘the day was rainy even’ but I hope a native speaker of Russian will check that out.
Why they didn’t use the word ‘damp’ or ‘humid’ is strange to me as nothing anti-Russian is gained by using ‘muggy’rather than ‘humid’. Was it a Russia native speaker translating with a dictionary, whose work wasn’t read by a native English speaker? For the record the same word vlazniy translates as ‘humid’ or ‘muggy’ and I wonder if a native speaker of Russian was looking in a dictionary.
adjective
влажный
wet, humid, damp, moist, dewy, muggy
and ‘muggy’ rhymes with ‘foggy’ . Elsewhere Mirzanov is translated as saying it was foggy on the day in question, so maybe someone conflated ‘foggy’ with ‘muggy’
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5616859/Novichok-Salisbury-hitman-failed-kill-Skripals-raining.html
A lot of poor translations are due to anti-Russian bias, eg. Putin desrcibed Skripal as podonok. which accurately translates as ‘dregs’ but was widely translated as ‘scumbag’. ‘Dregs’ is dismissive’ but you might want to harm someone who you call a ‘scumbag’. There’s no anti-Russian motive for describing Salisbury as ‘muggy’ rather than ‘humid’ so I think it is likely carelessness.
If Mirzanov’s case is that there had earlier been fog and rain and there was a high relative humidity that rests more closely on the facts. The midday relative humidity for Salisbury on 4th March was 82%, the average for March was 85% whereas Kazan, capital of Mirzanov’s native Tatarstan, had an average of 62% and Nukus in Uzbekistan had a humidity of 63%. It may not have been a particularly relative humidity for Salisbury, but would have been for places that Mirzanov had been in.
There are different compounds under the name novichok and it may be that some are more susceptible to humidity than others. In any event there would be no known cases of it being administered in a gel.
rob, please delete repeated comment, someotimes the system appears to reject comments when it hasn’t.
reply from BBC
Thanks for getting in touch about Panorama as broadcast on November 22.
We understand you feel Vil Mirzanov’s account of the weather in Salisbury at the time of the poisoning was inaccurate and should have been fact-checked.
Using the timeanddate.com reference for historic weather, one can see that on the morning of March 3, there was fog and 96% humidity in Salisbury. After days of snow, the weekend saw the thaw setting in, with high humidity and temperatures climbing above zero again. Further info shows this at https://www.accuweather.com/en/gb/salisbury/sp1-1/march-weather/326268 (please note we’re only responsible for BBC content online).
Our original news report also shows the damp streets and lying water typical of those moist post-snow conditions (image attached for convenience). It’s also worth noting that Alexander Petrov also commented on the heavy rain which they experienced while in the town:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/sep/13/skripal-suspects-account-of-salisbury-trip-does-not-add-up
We’re satisfied that this aspect of the conditions on the weekend is not in doubt. We hope this clarifies things for you and appreciate your interest in the programme.
I guess if you want to, you can complain about this answer to the Head of the BBC.
Humidity does not mean rain. The weather site they quote (and Rob quoted) says fog, which is a lot lighter than anything you can smear on a door handle. OPCW as quoted by Rob above says the stuff they found was weather resistant.
If they assume heavy rain, how did Skripals get poisoned at all.
Why don’t they quote what Uglev says, the guy who actually developed the stuff.
https://www.euronews.com/2018/07/09/novichok-could-have-been-carried-in-lipstick-tube-says-scientist-who-worked-on-nerve-agent
““For poisoning to occur, you need 2-3 milligrams. Think about that – a drop of water from a pipet is 30 milligrams,” he said.”
You can follow up complaints and take them higher up, there is a procedure which I will follow. They have referred me to Petrov’s remarks that there was ‘heavy rain with snow’ so expect me to believe that it was simultaneously muggy and snowing!
There was no fog in the middle of the day.
You have to show that BBC are violating journalistic standards. It is very hard to prove if there was rain in Salisbury or not on that day. Weather data is not necessarily accurate when a single cloud bursts. Skripal’s door knob had a roof and it is “highly unlikely” a combination of wind and rain washed all the 2000th of a gram needed to kill.
Journalistic standards
are violated when contradictory information is put out as fact without making it clear that their is no consensus on the information. Or only facts suiting an intended narrative are cited.
The BBC contradicts itself on Novichok:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-43377698
“”They [Novichok nerve agents] don’t evaporate, they don’t break up in water,” said Andrea Sella, professor of inorganic chemistry at University College London. “
Actually Mirzayanov said this to the Sun
“He told The Sun: ‘The substance was used when it was quite foggy — water droplets were in the air. It can be used only in dry air.
‘In such weather conditions this substance could be used only by an idiot who knows nothing about the chemical characteristics of Novichok.
‘If you drop it into water in some hours no trace will be left. It dissolves in water.’ ”
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5616859/Novichok-Salisbury-hitman-failed-kill-Skripals-raining.html
OPCW contradicts this and BBC themselves in other reports. It is against journalistic ethics to quote as fact a opinion that is contradicted by other experts.
You won’t nail them discussing weather reports.
Add: The reason the BBC quoted Mirzayanov and no other Russian or British chemist is because he is the only one who thinks Novichok dissolves in water. To quote him alone is journalistic malpractice.
It also raises the interesting question if Mirzayanov was involved right from the start of the affair (he was the first scientist interviewed), his relationship to Clinton’s/the CIA’s Tatarstan Muslim automony project and Ruslan Boshirov’s Tartar name.
Thank you anidea and Anonymous. Whether or not I can press a successful complaint against the BBC isn’t that important, the responses from them are in all cases worth having. I had no idea that Mirzanov was pressing the idea Novichok does not work in damp conditions back in April. He may well be correct, if so it may be an argument against Putin authorising such an attack and even against there being an attack at all. We need to distinguish between whether according to the British Government theory the Novichok was washed off the doorhandle by rain or broke down in damp conditions, or a combination of the two: maybe TPTB have variant theories. From the pictures of Skripal’s front door we could calculate the direction and speed of wind needed to blow rain onto the doorhandle.
Humidity appears to play at least a part according to Mirzanov. The most important figure is that for relative humidity between 12.00 and 13.30 though conditions earlier may have affected how much moisture was on the doorhandle. In any event it is important to clarify whether relative or absolute humidity is the more important, although 100% relative humidity must be significant as this would cause condensation. Of course B and P may have wiped the doorhandle before applying the spray, it would have made sense to do so. Another factor is that if the Novichok was suspended in oil the oil would protect against water, and would account for the delay between the Skripals having contact with the Novichok and the onset of symptoms.
A couple of other points to note, the doorhandle in the BBC construction doesn’t really match that on the Skripal’s door, on the door it is thin at the sides and wider on top whereas in the reconstruction it is the other way round. Also in the reconstruction Yulia appears to be wearing gloves.
More points will doubtless occur to me.
Official logic already has the form of a pretzel. The BBC’s answer will be non-sensical as they do not know anything.
You really should complain to the police and ask them why there is no information on where Novichok was actually found.
It cannot have been the door knob if the stuff dissolves in fog.
I can’t see too much point in complaining to the police, I am not a victim.
https://www.met.police.uk/advice/advice-and-information/c/complaints/what-is-a-complaint/
“you can complain about anyone employed by the police, from officers to members of staff. You don’t have to know their name or shoulder number, if you can give us a detailed description of what happened we can look into it.
You can also make a complaint about the way a particular case was handled, the quality of a police station, or just the force in general.
To make a complaint about a force chief constable, please contact the National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC).
To make a complaint about the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, please contact the Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC).
To complain about other police services, you can contact them directly or contact the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC). ”
There is lots to complain about the way the case was politicized and the public (mis-)informed.
Thanks anidea. It’s enough for me to complain to the BBC. anyone else want to complain to the Met? I wasted enough of my life doing so in the past.
I made a further complaint citing the different views on the stability of Novichok
It is central to your narrative that the Novichok attack failed because Novichok breaks down in damp conditions. In fact you are aware that not all experts hold to this view
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-43377698
>Experts are divided on the likelihood that the couple came across the same Novichok disposed by whoever administered it in March to the Skripals.
Dr Mirzayanov cast doubt on the theory, saying Novichok would have decomposed in the four months since the Skripal attack.
But Vladimir Uglev, a scientist who claims he invented the Novichok agent used in the Skripals’ poisoning, said this was wrong and the substance is “very stable”.
Other experts say the chemicals are designed to be persistent and could last for months or years, particularly if they were kept in containers.
“They [Novichok nerve agents] don’t evaporate, they don’t break up in water,” said Andrea Sella, professor of inorganic chemistry at University College London.
One difficulty is that Novichok is less well studied and understood than other nerve agents, and there is no official scientific data on how long they last.<
Unless data has emerged since July which now commands widespread assent amongst the scientific community that Novichok does break down in damp conditions you have been selective with evidence in order to support your chosen narrative.
I might add that Novichok is often taken to refer to a group of substances, if that is the case some may be less stable than others.
end of complaint
I am a bit worried they put me down as a vexatious complainant and refuse to answer, but if anyone else here is complaining they are not letting on. I'll leave complaining to the Met to someone else though.
Your BBC complaint sounds very good. If you do not get an answer, you can complain to the Head about not getting an answer.
Thanks very much for spending time on this. The more people do this with a copy to their MP the better.
I have now three separate complaints in to the BBC, I’ve had responses to two and am continuing the complaint in the light of the response. I hope to collate the answers and then send them to various people, including my MP. I’m grateful to everyone here who has given me ideas for complaints. It doesn’t actually take that much time and energy to complain to the BBC and they have to respond.
Just a minor detail.
2 milligrams is 1/500 of gram.
Even if it was 2 kilograms, it would not matter.
There was no Novichok.
How did it stay on the handle?
Why was the door mat not saturated with the world’s most deadly nerve agent?
Because it was not there on Sunday March 4th.
Grigory, as I understand it your complaint was : The weather condition in Salisbury at the time of the poisoning was given inaccurate.
So why does the BBC refer to March 3 when the poisoning happened on March 4 ?
Alexander Petrov spoke about rain in the afternoon March 4, AFTER the poisoning and AFTER the Skripals had left the house.
Neither in CCTV of Fisherton Bridge nor Dauwalders nor Summerlock Approach you see rain, but only the wet streets.
But most important is the OPCW statement that Novichok is weather resistant. Do you need the link where its said ?
Yes please, and let’s all get together to follow this up, whether through me and the BBC Complaints procedure or through composing an Open Letter, or both. I don’t think Petrov mentioned rain, the RT translation has sleet, and I hear ‘so snegom’ which in my dictionary is ‘sleet’ rather than ‘snow and rain’ and requires sub-zero temperatures. I can’t hear the Russian word translated as ‘muggy’ but given the quality of BBC translations wonder if someone chose it because it rhymed with ‘foggy’ which he is reported as saying in the Daily Mail article. There is of course a huge irony in the BBC using Petrov as a witness, when Dean Haydon says that B and P’s cover story is ‘the most ridiculous cover story’ he had ever heard.
Studying again the Fisherton Bridge picture the wet surface of the road does not look the consequence of recent rain. The wettest part of the road surface is close to the thickest of the remains of the snow that had been piled in the gutter next to the kerb. There is no sign of water in the potholes which you would expect if there had just been rain. If there had been rain we would probably have CCTV of this.
“However, the analysis of samples collected by the OPCW Technical Assistance Visit team concluded that the chemical substance found was of high purity, persistent and resistant to weather conditions.”
https://www.opcw.org/news/article/opcw-spokespersons-statement-on-amount-of-nerve-agent-used-in-salisbury/
Quite a lucid article, and a reasonable thought as to why Sergei became a target.
https://theworldnews.net/gb-news/salisbury-novichok-victim-sergei-skripal-targeted-by-assassins-as-he-was-still-active-spy-for-four-intelligence-agencies
and why a secondary divergence plan was needed.
Duncan, don´t trust UK media AND don´t trust German media.
FOCUS was wrong about the Estonian trace :
https://news.err.ee/865182/no-link-between-skripal-and-estonian-spy-cases-says-security-service
https://news.err.ee/859013/treason-suspects-named-as-father-and-son-deniss-metsavas-and-pjotr-volin
https://www.baltictimes.com/estonia_names_treason_suspects_as_deniss_metsavas__pjotr_volin/
Craig Murray connects Skripal to the Institute of Statecraft in his latest post.
Super active Skripal may be a myth.
On Eve 30th Anniversary Lockerbie? Ya not telling me in
this high-tech age signals frequency’s being used to operate
a drone can not be tracked-traced-jammed-blocked?
Lets be honest TPTB know when we fart but cant trace a drone.
Its another Hoax-Timings are the key!
Well TPTB couldn’t get away with a Novihoax-3 so they did
Gatwick Drone-1!
Takes pressure off Theresa and her Brexit disaster.
More Cobra Meetings and excuse to form another
Task Force at great cost.
Three Cheers For RT News………………
Practice for a no deal brexit. They scaring public into idea
Theresa Mays option is best.
Gatwick perfect for the little experiment on how to close an
airport and see chaos it will cause if UK leaves with no deal.
This will not happen if UK leaves with no deal.Scare the public!!
Apropos „leave“ and „practice for a no deal brexit“ – maybe it´s a lock down exercise to prevent a British mass exodus in the next year. LOL.
Excuse me, but the whole world is laughing about your HMG.
The people-smugglers will make a mint. Bring in illegal immigrants from France, go back with panicking emigrants from Britain.
Break bread with Little Gavin
For security purposes, the venue of the local event is being withheld.
However, you can buy a ticket. I suppose at some time you will know where you are going, although with HMG, that maybe optimistic.
https://www.vocca.org.uk/events/evening-gavin-williamson-mp
Today RT was reprimanded by Ofcom for some statements on the Skripal case :
https://twitter.com/NeilClark66/status/1075701204217405442
The Statecraft embedded journalists crowed over on twitter (Ben Nimmo, Luke Harding, Deborah Haynes) :
https://twitter.com/haynesdeborah/status/1075713828762148866
For sure the complaints were created in the Statecraft armoury, as evidenced here :
Institute for Statecraft
Production timetable March – June 2016
24 March: eight complaints forwarded to Ofcom on RT’s failure to ensure due impartiality with request to launch a formal investigation
https://www.pdf-archive.com/2018/12/13/00-production-schedule-05-04-2016/00-production-schedule-05-04-2016.pdf
Ofcom can be used as a weapon. More British citizens should forward complaints against the UK disinformation media.
Ofcom passes judgement on the reporting of the Skripal case, but it doesn’t even know which intelligence agency Sergei worked for. Twice it refers to him as the “former FSB secret service officer, Sergei Skripal”. The GRU is not mentioned in the document.
https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/131159/Issue-369-Broadcast-and-On-Demand-Bulletin.pdf
Of the seven programmes that Ofcom found guilty of breaking impartiality rules, two of them dealt with the Skripal case, and were on Sputnik, on 17 March 2018 and 7 April 2018. The same wording is used to describe part of Ofcom’s view of both of them (on p.39 and p.54 in the document, respectively):
“in our view the viewpoint of the UK Government was not adequately represented within this programme”.
Both programmes were found guilty of breaches of Rules 5.11 and 5.12.
Rule 5.12 states (p. 33): “In dealing with matters of major political and industrial controversy and major matters relating to current public policy an appropriately wide range of significant views must be included and given due weight in each programme or in clearly linked and timely programmes. Views and facts must not be misrepresented”.
https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/131159/Issue-369-Broadcast-and-On-Demand-Bulletin.pdf
If Sputnik is really guilty of breaking these rules, then the BBC definely broke them with its Panorama show, amongst many others. The amount of time that Panorama gave to any alternative to the official British version of events in Salisbury is zero. Any skeptical view that was mentioned was simply dismissed and not properly presented.
If there’s any truth in what the Russian embassy in London says, then the viewpoint of the Russian Government was not adequately represented, and this would be in breach of Ofcom’s rules :
“Unfortunately, the documentary does not contain any references to Russia’s position concerning the Salisbury incident. The authors claim that we had refused to comment. This is not true. We had not received any requests. Had the crew got in touch with us, we would have challenged the arrogant behaviour of the British side and its active unwillingness to answer our uncomfortable questions.”
https://www.rusemb.org.uk/fnapr/6692
“The Embassy alone has arranged three major press conferences and a great number of interviews, published a special report on its website, and made dozens of statements and comments on various aspects of the Skripal incident. Not a single of those facts has been mentioned in the documentary.”
https://www.rusemb.org.uk/fnapr/6693
What would be the odds that the drones are Russian?
How pathetic is the UK response when a drone incapacitates a major airport for this length of time.
If the situation had been at JFK, the drone would be jammed, shot down, vapourised with the new secret deathray gizmo (classified) within minutes.
New US sanctions on Russia.
They included the two suspects. But not under the names Bellingcrap found, but under Alexander Petrov and Ruslan Boshirov. That means the US don´t back the Higgins findings.
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/12/19/us-sanctions-russians-skripal-1070641
By the way : Do the EAW and the Red Notice still exist ? Or was the „evidence“ not convincing enough ?
Liane,
I was just about to respond to Paul’s comment about the sanctioning of Petrov and Boshirov to make exactly the point you’ve just made, but you just beat me to it. It’s very interesting. I’d like to see the wording the US administration actually uses, but if it does indeed say “Alexander Petrov and Ruslan Boshirov”, then what does that mean? As you say, presumably it means the US administration doesn’t believe Bellingcat (mind you, nor does The Met, who have never confirmed their identities as Mishkin and Chepiga)?
But assuming they are still considered to be aliases, how is it even possible to sanction people under false names?
Rob
They never forget.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/12/19/never-forget-never-give-met-chief-vows-bring-salisbury-poisoners/
Lets hope this extends to Hillsborough and their other cover ups.
Can the public obtain copies of European Arrest Warrants?
It seems so obvious that wanted “criminals” would be on a list in the public domain, but I might be veering towards so sort of insane logic.
Interesting piece, Duncan. Interesting for the number of errors it contains, that is:
1. “But the Russian government has denied any involvement and has refused to extradite the suspects to the UK to face justice.” This is simple disinformation. The Crown Prosecution Service has declined to put in an extradition request to the Russian government for the two men to be handed over. In what way can the Russian Government be said to have refused to extradite them then, since no such request has been made?
2. “Mr Skripal and his daughter were in hospital for months following the attack and are now recovering at an undisclosed location.” Miss Skripal had clearly recovered in May, when she gave her interview to Reuters. How, then, can she be said to be still recovering 7 months later? As for Mr Skripal’s health, we have had no reports whatsoever of the status of his health since he left hospital.
3. “On Saturday March 3 the pair travelled to Salisbury from Waterloo station and carried out reconnaissance before returning to their hotel.” It has never been stated what exactly this “reconnaissance” involved. And The Met has never stated whether they actually believe that the two men left their two (yes two) bottles of the world’s most toxic nerve agent in the hotel during this “reconnaissance” or why on earth they would have done that.
4. “It is thought they discarded the bottle in the centre of Salisbury before returning to London, from where they flew back to Moscow.” Which bottle are they talking about? The one that they are alleged to have sprayed the door handle with, or the one that was allegedly found wrapped in cellophane in a bin in Catherine Street. They can’t be the same bottle can they, Ms Dick? And so what happened to the other one?
5. They missed the “v” off of Boshirov.
Rob, here is the original source :
Quote : Today OFAC is designating Alexander Petrov (Petrov) and Ruslan Boshirov (Boshirov), the GRU officers responsible for carrying out this attempted assassination of Sergei Skripal and his daughter. Petrov and Boshirov were designated pursuant to CAATSA Section 224 for acting or purporting to act for or on behalf of, directly or indirectly, the GRU.
https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/sm577
Note : The US not even mention alias names !
What a strange wording “acting or purporting to act for or on behalf of, directly or indirectly, the GRU.”
In this document the US listed R&A + aka (page 300 + 301) :
BOSHIROV, Ruslan (a.k.a. CHEPIGA, Anatoliy Vladimirovich), Moscow, Russia; DOB 05 Apr 1979; alt. DOB 12 Apr 1978; POB Nikolaevka, Amur Oblast, Russia; alt. POB Dushanbe, Tajikistan ; nationality Russia; Gender Male (individual)
[CAATSA – RUSSIA] (Linked To: MAIN INTELLIGENCE DIRECTORATE).
CHEPIGA, Anatoliy Vladimirovich (a.k.a. BOSHIROV, Ruslan), Moscow, Russia;
DOB 05 Apr 1979; alt. DOB 12 Apr 1978; POB Nikolaevka, Amur Oblast, Russia;
alt. POB Dushanbe, Tajikistan; nationality Russia; Gender Male (individual )
[CAATSA – RUSSIA] ( Linked To: MAIN INTELLIGENCE DIRECTORATE).
PETROV, Alexander (a.k.a. MISHKIN, Alexander Yevgeniyevich), Moscow, Russia;
DOB 13 Jul 1979; POB Loyga, Russia; alt. POB Kotlas, Russia; n ationality Russia; Gender Male
(individual) [CAATSA – RUSSIA] (Linked To: MAIN INTELLIGENCE DIRECTORATE).
MISHKIN, Alexander Yevgeniyevich (a.k.a. PETROV, Alexander), Moscow, Russia; DOB 13 Jul 1979; POB Loyga, Russia; alt. POB Kotlas, Russia ; nationality Russia; Gender Male (individual) [CAATSA – RUSSIA] (Linked To: MAIN INTELLIGENCE DIRECTORATE).
https://www.treasury.gov/ofac/downloads/sdnnew18.pdf
No passport numbers ! WHY ?
You would think that the aliases would not be used.
Naming the “real” names would add more credibility to the evidence, or the image of wrongdoing.
Can we as members of the public access the EAW database.
I tried couple of months ago, and could see a “Top 10 wanted” but no full list.
Earlier articles even explained why a medic was needed.
“Alexander Mishkin, the second man accused of involvement in the Skripal assassination plot, was likely to have been sent on the mission because he was a trained doctor capable of providing an antidote in case the novichok attack went wrong, according to security sources.
Dr Mishkin, like the GRU colleague who travelled with him to Salisbury, was made a ‘Hero of the Russian Federation’ with Vladimir Putin personally presenting him with the award, according to the investigative website Bellingcat.
But unlike Col Anatolyi Chepiga, who was a member of the Spetnatz special forces, the nature of the services the doctor had provided for the prestigious decoration remains unclear.”
Liane,
I emailed the NCA to enquire if EAWs had in fact been issued.
It would be difficult for the Met to be zealous if the paperwork had not been done……
General enquiries
For general enquiries or to verify a person as an NCA officer:
Email: communication@nca.x.gsi.gov.uk
Telephone: 0370 496 7622 (available 24/7)
This number is not used for outgoing calls.
The postal address for NCA headquarters is:
Units 1 – 6 Citadel Place,
Tinworth Street,
London SE11 5EF
Duncan, look :
https://eumostwanted.eu/#/boshirov-ruslan-timurovich
https://eumostwanted.eu/#/petrov-alexander-evgenevich
Excellent.
Lets hope there is no footage of a drone in their baggage at Gatwick.
That would be a “sleeper drone”.
For what it is worth Boshirov’s name is Tartar.
Thanks Liane, It seems a stupid question, but the 54 or so on that Europol list, must all have European Arrest Warrants issued against them? I researched the EAW totals, and it is a lot more “criminals” than this Most Wanted List.
As you saw from my UK NCA response, they referred to Interpol as the keepers of the data.
I would have thought, (wrongly, I assume) that there is a EAW list.
How else can the citizens reports a wanted person, if we don’t know who is “wanted”?
I might go for a lie down now, or play with my drone.
Duncan and Paul
I have nothing to add to R&A flight bookings.
But another thought :
We know that they traveled several times a year to European countries.
No media followed up to what they were doing there.
For sure no assassinations !
But after Salisbury they didn´t leave Russia, we were told.
Two possibilities :
1) R&A knew that they will be framed. That means their job in Salisbury had something to do with the Skripals.
2) They continued traveling, but it was not mentioned in the media.
3) Mr Putin got upset.
4) They travel using different names and different passports; and make no attempt to enter the UK.
5) They are dead.
I don’t know which country in Europe asks for fingerprints at immigrations now. Theirs are definitely stored.
Thirty Years after Lockerbie and it rises again!
Timings..Looks Good For Security Services-UK.
Total Hogwash by TPTB-MI56-OTHERS!
Will Salisbury Fudge Be Remembered In Thirty Years
Or Rotting In A Landfill Site?
Some interesting pictures of Bailey @ Solent News Image Gallery
regarding Salisbury fiasco.
Looks like his hair changed colour due to Novihox also.
Could be a Bungalow he in. Stonework could suggest Lake District
Northern Area?
Could be an extension on a larger property?
That made me Google some more.
From the BBC on the 11th of March.
Det Sgt Nick Bailey, who fell ill attending the pair, remains seriously ill in hospital but has been talking to his family.
In a statement, he said he did not “consider himself a hero” and was “merely doing his job”.
Joe Riddle, editor of the Salisbury Journal, said some residents were “understandably” scared but the majority were “more interested in finding out what happened” and “frustrated” at being “kept in the dark”.
Well, well, well. DS Bailey seems to be getting confused. Unless he was a first responder to the guinea pigs at midnight.
Where has Little Gavin got his 3,500 Toy Soldiers from?
Car Boot Sale or early Airfix Christmas Presents?
Paint and glue not provided…Bugger!
He’s obviously preparing for a Russian invasion.
And, unlike, PnB, they won’t be put off by the weather:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KuCxChP-HOI
Hopefully Airfix can manufacture plastic winter clothing for
Gavin’s Little Army in time?
Don’t want them fighting a “No Deal Brexit” in plastic
desert-summer clothing.
Cardboard boots compulsory as in Falklands-82!
Action Man Gavin With Ideas Rely Above His Station!
An idiot, but still a dangerous idiot,
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/has-gavin-williamson-the-defence-secretary-got-his-eye-on-the-top-job-w3528fspw
Just the man to hatch the Skripalgate Bad Russia scheme.
Including, (and I realise that I am in an extreme minority) just the man to pay Rus and Alex to come over for their Salisbury “be seen and loud” jaunt.
By the way. Do we know who booked their UK trip first?
Yulia or Rus/Alex.
Do we have access to the airline bookings system?
Related to that, do we know when the UK visas were issued?
Yulia’s visa was issued some long time ago. Her friends told the Russian newspaper Moskovsky Komsomolets that her UK visa was to expire soon.
Thanks Milda.
I assume the flight bookings we cannot access?
Paul and Liane, what say you?
Duncan,
Bellingcat said that R&A’s plane tickets to the UK were bought at the last minute, not as part of a long-planned vacation but we have not been given the date they obtained their visa (as far as I can recall). I believe that Liane found a reference saying that the story that R&A had booked 2 return tickets was untrue and that they actually purchased their return tickets on 3 March.
I am sure Milda is correct that one of Yulia’s friends said that her visa was due to expire soon, so she must have had it for some time already but she also must have been planning the March trip to the UK for some time because it was partly to coincide with her brother’s birthday anniversary. It was at least her third trip (maybe fourth) to the UK since July 2017.
Thanks Paul, if I am reading correctly what your are saying:
R&A bought one way tickets at short notice, and then booked the return leg to Moscow on Saturday March 3rd, for a flight on March 4th.
Therefore both legs of this journey would be high cost tickets. Or so I thought, but I can book a flight for £325 return LHR/Moscow and that includes a return leg I would not use.
Travelling tomorrow. I don’t know the prices early March, but it is not high tourist season.
However, this short notice stuff must mean the were under somebodies instruction, and not tourists.
Duncan, You read it correctly – maybe Liane has something else to add.
“…this short notice stuff must mean the were under somebodies instruction, and not tourists” – perhaps but equally, deciding to go on a trip at short notice does not rule out tourism…
“What are you doing next weekend Rus?”
“Same as usual Alex. Not a lot!”
“Why don’t we do something crazy… like… go to Salisbury to see the spire?”
“That’s a great idea Alex! Yeah, why not? Let’s do it! It’ll be c**p here anyway!! What will the weather be like at this time of year?”
“Don’t know… who cares?”
True, maybe.
What about:
“Rus, some guy in the UK wants to give us $10,000 on an all expenses paid trip to some English town.”
“Alex, all we have to do is be there on two days, and make sure some of the CCTV cameras see us.”
“Anything special we need to do? No, just stay away from some address at Christy Miller Road”
“Where’s my bag? Can we do hookers and dope as usual?”
Joking aside, it is possibly the most realistic post of the last nine months…
Whether you have translated it exactly from the original Russian, I cannot know but yes, they were set up and ‘highly likely’ walked into a trap.
Paul, after Putin “allowed” their TV appearance I allows thought that some western agency paid for their trip.
It seemed the only way their sojurn made any sense.
Well the US has now ‘deemed’ them guilty and has issued the (first) punishment. The US has sanctioned Rus and Alex!
“In addition, Treasury imposed sanctions on Alexander Petrov and Rusian Boshirov, two GRU officers who have been accusing [sic] of attempting to assassinate Sergei Skripal and his daughter in Salisbury, England, last year.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/russians-sanctioned-over-election-hacking-and-assassination-attempt/2018/12/19/c85adbba-03b7-11e9-9122-82e98f91ee6f_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.41a401731a25
The lunatics really have taken ‘control’ – where will it end?
[Please don’t ask me about the shoddy reporting: ‘accusing’… ‘last year'(!) it is only the WaPo after all.]
Last minute travel is very cheap. I know people who go to an airport not knowing where they will fly looking for the cheapest offer for a weekende.
If Boshirov and Petrov had decided spontaneously to have a getaway and let their hair down they would have done exactly what they did.
The British government is very quiet about their visa. It is possible that Boshirov’s and Petrov’s visa expired and they wanted to use the last dates because they were not sure it would be renewed.
There is the question why they had these visas though clearly identifyable by their passport sequence as some kind of “undercover official”. Bellingcat seems to have been effective in Russia but they did not even look in Britain.
The question is also why Glushkov was killed strangled with the dog leash. Glushkov was part of the Berezovsky mafia which may or may not have been involved in the Skripal case.
Can anyone read the name badges of these two women, next to Keir Prichard, at the press conference outside Salisbury Hospital, for Nick’s release from there, on I think the 22nd of March?
Those badges seem unusual, not like normal IDs worn at hospitals?
Does anyone know who these women are. Is the Sarah, Nick’s wife next to Prichard maybe?
https://cml.sad.ukrd.com/image/659741-3600×2400.jpg
Director of Nursing Lorna Wilkinson is on the left,
Chief Executive Cara Charles-Barks is in the middle,
Kier Pritchard is on the right
https://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/news/14810511.new-chief-executive-appointed-to-salisbury-district-hospital/
Thank you Eleanor, thats wonderful. I’m just trying to keep track of everyone involved.
Prompted by suggestions from Rob I followed up my complaint
43 mins In reponse to my complaint you wrote >we explained that “The Skripals are at home, oblivious to what is happening right outside.” We were reflecting the view of Dep. Asst. Commissioner Dean Haydon, Counter Terrorism Policing, who explained that Sergei Skripal left the house first followed by Yulia. I hope that this explains our approach. It was claimed she had nerve agent on her left hand, and her father had it on his right hand.< Why allow imprecision in Panorama? I have numbered four specific complaints in the complaint above, with numbers in square brackets. Scrupulous accuracy is required for the public to have confidence in the police investigation.
The previous comment didn’t copy the full complaint
43 mins In reponse to my complaint you wrote >we explained that “The Skripals are at home, oblivious to what is happening right outside.” We were reflecting the view of Dep. Asst. Commissioner Dean Haydon, Counter Terrorism Policing, who explained that Sergei Skripal left the house first followed by Yulia. I hope that this explains our approach. It was claimed she had nerve agent on her left hand, and her father had it on his right hand.< Why allow imprecision in Panorama? I have numbered four specific complaints in the complaint above, with numbers in square brackets. Scrupulous accuracy is required for the public to have confidence in the police investigation.
Nor did my second attempt. Yulia seems to be wearing gloves in the reconstruction.
You wrote this to the BBC?
You should write a letter to the Metropolitan Police, addressed to the head, listing all the inconsistencies in the media and asking for an official police statement as “trust in the police investigation is at stake”.
Send a copy to all media and journalists so they can follow up on it if they wish to. Some of them will.
You can also send a copy to your MP.
The more people do this, the more they will have to act.
I am not in Britain, they do not really care about my trust.
Hi anidea! They don’t care about British Peoples trust either!
Actually, they tend to do.
Their whole system on getting information and cooperation from the public depends on trust.
Apart from that most police people are human beings who prefer to be proud of their job.
Agree anidea! Thirty plus years ago this is true. Not now when TPTB are
pulling strings over budgets-costs for results within Police Force.
Its all about crime figures and not the victims of crime.
Looks great on paper! Crap for victims,how does this work?
Yes they Human but they following a system. A Government System.
Don’t mention Knife Crime In London as a failing,It will mess Government
Figures About.
No Trust in Police..Government..MPs…Sorry! [take a look at Brexit disaster]
Feel free checking a little tune on youtube “Theresa May Lire-Lire”
Very Good. Should explain it all.
Many Thanks
I had until 21st December to send it to the BBC, I can send it to the police after this date. And I felt I owed it to Rob to send it because he suggested this line of questioning.
The significance of what the police people say.
They suspected Fentanyl at the bench and took Sergey Skripal’s wallet and looked into Yulia’s smartphone.
One of them did not wear gloves.
They were not decontaminated.
None of them had symptoms afterwards.
CID came to the bench and went to Skripal’s home. This would be the 5pm neighbours reported. Unlikely – my assumption – they wore hazmat suits.
Unlikely – my assumption – they were decontaminated if the bench police people weren’t – nor Sergeant Bailey who came to the house at midnight.
Firefighters were called in to decontaminate the bench (Fentanyl suspected). Firefighters wore hazmat suits.
During the night the hospital notified authorities that patients did not respond to Fentanyl antidotes. This presumably is the reason Bailey went to Skripal’s house at midnight.
Only Sergeant Bailey who went to the house at midnight fell ill (and maybe a team mate who was treated as an out-patient). Bailey says he wore a hazmat suit. He was not decontaminated.
So the conclusion would be Bailey got the poison on the doorknob.
Bailey took a long time to show symptoms from midnight to Tuesday morning. The conclusion would be he got poisoned by handling the stuff later.
I don’t know what suit Bailey wore in Sunday night at the Skripal home.
Haz-Mat or a Forensic “gown”.
We may recall that Pritchard proudly said that Bailey wore a camera too.
That might have been a bit cumbersome, no wonder he had to break in.
Maybe with all this material in and around his person, switching on the house lights became too difficult.
Yep. The BBC visualization suggests he did it with a torchlight.
I wonder how they got this idea.
Nick Bailey says “forensic suit” in the panorama interview
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9NjQ3jFe8iQ
And for some strange reason panorama insists it was “around midnight” in the subtitles.
This here is the Salisbury Journal of March 5.
https://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/news/16066343.critically-ill-man-is-former-russian-spy/
“Police arrived at Skripal’s home in Christie Miller Road, Salisbury, yesterday at 5pm, according to neighbours. ”
Did they really enter the house without touching the doorknob?
The bench couple were unfamiliar faces, whereas they say they were upset about what happened later:
“But there was also huge sadness. Both knew Charlie Rowley and Dawn Sturgess, who were poisoned three months later after apparently coming upon a container of novichok disguised as a perfume bottle … ”
Taken at face value, this discounts the probability of the bench couple being Charlie and Dawn. These first responders don’t say whether they found photographic ID on the bench couple, but they found sufficient to identify the name Skripal.
As for the suspects PnB, Sgt Holloway ” … was trying to work back in my mind if I had seen them during that day”. But she wouldn’t have seen them, they were already back on a train to London by the time her shift started that Sunday, if she was told what the public were told.
See BBC doing best at implicating Russia in the HV [Yellow Vest] situation.
Sounds like clutching at straws via TPTB.
Will Russia be blamed for fire at Chester Zoo by BBC?
I agree Skripals vanished from rear Mill Pub. Was Skripals I.D. passed on
to Mystery Couple before alleged bench incident or was this another
Russian Couple?
TPTB are just digging a bigger hole with each new release of lies.
Dear Blogmirers,
I know we all really appreciate what Rob has done but sadly we must now make new plans.
This message is to start a discussion on what sort of site we would like to have moving forwards.
Unless there is somebody willing to step into Rob’s shoes and start a new blog along the lines of theblogmire.com, we need a new format.
A few of us have already had some preliminary discussions and we have a proposal to offer but unless there is some support for this idea, we will stop work and perhaps join somebody else with a better idea.
We envisage a new site split into two sections: a library resource and a comments section.
The library resource will contain copies of original documents (press releases, OPCW and other reports, images and videos, FoIRs, etc.) and will be maintained by us as administrators. Anyone can submit documents for inclusion in the library but cannot add documents themselves. The library will categorise documents by broad category (and can be browsed within that category) but the whole library can also be searched.
The comments section with be split by topic (new topics can be created at any time) and an index will keep a list of all active (and archived) topics. A separate board will hold the comments relating to each topic. Comments will be entirely open: completely anonymous comments will be allowed (to encourage ‘whistle blowers’); the comments will not be moderated; images and videos can be posted.
Please give your feedback on ‘New Thread and Announcement’, as this thread is already very long. I will repost this on that thread.
Is this something people would get behind, or are there better ideas?
Sounds really good, thank you. Just let me have a link to the new forum and I’m there.
I will be also there.
To post links like this stuff – more unknown Skripal activities :-))
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Obrechennyj-kontingent-Gennadiy-Rytchenko-Skripal/dp/5699169490/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1545000760&sr=1-1&refinements=p_27%3AGennadiy+Rytchenko+Sergey+Skripal
Anidea, the book about Afghanistan was written by another Sergey Skripal
http://www.stapravda.ru/projects/litera/avtor/SS.shtml
who was in Afghanistan
Salisbury Skripal was in Afghanistan. Soviet Afghan veterans are his network. He used to work for Boris Gromov after his government career.
But yes, of course, the biography you link to is completely different.
I posted this on the final thread.
Just duplicating so it is seen.
Fellow Blogmire Alumni,
Like many of you, I would also like to carry on the fight.
Well done to Rob for getting us to where we are, but I do believe now is the time for action, or at least a plan for action.
Write a book, get Cloud funding to either:
Get it written and published.
Or, just write it, then seek the Cloud funding to get it published.
Who would pay to get this book published?
Many people, a small band of interested folk, a Russian oligarch, (or two) RT Television, or maybe all the above.
We need exposure, and it seems that we cannot get dissention among the main stream media,
I have contacted Luke Harding, Mark Urban, Jane Corbin, Rebecca Hudson, and lately Steven Morris of the Guardian, the chap with the latest revelation from the two plods at the scene.
My angle in contacting them is:
Why does each subsequent version of what is supposed to have happened, directly contradict a previous version? Do authors not investigate? Did Corbin, for example not realise that Bailey was contradicting his Prime Minister and Chief Constable?
Of course, none of them have ever replied, except Rebecca Hudson.
Rebecca still walks the company line, but I believe she may have an interest in “The Salisbury Story- the Untold Truth.”
A few random thoughts and observations.
Phones usually have no writing on them, unless you have a special GRU secret phone which has “Russian Spy” on the case cover.
Sergei would/should have a pink UK drivers licences, which suprisingly would have English text, including home address and his name.
The two police officers in this weekend’s drip feed,I see are also heroes.
Because they watched the military doctor give first aid to Yulia.
I really need to readjust my hero reality meter.
Don’t touch the meter Duncan! That is not the problem.
TPTB are having very serious transmission problems… their story makes no sense. It is time to bring back this message:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/it/d/d8/Do_Not_Adjust_Your_Set.jpg
We can only hope that ‘normal service will resume as soon as possible’… but it might take a revolution to get there. Have you bought your ‘yellow vest’ yet?
Messages sometimes get corrupted.
During WWI, a young leuitenant saw an opportunity to advance and, this not being in the day of radios and mobile phones he sent a runner back headquarters with a message: “Send reinforcements, we are going to advance”.
Unfortunately for the leuitenant the runner was wounded and had to pass on his message, the second faired only a little better and likewise passed on the message, but the message did reach HQ.
Some time later a runner sent by HQ arrived at the leuitenant’s position. “What are you doing here”, he asked? The runner replied, “I’ve come in response to your message” and handed the leuitenant three shilling and four pence (this was in the days of pounds, shillings and pence). The astonished leuitenant asked, “I asked for reinforcements, What’s this for!?”. The runner replied, but the message you sent sir “Send three and four pence, we’re going to a dance”.
Unless the people being used to pass on the message truly understand and agree with the message and its intent, it is very likely that it will become, to a lesser or greater degree, corrupted.
As people have commented many times throughout the blog, it is very difficult to maintain conspiracy beyond a few dedicated members.
There will be more slip ups – as I commented earlier, Number 10 and the spooks should be advised to throw away the spade – when your in a hole, it isn’t possible to dig your way out of it.
Damned apostrophes “you’re”
Sometimes it depends where you put the comma. Probably apochryphal but always makes me laugh (apologies to Liane and our other continental cousins!):
“British Push Bottles Up German Rear”
Wow – the exposure of the backgrounds of the “Institute for Statecraft” and “Integrity Initiative” has reached such proportions that even Craig Murray and George Galloway fear for their lives :
Craig Murray :
Please note in the interim I am not even a smidgeon suicidal, and going to be very, very careful crossing the road and am not intending any walks in the hills.
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2018/12/british-security-service-infiltration-the-integrity-initiative-and-the-institute-for-statecraft/
George Galloway :
The more I see on this the more genuinely stunned I am. I awoke this morning for the first time in my adult life, more than half of which I spent in Parliament, with a sense of fear. Fear for democracy fear for Corbyn fear for Britain. Such dark actors milling around…
https://twitter.com/georgegalloway/status/1074188591146954752
The ugly grimace behind RussiaBlame is becoming more and more exposed.
The Skripal case is just a tiny piece of the puzzle.
RussiaGate – Steele Dossier – Atlantic Council – DFR Lab – Bellingcat : All connected to the Deep State and NATO.
Time to WAKE UP, journalists !
The journalists are on ‘their’ side Liane!
“Sputnik has obtained the correspondence of the BBC journalist, who wrote a message to one of the stringers covering Yellow Vest demonstrations in Paris, trying to find out whether Russia had something to do with the protests in the French capital. The stringer, in turn, explained that she had not seen any Russians at the protests.
The BBC stringer was not satisfied with such an answer.
“Well, maybe some Russian businesses are capitalizing quite well on it [protests] [smiling emoji]. Maybe, they [protesters] are eating cutlets en masse [smiling emoji]?” the BBC correspondent went on.
The stringer has only laughed in response.
The BBC journalist explained that she was “looking for various angles” since the broadcaster was “out for blood.”
https://sputniknews.com/europe/201812161070731396-russia-france-yellow-vests/
The BBC is absolutely not fit for purpose and needs decapitating – everyone should refuse to pay the license fee.
You are aware of the Greek legend, Paul? That particular animal, the BBC, has more than one head.
I sincerely doubt that any of the churnalists will wake up. When you are chasing a Knighthood or some other honour, Liane, the last thing you want to do is upset the person who hands them out.
Sargent Holloway checked the phone and it had Russian writing on it.
Does this mean phone was switched on or a sticker on back with
Russian writing on?
I could not see lots of children on images as stated by Collins.
Children have a habit of becoming a nuisance when something is
going down and hang around the area.
Mark, Does your phone have any ‘writing’ on it? I just checked six different phones brands and some of them have a logo but none of them has any ‘writing’ on the case at all.
What was the make of the phone that had ‘writing’ on it I wonder…
Lots of words on iphone home screen …. all translatable
Only when it is switched on though…
Hi Paul! I don’t know if Sargent Holloway was saying Russian
writing on screen meaning phone was powered up or just some
sticker personal to its owner with Russian handwriting in ink-biro
on back of phone? Honestly don’t know?
Elena Evdokimova :
To state that the mobile had Russian writing – one has to turn the screen on, touching that contaminated “on” button. Russians produce mobiles have Latin writing on their casings – for better marketing opportunities.
https://twitter.com/elenaevdokimov7/status/1074165591630475264
P.C.Collins drove along pedestrianized area and over bridge. Is this
Market Walk he referring in his account?
If so would he not have seen Man In Black running as captured on
CCTV and radioed it in asap as either a possible suspect-witness?
Mark, yes. As I understand it they drove through Market Walk and were captured by the Jenny´s restaurant CCTV.
Suspicious are not the two people running in the direction of the bench, but the man standing the whole time there and looking into the window of the library. Obviously he was watching the scene but didn´t want to be seen himself.
Hi Liane! Didn’t CCTV [Jennys I Think?] capture someone
running opposite way from police car along Market Walk?
I getting confused again…sorry!
Good evening/morning all:
Pablo Miller may be a malign ‘protector’. Long read but worth it and entirely relevant.
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2018/12/the-strange-mind-of-christopher-nigel-donnelly.html#more
@ ut/et al
Link to The .PDF document
The original data was initially available here:
https://www.cyberguerrilla.org/blog/operation-integrity-initiative-british-informational-war-against-all-part-3/
but most of those files have already been removed from the internet…
Fortunately, an archive copy can be downloaded from here:
https://www.mediafire.com/file/fs5xslv13elkulu/IntegrityInitiative.zip/file
They still can’t get Bailey’s story straight!
“Other detectives went to the Skripal house at the other end of Salisbury – where UK authorities said the highest concentration of Novichok was found.
It was here that an officer, Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey, was left critically ill after coming into contact with the nerve agent after it was sprayed on the door handle.”
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6498693/Officers-reach-Sergei-Skripal-daughter-say-didnt-feel-right.html
Still the door handle! But what gloves was Bailey wearing? Was it his “Police-issue leather gloves” as we have been told countless times before, or was it the gloves of the “full forensic suit” he now says he was wearing?
The timing of new revelations always perturbs me, so we must ask: what is it that we have discussed recently that ‘they’ might want us to not pay attention to? IMHO each new burst of information is a distraction, the magicians trick of directing their audience’ attention elsewhere than where things are really going on.
Cascadian
Couldn’t agree more.
Instead of peeling the onion to get to the truth they are adding layers in order to obscure the facts.
Timing is everything when you are orchestrating a complex international fraud.
It is really likely that Pablo Miller set out to murder Sergei and Yulia (or the substitutes) as part of the Integrity Initiative need for ‘fodder’ to boost the ‘hate russia’ obsession. DS Bailey accidentally foiled the game in some way. They rushed to recast the story line but deliberately lace it with nonsense to keep critical observers distracted.
I do not know when the Integrity Initiative server was hacked there is no published date but if they knew before Kit visited the premises in their salubrious basement then that’s when the distractions would have commenced. I am certain the UK state apparatus will deluge the world with distractions for the next month or so. Watch out gilet jaunes in UK.
The Guardian story looks like a weak attempt to address the contradicting reports of Bailey’s role in responding to the incident. Theresa May and many others called him a “first responder”, but the official story is that he was poisoned about eight hours later at Sergei’s house. A number of people have pointed out this problem with the story, including Rob in his article above.
The Guardian, like Panorama last month, is trying to say something like: “Bailey was, sort of, a first responder at the park bench, but that isn’t really significant because he was poisoned at the house”. It doesn’t even say clearly that he was at the bench, only that “CID officers” were there.
Paul, the DailyMail article is poorly structured (as always).
Better read the original :
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/dec/14/we-did-our-best-police-who-rushed-to-skripal-scene-tell-of-shock-and-pride
Note : According to Collins and Holloway they searched Skripal´s pockets and found their names :
„Holloway remembers examining Sergei Skripal’s wallet with bare hands. “We looked at their wallets to try to find their ID. There was a phone with Russian writing on it. The names weren’t familiar. That was strange. It didn’t feel right. It wasn’t quite normal.”
That means their identity was known immediately !
Note : According to Collins and Holloway it was them who called the CID :
„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.
Detectives went to the Skripal house on the edge of town. One of them, DS Nick Bailey, was left critically ill after being exposed to novichok when he searched the property.“
That sounds as if the CID officers went to Skripal´s house right after they were at the bench. NOT as claimed by Bailey at midnight !
Note : According to Collins and Holloway they had NO decontamination process at SDH after the incident !
Kier Pritchard lied when he said to Salisbury Journal :
„CC Pritchard said officers at the scene underwent a “decontamination process” at Salisbury District Hospital overnight on Sunday and into Monday morning, after details of the attack became clearer.“
https://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/news/16270991.kier-pritchard-says-ds-nick-bailey-poisoned-at-skripal-house/
And Public Health England also lied :
The hospital would not specify how many casualties had been treated.
A Public Health England (PHE) spokesman said:
„PHE understands that those exposed to the substances have been decontaminated, as is standard practice in situations like this.”
http://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/news/16064949.major-incident-at-salisbury-district-hospital-linked-to-medical-emergency-at-maltings-police-confirm/?ref=ar
Liane, Thanks – I read the Guardian as well.
The list of lies just grows and grows!
This is an article from the Times of 3 May that was republished by Wiltshire Police Federation which makes it clear that Bailey was wearing “police-issue gloves when he grabbed the handle of Sergei Skripal’s front door”:
https://polfed.org/Wilts/news/2018/salisbury-poisoning-gloves-failed-to-shield-sergeant-from-novichok/
How many pairs of gloves was Bailey wearing that day? Was he wearing the gloves over his forensic suit? Was he wearing “police-issue” gloves as he searched inside #47CMR?
By the way, Paul : police-issue gloves would not protect you from Novichock – neither Bailey nor the staff at the bench.
It´s difficult to hold on a Novichok narrative when all indicates that there was no… We have a lot of proof, including this new piece.
This may come as a surprise to some but, back in the day (60s and 70s) the NBC suits issued to military personnel were made of paper. Yes, paper, but many layers of paper with intervening layers of absorbent materials like carbon and other other substances designed to neutralize, or at least mitigate against the absorbtion of chemical agents. Some care was needed in getting it on and aid was required to ensure there were no gaps. There were also cautions about avoiding contact with liquid bodies of agent because they could seep through rather quickly.
Lifetime of the suit in conditions where chemical agents were deployed? 6 hours, and it was expected that a decontamination station would be needed to enable removal of the suit without harm to its occupant.
The rationale? Well, a hermetically sealed suit would result in its occupant overheating very quickly.
I’m working on the assumption that there’s been a certain amount of development since those times and that current suits are much more sophisticated.
Cascadian, there is a difference between police-issue gloves and police protection suits (including gloves).
And there is a difference between police protection suits and CBRN hazmat suits.
I remember an article where they wrote that the police asked for better protection suits, because the current ones didn´t protect them from Novichok.
I´ll try to find the link.
I’m not disagreeing with your view, Liane. There is a point to note, however, the military NBC suits circa 40 to 50 years ago were not designed for forensic examination activities. The threat was envisaged as airborne, falling into a puddle of the stuff was regarded as deadly. The gloves and over-boots were some sort of rubber or plastic compound totally waterproof, as was the gasmask.
And if the current protective suits used by the police wouldn’t protect them from novichok, then they wouldn’t protect from fentanyl either, or indeed any chemical agent. I wonder what led them to believe that novichok has some special properties other than being 8 times more deadly?
It’s all scare tactics.
It is a struggle of people who try to get the scare on and people who resist that by saying “no danger to the public” “just three treated for poisoning” plus this in the Daily Telegraph
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/03/08/russian-spy-poisoning-investigation-intensifies-cordons-cemetery/
“A Wiltshire detective suggested the cordon had been extended around the house and erected around the graves in the hunt for forensic clues to the identities of the assassination squad.
The source said: “The only reason to put up those cordons is to examine the area to see if the pair were under surveillance by hit squad. They will be looking in bushes and undergrowth for clues.”
So the police did not believe they were decontaminating the areas in the cordon, or looking for Novichok but somehow this was the impression given to the public.
Why is this coming up now? I guess because Theresa May is a lame duck. She was interior minister when the “anti-Russia” think tanks spread.
It looks more like they were searching for Skripal’s dead letter boxes, by the way.
Total Hogwash,Lies, BS,Cover Up Via Theresa and her
security service MI56 Fudge Men!
Its not GU who are amateurs. If GU involved both Skripal’s
would be deceased.
Poor Dawn collateral damage in Theresa’s political game.
Theresa evil and has no shame…..B***** Lire She Is!
She still in power after no confidence vote but everyone voted
against? Someone telling porkies. Maybe that big Jaguar car
is too good on dodgy MP expenses
As Cascadian commented.
The timings.
Is this new revelation by the two officers some sort of reinforcement of Bailey’s story in Panorama?
WPD thinking that something needed corroboration or as Mrs May would say “clarification”?
One of the most interesting ‘new bits’ was that (finally!) they have admitted what we have been saying for months – that the police searched the couple on the bench for ID. It would not be credible that the IDs were not immediately queried and that the police at the bench already had been informed who ‘Sergei Skripal’ was (even if at that point it wasn’t actually Sergei on the bench). Accordingly the ‘wiki search’ idea just bit the dust as well – that didn’t live very long did it? (This may also account for the police attending #47CMR by 5pm).
They also claim that ‘within minutes’ a cordon was put in place around the bench… do we believe this?
Paul
Mr Skripal would have had to have an EU/British driving licence with his picture on it.
I’m pretty sure it would not have been in Cyrillic script.
My EU driving licence has the address on it.
Mr Skripal’s would have had the same.
If that was the fact- they would know where he lived ( or had lived)
immediately.
So why would a copper go on Wikipedia to find out where he lived?
Maybe he had a Tesco card – who knows but he was well embedded into the British way of life I’m sure.
“They also claim that ‘within minutes’ a cordon was put in place around the bench… do we believe this?”
Yes we can. Meg Edgar :
“The next moment a policeman walked across in front of me and he came and asked me just to step back and put the first blue and white police cordon tape around the tree and in front of me, so I stepped back.
Previously I´d thought ´shall I go and help this woman who´s helping the person on the ground?´ But I thought, ´well no, there´s police on the scene now and there´s a paramedic arrived, so there´s nothing I can do.“
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-england-wiltshire-45381853/retired-teacher-recalls-salisbury-novichok-incident
“Then Ms Edgar heard police sirens and HELICOPTERS overhead.”
https://www.ft.com/content/c713dd5e-238b-11e8-ae48-60d3531b7d11
HELICOPTERS ? At around 4:30pm ???
Was she paying close attention to the time displayed on her watch or her phone or iPad at this time? Doubtful, so I wouldn’t put too much store in here assessment of timings.
That pesky bloody ‘e’ – ‘her’
Coincidentally, Meg Edgar appears in the SJ today:
https://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/news/17299770.dance-six-0-holding-auditions-for-new-members-in-salisbury/
What did she mean by helicopters (plural!)
She seems to have ‘arrived’ at both ends of the timescale… a paramedic had arrived (around 4:20)… and so had the helicopter (around 4:50)… so when did Meg arrive?
Paul, exactly my thoughts, too.
Meg must have arrived around 4:20. But did she stay for half an hour ? Or did the helicopter arrived earlier ? Or circled ?
Maybe she is wrong with the plural. Sometimes the sound is fooling you (sirene effect).
Duncan Carmichael asked :
[QUOTE]
Is this new revelation by the two officers some sort of reinforcement of Bailey’s story in Panorama?
WPD thinking that something needed corroboration or as Mrs May would say “clarification”?
[/QUOTE]
Blogmirers had asked why a CID member (Bailey) was immediately near the bench. Now we have a good explanation : the Wiltshire police found it strange that people with Russian links and unknown to them were implied in a fentanyl affair (“There was a phone with Russian writing on it. The names weren’t familiar. That was strange. It didn’t feel right. It wasn’t quite normal.”) and so they called CID.
Amber Rudd had said that the Wiltshire police felt that the bench scene didn’t feel right. (I had expressed a bit surprise about this in a comment on Blogmire.) Now, we know what didn’t feel right : the fact that people with Russian links and unknown to the police could be implied in a fentanyl affair.
I recorded Panorama Salisbury. Good friend has put on disc so we
have evidence if needed in future.
Before BBC try changing what they said and rewrite history again[Fudge]
Them three pictures and Guardian release of Officers at bench?
All very relaxed.hands in pockets. No evidence of Major Emergency.
No vomit-fluids on ground…No packaging from used medical equipment?
All very clean-sterile and then items start appearing in later pictures?
If Couple is Bailey-Another [looks like to me] would they be able to go
47 CMR [17:00-ish] after these pictures taken talking Officers at bench?
I don’t know how to get timings when images taken-sorry.
I got Panorama on disc if we need it. Thanks.
You would get timing from the EXIF data in the original file generated by the camera, Mark. However, that relies on the clock in the camera being set to the correct time and that the EXIF data hasn’t been stripped/modified in subsequent processing.
It would help if, in addition to all the CCTV scattered around the UK, the government also scattered around strategically placed clocks so we could then all see what the actual time was.
Oh! Wait! They would be able to control the time shown on the clocks – BUGGER!!
Thanks Cascadian! I not tech engaged. Many Thanks.
Some info on Laurie Bristow, HM Ambassador to Russia, appointed in 2016. The Panorama broadcast shows footage of his residence in Moscow opposite the Kremlin, where the case against Russia was set out.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laurie_Bristow
‘In 2003 Bristow worked on the Iraq Policy Unit, FCO.’
So he obviously has some relevant experience.
From the latest Anonymous release of documents from the FCO’s Institute of Statecraft
The one whose name is not allowed to be mentioned in the MSM (Dnotices) Pablo Miller is on the ‘List of employees who attended a closed-door meeting with the White Helmets’.
More evidence that the White Helmets are a UK operation.
I wonder if Sergei, being handled by Pablo, was involved with the false flag chemical attacks by the UK in Syria or at least providing intelligence somehow obtained on what Russia was up to at the time in Syria?
Oh and here is Pablo Miller’s email if you have any questions to ask him about the Salisbury affair.
Pablo Miller fearnaught4rtr@hotmail.com
And here is the link to the list of White Helmets meeting attendees:
https://www.pdf-archive.com/2018/12/13/cnd-gen-list-2/cnd-gen-list-2.pdf
This may be getting off topic and near to areas where Rob may not want to go
but if you go to 45 secs here
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-o3CJp4jDew&app=desktop
you will see a man in a burka wiping a tear from his eye when tributes are paid to the leading Parliamentary Supporter of the White Helmets
Rob feel free to delete
Ever since learning of the white helmets and their antics (from the likes of Vanessa Beeley, Janice Kortkamp, Eva Karene Bartlett, Andrew Ashdown and others) I’ve wondered about Jo Cox and her ‘humanitarian’ values.
Check out the manual and especially the bulldust on the Skripal fraud:
https://www.pdf-archive.com/2018/11/02/untitled-pdf-document-1/
Thank you CyberGuerilla.org
go here for full reality check:
https://www.cyberguerrilla.org/blog/operation-integrity-initiative-british-informational-war-against-all/
Now that’s interesting – following the link to the II manual results in a re-direction to a site loaded with a virus, as well as downloading the document.
I wonder what the virus is – it was blocked, so it didn’t load.
Hmm… that is odd. The link itself is clean. You can check it here:
https://virusdesk.kaspersky.com
It’s very strange. I can’t get it to consistently repeat. I tried it again after reading your response about, and sure enough it redirected to a page stating that my flash player was out of date (it isn’t) and inviting me to download an update, then almost immediately my f-secure extension warned that it was a malware site and did I want to continue – so I hit the back button.
But subsequent efforts at loading that link sometimes did sometimes didn’t exhibit that behaviour.
And there is an f-secure virus checker on board this PC.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/dec/14/we-did-our-best-police-who-rushed-to-skripal-scene-tell-of-shock-and-pride
New police version (different guys) from the bench.
No decontamination as claimed for them either.
‘The two Wiltshire officers spoke of…their surprise that they and many other first responders had not been contaminated.’ If they followed the Blogmire they might be less surprised.
Thank you for this link Anidea.
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.”
Yes sure they did. By then they were saying it was the most deadly poison on earth and they told him to just throw your clothes and other kit, you had that day, in the car and bring it in to the police station. The story just goes from improbable to plain stupid. lol
The thing that really frightens me, Denise, is the assumption, by the media, that people are so ignorant, that they will accept , without question, things which are clearly impossible or at best highly improbable regarding basic physical processes. Such as, if this is a very deadly substance, and it is on your clothes, then does it seem sensible to just instruct someone to put it in the car and bring it in to the police station without also providing instruction on the basic precautionary measures that they should take before doing so? – such as, visit SDH and get checked out, don’t handle it directly, get your house fumigated, invite anyone you’d like to see bumped off to have a nose around touching everything, etc.
What is really insulting is the basic underlying assumption that people, in general, are just plain stupid.
That’s one of the main things that drives me to dig, as hard as I can, into this saga Cascadian
I’m glad you folks are still digging, as the MSM clearly aren’t (no surprises there!). Questions I would have asked the officers include:
Why are you coming forward now to tell us this rather than much earlier when it was more topical?
Why does your account differ so much from the early reports in the papers (eg re Bailey being the first police responder, Yulia going to hospital by air ambulance).
How have you felt about Bailey being branded hero re my last point?
Can you explain why it took nearly an hour for the Skripals to be taken to hospital, when both were seemingly breathing (Yulia in recovery position, not being given CPR by doctor)?
After digging into what was happening in Syria I started reading some books about the parlous state of our media, the main revelation which came from that is that most of what the media print is either from a single source (Associated Press), government press releases (also output via AP), and plain PR generated by PR firms tied to those who seek to mould opinion. It sort explains why the same story with minor changes appear in multiple outlets almost simultaneously. The author of one of those books, a longstanding journalist himself, coined the term Churnalist for today’s crop of so called Journalists.
When I put a similar contradiction to my ‘focus group’, now sadly declined to zero, the response was that of course there were contradictions in the but the central story was true. So these things may seem stupid when the scales have fallen from your eyes but if your vision is blurred they don’t mean much at all.
Very good point Grigory
Is this a coincidence or a sure sign now of a cover-up?
Those are the two Officers in the three pictures we
pulled apart the other day!
TPTB have hit Big Red Panic Button………………………
Exactly Mark!
Just a thought: the publication of this Guardian article at 13:27 GMT today is rather hot on the heels of Rob’s notice to quit at 08:56 innit.
Wiltshire Police have more to tell …
Worth reading for details of the official version of events that day.
Anidea you said about police officers Collins and Holloway: “No decontamination as claimed for them either.”
Correct, PC Alex Collins said:
“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.
(…)
“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.”
That timeline contradicts what Chief Constable Kier Pritchard told the Salisbury Journal in June:
“officers at the scene underwent a “decontamination process” at Salisbury District Hospital overnight on Sunday and into Monday morning, after details of the attack became clearer.”
http://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/news/16270991.DS_Bailey_poisoned_at_Skripal_house_as_he_searched_for_evidence/
What’s happened to PC Alex Way then? IIRC she was originally named as the officer working with PC Alex Collins.
I don’t know about that, but Holloway looks like the red-haired WPC in the photos. She was also photographed with PM Theresa May. https://twitter.com/wiltshirepolice/status/974281426387587074
I was thinking more of the image positioned between the times of 3:54pm and 2:11pm, because I thought that this was recognisably PC Alex Collins with his work buddy:
https://www.gazetteandherald.co.uk/news/16067474.live-russian-former-spy-fights-for-life-after-he-was-deliberately-poisoned-with-nerve-agent-in-attempted-murder-in-salisbury/?ref=ar
Of course, (in alphabetical order of surname!) Collins, Holloway and Way could all have been first responders.
Well, she was blonde and called Alex Way then – when photographed with Theresa May
https://twitter.com/wiltshirepolice/status/974285225168658433
Wiltshire Police simply used the wrong pictures for the names.
That disturbed me too, but know it´s clear who is who.
@Brendon, sorry that I posted a similar statement about the decontamination above.
I hadn´t seen yours at the time.
No worries, Liane, this page is getting hard to navigate.
Maybe I missed it, but did we ever find out whose police car was taken away from outside A&E at SDH? It was reported at the time as being Bailey’s, but that doesn’t seem possible now. It couldn’t belong to PC’s Way and Collins either because its reg. number is different, as you posted last month. And they didn’t even get decontaminated until Tuesday at the earliest (if at all) a day after the emergency incident at SDH.
should probably be Holloway and Collins (those tweets from Wiltshire Police are confusing ).
Also from the Guardian: “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.”
Nick Bailey was CID, so presumably he was one of the people who helped move the Skripals from the bench. But – we have been told – the only way he could have been poisoned was not at that location, but from Sergei’s door handle which was smeared with Novichok!
That’s in spite of the fact that Bailey told Panorama he did not know how his protective suit did not protect him from the nerve agent. He assumed that he picked it up from adjusting his goggles and touching them later with his bare hands. The possibility that he might have been poisoned at the bench is not even considered.
In Panorama, Bailey downplayed his role as a ‘first resonder’ by saying:
“The details were a little bit sketchy so I thought, well, I’ll have a wander down then. There was nothing around on the bench that we could see.”
The police and medics knew very well what the couple on the bench looked like, since they were all examining their details and treating them up close. Then where did the Salisbury Journal get the following description of Sergei and Yulia, which it published only hours after the incident?:
“a man and a woman, aged in their late 20s to early 30s”
https://web.archive.org/web/20180305003702/http://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/news/16064166.LATEST__Two_in_hospital_after_medical_emergency_at_Maltings/
Usually media would get information on incidents from police pr departments. Police officers aren’t authorized to talk to media (which means suddenly for the guardian the two are, for some reason)
Presumably the police pr person did not give any information so they asked someone else – Freya Church?
Police do not seem to have taken the incident seriously until two days later, ie. when Bailey went to hospital.
Which leads to the question – how was this made into a big media event with images? A fentanyl overdose is nothing special.
Maybe that was the role of the helicopter. The hazmat suits look very photogenic too, which is not necessarily natural.
There is a BBC interview with a nurse at Salisbury hospital where she says they only took it seriously when Bailey came into hospital. The hospital says they suspected organophosphate poisoning by Tuesday.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-44278609
The hospital does not seem to remember decontaminating any police either.
An absolute cynic would say the poisoning of Bailey was necessary to start the scare.
By the way, who were the people in Hazmat suits filmed on Sunday night. Not police officers I suppose?
Firefighters, according to the archived SJ article.
In the Salisbury Journal on late Sunday, it was police who said they suspected fentanyl, so it’s likely they also described the victims.
The SJ’s reporter on the scene on Sunday, Rebecca Hudson said on the following evening (after the Russian spy story broke) that the inspector had said he’s pursuing a drugs enquiry.
https://twitter.com/journalrebecca/status/970731844323995648
And the Guardian article says that the police officers on the scene called a duty inspector. Was that him walking along and talking to the woman in one of Thom Belk’s photos, or do duty inspectors wear uniforms?
Inspector being someone higher up? Unlikely on the scene.
There is a Daily Mail article out now claiming the police officers knew Dawn Sturgess and Charles Rowley and that one of them lived close to Skripal.
Perhaps a note to Number 10, or MI5/6, reading “Now would be a good time to throw away the spade.”
” … the inspector …. ”
So not DSNB, one of the plain clothes CID officers.
BTW I’m fairly sure I read, or heard (Panorama?), that the Fire Service, not wishing to take any chances, donned their hazmats and cleaned up (‘decontaminated’) the area once the overdose couple were taken to hospital.
Police ranks and roles
https://mentalhealthcop.wordpress.com/2012/03/26/police-rank-and-roles-explained/
Suggests that if Bailey was with a team he was leading the team.
I can’t help wondering why these details come out now, more than nine months after the incident. It’s a big coincidence that only last week on this blog we discussed – in some detail, and for the first time as far as I know – some of the things described in that Guardian article. Those included the photos showing those two officers Collins and Holloway which were taken a few minutes after the Skripals were taken away, and also the hazmat team apparently using Fuller’s Earth to clean up body fluids.
There were very definitely two police cars within the early cordon, at the time when Thom Belk and his opposite counterpart were taking their pictures.
So my thinking is that it’s possible that the Guardian article features officers from both those vehicles: that Alex Collins and Alex Way had arrived in one police car, with Tracey Holloway and probably Janet Bald in the other (Why those two together? Because they met the PM together, at the Salisbury reception during her visit).
Always excepting the accuracy of the info that’s been available for months, that is.
https://www.app.college.police.uk/app-content/engagement-and-communication/media-relations/
Police media policy in Britain
I suppose if you ask the Salisbury police how they explain the different accounts (decontamination, no decontamination) you will get some kind of answer.
I guess there is this problem
“… as it emerged that police in Salisbury realised they were dealing with a possible terrorism attack within hours of Sergei and Yulia Skripal becoming ill when the pair failed to respond to antidotes.
Wiltshire police got in contact with the counter-terrorism network on the night of the attempted murder, the force’s chief constable, Kier Pritchard, said on Thursday.
…
When it was realised on Sunday night that the antidotes that medical staff were using were not working, the force contacted the counter-terrorism network and on Monday morning a major incident was declared, he said.”
So the police should have been decontaminated Sunday evening into Monday morning, but it looks like that they weren’t.
From the hospital staff it also looks like that they did not realise it until Tuesday morning – when Bailey came in.
https://www.spirefm.co.uk/news/local-news/2519873/police-link-major-incidents-at-hospital-and-maltings-in-salisbury/
And indeed a major incident was declared on March 5 at the hospital.
So what now for brave first responder Detective Sergeant Bailey & being lauded as the brave first responder as the sSkripal Affair goes back to basics
Quote from this Guardian article :
[QUOTE]
“We looked at their wallets to try to find their ID. There was a phone with Russian writing on it. The names weren’t familiar. That was strange. It didn’t feel right. It wasn’t quite normal.”
The uniformed officers called CID and a duty inspector.
[/QUOTE]
This seems a clumsy explanation of the presence of CID.
Yes Inquirer! Perfect. Sounds like they trying to confirm DS.Baileys
account from BBC regarding his actions 04-03.
Strange how this is opening up now?
Please recheck those three images by bench. Guardian stated
Female Officer did not use gloves in search [latex] yet in images
she has gloves after event?
Bailey now not a first responder as stated by Theresa May In Parliament?
Lets see how they explain Taxi at AA landing-departure?
I think we are being distracted – I suspect it might be more profitable to concentrate on Charley, which is probably what they don’t want us to examine.
From the cache URL below
https://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/video/aerial-shots-of-police-outside-the-home-of-former-russian-news-footage/928836628
Why is the chimney belching smoke? It’s hot enough in Hazmet suits and lower temperatures would surely preserve any evidence better. Are they doing any serious work in there or just warming themselves around a wood-burning stove?
The house is probably equipped with central heating supplied from a gas fired boiler. That boiler will be set on a timer to operate at certain times of day. The chemistry of the combustion process will produce water and waste gasses such as Carbon Mono and Di Oxide (plus trace amounts of others, possibly).
What you see is steam condensing in the cold air outside of the house.
I rather think you are right Cascadian, and I hope I am able to remain in contact with you for your technical knowledge. Nonetheless it is the only house from quite a few in the footage emitting steam, and that chimney, installed after Skripal acquired the house, doesn’t seem to be where I’d expect a boiler chimney to be. Unlike most other houses there is already a second white flue at the back of the house. That’s why I have thought it a flue serving a wood-burning stove. Of coure, being Russian Skripal may find things rather damp here and so set his thermostat a bit higher than his neighbours (no I’m not joking at all). Is it possible to get the date of this footage? There’s a south wind blowing as per 4th March, which would keep any rain off the door handle. Surely anyway turning off the heating would preserve more evidence than it would destroy and help anyone in Hazmet suits
Grigory, if it is true that the people of Salisbury have been subjected to a hoax ith all the associated theatre, then preservation of evidence will not have been the intent, rather, elimination of it would have be prioritized.
Interestingly, today The Guardian has two Salisbury politce officers relating their experience of events at the bench – but why today? As always, it’s the timing that perturbs one’s mind, and one May also conclude that someone is in trouble and requires a distraction – I wonder who that May be?
Note that they never refer to the Skripals by name – it’s The Guardian that provides this detail.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/dec/14/we-did-our-best-police-who-rushed-to-skripal-scene-tell-of-shock-and-pride
I’m particularly struck by the phrase “pile of vomit” , because that for me sums the whole charade up! Keep up the good work guys.
Novicurious that is
And in response to thread about the guardian piece, sorry
Bizarre! Theresa won Vote Of No Confidence but everyone voted
against her as stated MSM?
I was praying for someone lifting lid on Evil Theresa but?
Handbag with Junkers…Haha!
Theresa claims she worked hard last two years [Brexit Means Brexit]
I would say July this Year……**** Hit Fan!
Hence Salisbury-Russian Election-World Cup! [Syria Fake CW Attack]
Timings are fantastic and well synchronized [Bluff-N-Fudge]
MI56 tried making GU look stupid…But truth is Sergei-Yulia would be
dead if they involved.
Think MI56 need practise and read GU Manual regarding Fudge on
door handles.
I asked Father Christmas for copy of this Manual.
Hi Miheila and everyone,
Here are my thoughts on novichok’s involvement in the Skripal saga.
If we assume that the whole Salisbury bench poison incident was a hoax, straight out of Hollywood, which I do, then there is no need for novichok to be anywhere other than in the doctored samples from the hospital and on the doctored door handle. Those samples were sent away, to that extremely suspect, ‘West’ front operation, known as the OPCW.
The plan was for the OPCW to find novichok, for MI6’s malicious Russia blaming deception, which of course they did.
The UK was in the process of pushing for a widening the OPCW’s remit, to allow them to apportion blame, on countries accused of using chemical weapons. Something that is more politics than chemistry. How they were to become perpetrator investigators as well as chemists I don’t know. I suspect it was always going to be all fake.
I don’t think anyone was poisoned in Salisbury in March, with anything, let alone the so called novichok.
There is no independent evidence that Sergie and Yulia were ever in Salisbury Hospital other than the dubious statements from three senior staff at the cash strapped Salisbury Hospital, who rarely mentioned their patients by name.
I don’t think Nick was poisoned either. Its likely that Sergei and Yulia had been secreted away to a safe-house on Sunday evening, in preparation for their leaving the country for new lives with new identities.
The comments under every Skripal story in the newspapers at the time, were running ten to one against the government’s story being true. The government desperately needed someone to show in public. Someone the public would have sympathy for. Someone the public could see, who had been poisoned, by the bad Putin and Nick was it. They iced the cake just a little too much by making him a hero though, something that had to be undone later.
Nick’s explanations as to what he did on Sunday to Tuesday are all over the place and his description of his symptoms, on Panorama, sound like they are being parroted straight from a medical text book.
Being a MI56 operation the ‘evidence chain of custody’ for the samples would be simple for them to circumvent somewhere along the way. They most likely laced any samples with novichok, after they were collected. Hence the strange purity, of the so called novichok, long after the supposed poisonings. In some cases weeks after.
MI56 may have plants in the OPCW making it even easier for them to rig the results, if that is so.
There was no poison to clean up anywhere. That can be seen by the the amount of times the police were in so called dangerous places without any protective gear, also why they weren’t worried about the boys at the duck feeding, the delay in closing the Mill pub and the lack concern about the general public being affected.
The whole military Operation Morlap fake clean up, was part of that well known political tactic, of scaring the hell out of the public, knowing that a lot will vote for a ‘we’ll keep you safe’ conservative government, next time. Or to distract from domestic political problems at the time
Members of the jury, I put it to you that this final bit of evidence will prove that the events of March the 4th were all a hoax. It’s a quote from the ‘Integrity Initiative’ dated May 14th 2016.
It shows MI6’s absolute frustration at being continually out-smarted by Putin’s geopolitical abilities and so I think this time MI56 decided to be pro-active and set out to frame Putin with this huge Salisbury novichok lie.
From the Integrity Initiative:
“Each time, the West has been left playing catch-up – powerless to prevent the annexation of Crimea and the Kremlin-driven bloodshed in eastern Ukraine, unable to do more than watch as Russian aircraft began their campaign in support of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s forces. In the process, the West’s long-standing twin-track policy of pragmatic engagement on issues of shared concern such as proliferation, chemical weapons, arms control and terrorism, coupled with tough talking in areas where Russia was perceived to be opposing Western interests and values, has been exposed as, at best, of limited effect.”
Just why Sergei and Yulia needed to disappear at the same time, is one for a later post.
OK so far, Denise, but what about Charlie and Dawn?
I’m working on Charlie and poor Dawn too Blunderbuss
I have a post on them soon too.
Good question.
How to connect Charlie and Dawn with the carelessly disposed bottle
of something.
dawn died of ‘something’ and Charlie has been severely injured with supposedly the same ‘something.’
He either found it or nicked it.
If he found it – where?
If he nicked it – who off?
If he nicked it off a Brit – then it wasn’t the Russkies.
The PTB are insistent that there was only one bottle to attempt to murder two people.
The other three affected have no charges on their behalf.
Perhaps the Coroner will give us a clue on the cause of Dawn’s death?
I won’t hold my breath though.
But if it was ‘ something ‘ else that killed Dawn – what was it, if not the same substance which contaminated the Skripals and DSB?
I suspect there is only one bottle involved and it was the one that Charlie “found.”
There is no other.
p.s. the Integrity Initiative gang were suggesting showing the Skripals
a la Litvenenko in hospital for public effect.
All I and many on here want to see is just the duck feeding video.
A before and after set of videos would be much more heart rending
for public effect I think.
I’m game – are they?
Integrity Initiative: A Look Into the Deep State? – Link to UK Column
Excerpt: “To get to the bottom of what Andy Pryce is, and what he does, I decided Freedom of Information was probably the best approach. I asked about the scope of his role and the size of his team, and was both bemused and amused that the request for information was refused on the basis of ‘national security’: the Freedom of Information act says that national security can only be used as grounds for refusal where intelligence services are involved.”
side note: as has been said/explained before, it’s this stonewalling of essential info that’s a dead giveaway of TPTB refusal to be honest, open and disclose information to help us make the right decisions. You [well, not you] voted these clowns into office, any chance to evict them? The rot runs deep. If TPTB were a tree, we’d have fell it, uproot it and burn everything exposed to oxygen.
A very interesting read!
“A slightly deeper look at the Institute for Statecraft reveals that all is not as it seems however. The charity, registered in Scotland, lists as its principle address Gateside Mills, in Fife. The same address is registered in its Companies House records, and in its recently filed audited accounts.
But as the UK Column’s David Scott discovered last week, Gateside Mills is an empty, semi-derelict, partly demolished building. Why, we wonder, would such a prestigious think tank be potentially breaking the law in this way? How could they have legal documents served on them, for example? We have asked the Scottish Charity Regulator for comment, but they had not replied by the time of publication.”
These people lie about everything – even their own address!
@ GR,
And, as per usual, everything’s shrouded in that magical piece of cloth, ‘National Security.’
Although Emily Thornberry is being a thorn in the side of TPTB @ https://twitter.com/EmilyThornberry/status/1072917880411447297
Yes, very interesting, but not at all surprising. I’ve seen it all before. IfS and II have all the hallmarks of the MI6-and-CIA-run propaganda outfits that proliferated during the Cold War, along with the expected typical mix of ‘spooks’ and characteristic lack oif accountability.
Note the links with hedge fund interests and think tanks and NGOs like DEMOS, RUSI, Henry Jackson Society, European Council on Foreign Relations, Chatham House, European Endowment for Democracy, NATO’s Atlantic Council, Prop or Not, Institute of Modern Russia, Information Warfare Initiative, etc. IfS and II, despite their ‘charity’ status, are ultimately under the control of the FCO (read MI6), the UK MoD (77th Brigade). – and NATO. (S-B networks were equally being controlled by MI6, SAS (Army) and NATO’s Allied Clandestine Committee). I see IfS and II as Britain’s answer to Gladio B, a CIA-run operation, probably based in Poland and Cyprus, and concentrating on E Europe, Middle East, Russia, Ukraine and the Caucasus.
IfS and II have many similarities with the Stay-Behind networks and the shadowy groups that sustained them. Their tentacles spread across Europe (and even further afield), but the strings are being pulled by London, just as they were with the ‘Gladio’ organisations, whose role gradually mutated from defensive to offensive – in the form of conducting many false flag terrorist attacks, whereas II is currently destabilising not only Russia, but even influencing elections in other countries too, by using black propaganda. The effects are more or less the same – destabilisation (i.e. weakening) but by different means. The role of the closely linked British Army’s 77th Brigade needs to be investigated and questioned too.
One of its directors attended the Herzliya Conference, the so-called ‘Bilderberg of the Levant’, run by the Israeli establishment and MIC. He also represents “BICOM, the Britain Israel Communications and Research Centre, a pro-Israeli advocacy organisation with very close links to the UK Conservative Party via Poju Zabludovicz, BICOM’s founder and former chairman, who funded David Cameron’s Tory leadership campaign”.
Another director “initiated and participated in the first official high-level post conflict talks between NATO and the government in Belgrade. For 25 years he was Executive Committee Member, Pax Christi International, responsible for the movement’s East-West Dialogue programme during the Soviet period”. Little known is the fact that the seemingly innocent Pax Christi and Keston College were MI6 assets during the Cold War, members being used for spying in Russia and Eastern Europe.
Their activities are highly significant in the context of the Skripal affair, not least in that a third director just happens to be Sir Andrew Wood, former British ambassador to Russia, and one of the founders of Orbis Business Intelligence, Christopher Steele’s outfit (that created the ‘dirty dossier’ on Trump), with close links to Pablo Miller, who in turn was Sergei Skripal’s MI6 handler.
The UK is the envy of world’s intel agencies when it comes to its expertise and experience with this kind of skulduggery. Unsuspecting, duped tax-payers have being paying for it for a very long time.
What a can of worms!
In regard to the excerpt: this is a little bit like Yandex blurring out sensitive sites, thus revealing that they are “sensitive” by the fact of that omission.
It leaves the distinct impression that the left hand doesn’t know what the right hand is doing.
Daniel Rich
It’s curious that II are a private company.
The idea that a private firm is subject to ‘National Security ‘ prevention is a strange defence from the State to say the least.
These are not MI5/6 state operators and are operating on behalf of the State similar to Blackwater in the US.
A private company with connections to the state should be no defence against enquiry from members of the public.
It’s very murky stuff.
By the way I hear that the original leakers of this info ( Anonymous) are going to reveal more about what they claim to know bit by bit.
I do know that there is a lot of Skripal info on the sites.
The image of Freya Church leaving Snap Fitness [work] she on her mobile.
Could she be texting “On My Way”?
That camera would have got a good image of Man In Black running past.
In Thom Belk image a single black hooded figure standing at railings?
They say an Arsonists returns to scene of the fire. Could this be Man In Black?
Paul, we reach the limit of the replies depth.
I still think that Yulia could have been at some of the charities on Catherine street prior or right after the duck pond. Why police didn’t closed the charity shop for decontamination? It could have been the same reason because they didn’t decontaminated the ducks pond. Also there is a chance police to have not known that Yulia was there. It is possible she to have left the clothes at the charity and noone to have paid attention. It is possible she to have not been on CCTVs there or just noone to have noticed.
Police anyway never gave details what Scripals were doing on 4-th March between 1:35 pm and 2:20 pm:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/mar/16/skripals-poisoning-what-we-know-so-far
“CCTV footage from a pub caught Sergei Skripal driving his daughter, Yulia, into Salisbury at 1.35pm He parked his dark red BMW in the Sainsbury’s open-air car park at the Maltings shopping centre at 1.40pm. From there they went to the Mill pub and on to the restaurant Zizzi, arriving there at about 2.20pm and staying until 3.35pm. “…..
Here Mills is confused with Zizzi which we now know that is a lie, Scripals were first at Zizzi and then at Mills, where they have shared a bottle wine before to colapse at the bench. So we have a hole from about 35 minutes after the car park and the arrival at Zizzi.
My guess is that during that interval Yulia may have been also and at the charity shop.
Sorry Anthony I cannot agree with you. The duck feeding was by the river not at a pond and the area was cordoned off by the police.
I think it would be impossible for Yulia to have left the Maltings without being spotted doing so on CCTV and if so the police would surely have followed where she went. The people who work in the charity shop would also surely have alerted the police when images of Yulia were circulated a few days later.
I just can’t believe it could have happened and I am sure that Yulia did not have the perfume bottle in any case. The police hadn’t yet ‘invented’ it!
On 4 March, Sergei and Yulia were going to vanish – I really don’t think that a visit to a charity shop would have figured in their plans.
Paul, we have to look at all options based on the available facts. Catherine street is quite busy, with traffic, I am not sure about the CCTV coverage. You say:
“The people who work in the charity shop would also surely have alerted the police when images of Yulia were circulated a few days later.”
Even if we suppose that some of the workers have recognized Yulia he/she may have reasons not to talk to police. I think that one of the waiters in Mills were interrogated for two days by different investigators. Some of the workers may have been just afraid not realizing what danger the perfume bottle have been.
But the more important question is why at all the perfume bottle was found at Catherine street, nearby the charity shops? It is not close to Scripal house and not close to Boshirov & Petrov route? Why it was thrown exactly there?
And where Scripals have been between 1:40pm and 2:20 pm?
Hi Anthony,I don’t think perfume bottle was ever in the bin.
It was manufactured and placed in Charlie Rowleys house.
They don’t want to admit its a bad drug related issue in
Salisbury-Amesbury area so they concocted a story
Novihoax Perfume?
Thanks
Mark, I think you are very probably correct but I actually do think that Charlie really does ‘believe’ that he found the bottle…
If Charlie really found it (instead of it being a false memory) the bottle was, I believe, put in those bins precisely because Charlie used to visit them frequently – he had found stuff there previously. It would have been easy to seed the bin with the bottle shortly before Charlie got there and then watch the bin to make sure nobody else got it first.
Where were the Skripals between 1:40pm and 2:20 pm?
All times approx:
– car parked at 1:40pm
– feeding ducks 1:45pm
– arrived Zizzi between 2:00 and 2:10pm
– left Zizzi 2:55pm
– arrived the Mill 3:00pm
– left the Mill 3:25pm
Would that mean Charlie was specifically targeted,If so why?
Whatever the truth about the perfume bottle, I think Dawn was specifically targetted – perfume is rarely used by men (at least where I live!). Also remember what Charlie’s brother said Charlie said, when told Dawn had died: “They killed my girlfriend.”
Thanks Paul! I did hear Dawn had Family-Relatives employed
at Porton Down. In what capacity I don’t know?
Don’t know if this true or not or connected in anyway?
Was thinking about burns to face-hands. What ever she sprayed
on herself out of bottle was it inflammable. I presume Dawn smoked
and when she lighted cigarette….Well not nice!
Just an idea?
Dawn’s former husband, Andrew Hope, has worked for Qinetiq since 2001 (and probably DERA before that).
QinetiQ was created in 2001 from a spin-off of part of the Defence Evaluation and Research Agency (DERA). The more sensitive parts of DERA is now the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (Dstl).
QinetiQ is basically a privatised defense research agency of HMG.
RAF Boscombe Down, formerly DERA, formerly MoD (PE) is now runby Qinetiq. As far as I can remember, Andrew Hope worked/works there, not at DSTL Porton Down.
https://steemit.com/news/@fortified/qinetiq-or-ex-partner-of-new-novichok-victim-works-for-us-uk-defense-contractor-linked-to-porton-down
I think Charlie and Dawn were targetted because they saw something they should not have seen.
Maybe ‘they’ thought that Charlie had been bought out with his new house… but he got greedy.
Excitement Builds.
It’s competition time.
Inspector Joh England of Wiltshire Police has kindly told me that he has finished his report into my claim that WPD acted unprofessionaly in not alerting the parents of the three boys involved in the duck feed. (Blogmirers know the details and the timing.)
Anyway, once his report is signed off, I will see the copy.
However, what will the report say?
1) Onging investigation – no report
2) All reasonable measures were taken in the timeframe allowed
3) WPD acted under the instruction of the Met counter terror team, please refer to them
4) Yes, we messed up. We should have told the parents 14 days earlier – Sorry
5) Something else?
I will of course paste the report on the Blogmire once it is received.
Top Of The House…Number One[1] In The Charts [Theresa And The Fudge Men]
Fun Boy Three Move..Number Two[2] Ghost Town!
Duran Duran..Up Number Three[3] View To A Kill!
Salisbury Hill At Number Four[4] Peter Gabe!
I going with number one[1]
Did we find out who man in black[not Jonny Cash]was running
away along Market Walk just after alleged incident?
Addition to
PART 3 – Five questions the BBC has to answer.
Comparison of Mark Urban´s book and BBC Panorama.
3. What did Bailey in Skripals house ?
Urban :
The two CID officers meanwhile went to Skripal’s house on Christie Miller Road.
BBC :
Comment : That night, Nick Bailey and two collegues are sent to the Skripals home.
Bailey : “We had to make sure that there were no other casualities at the house. It was vital to first find out what has happend. We decided to protect ourselves and to protect the scene. We wear full forensic suits. The house was in darkness. I was the first person in the house. There was nothing to see ontoward. We came out of the house, secured it again, took our forensic suits off, which we than bagged off, and than we went back to the station.”
Kier Pritchard on June 5 :
DETECTIVE Sergeant Nick Bailey was poisoned with a nerve agent when he and other officers [plural] attended Sergei Skripal’s home looking for evidence including signs of drug use or suicide notes.
Chief Constable Kier Pritchard told the Journal he had watched evidence from body-worn cameras used by officers who first attended the scene on March 4, and that their response to the incident was “first class”.
CC Pritchard said DS Bailey was one of a team of officers who attended Mr Skripal’s home in Christie Miller Road, after the Russian former-spy and his daughter were found slumped on a bench in the city three months ago.
CC Pritchard said officers at the scene underwent a “decontamination process” at Salisbury District Hospital overnight on Sunday and into Monday morning, after details of the attack became clearer.
https://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/news/16270991.kier-pritchard-says-ds-nick-bailey-poisoned-at-skripal-house/
Quote : James Thomas sits in & talks to Wiltshire Chief Constable Keir Pritchard about Salisbury.
Pritchard says : Nick Bailey was the first responder at the bench, but as an investigator to look if a crime has taken place.
„Nick forms part of our investigate response, as we didn´t know what we were dealing with.“
He was in plain clothes, but has a body camera. Then Bailey and other officers went to Skripals home. This was filmed by a body camera, too.
Pritchard did not clearly say, how and where Bailey was poisoned and why the other officers were not. But he clearly say „Nick was exposed to the nerve agent at the home adress.“
Pritchard also didn´t really answer the question why the pets died. He only said that they responded to some rabbits and fishes outside the house.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p067fqg4
So we have three different versions of what happened at Skripal´s home !
Urban claims it were two CID officers. Panorama speaks of three. Pritchard mentioned “a team of officers”.
Pritchard did NOT mention any protective gear.
Bailey and Urban did NOT mention a body camera.
Bailey did NOT mention that he underwent a “decontamination process” at Salisbury District Hospital as Pritchard claims.
Pritchard confirms : “Nick Bailey was the first responder at the bench”.
Liane,
I think the BBC has read your post. They have withdrawn the episode:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p067fqg4
“Sorry, this episode is not currently available”
On legal advice most likely. I think they’re getting scared. Maybe they realise they’ve gone too far this time.
The Blogmirers should keep the YouTube video of the programme or is it gone too?
I have it recorded , in case of disappearance I can always record it to another device .
VERY GOOD, Isa.
Would it be too much work to write it down and post here ?
Oh sorry… I thought you refer to the radio piece, but you meant the video…
It’s still available on the media player.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0bshm58
Sorry.
I thought we were referring to Panorama.
What nuggets were in the Radio Wiltshire piece?
Duncan, I heard the Radio Wiltshire piece some month ago.
It wasn´t available any more a short time after it was aired.
So, Blunderbuss, it´s too much honor to say the piece was deleted after my comment here.
I remember how Pritchard evaded the answer what happened to the pets. That convinced me even more that Sergei had brought the pets to a safe place.
As I understood Pritchard, it was not Bailey who had a body camera at the bench, but the other first responder.
But Pritchard was quite clear that all the action at Skripals house was filmed by a body camera. Why was it not given to the Panorama team ?
Liane,
For evading the answer of what happened to the pets there is a simple and natural explanation. According to official narratives, Bailey, after touching the door handle, should have contaminated many things in Skripal’s house. As the “military-grade nerve agent” would have evapourated in the indoors air, the pets would have died quickly. But they did not! So, there was no nerve agent in the house.
These blatant inconsistencies inthe police narrative mustn’t be allowed to go unaddressed. Answers are needed, and I always imagined that that was one reason why MPs existed – to hold the covenment and their servants accountable. Evidently not any longer.
I’m pleased the rabbits and fish got a mention. So it was apparently the police who attended to them. In what way, I wonder? Did they call in the RSPCA? That would be the usual response. I doubt very much that they called in DEFRA, as later claimed over the cat and guinea pigs, allegedly found inside. They weren’t actually there of course, for the Skripals had already made sure they were safe, and that’s why Pritchard evaded the question about them.
Miheila, I doubt that the fishes and rabbits ever existed.
Neither Ross Cassidy nor the neighbors mentioned them.
And on Yulia´s FB was no photo of rabbits.
PS.: What I quoted was the text to the radio piece.
I agree. They may not have existed. If not, why on earth did he make them up? Very odd.
I have always suspected that the rabbits was Pritchard getting confused (or deliberate mis-direction) with Greg Townsend’s rabbits… “Outside the house”…
If the cats or guinea pigs had been in the house, he would probably have thought of them first but as Sergei had already arranged for them to be cared for…[you know the rest Miheila]
Did the The Mill manager have fishes in addition to Rabbits?
Maybe Pritchard confused the two?
Maybe it was loaves and fishes. That would explain how one perfume bottle became two – they multiplied.
Of course, that’s where the bread for the ducks came from.
Did anyone download the full audio for “Wiltshire Police Officers in Salisbury”? If so, it would be very helpful to put this on YouTube/Dropbox or the like.
Rob, I’ve not heard from you for a while. I hope all’s well with you. This is the 1000th post on this blog page, and it’s becoming unwieldy. Any chance of starting a new one? Thanks.
Mihelia, do not use Internet Explorer. 🙂 Firefox and Chrome are managing the blog quite well.
I use Firefox. Won’t touch IE or Chrome! I just thought this page was getting too unwieldy, especially for those who struggle with mobile devices. We’ve never reached 1000 posts on one page before.
Miheila, couldn’t agree more…….Consider my theory in respect of Sergies missing 4 hours on Sunday from 09.15 until 13.30. I maintain Sergie met with B&P for an hour after he & Julia left Londn Road Cemetery & travelled directly to Andover station (40 mins) to meet the 09.15 Waterloo train arriving 10.28. B&P break their journey at Andover followed by 1 hour meeting with Sergie & a probable exchange of documents/information. Following this Sergie & Julia drove home to CMR arriving around 12ish – B&P joined the 11.29 train at Andover (10.15 from Waterloo) arriving Salisbury as per MeT timing of 11.45
Hope this merits serious discussion Regards
I haven’t considered when B and P left London on Sunday and this page
http://news.met.police.uk/news/counter-terrorism-police-release-images-of-two-suspects-in-connection-with-salisbury-attack-320534?utm_source=yxnews&utm_medium=mobile
iIs down.
Why would B and P travel on to Salisbury after a handover at Andover?
“Why would B and P travel on to Salisbury after a handover at Andover?”
To support the “We wanted to see Salisbury cathedral” story.
But they walked away from the Cathedral, at first
Not that they would share the information with us, but your scenario would have left a CCTV trail and the police would have known all about it. Everywhere the Skripals went on 4 March became a police cordon – that was the reason for the cordon in the Mill car park.
It has never been admitted that the Skripals vanished from the Mill car park but the police cordon tells us they were (without the slightest doubt) there.
The fact there was no cordon in Andover tells us (with equal certainty) that they were not there.
The MeT confirmed no trace of S&Y between 09.15 – 13.30. Phones switched off/disabled. As no crime had been committed before 16.00 there would be no cordon or police interest in Sergie until after the events at the Mill & it was several weeks before Met identified B&P.
Sergie would not wish to meet meet B&P in Salisbury so Andover chosen with B&&Pcontinuing travel to Salisbury to be deliberately caught on ccTv as part of Sergies plans to disappear and add substance & credence to the Russians being blamed. 2 competing plans Sergie & Mi5
“The MeT confirmed no trace of S&Y between 09.15 – 13.30. Phones switched off/disabled. ”
That is not correct – the Met asked if people had seen Sergei car on Sunday morning which is very different from saying the Met didn’t know where Sergei was. In any case Ross Cassidy said he thought Sergei was at home.
The Met has confirmed nothing about the phones. It was reported that the phones were off for 4 hours but nobody knows when that was. Many of us think it is far more likely that they were off in the afternoon and not the morning.
>The fact there was no cordon in Andover tells us (with equal certainty) that they were not there.<
Not necessarily. If Skripals had met B and P there the authorities wouldn't advertise it. I hadn't realised until now that B and P took 3hrs 40 mins to get from Bow to Salisbury. However if trains are one an hour – where's that timetable someone posted? – and they just missed on at Waterloo they might have spent time there.
We think the police were searching for something Sergei probably had, such as an sd card. If Sergei had been in Andover, there would have been a cordon. You can’t really ‘hide’ a police cordon – just like the Mill car park, not advertised… but there.
If you think otherwise, then good luck!
See Rob’s earlier post & Basu’s statement 17March in connection with Sergies movements 09.15 -13.30 being ‘the missing hours ‘ where the Met were asking for sightings of Sergie’s BMW in that specific time frame. They did not have the Intel for this time frame & were unable to trace either S or Y through geolocation of their mobiles .I repeat that as no incident had taken place prior to 16.00 on the Sunday the police did not have cordons anywhere in the Salisbury area
Ross Cassidy said they were at home on Sunday morning and Panorama agreed with that so there was no point switching off GPS on their phones.
The period when Sergei and Yulia did not want to be traced was in the afternoon so it is more likely the phones were off between 1 and 5pm.
You say: “…no incident had taken place prior to 16.00…” – the Met is saying that they were poisoned around 1:15 when they left their home. Obviously all lies but it does explain the cordon at #47CMR – the fact that there was no cordon in Andover therefore stands in stark contrast to the cordon at the cemetery but is easily understood if S&Y had not been in Andover.
I made my complaint to the BBC.
I suggest others follow.
“Jane Corbin’s programme failed to challenge any official narrative of the Skripal poisoning. It seems impossible that BBC researchers did not first examine the government version of events, then compare their findings and investigate.
This is especially true with the first interview we have seen and heard from DS Bailey.
In Bailey’s interview and his own words, he directly contradicts statements from our own Prime Minister.
His actions are not questioned by Corbin, despite the fact that it was obviously a rogue mission involving breaking into a private citizen’s home without authority.
The synopsis of the programme was non investigative. Why pay for Corbin and a crew to travel to Russia, interview Sergei Skripal’s mother and then fail to ask the UK authorities why the son had not contacted the mother?
Instead, we had almost an hour of statements being made, with no challenge, no counter discussion etc.
For example, was Bailey a first responder or not?
Mrs May says yes, Bailey says no.
Is this not a point for follow up?”
My complaint of yesterday, discussed further below.
Complaint Summary: Erroneous or incomplete evidence
Full Complaint: Vil Mirzanov stated that Novichok loses its potency in humid conditions and that Salisbury was ‘rainy and muggy’ on the day in question. In fact weather records for Salisbury at midday show it as dry, cool and mainly sunny. https://www.timeanddate.com/weather/uk/salisbury/historic?month=3&year=2018 It is appropriate for Mirzanov to comment on the properties of Novichok but how can he be authority for weather conditions in Salisbury at the time? You should show Met Office records. This is a very important point because the weather is given as the reason why Boshirov and Petrov were unsuccessful in the attempt to murder Sergei Skripal.
Mirzayanov, as I’ve said before, is a totally unreliable witness and CIA asset. Obvioulsy he had no idea of the weather conditions on that day, but he’d probably been coached beforehand, like the rest of them. The whole Panorama ‘investigative documentary’ was nothing of the kind. It was a charade aimed at vilifying Russia and spreading lies – a crude piece of black propaganda, courtesy of the UK state broadcaster, Whitehall mouthpiece.
Also, the GRU “manual” should have contained a guideline:
“Do not apply Novichok outdoors in the humid weather.”
It should, Milda. Obviously the intrepid, ruthless Russian assassins were a bit lazy when it came to following the advice in the manual (which clearly exists for the covenment said so, so it must be true). Perhaps they were dyslexic and just gave up reading the small Cyrillic print.
This would explain how MI567 got their grasping paws on it!! P&B sauntering along Catherine Street nonchalently flung it into the ‘charity bin’ that wasn’t – along with that fake Premier Jour bottle version 1 (complete with useless applicator). Perhaps some down-and-out on a nocturnal bin-diving mission found it and, with an unusually strong sense of duty, handed it in to the police, who thought the back-to-front N’s and R’s looked suspiciously ‘foreign’. Way out of their depth, they passed it on to 567.
Please add to the questions:
Why BBC didn’t asked PD (who is under their nose and possess well preserved bottle filled with Novichok and the chemical formula) about the nature of the nerve agent but instead BBC traveled to US to interview Myzyanov who is retired from 25 years?
Noone said anything specific so far about the substance.
Don’t add.
Complain.
You don’t have to be a UK Resident or even a licence holder to complain.
Yes but if you say you’ve seen it on Youtube they might not respond.
Also why BBC released a nothing proving footage of Boshirov & Petrov casually wandering on the bridge and making pictures? It rather disproves that they are the poisoners. Where is the remaining footage proving that they have been at Skripal house?
Why BBC didn’t asked how the perfume bottle ended at the Catherine street charity bin? Where is the footage that Boshirov & Petrov have been there?
Why didn’t BBC asked interviewing Yulia and Scripal – the main personages of their movie?
Several pages of useful news clips here
https://www.gettyimages.co.uk/videos/sergei-skripal
Footpath that leads to the path at the rear of the Skripal home (Highbury Ave between Highbury Close and Macklin Ave)
https://www.google.com/maps/@51.0764188,-1.8122566,3a,75y,300.35h,69.85t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGRecHwZWeQj-JuWSix5OgQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
https://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/video/exterior-shots-of-forensic-police-searching-an-alley-way-news-footage/941800932
But the Russian pair had passed Highbury Ave on the way to the Shell station
Nothing is as it seems in Salisbury.
In the forensic search clip above, after the Highbury Ave footpath, we see a pop-up tent being carried through the Maltings passing the Mill Pub through a tunnel (the path leads to a bridge and then Fisherton Street. Yet the continuity has the tent emerging from Malthouse lane into Priory Square.
Be careful of what you see and believe nothing you hear
This statement on Planefinder’s website is worrying:
“Blocked Aircraft
At Plane Finder, we realise that we have a responsibility to do the right thing. We aim to deliver the benefits of live flight tracking whilst working hard to ensure that our live feeds do not include data that could compromise national or regional security.
We actively review the aircraft that we are tracking and consider all requests to block aircraft from our systems for security reasons.”
The above probably explains why RAF VIP helicopter GZ100 landed at Porton Down or the ‘Defence Chemical Biological Radiological and Nuclear Centre’ Winterbourne Gunner and never takes off again on Monday the 5th.
Very interesting, Denise… and worrying. Nothing is what it seems. Not only is the ews censored but also flight tracking. I’m not surprised though.
That GZ100 flight from Northolt on the day after the poisoning drama was highly suspicious. On this same day the GU and SVR began sending several lengthy and unscheduled radio messages mainly to sleeper agents, and mainly in USA (but on a smaller scale also to agents in Europe/UK). The panic didn’t end on 4th March, and that flight and those messages, were not coincidental, but were evidence of secret, high-level, urgent responses by two countries to the events of that day.
Paul, you have probably seen this but if not it explains how plane location websites work very well.
https://planefinder.net/about/ads-b-how-planefinder-works/
There are volunteers with transponder receivers all over the world, feeding the data to different plane location websites, so that explains the variations between the various websites.
You can get a free receiver to hook up to the net if you would like, to and fill in the gap over your house. lol
“If you want to become a part of Plane Finder then we will be delighted to receive your data – you can also apply to host a Plane Finder receiver if you think your location will help. See here for more details” https://planefinder.net/sharing/coverage.
It is all very interesting and highlights the question of why data between 16:46 and 17:14, and then from 17:17 to 17:50, is missing…
It seems that it must have been a deliberate act on the part of someone.
Charlie and Dawn were very close, he sat in the front row with her family at the funeral.
“Mr Hobson said the “great couple” aged in their 40s, have one daughter each from previous relationships and have been together for several months.”
“Sam Hobson, 29, told journalists he witnessed Ms Sturgess being carried into an ambulance on a stretcher on Saturday morning after she fell unconscious.”
“She was having assistance with her breathing,” he said. “Paramedics said they needed to do a heart and brain scan and so Charlie and I were told we couldn’t see her.”
That’s very unusual isn’t for a partner to be told he couldn’t accompany her in the ambulance or even see her in hospital?
Wasn’t Charlie so worried about poor Dawn that he went to a church barbecue instead of going to the hospital, I seem to remember? Curious behaviour for a loving partner.
I also seem to remember that when Charlie was admitted to hospital because he had meningitis, SDH said it was not novichock-related. Have they since changed their mind?
Rob, perhaps a new blog article dedicated to “Charlie’s story”, perhaps the most bizarre and contradictory in this whole sordid affair, and the only one the MSM still seem to be running with?
Dear Mr xxx
Reference CAS-5213634-LX7QH1
Thank you for contacting us regarding ‘Salisbury Nerve Agent Attack: The Inside Story’ on 22 November and Mark Urban’s book.
I understand you had concerns about Mark Urban’s book, however this was his own book and not a BBC publication. You can read more on the complaints framework here:
‘You should normally complain within 30 working days of the relevant transmission or publication (online or in a BBC-owned publication).’
http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/handle-complaint/
In regards to the Panorama programme, we explained that “The Skripals are at home, oblivious to what is happening right outside.”
We were reflecting the view of Dep. Asst. Commissioner Dean Haydon, Counter Terrorism Policing, who explained that Sergei Skripal left the house first followed by Yulia.
I hope that this explains our approach.
Your feedback is important to us and your concerns have been placed on an overnight report which is made available to senior management and the ‘Panorama’ production team. This report can be used to inform future broadcasting and policy decisions, so please be assured that your complaint has been sent to the right people.
Thanks again for getting in touch.
Kind regards
David Currie
BBC Complaints Team
Thank you so much Grigory
David Currie in his (non)answer misses the main point :
How could Dean Haydon claim that Yulia got Novichok on her hands when leaving the house, but Panorama were not able to show it in their reconstruction (because it´s impossible).
And how can Haydon be sure that Sergei left the house first ?
Liane, I am happy he answered my question, which is not included in his reply. However the first of your questions sounds like a suitable point a complaint: the reconstruction doesn’t match Haydon’s words. You have another 10 days. If you do complain it is probably better if you don’t refer to the answer above. I’m not sure where you live (and don’t want tomsound too Brexity) but it may be best for someone living in the UK to complain, they may not respond to anyone who watched Panorama on YouTube but may not tell you that until it’s too late for anyone else to complain.
Thanks for this Grigory.
My question to Mr Currie would be:
You say that the programme was reflecting the view of Dep. Asst. Commissioner Dean Haydon, Counter Terrorism Policing, who explained that Sergei Skripal left the house first followed by Yulia. What do you mean “reflecting the view”? Are you saying this is his opinion, or is it based on actual evidence? If the former, should you not have alerted your viewers to this, and also asked him why he holds to this “view”? If the latter, should you not have mentioned to your viewers what this evidence was? In either possibility, was it not the duty of the researchers of a programme purporting to be investigative journalism to dig a little deeper? For instance, did you ask those who are holding Mr Skripal and his daughter if you could speak to them to find out if they can recall who exited the house first?”
Best wishes,
Rob
Excellent points, Rob. Like politicians, these scoundrels need to be cornered and pinned down, allowing them no wriggle room. They’re as dishonest and devious as the day is long, and cannot be trusted to seek the truth let alone pass on true investigative findings to their viewers.
By the way, I said in my previous post that I hadn’t heard from you for a while. At that time I hadn’t yet read this one. Good to have you back. 🙂
Thanks Rob. As I understand it has to be a complaint. Actually the answer I got thus far was by accident, I complained about imagined discrepancies between Urban’s book, which I hadn’t read at the time and the Panorama account. When I did manage to download Urban’s book I saw that he didn’t explicitly say thst the Skripals were out when B and P came by, and in fact emailed to withdraw my complaint just before I got my answer. But I could write and politely ask some questions. I’ll mull it over.
This one from ‘Security Sources’ is quite interesting in the lightbof Dean Haydon’s view
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/four-more-russian-suspects-yet-13212077
A source said: “Back-up is needed to keep the Skripals under surveillance. Petrov and Boshirov needed to know they wouldn’t turn up while they were spraying the novichok.”
I think I remember an article where a professional team to cover all circumstances….Skripals at home or away…covering the alledged poiseners ….warning of external interference eg neighbours friends …would be up to a dozen people?
Mirror headline:
“Four MORE Russian suspects in Salisbury Novichok probe as part of six-strong assassination squad named The Cleaners”
The storytellers have been watching films again. I seem to remember the term “The Cleaners” from one of the “Bourne” films.
The OPCW report says: “It is also the same toxic chemical that was found in the biomedical and environmental samples relating to the poisoning of Mr. Sergei Skripal, Ms. Yulia Skripal, and Mr. Nicholas Bailey on 4 March 2018 in Salisbury, ”
So if Dawn has damage to her face and hands after spraying the substance in the perfume bottle on her hands and face then charlie should have damage to his hand or hands and as the OPCW say its the same stuff poisoned Sergei and Yulia then they should have at least damage to their hands from the door handle?
No mention of any of any damage on the others anywhere?
Didn’t see any damage to Bailey either – did he mention it?
Also, the only other known survivor of (real) Novichok, Zheleznyakov, got a whiff of Novichok and then spent 18 days in intensive care. He then suffered years of after effects: including chronic weakness in his arms, toxic hepatitis, epilepsy, severe depression and an inability to concentrate. The accident left him unable to work or be creative and he died five years later.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/novichok-effects-nerve-agent-russian-spy-attack-salisbury-sergei-skripal-if-survive-live-body-a8253976.html
Did Bailey or Yulia mention any after effects?
Paul, the Independent article is cautious : “According to an account relayed by Vil Mirzayanov to David E Hoffman (…) ”
Thus, this story about Zheleznyakov relies on Mirzayanov. Like Miheila, I don’t trust Mirzayanov.
I noticed that but what are we going to do? If we ignore everything we are a bit stuck…
The quote comes from a Pulitzer prize winnning book:
The Dead Hand: The Untold Story of the Cold War Arms Race and Its Dangerous Legacy Paperback – 4 Oct 2010
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Dead-Hand-Untold-Dangerous-Legacy/dp/0307387844/ref=sr_1_1?tag=independen058-21&ie=UTF8&qid=1520954498&sr=8-1&keywords=The+Dead+Hand%3a+The+Untold+Story+of+the+Cold+War+Arms+Race+and+Its+Dangerous+Legacy%2c
Hoffman did have access to a number of other sources: “Drawing on memoirs, interviews in both Russia and the US, and classified documents from deep inside the Kremlin” and whilst Novichok is now highly politicised, there was less motive for Mirzayanov not to tell the story honestly back in 2009/10.
There is also an earlier account I have found:
Their effect on humans was demonstrated by the accidental exposure of Andrei Zheleznyakov, one of the scientists involved in their development, to the residue of an unspecified Novichok agent while working in a Moscow laboratory in May 1987. He was critically injured and took ten days to recover consciousness after the incident. He lost the ability to walk and was treated at a secret clinic in Leningrad for three months afterwards. The agent caused permanent harm, with effects that included “chronic weakness in his arms, a toxic hepatitis that gave rise to cirrhosis of the liver, epilepsy, spells of severe depression, and an inability to read or concentrate that left him totally disabled and unable to work.” He never recovered and, after five years of deteriorating health, died in July 1992.
Tucker, Jonathon B. (2006), War of Nerves, New York: Anchor Books, ISBN 978-0-375-42229-4
Although given the similarity in wording it is likely to be from the same original source.
Those symptoms seem very serious indeed!
“He lost the ability to walk and was treated at a secret clinic in Leningrad for three months afterwards.”
Unconscious for ten days and then treated for three months? Remind me, how long was Bailey in SDH?
Paul, you are right to note the inconsistencies in all we are told about Novichok. Personally, I’m inclined to believe that the extreme toxicity of Novichok is a myth because the scientific literature spoke of it with scepticism, at least until 2016. It is the reason why I don’t take Mirayanov’s story about Zheleznyakov at face value, but I can be wrong, of course.
They filmed Charles Rowley’s hands in his first interview. He had lot of scars on them.
Add: Charles Rowley’s hands showed an acid burn that must have been felt immediately.
Assuming that the poison worked through Skripals’ skin very slowly the stuff must have been very diluted indeed, if it is the same stuff.
There is a roof over the door knob. To get wet strong winds would be needed.
Drug addicts sometimes have scared hands from repeatedly injecting into them, if other veins have collapsed. I guess that would let the poison in easily then though but I dont know about the acid type burn.
I wonder. Is the “and” between biomedical and environmental a “both” or is it an “or”. I can’t imagine any poison still being in original form in the body after two weeks.
They are just careless about accuracy. This is the original report on Skripals and Bailey.
https://www.opcw.org/sites/default/files/documents/S_series/2018/en/s-1612-2018_e___1_.pdf
The results of analysis of biomedical samples conducted by OPCW designated laboratories demonstrate the exposure of the three hospitalised individuals to this toxic chemical.
9. The results of analysis of the environmental samples conducted by OPCW designated laboratories demonstrate the presence of this toxic chemical in the samples.
So OPCW confirms that environmental samples were the same toxin but not necessarily biomedical samples. Biomedical samples will have shown the effects of an acetylecholine inhibitor.
Paul often reminds us about Dawn’s face and hands being damaged. So I guess we can rule out Sergei and Yulia being sprayed with novichok then, Well for Yulia we can at least.
“The woman who died after the novichok poisoning in Amesbury suffered damage to her hands and face, Sky News understands.” Dawn us that woman.
Have a look at this picture, not the slightest sign of any damage to Yulia’s face or neck. (other than the possibly fake tracheotomy scar that is)
https://cdn4.img.sputniknews.com/images/106473/39/1064733905.jpg
Denise, This was the other report regarding damage to Dawn’s hands and face:
https://www.spirefm.co.uk/news/local-news/2636298/amesbury-novichok-victim-suffered-damage-to-hands-and-face/
SpireFm suggests it was a preliminary finding from the autopsy.
Wild speculation:
Damage to face and hands could be used to make a corpse unrecognizable (although dental records could still be used – unless body cremated, of course) – i.e. destroyed facial features, destroyed fingerprints.
Callous statements:
Let’s see the body – Oh! Wait! we can’t
Again, was the body Dawn?
I just received an email from the BBC containing the following
>We were reflecting the view of Dep. Asst. Commissioner Dean Haydon, Counter Terrorism Policing, who explained that Sergei Skripal left the house first followed by Yulia.<
This is helpful as it makes explicit that Haydon is the source, which the Panorama does not, but says also that it is only his 'view'. I can forward the email if itvis useful.
With any luck they will also in due course tell me where Vil Mizanov got his information about weather conditions in Salisbury on 4th March.
We would love to see their reply Grigory
i’d be happy to email it to anyone who could post it online, though I may want to redact my identity
Can you retype it in here Grigory, with the bits identifying you left. out or is it too long to do that?
I’ll put it at the top of comments so get maximum width.
Do I detect the BBC wriggling out of an awkward situation? They should have made it clear that it was Haydon’s ‘view’ at the time. I wonder what Basu’s view would have been.
As for Mirzaynov’s source of weather information… a crystal ball maybe?
Well done on getting the BBC to comment on anything. I have emailed Urban and Corbin twice about the obvious inconsistencies in the two versions of events.
I thought naively, that one of them may point out that Urban’s effort was a piece of fiction.
On a separate topic, why do we care about Salisbury weather on Sunday, March 4th?
No one in the Blogmire, believes the door handle was dosed with Novichok, so the humidity, temperature, rainfall on that Sunday does not matter.
Duncan, Just about everyone not in the Blogmire believes the door handle was dosed with Novichok, so the humidity, temperature, rainfall on that Sunday does matter.
Duncan, Anonymous was me, by accident. Go through the BBC Complaints website, you have 30 days from first broadcast. Put yourcquestion as a complaint. You get a quick acknowledgement so they have to reply,
Thanks Grigory, I just don’t know what to complain about.
I had many details in the Panorama programme that I had issues with, and DS Bailey did his best to dispute ALL of the earlier versions of HMG and the Met.
Corbin and the producers will rightly say that they are only taping comments and conclusions from people appearing in the “documentary” that they are producing.
I suppose my complaint would be why did the Panorama team not take this new version to challenge the old version?
Plus not really following up on why Sergei had not contacted his mother.
I am not saying that Sergei’s mother had email or WhatsApp, but there had to be some way he could send a message to a 90 year old, frail woman who wanted to hear from her son.
Duncan, there is bias throughout the programme so it’s quite difficult to be specific. It’s as though you’d have to take a thousand little points. For example, in what way was Putin’s remark that if itvwas military-grade Novichok everyone would be dead constitute a ‘taunt’? Who has the energy to log all these when they will be rebuffed?
Anonymous again, sorry
Some of the mysterious characters in the Skripal saga:
Charles Filmer of Distillary Farm Minety, where the Wiltshire Air Ambulance landed the day Sergei disappeared. Its possible that his role was to look after the Skripal’s financial affairs after they disappeared. He is the one in the centre.
http://500.spearswms.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/89A6845.jpg
‘Professor Tim’ of Porton Down, from the Panorama story, whose name they wouldn’t reveal on the show and whose full real name is Tim Atkins. Panorama said he went in person to Wiltshire Police and told them the Skripal’s had been poisoned with novichok.
https://woodboroughschool.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/Tim_Atkins.jpg
Im think Professor Tim went into the MET counter terrorism unit and not the Wiltshire Police to brief them on the poison being novichock.
Why would The Sun publish this general story about Dawn six months after the event?
“Who was Dawn Sturgess, what has the Salisbury Novichok victim’s family said about her drug addiction, and how many kids does she have?”
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6729599/dawn-sturgess-salisbury-novichok-victim-family-drug-addiction-children-funeral/
The Sun says: “Here is everything you need to know”. Not everything that we know but everything you need to know.
And she has been cremated – more destruction of evidence.
I have raised with the BBC the point about the weather at midday on 4th March. it is important to know how specific that record is to Christie Miller Road. This page leads me to suspect that weather records for Salisbury are actually for Boscombe Down a few kilometers away
https://www.weatheronline.co.uk/weather/maps/city?WMO=03746&CONT=ukuk&LAND=UK&LEVEL=140&TIME=std
Showers can be fairly local. Does anyone have any knowledge on this. I guess we could test the site used by Rob for other nearby locations and see what happens. The CCTV pictures do look overcast.
The nearest weather stations are at Boscombe Down airfield, Larkhill ranges and Middle Wallop airfield. Nothing closer. The UK Meteorological Office locate most of their sites at military bases. Historically, they were for many years a branch of the RAF.
The weather records had been for me the strongest single piece of evidence against the officicial story. We dan’t rely on them. In the Fisherton Street CCTV from just after one o’clock it looks as though it has just been raining. You may wonder however why it took them so long to come up with this explanation.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6706913/salisbury-rain-saved-poisoned-sergei-skripals-life/
The water on the ground at Fisherton Street was from melting snow. You can still see a few bits of slush that have not completely melted but the temperature had been above zero for several hours by then and most of the snow had gone.
But you are right that the weather is a curiosity. The pictures from Sainsbury’s car park show an almost cloudless sky at 16:53 when the AA arrived but we are told people used umbrellas to shield the couple on the bench from the rain. Why? It wasn’t raining!
Look at this image from Sainsbury’s shot at: 2018:03:04 16:52:46
http://www.airport-data.com/aircraft/photo/001393415.html
I can’t see any rain….
I see no rain…Where did these Mary Poppins in multiple appear
from and then vanish mysteriously…All very odd and disturbing?
Paul, yes I can see rhe snow but the even distribution of moisture on the shiny paving stones looked a bit more like recent rain than melting snow. But looking at roads cleared of snow from the window of my flat they look similarly shiny. However the blue jeans of either B or P look a bit as though they may have been in a shower.
Some folk set up their own amateur weather stations, complete with video; active glider pilots, as I was many years, often check them for the conditions in areas where they fly.
The fact is that official records are obtained, as Miheila as stated, from weather stations set up and maintained by airfields, the met office and research institutions – they do not, in general provide a good guide to micro-climate features such as showers.
You could check this site: http://www.martynhicks.uk/weather/topsites/ to see if there are any that maintain records for the Salisbury area.
I still check sites such as: https://www.xcweather.co.uk to get an idea of current and forcast weather conditions in my local area – the data is obtained from METAR and TAF (look them up) reports – I confess that sometimes when reading supposed local weather conditions reports I feel a distinct urge to comment and say “Indeed? Have you looked out the window?”.
Your best bet is asking the amateurs who maintain these unofficial weather stations – good luck with Salisbury (where the SEP field [Douglas Adams] seems strongest these days)
e.g.
http://flamstone.com/rain/dlyrain18.php
Cascadian, Did you mange to make anything of the transponder information from the AA? It would be very helpful if you could post any thoughts – for example, the frequency of the data points seems to be very random; does that give us a clue about how the data was collected? Thanks
Not yet, I’ve been a busy with other things.
Later this week.
One thing that spring to mind regarding the transponder code and the apparent gap in returns – it would take some fine tuned coordination, but it is possible that the code could have been handed off to another helicopter and back again, probably realms of fantasy.
Thanks for the reply. It is good to know that you are looking at it – timing is not the issue at all.
Regarding “handing off” – is that even possible? I do not have a clue!
Paul, I think the my concern is about the seeming non-use of Mode C. I recall that the introduction of European legislation as part of EASA (European Aviation Safety Authority) rules was that Mode C would be mandatory for commercial and private aircraft, so the use of Mode A transponder codes is curious (maybe me being a bit ignorant after being out of practice for a few years).
I was aware of some aspects of collision avoidance systems when I was active – such as TCAS and other systems, with ADS-B I wasn’t that familiar – and some of the dispute between the gliding community and the authorities about what should be carried in gliders (no engine, no power generation, reliance on batteries to power equipment).
It seems that these flight tracking systems rely on ADS-B, gliders now seem to rely on FLARM which is set up in a similar manner – GPS reception and broadcast of analysed data.
I’ll have a dig and see what I find.
From the time when I flew light aircraft: ATC (Air Traffic Control) like to be able to identify aircraft that they control, so the on-board transponder, when it is painted (scanned) by the ATC’s SSR (Secondary Surveillance Radar) responds with a code – this is the 4 octal digit code set on the transponder by the pilot in agreement with the ATC controlling the flight: light aircraft pilots can request a Radar Service so that ATC is aware of their identity and location.
So, the 0020 transponder code implies to me that the helicopter must have at least been under the loose (radar service) control of some ATC.
It is feasible for two aircraft, in agreement between themselves and ATC to swap transponder codes (a bit arcane, admittedly) – the scenario would be: agree the exchange, switch off the transponder, set the codes, switch on again. That would have the effect of the aircraft (the code) seeming to suddenly move to a different location. Certainly feasible, but a bit fastastical.
Thanks again.
The Flight Data website from which you already have this link:
ght-data.adsbexchange.com/map?icao=406CBC&date=2018-03-04
allows historic flight data to be accessed by providing only the ICAO code and the relevant date (in our case, the ICAO code for G-WLTS is 406CBC). So even if transponder signals were switched between aircraft, I would have thought we should simply see the data swapping from one transponder code to another code – but we should still see the data because we are searching by the unique ICAO code, not the transponder code.
Mode A would be incapable of returning that data, Paul, it’s WWII IFF (Identication Friend or Foe) technology. Mode C, however, would, and possibly the ADS-B broadcast. Also, Mode C has encoded, uniquely, into every transponder a unique (withing 24 bit address space) code which unambiguously identifies the transponder and thus the aircraft using it.
Now that I’ve had a look at the data maintained by ADSBEXCHANGE I can see that the ICAO code is not broadcast by the aircraft, it is looked up based on other received data.
Here is the raw data for today based on location (not historic) but each set does have the ICAO code embedded in it (along with a lot of other types of information):
https://public-api.adsbexchange.com/VirtualRadar/AircraftList.json?lat=33.433638&lng=-112.008113&fDstL=0&fDstU=100
I should clarify – the ICAO code is the 24bit unique identifier, it is not the aircraft’s ICAO type code. 24bits is when coded in hexadecimal results in a six digit code.
There’s something else that maybe I should have noticed before – Salisbury plain is a restricted area for aerial traffic. Pilots always (should always – there are idiots up there) check their maps for airspace restrictions, some are marked on the map, some are dynamically assigned by a NOTAM (Notice to Airmen), things like aerobatic displays, parachute dropping, artillery and missile firing (er,… Salisbury plain !!!), etc.
So why would this air ambulance merrily jaunt off across Salisbury plain without a) having checked NOTAMS, b) checked with the military, c) been cautios anyway and flown around it ??
Cascadian, Thanks for the Flamstone link. It’s 5 miles SW of Salisbury and makes a useful complement to the TimeAndDate data. There was 3.8 mm rainfall on 4th March which we might expect to have fallen in the times shown on the 24 hour analysis, mainly during the time of heavy rain before sunrise. With a constant South wind during the hours in question any rain would probably have missed the handle as the door faces slightly North of West and there is some protection from above. So the likelihood of rain hitting the doorhandle seems low. It’s up to the BBC to show where Vil Mirzanov got his weather data from, it’s on the record that theybhave been asked during the 30 day period.
Complaint Summary: Erroneous or incomplete evidence
Full Complaint: Vil Mirzanov stated that Novichok loses its potency in humid conditions and that Salisbury was ‘rainy and muggy’ on the day in question. In fact weather records for Salisbury at midday show it as dry, cool and mainly sunny. https://www.timeanddate.com/weather/uk/salisbury/historic?month=3&year=2018 It is appropriate for Mirzanov to comment on the properties of Novichok but how can he be authority for weather conditions in Salisbury at the time? You should show Met Office records. This is a very important point because the weather is given as the reason why Boshirov and Petrov were unsuccessful in the attempt to murder Sergei Skripal.
As it’s not in Rob’s article (I may not have read all comments) Sir Mark Sedwill, National Security Adviser, stated on April 13th that Bailey was a first responder.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/apr/13/russia-tested-nerve-agent-on-door-handles-before-skripal-attack-uk-dossier-claims
From Sputnik Poland:
Viktoria Skripal in an interview for the newspaper “Izvestia” stated that from July 24, she can not contact her cousin Julia, who suffered in the incident in Salisbury. In her opinion, the British secret services actually kidnapped Julia and forcibly prevent her from returning to Russia.
“Why do not they allow Russian diplomats and relatives to her, do not allow her to appear on television? I think they are holding her, most likely in a military base, far from the media, isolated from the outside world, “said Viktoria Skripal, adding that her sister is most likely kept in a chemical laboratory in Porton Down.
In addition, she stated that Great Britain could stalk poisoning at Salisbury, to find a reason to tighten relations with Russia, and Julia needed them to “manipulate public opinion and constantly declare about danger from Russia.”
Me and other relatives have tried many times to call and write messages to Julia. Unanswered. Although the last time we talked, she said she can use the phone freely and want to come back to Russia. After all, Julia has real estate here, property, here is her whole life – said Viktoria.
https://pl.sputniknews.com/swiat/201812119366428-sputnik-wielka-brytania-rosja-julia-skripal/
She made it to British media
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/novichok-victims-sergei-yulia-skripal-13713851
The way this is going, it will end up in the European court of Human Rights.
Russia is still a member I suppose.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russia-echr-human-rights-european-convention-putin-kremlin-eu-a8234086.html
You are right, it has made it to British media… for what it is worth!
This is clearly Russia having a laugh and causing some embarrassment for the UK again. They know full well that the Skripals are not in the UK so they are kicking Treasonous May while she is down. Which is a perfectly reasonable thing to do.
“Viktoria Skripal, adding that her sister is most likely kept in a chemical laboratory in Porton Down.”
I wonder why she thinks that?
Guys, sorry to interrupt the conspiracy theories, I still think it worth to investigate and the simple theory for the Skriplas poisoning that I posted below.
In the blog from July-
https://www.theblogmire.com/its-the-wrong-park-how-the-ducks-raise-some-serious-questions-in-the-salisbury-poisonings/
became clear that Scripal and Yulia have deviated quite a lot after leaving Zizzi, during the ducks feeding episode. Is it possible Yulia to have been also at Catherine Street? I don’t know if she have been alone or with Skripal. My theory is that Yulia have left the perfume bottle in the charity bin together with other things. This should have happened before going to the ducks pond.
According to Mrs Cooper, the duck feeding was at 1:45pm, before Zizzi.
Paul.
Yes, this fits better. I suppose that after the cemetery, Yulia and Sergei have been distressed. They needed to walk around. Sergei may have felt worse. I can only guess but maybe they have departed, Scripal have went to the ducks pond and Yulia to the charity where she left the bag with the clothes and the perfume bottle . Then she may have walked to the pond o meet with Sergei and they both have went to Zizzi which is not too far. Maybe someone have saw Yulia with a bag at the charity? Was Yulia known to have participated in charities or helping homeless?
Anthony, the bin is not for the public to donate items for charity, it is a rubbish bin for the shop’s commercial waste (cardboard, plastic etc); the shop has another bin for general waste.
Also please note that Mrs Cooper told Rob that Yulia and Sergei were both at the duck feeding – she told Rob that Yulia had a red bag.
Paul, on numerous sources I saw that it was a charity bin. Charlie is not sure anyway. I have not been in Salisbury but is there charity bins for clothes? I have seen such behind some big shops, they contain clothes, etc. left there for the poor. This explain what Yulia have been doing at this area, leaving some old Alexander clothes and other belongings.
Note that it is possible Yulia to have left the clothes at a charity bin at Catherine street. but she have left the perfume bottle and other items nearby, not necessary in the same bin. Then she have joined Scripal at the pond and they have stayed there for 5-10 minutes to commemorate Alexander before walking to Zizzi. Mrs. Cooper have met them at the pond but she can’t know how they have came from.
Here is a video of Charlie showing the waste bin in which he thinks he found it:
https://www.itv.com/news/2018-07-26/novichok-charlie-rowley-amesbury-nerve-agent-exclusive/
You can see it for yourself. It is not for people to donate clothes.
Mrs Cooper did not “meet them”, she was shown CCTV by the police.
Anthony, I don’t think you have a grasp of the basic facts and your idea is impossible.
Paul, thanks, I tried it the first time you posted it but the video is not running.
You are not following what I wrote – I didn’t said that perfume was left in a bin that people use to donate clothes, but that Yulia may have been in this area because of this purpose – donating clothes. Mrs Cooper have saw both of them at the pond, but so what? Both of them or only Yulia may have been at the Catherine street, which is at 400 meters from the pond, before this.
Noone from us has the exact “facts”, you may not know that this is impossible, Please explain, how the perfume bottle have stayed intact in one of the waste bins for mounts and who throw it there?
Here is an image of the waste bins:
https://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/resources/images/8150620.jpg?display=1&htype=0&type=responsive-gallery
Here is an article from the SJ with more information:
https://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/news/16393530.new-cordons-behind-pub-on-catherine-street/
“Please explain, how the perfume bottle have stayed intact in one of the waste bins for mounts and who throw it there?” – It didn’t stay there for months, that is impossible because the bins are emptied every week. If the bottle had been thrown in one of those bins on 4 March it would have gone by 11 March! Which means Yulia cannot possibly have put it there. It is impossible.
If Rowley found it there, somebody had put it there not long before it was found. It had not been there for months!
Paul, this time I exactly agree! Perfume can not have been inside a waste bin for almost 4 mounts. But it also can not have been and outside at the park or the riverside. The reason is that it would be even more damaged from the snow and rain, the paper would be completely destroyed and dirty,
Lets look at what you wrote – “somebody had put it there not long before it was found”. Who is this one and why have done this 3 mounts after the poisoning?
This is the very weakest part of the whole Boshirov & Petrov story. Why they didn’t throw it in a wsste bin close to Skripal house? Why the brought it to the other side of the city, risking to contaminated, and throw it there? If they throwed it just anywhere in the park or in the river, how happened so that it ended in a relative good condition in the bin?
I can continue but the absurdity is clear. Lets see how the bottle can not just reappear after 3 mounts put by “someone” in the waste bin.
What I think that could have happened is that Yulia have been nearby to donate clothes. Maybe at Salisbury Barnardos charity shop which is from the other side of these waste bins. She may have left the perfume on a shelf too there or in another charity shop. It was not in very good shape, so noone bought it and after 3 mounts some of the workers in the charity have thrown it at the waste bin. I found many sources that perfume was in a charity bin, not in a waste bin, when found by Charlie. And Yulia & Skripal were not far from the charity, at the ducks pond!
Anthony, Apart from the fact that nobody (apart from the Metropolitan police) would think of putting the world’s deadliest poison in a £4 counterfeit perfume bottle, if Yulia had been in a charity shop, the police would have known about it and that shop would have been sealed off in a police cordon.
Zizzi, The Mill, the cemetery, the house, everywhere the Skripals went on 4 March there was a cordon.
The bottle was a prop made by the police long after 4 March. If Rowley found it, it was put there, shortly beforehand, just so that he could find it. It had no role on 4 March.
Anthony.
That theory would need a time machine.
Although, in Salisbury -in – Wonderland it would not be unrealistic.
Can you please explain?
On the map the ducks pond ( Queen Elizabeth Gardens) do not looks so far from Catherine street? Not more than 5 minutes walk.
Well, the Swiss don’t make nerve agents, do they?
I had replied to one of Liane’s earlier questions about reference materials in the labs which OPCW use for their analysis.
The SPIEZ lab was one of the ones used, and as we know, positively identified the worlds most deadly nerve agent used in Salisbury.
What other services do they offer?
“We are currently able to supply more than 1,500 compounds from our stocks. Substances that cannot be supplied are synthesised in our laboratories. Each synthetic step is optimised in such a way that the target substance is as pure as possible. The essential characteristics of all reference chemicals are stored in a database. This makes it possible to easily and rapidly trace origin and history of our chemicals. For security reasons and due to confidentiality, an inventory of the chemicals cannot be published on-line. The following product groups can be delivered:
G substances such as sarin, soman, GF;
GA substances such as tabun;
V substances such as VX;
Sulphur-yperites such as yperite, sesqui and O-yperite;
Lewisites (Lewisite 1, 2 and 3);
Nitrogen-yperites (HN1, 2 and 3);
(Thio)phosphonate-di-halogenides such as methyl-phosphonat-dichlorid and DF;
(Thio)phosphonate-chloridates such as chlorsarin und chlorsoman;
(Thio)phosphate-amid-di-halogenide;
(Thio)phosphate-amid-ester;
2-chlor- / 2-hydroxy / 2-mercapto-ethyl-amine group;
Amino-ethyl-sulphide and disulphide group;
Hydrolysis products of nerve toxins such as (thio)phosphonic acids, (thio)phosphonate-mono-esters, pyro-compounds;
Hydrolysis and oxidation products of S-yperites such as di-hydroxy, sulfoxide und sulfonic acid homologies
Nerve agent and yperite-aminoacid bio adducts”
Now you know.
Who are the customers? ISIS? Al-Qaeda?
“The use of toxic gases or other chemicals, including mustard agent, during warfare is known as chemical warfare, and this kind of warfare was prohibited by the Geneva Protocol of 1925, and also by the later Chemical Weapons Convention of 1993. The latter agreement also prohibits the development, production, stockpiling, and sale of such weapons”.
Quoted from:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sulfur_mustard
Are those nice Swiss breaching the Chemical Weapons Convention? I thought they just made chocolate and cuckoo clocks.
Oh, silly me. It’s all fake news and their website has been hacked by the Russians. All those nerve agents should be chocolates.
This stuff is purely for research.
That’s why it’s so pure.
Yes, but research on what or whom?
Exactly, Blunderbuss. What kind of people do research using the most deadly substances on earth – and why are they still doing it? I suppose the neutral Swiss just sell the stuff to whoever’s prepared to buy it – no questions asked. I wouldn’t be surprised if Porton was in the same lucrative racket. How is is transported? An accident during shipment could have catastrophic results.
By the way, taxpayers recently ‘gave’ them 17m pounds to build a ‘magazine storage facility’ there – apparently for explosives, and big enough to hold a massive CB stockpile? PD specialises in chemical and biological warfare rather than conventional explosives, so why the need for that ‘magazine’?
A photo of the 17m pound project:
https://cdn2.img.sputniknewslv.com/images/768/35/7683593.jpg
Hideous!
“Producing or stockpiling lewisite was banned by the Chemical Weapons Convention. When the convention entered force in 1997, the parties declared world-wide stockpiles of 6,747 tonnes of lewisite. As of December 2015, 98% of these stockpiles had been destroyed”.
Quoted from:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewisite
Yperite (sulfur mustard) and Lewisite are World War I weapons. Why would anyone be producing them now?
@ Blunderbuss
WWI gave WWII. WWIII didn’t materialize, yet, so they went back to the drawing board and started all over…
Why work for the better of mankind while you can so easily destroy it, eh?
Update on the Integrity Initiative scandal (with video):
https://www.rt.com/uk/446088-anti-corbyn-government-investigation/
From the comments:
The BBC leads with this on all its news bulletins, All broadsheets have banner headlines on the front page, all feature writers incensed, the story knocks “Celebrity” off page one of the Sun. Then I awoke, b***** all. Thank goodness for RT.
The British Foreign Office will hold an enquiry ??? They are part of the problem !!!
Now let’s stay calm and be sensible. It’s just the psycho novichok brits again….. Of course they don’t know what happened nor have they any real intention to find out.
i am sorry to say that our once proud nation has become tend amount to a laughing stock on the world stage and some of our so called peers are living in a fantasy land. Some will stoop to whatever it takes to try and secure onto power regardless of the consequences- they blatantly lie to the general public , publish widely through the media a case of false information and subservient means to cloud the real facts. we are not stupid …you in charge must be held to account and be held responsible for your actions – crimes against the state and its people – you are guilty .
Nobody who is aware of how this totally corrupt system works will be surprised that the Establishment / War Industry / BBC operates against democracy 24/7 i.e. this is fake democracy and nothing is going to change it, short of a republic based on real democracy. Anything less will always result in the inevitable bitter disappointment for the many millions of its victims
AND WHILE YOU THERE RE OPEN A FAKE SKRIPAL CASE TOO !!! JAIL FOR TREASON MAY!!!
This Washington Post Story is funny in the way it is a mirror
https://www.princegeorgecitizen.com/washington-post/international/how-russian-propaganda-chips-away-at-truth-1.23526035
Its very first paragraph is a demonstration on how unbelievable the official story is
“SALISBURY, England – The initial plan was a Cold War classic – brutal yet simple. Two Russian agents would slip onto the property of a turncoat spy in Britain and daub his front door with a rare military-grade poison designed to produce an agonizing and untraceable death.”
How can a military-grade poison be rare and how can a rare poison with a Russian name like “Novichok” used in popular cinema be untraceable?
If you missed the Novichok Strike Back series
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strike_Back:_Retribution
” Brutal ” as the piece says is Khashoggi.
This alleged attack is too complex and clownish.
Unbelievable would be a better description.
Why did the Government, the Metropolitan Police and Wiltshire Constabulary want the public to believe a lie?
Why did they let us believe that Det Sgt Bailey was a first responder (“the” in some pronouncements) at the bench scene and then again at the house, when neither (apparently) is true?
We are now told he turned up at the bench after the patients had been evacuated and didn’t attend the home until midnight.
We WERE told he was the first police officer at the bench scene and it was also reported that police were at the house at 5pm, we were told Bailey was the first police officer to go to the house.
Bailey was lauded as a Hero by his Chief Constable, the PM and the media.
Why did they deceive us?
Why did they lie?
Why is Bailey getting so much support and Charlie Rowley who actually got Novichok all over his hands and lost his partner in the attack, is getting none?
Charlie has been bundled into inconvenient insignificance, he has lost all his possession and his home. He has had the bare essentials replaced and put in a pig sty by the council. He asked them if they would clean the place up, they refused but offered him some decorating vouchers if he wanted to do it himself. He is not physically or mentally capable of doing that.
Bailey is celebrated as a hero and given everything, Charlie is treated as dirt and given nothing.
It says everything about who is running the country and who they are running it for.
It’s an unfortunate side-effect of democracy. Vox populi, vox dei. As long as the majority of people believe something then it becomes the truth even when it isn’t the truth.
And Dawn too:
A family friend said mum Caroline Sturgess had claimed her daughter was not being given the same care as the Skripals because she is a “nobody alcoholic”.
They added: “She feels that Dawn is not getting the same quality of treatment as the Skripals because of her background and the fact she’s an alcoholic. She’s seen as a nobody, really.”
From The Sun Nov 22:
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6729599/dawn-sturgess-salisbury-novichok-victim-family-drug-addiction-children-funeral/
Sergei Skripal’s BMW license plate: [letters]HO[numbers]09[letters[WAO]
It can’t be found in the UK DVLA and is therefore [most likely] destroyed.
What is it with governments and the destruction of evidence?
They destroy evidence for the same reasons that any common low-life criminal would – to cover up their crimes. The only difference is that the police are in a unique position to destroy, doctor, manipulate and create evidence whenever they feel the need to, no questions asked and no risk of police prosecuting themselves.
The bigger the ‘incident’ or crime, the faster the evidence is destroyed. I’m not saying the following to get into a debate on these cases or to disrupt this thread, just reflecting on the fact that with JFK, RFK, MLK, 9/11, MH17, Skripal – the evidence is removed asap, witnesses disappear or are intimidated to change their evidence, and the perpetrator is named before the investigation has got under way. Then, eventually, an official report is issued (or not) which is so full of holes it’s obviously phony but anyone who points out the impossibilities is labelled a conspiracy theorist and ridiculed by the MSM. And they get away with it, they keep doing it, and nothing changes.
Very true, and I can add more to that list: Lockerbie, Hilda Murrell, Pat Finucane, Dr David Kelly, Gareth Williams… to name a few.b
@ Robyn/et al,
Yes, they’ve done it for ever, but when you look around this forum you see countless wo/men who ain’t buying into the covernment’s BS. It’s something TPTB worry about to such an extent they send in distracting elements to plant dis-info and sidetrack debates. So, give them a run for their money and keep the Skripal saga alive for as long as it takes.
@ Lt,
Add Frank Olson to the list as well [the list is endless, so it’s easy to miss out on people].
Also Willie McRae
Also Father Merton
How could the government have cooked up such an unbelievable Skripal story? I think it’s quite deliberate. They know that we know it is a hoax but there is nothing we can do about it so it doesn’t matter.
A shepherd-boy, who watched a flock of sheep near a village, brought out the villagers three or four times by crying out, “Wolf! Wolf!” and when his neighbors came to help him, laughed at them for their pains.
The Wolf, however, did truly come at last. The Shepherd-boy, now really alarmed, shouted in an agony of terror: “Pray, do come and help me; the Wolf is killing the sheep”; but no one paid any heed to his cries, nor rendered any assistance. The Wolf, having no cause of fear, at his leisure lacerated or destroyed the whole flock.
There is no believing a liar, even when he speaks the truth.
http://www.eastoftheweb.com/short-stories/UBooks/BoyCri.shtml
They are destroying what little credibility they had and don’t know where it will come back to haunt them. The police can no longer expect help from the public in the way they used to expect… when they were trusted.
If there is a chemical weapon attack on the London Tube, what should we think?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6474997/Security-chiefs-believe-Jihadis-plotting-devastating-chemical-weapons-attack-Britain.html
a) The Security Services knew it would happen but were powerless to stop it?
Or
b) The British government were instrumental in performing it?
It doesn’t really matter which, both instil fear just different types to different people. All bases covered!
But did you read the comments below the article?
Some people are waking up to the fact they are being fed a diet of lies.
Before 9/11 and the Iraq, TPTB could get away with their scaremongering more credibly. Those days are gone and there will be a price to pay for that lack of trust. The demonstrations in France are clear proof that people are reaching a breaking point. The disconnect betwen TPTB and the man on the street is a very dangerous thing…
Last Attack On London Tube…Sorry but I did worse as a School Kid!
Just looked like box of kitchen matches being ignited,Great Fun in 80s
Stink Bombs was another favourite,Buses,Trains.
Firework Banger under a Police Car. Great fun for a chase. Get caught
ya got smacking around head and taken home for another smacking by
Mum-Dad while Officer watched.
Sorry but TPTB Know about Terrorist Threats but choose in letting
things happen.
Scaring British Public for Control!! Northern Folk..Collateral Damage
In Government Propaganda Machine {Manchester}
No Terrorist Incidents within UK from March 4th except for fiasco at
Westminster when car hit barriers {ambulance following?}
“TPTB Know about Terrorist Threats but choose in letting things happen.”
Yes they do! Grenfell Tower!! An exploding fridge? The only fridge of that model recorded as having spontaneously combusted? Not really! The fridge was being used to store TATP, the muslim terrorist’s explosive of choice because it is so easy to make! Acetone and hydrogen peroxide plus a bit of very easy chemistry and you have an explosive, as used in Manchester! Very unstable but slightly better to keep it in your fridge rather than in a kitchen cupboard.
Yes, the cladding caught fire but the disaster was caused by the man who ran from the flat after the explosion had happened. He was a terrorist! What happened to him? Why all the hand-wringing from TPTB about how dreadful it all was instead of calling a spade a spade??
If your are referring to the 21st July 2005 bombing I have to agree that was a bit of a damp squibs (several damp squibs actually) and the bombs failed to go off. This attack is they one they want us to forget if it wasn’t for them shooting Jean Charles de Menezes it probably would have been.
If you are referring to the attack 2 weeks earlier (7/7) then that must have been a heck of a box of matches that you used to play with.
A photograph of the train where one of the bombs detonated shows a hole in the floor of the carriage and the metal structure cut through, but mysteriously the bent metal protrudes into the carriage (not away from) it protrudes in the opposite direction of the blast.
It was made more confusing when the “real” ambulances appeared because it was difficult to pick out the real victims.
It just so happened that a Emergency Response Exercise was being carried out at the actual stations where the bombs went off (managed and organised by Peter Power). To make the drill more realistic actors were employed with bandages to their heads and fake blood.
When the bombs went off the actors, fake first responders and real victims / real first responders mingled together.
It was very confusing but fortunately photographic evidence was made available to the public (the photographs that were not seized by the police).
Another strange similarity of Salisbury to 7/7 is Cancelled Trains
The train the police say bombers took to London that day was in fact cancelled, as was the train the police say the two Russian Assassins took took to London on Sat 3rd March.
If the police can’t get their suspects on the right trains then why should we believe them about anything?
In Salisbury the Met police statement said the suspects caught the 4:10 train but then published a photo of the pair at 4:11 before they had gone onto a platform. The next London train was at 4:21pm but that was cancelled.
There was working cctv on the platforms and on the trains. How could they make that mistake? Why tell such a stupid lie?
Hi Annon! Yeah as said big box kitchen matches wrapped in
cling film and put Estes model rocket fuse inside.
Spectacular bang and mushroom cloud….No harm done.
Nice sulphur smell.
CCTV on Tube rubbish-Setup-Damp Squib Fizz Bomb.
Effective areal footage of female shoe on platform. Shocking Horror Outrage!
Grenfell Tower was all London Fire Brigades fault! Due to Government cutbacks
within Service. Contract undercutting within Government regarding Cladding with
Big Bonus for Crap Hooray Henry in suite.
Allowing Illegals subletting flats with bomb in fridge.
Blame London Fire Brigade….
Metropolitan police seem to think the full “novichok” bottle was “discarded” on March 4.
I tend to believe Charles Rowley who said it was “sealed” ie not the murder weapon.
Presumably MI5/6 do not have to tell the metropolitan police what they know but metropolitan police can come under political pressure to look in certain areas (or rather not look in certain areas).
I think the bottle was hidden in a place where druggies would look (why did Charles Rowley decisively rule out a park?) in a way that suggested it was meant as sublingual spray.
That could be the reason why the police now look for the bottle without the branding – it may be used in other types of drugs.
I think it was hidden separately from the incident and was blackmail to the British government. Which would simply be blowback from what British intelligence has been doing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blowback_(intelligence)
This would rhyme with the “threat on the London tube”.
But, on the other hand, secret services are clearly capable of pulling something like this out of their hat, if they need funding.
We are The Wolf Pack,Hot on heels of Theresa and her corruption
Bellingcat has been chased off the block by Bellingdog. Amusement:
https://southfront.org/hypocrisy-and-propaganda-twitter-parody-account-takes-harsh-aim-at-bana-alabed/
Keep laughing comrade blogmire friends.
Logically, Crime Scene Investigators [CSI or the UK version thereof] -and I’m going along with the covernment’s version of the story here- once it became obvious they dealt with a ‘crime,’ not junkies, everything in/on and around the bench would have been [meticulously] photographed, CCTV footage [of the 3 CCTV cameras overlooking the bench] pulled, eyewitnesses interviewed, and [given all the filmed footage] a very comprehensive and detailed story put forward about what happened to those two people on the bench…
That’s what would happen [or supposed to happen] in reality. If the suspension of disbelief would have been a rubber band, it would have snapped months ago. Nevertheless, TPTB keep pushing all their bogus nonsense around like its a marvel of truth.
CCTV footage will set me free. TPTB will not allow me, you or anyone else of the common public to see it, because the CCTV footage and TPTB’s fairytale live on opposite sides of each other.
Amidst all uncertainties, that’s a conclusion I’m sure about.
Daniel,
The real first responders which (apparently)
were a military doctor and nurse, would have known immediately that opioid poisoning was not the issue.
My point being, at what time did TPTB know they were dealing with something else?
Would they really?
https://drugabuse.com/library/fentanyl-overdose/
Duncan,
The ‘first responder’ doctor and nurse were initially identified a doctor (female) and an ” army nurse” (male). They would have known the cause of the Skripals’ distress if they were members of a team ‘taking out’ (meaning incapacitating and remmoving to a destination location) Sergei Skripal, but would not have known if they were passers-by. At SDH they did not know if the distress was or was not opioid related, which was normal, but they decided to try opioid overdose therapy because opioids were a dominant possibility.
The time of recognition, or suspicion, that theincapacitant was something other than opioid, or another common street-drug, can be identified by when hazmat dress began to appear at the scene. This would be what — about 8:00 PM the evening of the 4th? It was after 6:00PM, when forensic police were cleaning up and collecting evidence, and, themselves, by their presence and their remarkable for a public drug overdose event, close investigative attention to the scene, that something extremely unusual had occurred, not being bruited in the news. The most likely event that would have elicited that kind of degree of immediate forensic attention would have been an ‘officer-down’ event. Which officer would have been DS Bailey, and which would have meant the incapacitant that effected the three, and only the three, Sergei, Yulia and Nick, had to have been administered at the Market Walk bench, and had to be extremely fast acting, which BZ is not, but A230s are (A230 appears to be a vehicle, and one in the A230 series is certainly lethal, but the others, with non-lethal payloads, are not).
There is a high likelihood that the doctor and army nurse were members of a team, on hand to assure assistance if Sergei had a bad reaction. There appears to have been no provisions made for Yulia (only one transport for one party), so Yulia getting into the incapacitant was a serious hiccup in the proceeding even before her having a serious over-reactive response to the incapacitant. The doctor and nurse should have been team members, it would have been so stupid to a degree beyond even the incapacity of a government to have attempted what the evidence indicates without med back-up that we have to assume (and they did claim anonimity and disappear). If so, they would not have broken cover to advise, but would have reported up, from where advice could have been passed to Porton Down, who would then have passed advice to SDH personnel to change therapies, which appears to have happened. A Salisbury Hospital spokesperson did state, early on, that ‘international’ sources and Porton Down advised the regimen that worked when the opioid one did not. The ‘ international’ sources would most likely have been U.S. sources, who know the most about A230s, and are the ‘owners’ of Sergei Skripal, having arranged the swap deal that brought him west. And it was in the U.S. there was a political need for a ‘captive’ Russian to blow a little smoke to help his ‘hosts’ through a tight place…
And Ami Ops would be unaware of Sergei’ s situation, and would not check, or clear with UK Services, to provide them ‘deniability’ after the event.
Evangelista,
Are you saying that the police and ambulance services (who were not in on the operation) arrived too soon, before the first responders (who were in on the operation) had time to whisk the Skripals away?
Evangelista – all that assumes that the Skripals were poisoned and on the bench, etc. Supposing they never were…
Anonymous -3,
Supposing a piece of green cheese broke off of the moon, fell to Earth and struck the S – – – – – – ‘s, who “never were”?
That the moon is made of green cheese is more likely than that the Skripals were on the bench or were poisoned!
Don’t trivialise serious matters, Evangelista. You risk making a fool of yourself. The most coherent theory, based upon much evidence says that the Skripals were not poisoned, nor on the bench. There is zero reliable evidence that suggests otherwise – so far.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T0qagA4_eVQ&feature=youtu.be&t=37
Blunderbuss,
The air ambulance was called before 4:00PM; it went to the wrong location, fourteen miles out of Salisbury, looked around and then returned to land in the carpark approx. 4:25PM (the ground ambulances, called by rcivilian responders, arrived, in original evidences, a bit after 4:20PM), where it onloaded Yulia, rose, made an azimuth start then oriented to SDH where it took her. The wrong destination flight evidences that the air ambulance was given two locations, two sets of coordinates, and went to the most logical for an air ambulance, the distant one, since a land transport from Maket Walk to SDH would have been quicker, and more logical. The two coordinate sets at call-out evidences that the caller ordered a pick-up and deliver. The normal direction for an air ambulance being wrong evidences that the caller wanted a pick-up from Market Walk and delivery to the out of town location. This evidence evidences a ‘rendition’ intention. the caller using the available-resource air ambulance service.
Air Ambulances DO NOT EVER fly to an urban location hoping to find a parking-space (landing-place) open. They call municipal authorities to clear and hold the space they need, and forewarn the public. Clearing for an air ambulance is a prestige assignment, one an available DS would jump to accept. That is probably how DS Bailey came to be at the Market Walk scene, since the pilot remains with the aircraft, wherefore after arrival the attending officer is free to help at the scene.
The evidences indicate that Sergei Skripal was to be incapacitated at the bench, attended until an air ambulance arrived, then transported to, prob ably, be transported again, to ‘an undisclosed destination’. By-standers would see only an old man collapse, be tended, an air ambulance arrive and transport him. The by-standers would marvel and be impressed, but see nothing exraordinarily extraordinary and go on to talk about what they saw without suspicion. It would have been a clever rendition if not for the cock-ups of the air ambulance not arriving about 4:05PM and having him gone by 4:10PM with no fuss, and Yulia being there, and sticking her nose in the red bag containing the incapacitant first, before Sergei. We know Yulia did this because the OPCW found unresolved fractals of the incapacitating agent, which evidences, one, that the agen was a binary, and two, that she received her dose before recombination was complete. That Yulia was first to the ‘bait’ evidences that the ‘bait’ that Sergei was to look for in the bag and be dosed was something Skripal-family related, not spy-op stuff that would not have interested her. Had the operation organizers known Yulia was to be there they would have used other bait, to avoid interesting her. The local ops, the pair in the stolen seconds of CCTV video, especially the actor, the short one on the left with a mechanical left knee (a “Belfast knee”, suggesting MI5, who would be recruited to carry out a ‘British soil’ op) who was carrying the bag under his left arm and a cannister shape container in his left hand, should have aborted on seeing Sergei not alone at the drop-spot. So, lots of cock-ups.
At 7:00AM 5 March, 2018 a special emergency meeting was convened between Whithall, Whitechapel and Downing, ‘Cabinet Level’. From there and then ‘damage control’ activities radiated, hap-hazard and uncoordinated to begin, with D-notices and false-start stories and explanations to, first, re-direct attention from the Market Walk bench, and then to sow confusion and contradiction. Investigation was taken from the police, who knew what they were doing and how to go about it, and given to the military, who employ recruits who do the jobs assigned, making no judgments or decisions. Information evidences begin becoming rubbish by 6 March and by 10 March are just about all misleading and misdirecting. Then the original evidences begin disappearing. Does anyone remember that Bailey was hospitalized twice? That he was ‘interviewed’by Theresa May, herself? You are supposed to forget, and forget to ask ‘why?’.
P.S. Ana Campbell’s appearance in the case, as “Yulia Skripal, from a picture on her Facebook page” appears to have been an unintended error: Yulia had removed all family pictures, that migh have been useful for enemies’ targeting, after Alexandr’s suspicious death (livers process toxins, wherefore “liver failure” is a reasonable euphemism for poisoning). She left Ana Campbell’s picture, which would have been there as a tribute, Ms. Campbell having been instrumental in getting her father out of jail when her mother was dying, probably never imagining dumb-bunny Brit reporters would not recognize the famously foxy face and style, or ever mistake her for a round-cheeked Skripal. And so, in British Journalistic mythology, round-faced Yulia Skripal, blonde-rinsed over natural brown haired, became red-haired and narrow-cheeked… Even after her hostage video (in which she was made up and lighted to make her look more like Ms. Campbell)…
Some interesting points – can we look at a few, one at a time (or these posts will get very long and possibly confusing)?
The AA left from its base in Devizes and was already flying at 15:56 – that is even before Freya Church left SnapFitness. So if that flight was in response to a call, the call must have been before the CCTV even arrived at the bench. The AA flew north and arrived at Distillery Farm at 16:03 which was just about the same time that Freya saw the couple on the bench.
According to WAA’s log, the call was received at 16:19.
The AA left Distillery Farm at 16:30 and finally arrived in Sainsbury’s car park at 16:53.
The AA took off from Sainsbury’s car park at 17:11 and started towards SDH but did not go there and turned away from that course after 30 seconds, taking it towards Bourne Retail Park instead.
How does that fit with the description you give in your first paragraph? Incidentally you are quite right that there were no police or other ambulance crews that went anywhere near the AA while it was on the ground and a civilian (i.e. not police) assisted with traffic control when it departed.
I only read your first paragraph, Evangelista. It was so riddled with factual flaws that I felt there was little point in reading the rest. If you can’t even get the basic facts right, you are in no position to make inane, judgmental and sarcastic remarks. Keep up, give up or make a fool of yourself. The choice is yours.
Paul and Anonymous -3,
My evidenciary facts in regard to the botched renditioning event in itself are all from 4 and 5 March, 2018. with corroboratable, and so corroborated, testimonial evidence through 7 and 8 March. From the morning 5 March special meeting, or rather from the time of subsequent government issuances indicating decision taken in that meeting and direction of official response my interest moved to ‘mapping the ripples’ as the official response overtook the natural responses of the primarily involved, and observing the advances in covering-up techniques permitted by technology, and utilized–depended upon, by the narrative-creators, and adjusted as patching and filling attempts required.
Itg appears that because digital electronic signal record preservation permits near total modifiability, the ‘authorities’ determined that they could rewrite completely enough, over a surface of erasures and contradiction-confusions, that they could obliterate and replace the factual events of the real history. They may be able to, in some minds, but their techniques in themselves render their technique-created narrative not credible: However high a mound of Bog-Solids all and sundry may engage in building up, the core elements of the primary event facts remain, and may be discriminated by their specific characteristics, and what those specifics verify.
Paul, when can you verify your stated information that the AA was flying a minute before the time-stamp on the only available seconds of CCTV image? On what date did that conveniently contra-indicative information become available to stir into the confusion-cauldron? How does whatever version you may forward with those details square to one of the AA personnel at the bench justifying (and confirming) the AA’s late arrival by explaining they went to the wrong location first? Which justification, you might note, proofs someone at the bench scene on 4 March having expected the AA earlier, and having made a comment. That commenter would have been the doctor or the nurse — unless an event coordinator was at the scene pretending to be a civilian. Whoever it was, the apparent need to justify late arrival evidences a planned event, whose planning included the AA transport of a victim, and the wrong destination, if distillery farm or other, indicates where the immediate destination intended for the victim.
See how it works? For a short and pleasant course in deductive logic and its use in investigation, read, or re-read Doyle’s Sherlock Holmes stories and novellas.
I note above that the AA was in the air at 15:56. This is the first data point for the AA on 4 March:
callsign: HELIME2
sqk: 0020
registration: G-WLTS
altitude: 1625
speed: 98
lat: 51.359573
long: -1.988525
time: 2018-03-04 15:56:20
https://flight-data.adsbexchange.com/map?icao=406CBC&date=2018-03-04
Allowing time for the crew to respond to a call and start engines etc (which itself takes about 3) – the call itself must have been before 15:50. The Market Walk CCTV timestamp is 15:47 – but the couple were (obviously) not yet at the bench.
You say:
“AA personnel at the bench justifying (and confirming) the AA’s late arrival by explaining..” – do you have a source for that?
I think you’ll find, Paul, that three minutes from crew alert, to getting into helicopter, to starting up, to getting clearance for lift-off and departure, and lift-off itself, is very, very ambitious. The basic physics involved in starting a helicopter, even in something as sophisticated and automated as a Bell 429, and checking that it is fit to go, would take far longer than three minutes. This video shows that just the startup, after having moved to the helicopter and strapped in, takes about four and a half minutes before the pilot dare commit to lifting-off.
I agree with you 100% I was just referring to getting the engines started and up to speed once the crew is in the AA. Twin turbines means you have to balance the output from each engine or things might get bent – everything else (like getting clearance for take off) would be on top of that. So from sitting down to take off would be (as you say) more like 4 and a half mins.
On another matter, we have found something very curious in the flight data stats (of an associated AA) and would really appreciate your thoughts. I don’t want to crowd out this blog with the discussion, so would you be willing to join an off blog discussion? If so then please ask Rob to send me an email or other contact for you. If we can work out what is going on then we can post here to inform everyone else. Thanks.
I forgot the video, sorry:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bMh5byLm8Nk
Just to others (possible doubting Thomases), beside you and I, Paul, know.
Paul,
I concatenated and left a sentence out in writing about the AA time alterations. I meant to reference the ‘adjustments’ that put the AA arrival after 5:00PM. Your time, above, is correct, the AA would have been called between 3:47PM and 3:50PM. It takes about six minutes from pilot scramble to spool-up, spin-up, load-up and pull up pitch to raise a turbine helicopter, so a 3:56PM launch time would be within frame. As would be thirty minutes to fly fourteen miles, then a triangular search and fourteen miles return.
The words of the AA crew admitting going to the wrong location first was recorded in first reports by witnesses/responders at scene at the bench.
“As would be thirty minutes to fly fourteen miles, then a…”
The flight records say it flew north for 7 minutes, landing at Distillery Farm at 16:03 and took off again at 16:30, after a call at 16:19.
“The words of the AA crew admitting going to the wrong location first was recorded in first reports by witnesses/responders at scene at the bench.”
I still do not understand where this comes from – can you provide some evidence to support it? I do not know of anywhere that this was reported.
Perhaps you can reply in a new thread at the top of the page as this one is now too long for easy replies. Thanks
no
Hazmat suits would be used if they respected fentanyl, carfentanyl whatever regardless.
We only have the timing of the hospital.
And the timing of the police when they found out about Skripal’s identity. But that would only get the suspicion of an attack not the method used.
http://www.dupont.com/products-and-services/personal-protective-equipment/chemical-protective-garments/articles/protection-against-fentanyl-opiods.html
For me, the conclusion is that the issue were not Skripal’s, if they were the main goal carfentanyl could have been used – much easier to procure.
The issue was the A-234, which just like polonium, serves a cold war scare.
And when a secret service does that, their victims tend to be people who are bridges between the two worlds they try to split.
suspected
anidea,
I agree that hazmat suits would be used if they respected fentanyl, but who respects fenatnyls to that extent? Look in all the manuals and bulletins, you will find nothing but reminders to wear prophylactic gloves and reminding to avoidance contact and to not attempt to identify by tasting or sniffing anything, suspect or not suspect.
Before 18:00hrs-04-03 looks very much like Uniformed Officers
planting evidence too me!
Except that the stuff the lad in uniform is trowling on the bricks is too light-coloured, like absorbent-earth rather than potting-soil…
@ Duncan,
As we’re dealing with 2 separate universes here [TPTB’s baloney and plain realism], your guess is as good as mine.
The fact Yulia has been seen on TV indicates she’s in UK/US hands [or at least was].
The fact Sergei hasn’t, indicates he was either whisked out of the country or is dead.
The unwillingness to give us [the public at large] access to the CCTV footage, the stone walling on all fronts and the flurry of impossible stories in this saga, tell me I’m being lied to and lied to in spades.
But I, and hopefully others, keep chipping away at this concrete wall cast around the truth.
Like everyone else, I’m not privy to any behind the scenes info, thus forced to deduce conclusions based on the little evidence there is.
Or Sergej Skripal refuses to talk to the media or is disoriented. He is old enough to not take any hospital stay very well.
Er… before it even happened? I that’s your answer. (Well, some of them did anyway)
Sorry for the spelling….
Rob, can I correct some errors in the post below?
I don’t have proofs but I will share with you guys my short theory which I come to thanks to this blog.:) Anyone is free to use it as likes.
From the beginning of this case, I was certain that what happened on 4-th of March this year in Salisbury was not poisonings at all. Poisoning means someone deliberately to try to kill someone else with poison. MSM and HMG endorsed right from the start that this was Russian poisoning attempt and later it was not possible to press the propaganda train brakes. More and more someone is lying, harder is to stop. So no matter what evidences were collected later by investigators, anything not fitting in the official line was discarded. I honestly believe that is possible even police not to have figure out this case too. Door-handle theory has impossible holes but still fits well in the Rusophobia line, task of the Met was not to solve the case but to find out the best version fitting in the anti-Russia rhetoric.
So why it was neither poisoning or setup? There are many reasons, we have discussed them here many times, I will not repeat. All signs instead points that it was an incident. In another words done not by purpose but because someone have not been careful with a very dangerous substance.
Initially I thought that it was Scripal who had contaminated the house. But there are some discrepancies. He would be very careful handling the Novichok, it is not possible to have smeared so big quantity without to notice.
Also there are some events which cannot be coincidental:
1. Yulia visit
2. One year anniversary of her brother Alexander burial
3. Yulia expected to get a lot of money from her father
And what about Alexander Skripal? He was unemployed and alcoholic. Where did he managed to get 200 000$? Story that these money are from his former wife Natalia do not works, he have been to long in UK, from 2010, and have spent everything. What was he doing after his divorce. alone with his father?
There are several thing that could have happened on 4-th but the most logical seems to me that the source of the contamination is not Sergei, but Yulia, and that is why this happened during her visit. But it was investigated already that she didn’t brought the Novivhok, and Alexander grave was not contaminated. So what could she have done?
Of course the most obvious is that her father have used to smuggle Novichok and to sell it to PD or whoever want to pay. That is what I also was thinking until recently. What doesn’t fit is that Yulia after all do not looks this kind of person. But this still is one of the possibilities – that Yulia have brought the Novichok and by incident have caused leakage after she and Sergei have returned to the house. She was the one who smeared the door handle with Novichok. We will get back to this.
But there is one other possibility that explains the Charlie and Down poisoning by the perfume bottle.
If Charlie have found the perfume bottle nearby the charity bin then this whole case may have very trivial explanation. Maybe Yulia have left or throw it there on 4-th of March, not knowing what is it!
The point is that after cumming on 2-th Yulia probably done some cleaning of the house. Sergei have been alone and very depressed after burial and he probably didn’t entered the Alexander room at all after his death. So Yulia could have clean the room and collected some belongings of her brother; like clothes. and prepared to leave them at the charity. This could have happened on 3-th March. On 4-th morning she went with her father to the cemetery and then after they returned to the house around noon, she again have entered the Alexander room to take the package with clothes and other goods.
I can not know exactly what have happened but maybe she saw Ninna Rici perfume in Alexander room. Or maybe she have saw it later. But she have tried to use it, just like Dawn three mounts later, and have smeared some of it on her hands. Just like Dawn she thought that it is broken and in the haste have put it together with the charity package. Then before to leave the house she contaminated the computer, some other unknown objects inside the house and the door habdle! Somehow Sergei also was contaminated touching these same objects.
Here we comes to the critical part of this theory. Before to went to the Zizzi, Yulia and Sergei must have been at the charity and have left there the Alexander belongings. There Yulia have left the perfume bottle at the bin, maybe thinking that someone else could use it. It is possible that it was there where she have contaminated herself further. If Scripal was together with her maybe he was poisoned there.
You can ask why the charity package was not contaminated? It could have been put in bag which later have been thrown out. I can assume however that lothes also have been contaminated with small quantities Novichok which would means that some other poor people have been at risk too.
How the perfume have stayed so long at the charity bin until Charlie got it? Well, people who collect items at charities usually are not interested from paper envelopes that does not looks good, they look for clothes, shoes, food. There is a good chance that bottle have stayed there for 3 mounts unnoticed.
Much later, in April, while Yulia was recovering in the hospital she may still not know what have poisoned her. Or more probably she knew but to protect her father she have decided not to tell to the police about the perfume. She may have thought that it have been decomposed at that time and is not dangerous. After Dawn death MI6 have become annoyed that Yulia have not told them about the perfume bottle and one person have died. Yulia was forbidden to get in touch with public also and because her story will blows up the Propaganda Train. Returning to Russia is out of the question.
Boshirov & Petrov have nothing to do with the poisoning but are rather defectors who have worked for Sergei, making him deliveries of documents. It have been coincidence that have been in Salisbury on 4th of March.
Novichok type in the bottle was for research purposes, not at all military grade. It was reacting with alcohol before to become dangerous and lethal, and that is why it didn’t affected DS Bailey initially, and Yulia and Skripal only after drinking wine at Mills pub.
The big question now is what have been doing the perfume bottle with Novichok in the Skripal house, probably in Alexander room?
What do you think?
Interesting theory Anthony, thank you.
One thing I did pick of on was the possibility that Alexander may have known Dawn, by way of them both being alcoholics. Its a possibility that they both went to AA meetings at the United Reform Church in Fisherton St?
Thanks, Denise. I wrote it in the haste and did too many spelling errors, sorry.
My point is that whoever left the perfume bottle at the charity bin didn’t knew what it is and what danger it presents for people like Dawn and Charlie.
It is possible Alexander to have met Dawn, she j=have been very popular, but I do not believe that they close were friends or that Yulia also knew Dawn and gave her the perfume. Alexander had a lot of money for unemployed alcoholic.
The problem with your theory is that the poison coming into Salisbury was certainly no incident, even if you assume that it was “made in Porton down”.
I have said all along that whatever happened to the Skripals was not done on purpose, it was not an assassination attempt, it was an accidental outcome of some other nefarious operation.
Maybe Sergei was operating on his own account (importing fentanyl/carfentanyl for example), maybe he was operating on behalf of SIS to bring in samples of chemical warfare agents for Porton Down to test/copy, maybe he was operating in some way for the intelligence services of a foreign power (quite possibly Russia). But whatever he was up to it wasn’t supposed to end up with him, Yulia or any members of the British Public being killed by toxic chemicals. That was a mistake. The cover up that follows is down to the nature of the underlying activity, which the authorities do not want made public, for obvious reasons.
Either the UK’s double agent has been involved in drug dealing under their own noses, an operation they’ve been running has gone t*ts up in a horrible manner, or their double agent has turned out to be a triple, and has been working for another country. All of these cannot be played out in public, so a cover up is required.
Thats my reading of whats gone down. The actual details are kind of irrelevant. Its the cover up thats the important part, as is often the case.
Jim, There are 2 major problems with the ‘Mr Big’ scenario:
1) Sergei will have been under regular (if not constant) surveillance – he would not last 5 minutes as a Mr Big. I am sure HMG knew what he was doing; and
2) Where do all his contacts come from? Somebody has to supply him and then he has to find people to sell it for him. How can somebody parachuted into Salisbury , from a prison in Russia, do that? And why did the existing drug ‘mafia’ in Salisbury let him do it?
It is far too improbable. Yes there is a cover up – but not of drug running.
Skripal’s contacts are solid, he is obviously a very nice social guy.
– ex Soviet Afghan veterans
– ex Soviet Afghan veterans in Russian prisons who will have been released by now
– the GRU community who may or may not share Skripal’s views on what happened in the 1990’s in the Soviet Union
– the Salisbury military community
My guess is as good as yours but yes, I think he was used in some sting operation on the Russian mafia. The Russian mafia is used by all sides – oligarchs, secret services, you name it. Skripal must have got on somebody’s nerves. The side that wanted to get rid of Skripal would not necessarily be the same side that introduced the “novichok”. But the side that introduced the “novichok” must have known of the planned attack.
My other guess is that Glushkov was on the side whose nerves were rattled by Skripal.
His death – the insinuations of strange sexual practices – the complete silence, the claim it is unconnected to Skripals, points to MI6.
Beresovsky fled the Moscow mob war to Britain, he had brought his network with him. Glushkov was part of it.
The type of guy Britain supported
https://www.forbes.com/sites/richardbehar/2013/03/24/did-boris-berezovsky-kill-himself-more-compelling-did-he-kill-forbes-editor-paul-klebnikov/#1c945b856729
anidea, you are right, Skripal had many connections. But most of these like father of Alexander wife Natalia, Genady Grishchenko, cut the contacts with Skripal after he was exposed and detained in 2006.
I wonder however for Alexander. I think Alexander never have worked anything. He have lived in UK since 2010 and was unemployed, after a while his wife Natalia left him, because he wasn’t treat her well when drunk, describing her marriage with him as “nightmare”. Then Alexander moved to live in Salisbury with his father and got 150 000 pounds from Natalia. How one unemployed alcoholic like him managed to have so much money? How he paid for his frequent travels to Russia?
I think that Alexander may had his own “business” and his own network, he may have used both Sergei Natalia father connections. He was part of the GRU circle. It is even possible Yulia and Sergei not to have been fully aware about this business.
As I’ve said before, Sergei’s trips abroad, incl to the Baltic states (ideal locations for meetings with Russian contacts), are a matter of public record. He hasn’t been sat in Salisbury 24/7, so I doubt that the British intelligence services are 100% aware of everything he may have been up to.
Or as I said, this could be a UK run operation thats gone horribly wrong. In some ways that makes the most sense, it would account for why there was such a response for an alleged drugs overdose in a provincial UK town (I know Salisbury is a city, but its a small place). If the authorities knew that toxic chemicals were being handled they’d have the people to deal with them on red alert.
I always go for c*ckup followed by cover up as an explanation over out and out conspiracy theory every time.
“…the Baltic states (ideal locations for meetings with Russian contacts)…” – but all Sergei’s old friends in Russia disowned him (and his family) when he was prosecuted (or so we are told). Yulia described how hard it was for her. Vikeev’s mother was said to reject Yulia because of her father.
So how did Sergei suddenly get ‘Russian contacts’ in the Baltic states? And who was he sellling it to?
I just think it is so unlikely… but if you want to think otherwise, then good luck.
Not a lot …of this theory.
From April.
After OPCW visited Salisbury, collected and analysed their samples.
The French UN secretary said the following:
The OPCW results, as they have been presented to us, now speak for themselves. They confirm the British conclusions. A high-quality chemical agent, Novichok, considered to be militarily produced, was indeed used in Salisbury against Sergei Skripal and his daughter. The characteristics of this chemical agent, independently identified by each of the OPCW laboratories, and in particular its high level of purity, testify to a know-how that only a State could master. Its manufacture and handling require equipment and expertise that cannot be improvised.”
This means that multiple labs confirmed the Novichok nerve agent and it’s purity.
“Each of the OPCW Labs….
They all had reference samples of a material which only Russia had.
If the OPCW-approved labs had samples (whether reference or otherwise) then how could Russia alone have such substances? It’s generally accepted that the UK, USA, Czech Republic, Iran, Sweden… all had quantities of ‘novichoks’.
Exactly, but Mrs May’s assertions go unchallenged.
Multiple labs having reference material.
An excellent Iranian academic paper detailing the synthesis and analysis, mass spectral information of many of the so called “Novichok family”.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/309093991_Fragmentation_pathways_and_structural_characterization_of_organophosphorus_compounds_related_to_CWC_by_electron_ionization_and_electrospray_ionization_tandem_mass_spectrometry_Mass_spectral_studies_of
However, MSM do not seem to follow up on this, but we know why.
Apart from the fact that the French UN secretary says the untruth when he claims „only a State could master“ high purity Novichock – what does he mean with „considered to be militarily produced“ ?
Produced by the military or produced for military purpose ?
Duncan, what do you think the OPCW reference samples came from ?
From Porton Down or had each OPCW lab its own produced samples ?
Given how many different Novichok types exists, it’s amazing that they could identify exactly A-234.
Why does the UK refuse to give Russia a sample ? It’s just like refusing Coca-Cola its own recip.
But hey, wait a moment… In the US the Coca-Cola sweetener is corn syrup. In Switzerland it´s sugar beet and in many other countries it is cane sugar.
Liane,
From the OPCW’s own seminar material below.
Any lab vying to be considered a “player” in nerve agent identification would make sure they had as many reference samples as possible.
“The identification
of these chemicals during OPCW onsite analysis
is based on comparison of mass spectral data with reference
data libraries, and, during offsite analysis at
OPCW designated laboratories identification is additionally
confirmed by comparing analysis data (of different
analytical techniques) to synthesised reference
chemicals.”
Liane,
I think the French UN Secretary used the phrase “miltary produced” to imply, as an excuse that the amount of Novichok claimed by HMG would not typically,normally,maybe be made by a OPCW lab.
All fudge of course.
Keep being drawn back images just after alleged attack?
Image of Male-Female walking towards camera past Greggs.
Looking further back looks like another plain clothed Male
walking away past Card Shop.
Bailey does not look as if he shaves on a regular basis as
Panorama showed.
Plain clothed Male in Images has stubble shadow.
It all seems very relaxed and no urgency considering what
allegedly just happened. Uniformed Officer with hands in
pocket talking with Male-Female?
It all seems so wrong…Items appearing. No Paramedics
or Members Of Public gathering?
Here is Belk’s image again:
https://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/newpix/2018/03/08/18/4A020F9400000578-5476507-image-a-37_1520532905287.jpg
At least 3 police cars and an ambulance but only 1 policeman in sight. Also the scene is remarkably tidy: one used drinks cup sitting on a bin (which is not full) and a red bag on the floor… no rubbish or anything to say what had just happened there… who cleaned it all up before the area was decontaminated by firemen in hazmat suits?
Yes the drink cup, another item that appears. Box or bag on
floor by Greggs. Setting The Scene is what it looks like?
No CCTV explaining Special Effects -Props used in this
movie….Says It All!
Hi Miheila, I’m so glad you agree with a lot of my theory. I will just comment of a few things where we might differ, in separate posts, if thats ok, so I can do some work in between. lol
I dont think the Skripals or the imposters were poisoned with anything. The whole bench incident looked staged like part of an exercise (Toxic Dagger?) to me.
I remember a report of a policeman rolling out police tape as soon as he arrived, like he already knew what he was going to do when he got there rather than checking if the bench couple were ok. The paramedics and police got there too quickly and there were too many of them for a drug overdose incident.
I think it was one big blame Russia, MI56, Syria style White Helmets hoax with all parts being played by MI56 actors.
They didn’t really soil themselves. It was all Hollywood, for our consumption, for their insane geopolitical, UK domestic political, and Deep State budget increasing needs.
Novichok’s role next post
Hai, Denise. I can see your reasoning only too clearly, and I must admit it’s just the kind of thing that they’d do. IF the whole thing was staged, including the poisonings, it would have been tagged onto Toxic Dagger, not in the way I originally suggested but as a pure exercise (i.e. pure theatre), as was TD itself. You’d then be right in likening it to a White-Helmet style operation. If true, then we’ll need to look carefully for any evidence that definitively refutes it (I don’t mean ‘evidence’ drawn for any official narrative). If none can be found then you may well 100% correct.
Looking forward to hear about your Novichok theory.
This is the link to the Met statement from 5 September that included images of the perfume bottle and box:
http://news.met.police.uk/news/counter-terrorism-police-release-images-of-two-suspects-in-connection-with-salisbury-attack-320534
But it has now been removed! That should help people to remember what the box looked like! Fortunately copies exist in the archive:
http://archive.is/NcHfP
Here is a good image of the bottle and box found in Charlie’s flat from the Met statement:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DmU0oeYXoAA2Wg2.jpg
This is the link to the Met statement from 22 November that included images of the white plastic replica perfume bottle. There are 3 images at the bottom of the statement:
http://news.met.police.uk/news/counter-terrorism-police-continue-appeal-over-salisbury-suspects-334173
This is the link to the £4 online Russian counterfeit bottle:
https://mistersmell.ru/catalog/originaly/original_parfyum_v_miniatyure/original_nina_ricci_premier_jour_5_5_ml/
Box and bottle:
https://mistersmell.ru/upload/iblock/56a/56a8d80126098356dc6127cafc84f89c.jpg
Box interior (not shown by the Met):
https://mistersmell.ru/upload/iblock/491/49134cd1bf5f8e096c8fe9db16fb7fde.jpg
Bottle:
https://mistersmell.ru/upload/iblock/d41/d418f54a5fc587564b43bdc5e1b07cd5.jpg
https://mistersmell.ru/upload/iblock/ce0/ce01586bb914a0ad4890115117cf5620.jpg
Paul, thanks.
One thing that I found interesting – from the image with paper packaging seems to there is white sticker with barcode but it is from below and can’t be seen.Is there other images of the Ninna Rici paper envelop?
I am interested is it possible to see a date or barcode. It will show from where the original perfume has been bought and when.
I don’t know of one Anthony but if there is a barcode, it could also be fake. I have found exactly the same item on a few websites in Russia (and there was also one in the Ukraine but I can’t find it now).
It has been suggested that the counterfeit was made in the UAE, which is quite likely as the UAE is one of the world’s biggest markets for fragrance and flavour compounds – both natural and synthetic. It is an ideal place to get fake fragrance products into the market.
Hmm, more likely poisoners have bought one real Ninna Rici perfume and to have used the bottle to fill it with Novichok. Police have means to find out where this brand have been bough. I think it is expensive one, poisoners definitely did had style. Sucj perfumes are relatively rare and can be traced. Beeing thrown in the bin together with the paper package makes the police job easier, they can look carefully for any bar codes, price tags, dates…It must had some id number like most expensive goods.
Why police didn’t investigated where this Ninna Rici perfume have came from?
But the police did investigate it Anthony. Nina Ricci told them the bottle and box were both counterfeit. Nina Ricci do not make 5.5ml bottles.
It was in the 5 September statement:
“We have spoken to Nina Ricci and undertaken further inquiries. Nina Ricci and our inquiries have confirmed that it is not a genuine Nina Ricci perfume bottle, box or nozzle. It is in fact a counterfeit box, bottle and nozzle…”
I just checked to make sure the ‘mistersmell’ links are archived. They are. If any of the above links are removed from the web, go to:
web.archive.org
and paste the entire link into the query box.
The Met links are already archived as well.
Can we expect an edition of “Salisbury” in the Adult versions
of the classic Ladybird books?
Haha! It would be a best-seller. The Ladybird Book of Salisbury Fairy Tales, complete with doctored pictures, twisted timelines, redacted paragraphs and traces of purest novichok. Shrink-wrapped for safe delivery.
Apologies if posted already, but this website below is very useful.
https://bd8.com/russia/skripal/
Fascinating. Is head of counter-terrorism policing, Mark Rowley, related to Charlie Rowley?
Sir, I mentioned this months ago but had no response? I will agree
with your question and we do have a resemblance not just by Surname.
Do you mean they look alike? Like Sherlock Holmes disguised as an opium addict?
My apologies if the website below has already been discussed, but it has a lot of useful links and discussion of articles, in a concise format.
https://bd8.com/russia/skripal/
I see the Institute of Statecraft, the pretentious outfit that spawned the Integrity Initiative have been keeping themselves busy lying for the Cause:
https://www.rt.com/uk/446025-anti-russia-organization-targets-corbyn/
Labour politicians are outraged and calling for a probe after a report that a McCarthy style charity has received £2 million in government money and targeted Jeremy Corbyn, straying from tackling so-called Russian disinformation.
The Institute for Statecraft, based in Scotland, initially seems to be a small organization which claims to counter alleged Russian propaganda by forming communities of journalists and influencers who use social media to push back on any so-called disinformation.
However, leaked documents provided to the Daily Record show that the organization’s Integrity Initiative isn’t as grassroots as it appears on the surface. In fact, it’s apparently funded with £2 million of Foreign Office cash and run by British military intelligence specialists.
My theories about Charlie’s bottle.
1) Sergei was active GRU agent running a spy ring at PD. He was acquiring samples of UK chemical/biological weapons to send to Russia for analysis. One such sample was in this bottle for collection by the two GRU couriers. After March 4th the PD operative or the person/people acting as go-betweens had this hot property on their hands and suspected or knew they were being watched.So they waited until the heat was off then on an innocent shopping trip put it in skip bin/dumpster.
2) MI6 foisted botttle on to Charlie, it was never in a bin.
3) FSB put it there as a sick joke.
Skripal didn’t had the energy to run ring of spies. He was 66, retired and alcoholic.
Where does the alcoholic come from?
But I agree. Super active Scripal is bound to be fiction. He might have done stuff though where his knowledge was useful. His unique acquaintance with ex-Afghan veterans who had spent some time in Russian prisons for example.
Both of his children returning to Russia is a clue where they felt safe and belonged.
Official BBC line now is he was working on the Russian mafia.
Active work as spy requires a lot of time, being at permanent job. Skripal wasn’t actively involved in operations even prior to his release, and his access to up- to date records was blocked. One of the biggest wonders is why British were at all so willing to save him from prison and to pay more than 400 000 pounds for the house and his relocation.
My guess is that Skripal continued to use his former contacts in Russia, serving as person for contact for possible defectors. This explains the B&P visit. He continued to be involved in agencies but at much less extent.
Skripal was frequent visitor of Mills pub spending there a lot of time (should find the links). His son Alexander was alcoholic and died because of liver failure, result of heavy drinking. This is not typical behavior of someone that is mastering network. Skripal was small fish is someone else network.
Yep. He seems to have been good at socialising. His knowledge of people the main skill he sold.
“…why British were at all so willing to save him from prison…”
I think they did not want those Russians, who worked for MI6 or could do it in the future, to be discouraged by Skripal’s imprisonment. His saving was a statement: whatever happens, we will take care of you.
Of course, (2).
Skripal was a man of the past century.
An excerpt from an article by The Sun:
The friend told The Sun: “For a Russian spy, he wasn’t very good with tech. He would ask us to fix very basic things. He struggled to connect to his wi-fi and didn’t even know how to turn his router off and on.
“He didn’t even have a password. I guess because he just lived with his son they trusted each other.
“If you take the sort of average person’s knowledge of a computer, Sergei’s was probably considerably worse than that.”
Instead, the source revealed he would spend hours sitting in a black wheeled office chair playing old Russian tank games. His friend added: “His PC was a few years old, but it was OK but the games were much older.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5777088/poisoned-russian-double-agent-spent-much-time-alone-tending-to-his-pets-playing-computer-games/
Denise, I’m replying to your ‘almost nothing went wrong’ theory here, but not fully. There’s too much for me to go through in one go.
Although it has a lot to commend it, and you make some very good points, there are certain elements that I feel are not possible or unlikely.
Sergei makes a fuss there to be noticed as part of the “Russia did it’ hoax.
I’d sooner say that he made a fuss simply to be noticed, for he was very afraid of MI56’s plan for him and he wasn’t prepared go along with it.
They both go to the Mill Pub and leave by the rear of the pub and wait in a car
for the Wiltshire Air Ambulance helicopter, with Charles Filmer the financial affairs manager in it, to arrive.
No, they don’t wait. Time was of the essence, and they were seen to leave in a hurry. It’s possible that Yulia was separated in the car park or at a later stage, but at least one of them quickly leaves Salisbury. (The helicopter was an essential element in MI56’s plan, and played no part in the opposing agency’s plan).
They both sign financial papers give Filmer control of their affairs and Filmer goes back to Minety in Nigel’s the Melksham taxi.
Now this idea is interesting. It could well have been part of MI56’s plan to fly in Filmer (if only to greet and escort the Skripals), and would make a lot of sense. Possibly, if separated, Sergei may have signed papers. Otherwise, no papers could have been signed at this time.
They both leave in the helicopter which goes over the cemetery for one last look and then they fly to a safe house within 20 minutes radius of Salisbury Hospital. They are off the begin a new life with new identities in another country.
All possible, had the MI56 plot succeeded – but it failed – either completely (both Skripals lost) or partially (just one).
The MI56 operatives who are the imposter couple walk down Market Walk to the bench and put on the poisoned act after a witness or two arrive, other MI56 operatives arrive, doctor and first responders, to complete the completely staged Russia blaming hoax of two people being poisoned on the bench.
Agreed, except that I don’t feel they were acting, but had been genuinely poisoned by an incapacitant, possibly BZ or a fentanyl cocktail.
The two MI56 imposters are transported to Salisbury Hospital by ambulance, an hour later, to make sure that nobody other than MI56 and CBRN miltitary doctors and nurses are there when they arrive. They are supposedly treated at that time and they are isolated from Salisbury Hospital staff and everybody else, at all times, and are placed in the MI56 and CBRN military controlled Radnor ward.
Agreed. Excellent points. Of course, saying that they were ‘supposedly treated’ would imply that they had not been poisoned. However, when the OPCW were involved in the blood tests, how could this have been staged?
The two Porton Down doctors who magically just happened to be on duty at Salisbury Hospital that night are part of the CBRN military people there to help with the hoax.
Agreed. Mentions of the DCBRNC, major players in the affair, in the MSM are conspicuous by their absence. Nobody has raised this question or interviewed anyone from there. The PD doctors may actually have been been from DCBRNC.
Only three senior medical staff at Salisbury are part of the Hoax, how they became to be so we don’t know.
Agreed, and Dr Davies made a faux pas in his letter, and was quickly transferred to a distant part of the country, and no doubt threatened to keep silent. There are lots of ways they could have been co-opted as part of the hoax. Most people have their price and are corruptible. Bribery? Threats? Gentle persuasion combined with boosting their egos, tapping their sense of awe and obedience to ‘authority’, a sense of duty to ‘queen and country’. More likely a combination of all these. This process could even have begun long before the patents’ arrival, descibed as part of a secret CW exercise linked to Toxic Dagger. These staff would already have routinely prepared the hospital for emergencies that may have arisen out of TD.
Nick’s job is to plant novichok as proof that ‘Russia did it’, late on Saturday night, on or in Sergie’s car but he spills on himself it and then spreads it all over Salisbury, at Sergeis house, Bourne Hill police station, in the Mill pub and possibly at Zizzis.
I don’t think so, and certainly not Novichok, but I suspect that a mistake was made and that he somehow came into contact with whatever it was that poisoned the bench couple – an incapacitant. Your scenario doesn’t account for the high purity of nerve agent present on the door handle at the time of the OPCW visit.
UK Keeps Destroying Evidence in Skripal Case – Russian Foreign Intel Chief – Link to Sputnik
Excerpt: “”The Russian side, if you recall, immediately offered its readiness to participate and help in the investigation of this incident, this provocation. Unfortunately, the British side has not been forthcoming. Furthermore, the British side, as we see it, is constantly destroying evidence — [the Skripal’s] pets, other objects. The Skripals themselves have not appeared,” Naryshkin said, speaking to Russia’s Channel 1 on Sunday.”
Picture of Sergei Skripal’s abode before the ‘deadly’ doors were taken down @ https://cdn1.img.sputniknews.com/images/106227/73/1062277367.jpg
Just like they destroyed all the Assange emails, showing that they perverted the course of justice at the CPS by deliberately pressuring Sweden not interview Assange in the Ecuadorian Embassy in the UK for all those years Daniel.
We are ruled by a bunch of crooks.
Bit different in Tass
http://tass.com/politics/1035170
with this interesting bit of information
“In this case this process is being politicized, and they do not contact us on this case. As for other issues, we continue cooperation as normal,” Kurennoy said.
I agree. Evidence is being systematically destroyed – and atered, and this has been going on from 5th March. By the way, as I keep saying, the pets were not destroyed. All the evidence suggests that they were rescued prior to the police arriving at 47 CMR.
The proponents of the theory, which is known here as the “patsies theory”, but I would rather name it the “planned disapperance theory”, like fantasies and speculations, but ignore fundamental facts. There are at least two fundamental facts in the Skripal case, which make the “planned disapperance theory” invalid. These facts are:
(1) In early March 2018, Yulia arrived to Salisbury to visit her father.
(2) In May-some time in July 2018, Yulia was going to return to Moscow. She said about it in her Reuters-filmed statement of 23 May and in her phone call to Viktoria of 3 July. The phone call transcript can be seen here:
https://www.theblogmire.com/if-yulia-skripal-now-understands-everything-what-did-they-tell-her-before/
Also, Yulia’s friend Diana, who was supervising the renovation of her flat in Moscow, told the Russian newspaper Moskovsky Komsomolets that Yulia called her on 22 May and asked to continue the renovation of the flat. Yulia said that she would pay for the work upon her return to Moscow.
Meanwhile, the “planned disapperance theory” claims that by early March Sergei Skripal was in fear for his life and planned to disappear and hide from some evil organization – an intelligence agency or mafia. This claim conflicts with the fact (1), because, if Sergei had feared for his safety, he would not have allowed Yulia to come. However, the proponents of the “planned disapperance theory” are not confused. They claim that Yulia was in danger, too, and so she had to disappear together with Sergei. Apparently, it had to be a grave danger, as, to escape it, Yulia abandoned her life in Moscow, including the man with whom she was in love and whom she wanted to marry, the dog she loved (and whom she placed in a dog hotel just for two weeks), good friends, her own flat, and her job.
Now the fact (2), Yulia’s plan to return to Moscow. If we are to believe the “planned disapperance theory”, then what about the hugely grave danger? Did it dissipate? Did the evil organization cease to exist? Of course, Yulia’s plan to return to Moscow means that back in March there was no danger of the kind that allegedly made Yulia to abandon her Moscow life, her dear people and the dog. Thus, there was no need for her “to disappear”. As well, there was no such danger for Sergei, because, if he had known about it, he, as a normal parent, would not have allowed Yulia to come.
The danger, which Sergei and Yulia were unaware of, was of a different kind: they were targeted as victims in a false flag operation to frame Russia.
Welcome back Milda.
How does any of what you say (which is only opinion) invalidate what Cain Prince told the Telegraph about the couple seen on CCTV:
“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/
The Skripals were not on the bench… but the CCTV couple was. There were witnesses.
A theory based on one witness who did not go close, did nothing to help, but kept walking, presumably avoiding the scene as unpleasant, whilst her manager sold cctv to the media with an interest to make it relevant, is a bit weak.
As you well know it is more than one witness and neither you nor Milda (nor Siberiak – where has he gone?) have ever managed to explain why the witnesses ‘wasted’ the time of the police and the press with this ‘story’ on 5 & 6 March.
Nothing you have said alters the fact that it is what Cain Prince said – and since it is clearly the truth, it isn’t possible for you to change it.
Yes, Cain Prince said, that Freya said …
That is still one witness and one person telling from hearsay (of this one witness), a witness who did not bother to call for help or go close.
A witness who had recounted her story to the police, which is how Cain Prince knew about it! Then you have Olly Field and Cain Prince also telling the Telegraph that the man in the green coat (seen on CCTV) was Mr Skripal, which he had been told by the police and was also reported by the Times on 6 March.
For clarity, Olly Field was a witness at the bench who gave 2 interviews in which he said the female there had blonde hair. The reference to the green coat is only from Cain Prince (not Field and Prince, as may be inferred from the poor way in which I phrased the above post).
To remind: Freya Church is worthless as an eyewitness. Freya testified in accordance with what she had seen last. When shown the SnapFitness CCTV, Freya said that the CCTV couple were “100%” the people she had seen on the bench. Having seen TV news, Freya said that the man on the bench “was definitely the man that’s been pictured in the news – the guy that’s a spy,” that is Skripal.
Even Paul dumped her. See his reply to one of my comments in October:
Paul says:
October 17, 2018 at 11:33 am
You are also wrong to say: “Remember that Freya Church’s interviews are the basis for the “patsies” theory.”
I don’t need Freya Church at all. There is so much other evidence – such as all the MSM reports on 6 March.
Forget Freya Church – she does not ‘make’ the theory at all. What proves the theory is that you can’t knock it down…. no matter how hard you try.
Milda. You haven’t a hope! You cling like a limpet to something I posted nearly 2 months ago!! Why?? We know much more now.
You are on a futile mission Milda. Give it up!
You seem to have run out of arguments, Paul.
LOL!! Not in a million years. I will be here repeating facts long after you have gone!
May I ask why you and Milda so frequently reply to and support each other’s posts? There have been many examples over the months.
I think many of us here could make an educated guess, Paul. 😉
Somehow I suspected that I had not been the only one to notice it. But where is Siberiak?
My theory on Yulia Milda is that she did want to go back to Russia and marry Stepan but Sergei didn’t want her to because he knew Stepan and his mother were FSB and he thought that Stepan was only interested in Yulia for FSB purposes (to keep an eye on Sergei via Yulia) and for, what I think Elenora, described perfectly as ‘horizontal’ interests.
So Sergei added Yulia to the MI56 disappearing plan to ‘save’ her from all that.
Milda. Good to have you back. You keep repeating tired old matters which have already been adequately explained before several times. I know you worthily claim that your agenda is simply not to make this blog a laughing stock peopled by ‘conspiracy nutters’. All well and good, but there’s no sign of that happening, is there? Not a glimmer. No, I suspect your true agenda is quite different, and that is to maintain a specific narrative as and when certain ‘sensitive’ topics crop up – and this you do, so predictably.
To quote Nazi propaganda minister Goebbels:
“The essential English leadership secret does not depend on particular intelligence. Rather, it depends on a remarkably stupid thick-headedness. The English follow the principle that when one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it. They keep up their lies, even at the risk of looking ridiculous”.
Evidence of this behaviour is obvious to anyone who even skims the surface of the various official narratives, and you too have accepted this. But you strangely cling on to certain aspects of their narrative/s with what amounts to a kind of religious zeal – and yet for no obvious logical reason. The spoutings of TPTB have by now long surpassed the merely ridiculous stage and entered the theatre of the absurd. They’re certainly living up to the ‘English weaknesses’ that Goebbels described – stupidity and thick-headedness. You may fairly accuse those that you now call ‘planned disappearance theorists’ of doing this too, but that’s only your opinion, and it’s based on arguments made of sand. You selectively ignore the overwhelming and disparate evidence that supports that theory. There is now so much of it, that large elements of the ‘theory’, cannot reasonably be considered to be theory any longer.
Anidea – you too, interestingly follow a similarly predictable line. Although you too reject much of the official narrative, you too accept elements of it as gospel truth, without reason to do so, and while ignoring ‘inconvenient’ evidence. You rise too eagerly to the same bait as Milda. Your over simplistic reply, “A theory based on one witness who did not go close…”, underestimates the intelligence of some of us here – and as I’m sure you know perfectly well, is not the basis of this theory – as has been explained to you several times before.
In time, you’ll find that new evidence will prove that two opposing agencies had planned two different disappearances on that day. But at least you’re both going along with the framing-Russia element. So am I.
As I said, the “planned disappearance” theorists are fond of fantasies and speculations, but ignore fundamental facts.
Milda, you keep repeating nonsense. You are the one without any facts. You keep going on about a dog in a kennel as if it is supposed to mean something. It doesn’t! You are just making it all up.
Surely there is room for multiple theories on this blog.
Multiple theories are fine (they are the life blood of the blog) but Milda is not offering a theory, she is trying to distract people away from facts which point to the CCTV couple being the ones on the bench.
She is now reduced to casting personal insults, such as: “fond of fantasies and speculations”, because there simply is no evidence that the Skripals were the ones poisoned.
After nine months there isn’t a single person who had come forward and said: “I was there and I saw the Skripals on the bench.” But we do have witnesses who saw other people on the bench – we even have one witness who said she was 100% sure the CCTV couple was the couple on the bench.
There isn’t a single fact in this whole saga that is as clear as the fact that it was not the Skripals on the bench. It was stated in black and white by multiple news agencies.
I haven’t made that up, I am simply repeating what was reported by the Times and Telegraph (amongst others) when the events were still fresh in the minds of those who saw it all. Also, do not forget that it is all on CCTV which, very obviously, is why we have not been allowed to see any of it.
Repeating what was reported does not make me “fond of fantasies and speculations” – you might spend a brief moment considering the motives of people who suggest such things.
I agree that this ‘theory’ sounds reasonable. But as we discussed it before British arre also not very keen providing proofs. If this was a setup, why not B&P lured at the house and filmed on CCTVs how they touch the door handle? Maybe catch them while leaving Salisbury with a Novichok flacon in their backpack. If British searched for scandal blaming Russia there were hundreds of much better ways to do it.
Why does the Met’s Nina Ricci box look like this:
https://cml.sad.ukrd.com/image/705800-462×568.jpg
Instead of looking like this if Charlie had just opened it out of its cellophane wrapper?
https://www.picclickimg.com/d/w1600/pict/292652677857_/Nina-Ricci-Premier-Jour-By-Nina-Ricci-Eau.jpg
This is what Charlie’s actual box should have looked like:
https://mistersmell.ru/upload/iblock/56a/56a8d80126098356dc6127cafc84f89c.jpg
There are more images here that can be enlarged:
https://mistersmell.ru/catalog/originaly/original_parfyum_v_miniatyure/original_nina_ricci_premier_jour_5_5_ml/
I assume the box has been “distressed” to add credence to the idea that it has been in a rubbish bin for several months.
Haha! They think they’re so clever, but they’re no match for people of average intelligence.
The only distressing they’re good at is distressing their victims… to the point of killing them if ‘necessary’.
I’m not sure what point you are making, Denise.
Are you suggesting that because Charlie said he took the box out of its celophane wrapping then you would expect the box to look as pristine as the second image you link to? To which I would say two things: firstly, it is entirely reasonable that even a celophone wrapped box can be squashed, crumpled, and creased. Secondly, that even if it were pristine when Charlie unwrapped it, we don’t know what he did with the box after he opened it – he might very well have crumpled it and tossed it into his bin for all we know.
Or is your point that the box in the first link looks different to the box in the second link? In which case, this article in The Times shows both sides of Charlie’s box, and you can see it is the same as in your first link.
https://web.archive.org/web/20180906052025/https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/novichok-attack-killer-liquid-was-smuggled-in-using-fake-nina-ricci-perfume-bottle-x7j2txrgl
However, I do wonder as to why the police, in The Times article above, think that the box was not a genuine Nina Ricci box. Why would the alleged assassins go to the trouble and effort of making a counterfeit box when they can buy an authentic one?
The assassins didn’t have to make anything. That is the box that the £4 counterfeit perfume comes with. Even counterfeits need a box.
This is the counterfeit box and perfume:
https://mistersmell.ru/upload/iblock/56a/56a8d80126098356dc6127cafc84f89c.jpg
I tried to buy some but sadly got no reply from the seller. I assume they were told to stop selling them.
Paul,
Can you do a fresh post please?
A picture of the £4 fake and a second picture of the “original” same fake and packaging as first shown by the police.
The Blogmirers seem confused in thinking that some other packaging was found.
No doubt this confusion was aided by the Panorama exhibit.
Will do. I will put a post at the top of the blog with images from:
– Met statement 5 September showing box and bottle found in Charlie’s flat.
– Met statement of 23 November showing white plastic replica.
– Russian website showing counterfeit bottle and box.
Thanks Paul.
I wonder why and how the Panorama version ended up with the white plastic expensive “copies” which looked nothing like the fake “real” thing?
Paul
Thanks for the picture.
In the picture the spray top is already on so why would Charlie say he had to assemble a pump top?
The thing re: Charlie for myself is that it could have been accidental and an unfortuitous find but the odds are pretty high against it I think.
Whereas if the tale of the forensic people finding it days later on top of his kitchen work surface is true then I think it’s possible he ” found ” some other it elsewhere as in took it from somewhere or someone or he didn’t find IT – he found something else and the IT was added later courtesy of a search of his flat post first ‘ search ‘
How many bottles of something are in play here and what do you think was in each if there were two?
According to the official narrative only one was used.
How can that be as the discarded bottle would not have been wrapped as the would be assassins couldn’t utilise it without taking the wrapping off.
Charlie say’s his was wrapped.
Two bottles – two red bags?
It does not fit the official narrative at all in my book.
I must add that Charlie and Dawn were poisoned – but poisoned with what – the one Charlie found or not by the one possibly placed in his flat?
Ken, I actually believe that Charlie is convinced that he did find the bottle but I also believe that is a false memory – no one thing makes me think that, it is ‘on the balance of probabilities’.
I think it is likely that the bottle was planted in Charlie’s flat after he and Dawn were taken ill – I don’t think it is what killed Dawn for 2 reasons:
1) Dawn was not stupid, no woman would believe that the applicator was correct; and
2) Dawn’s hands and face were damaged, not her wrists and neck – so it wasn’t perfume she had used.
Add to that the fact that Charlie said it “had very little odour”, he claims to have spilt it on his hands but washed them… have you seen the state of his nails? He simply could not have removed poison from his hands (and especially under his nails) by running them under a tap… and why would he give Dawn a perfume that had little odour? It is all nonsense. Which is why I think it is a false memory.
I think it is highly likely that is the only bottle. It was a pathetic hoax perpetrated by the Met after Dawn and Charlie were poisoned with something else. Why did they do it? “Russia, Russia, Russia”. The UK is under orders from the US.
Paul, Blunderbuss and Sayless thank you.
I was thinking more about the condition of the box Charlie supposedly had, not the details on the actual box.
Even if Charlie crushed it up after opening it. It wouldn’t have been in such bad condition as it had been protected by cellophane all those months.
It would just have a few creases and not look as though it was many years old, like it does in the Met’s picture?
The condition of the faux Premier Jour box is not unlike the assorted fast food wrappers and containers that turn up in my front garden, having been slightly crumpled when discarded and then weathered by overnight rain.
My take on Charlie’s dumpster find is that he can’t really remember where he found it, but is fairly sure where he didn’t find it. This in turn leads me to surmise that it wasn’t found per se, but was in a bag of random small items that looked promising but needed sorting out; for instance, the sort of bag you’d sometimes see in a paladin or dumpster, disposed of when someone was clearing and cleaning a recently vacated flat or house, full of half empty bottles of shampoo, abandoned cosmetics, unopened samples, scrunchies and the like.
What I’m not sure of is whether Charlie scavenged it himself, or whether someone else did; and how recently.
Nina Ricci, when contacted by the police, claimed the item was a fake but it was not clear to me whether they were referring to the adapted vial and applicator, or whether the packaging was fake as well.
Eleanor – You’re certainly impressively well-acquainted with this recondite area of research, and your most enlightening post warrants a detailed reply, which is now forthcoming….
The condition of the faux Premier Jour box is not unlike the assorted fast food wrappers and containers that turn up in my front garden, having been slightly crumpled when discarded and then weathered by overnight rain.
How totally fascinating! Your garden sounds somewhat distressed. Have you ever considered employing a more efficient head gardener to keep this urban blight at bay? I’m sure Ernie ‘4-Barrel’ Drax’s fleet of gardeners wouldn’t put up with the hoi-polloi flinging assorted fast-food paraphernalia over his famous longest wall in England.
My take on Charlie’s dumpster find is that he can’t really remember where he found it, but is fairly sure where he didn’t find it. This in turn leads me to surmise that it wasn’t found per se…
Yes, yes, yes! Our agreements neatly coincide on this. Not only may it not have been found per se, it may not have been found at all!
…but was in a bag of random small items that looked promising but needed sorting out; for instance, the sort of bag you’d sometimes see in a paladin or dumpster, disposed of when someone was clearing and cleaning a recently vacated flat or house, full of half empty bottles of shampoo, abandoned cosmetics, unopened samples, scrunchies and the like.
Clearly you’re very familiar with this scenario – to the extent of detailing typical bag contents. “The sort of bag you’d sometimes see…” Sadly, not me. Not ever. So it’s a kind of random goody bag then… depending on one’s personal taste, naturally. What, in the name of neologisms, is a ‘paladin’? I thought it was some kind of mediaeval armoured crusading type, with a touch of cavalry and chivalry thrown in. Evidently, the word has another more arcane meaning, a meaning that only the initiated of a certain milieu would know, but my experience of these pot-luck bags is minimal, to say the minimum at least. I’ve refrained from responding to the barely-controllable urge of looking up the word, for I’d prefer to hear the meaning from the horse’s mouth, as ‘they’ say. (As for ‘dumpster’ I did look up that word a while back, and found it was an American version of a big bin on wheels, rather than a machine used in building work for dumping rubble & stuff).
What I’m not sure of is whether Charlie scavenged it himself, or whether someone else did; and how recently.
Maybe he was… guided… to scavenge it, by ‘them’. Perhaps it was never scavenged per se at all, and that was just a simple lie, that impressionably Charlie took on board and half-heartedly nurtured.
Ahem no, I am most definitely hoi polloi and the front garden is so small that all and any empty Macdonald’s offcasts are immediately and annoyingly obvious. Drop it in the road, and it’s litter; lob it into someone’s garden and the householder can be accused of encouraging fly tipping.
Prior to having a tiny front garden, I was a flat dweller and the block had two large round metal paladin bins into which we put our bags of household rubbish. Quite often, neighbours’ rubbish migrated to these unwieldy containers, and small shopping bags of other people’s odds and ends were frequently to be seen nestling around the base of the overfull paladins.
Until I encountered the term ‘dumpster diving’, as one of Charlie’s pastimes, I’d never heard of it before. But I was familiar with the term ‘skip diving’, which seems to have acquired an almost respectable niche status once the term was coined for the activity.
Did I say I used to live in a flat? Well, I did and in what has been called a cosmopolitan part of town. The flat is two doors along from one allegedly kept by Burgess, or maybe Maclean, for some of his more salacious out of office activities, although he was long gone and years before I moved in.
Clearly we don’t move in the same circles … Burgess, almost certainly.
But I digress: it’s likely that Charlie had no idea where the perfume bottle came from and, when reminded of where he found it, reluctantly and disbelievingly agreed its provenance.
Miheila,
I wondered what a paladin was too. I think it might be a rude name for the “Nissan Paladin, the name by which the Nissan Xterra sport utility vehicle is sold in China” (from Wikipedia).
Denise. I can only assume that the clumsy, hamfisted hands of the Met’s secretive EMDMD (Evidence Manipulation, Destroying and Manufacturing Dept) overdid the ‘distressing’ of the box. Instead of applying their touch to allow for a few months of ageing, they were characteristically over-zealous, and created a few decades of ageing in their misplaced enthusiasm to create an aura of authenticity. Once done, it was too late, so they hoped no one would notice.
Here is the statement issued by the Met on 23 November, in connection with the Panorama programme:
http://news.met.police.uk/news/counter-terrorism-police-continue-appeal-over-salisbury-suspects-334173
“…we are still to identify … where the counterfeit perfume bottle was between the time we think it was discarded on the afternoon of 4 March, to when Charlie Rowley says he found it on 27 June. If you think you saw the pink box or bottle anywhere in the Salisbury area during that time, then please get in touch with us.”
It is accompanied by images of the new (vastly expensive) white plastic fake bottle, created by the Met (which nobody could have seen), of the real counterfeit bottle (available online in Russia for about £4) but there are no new images of the ‘pink box’ (but I suppose we could find that ourselves because it is the same as the £4 one available online in Russia).
Two things:
– why has the Met not said what “the time we think it was discarded” was?
– how can anybody have seen the bottle at all? It was inside a sealed box and Charlie needed a knife to open it.
So the only thing anybody could have seen was the box … but there are no pictures of the box in the statement.
Who makes this stuff up?
In reply to Paul’s question “How can anybody have seen the bottle at all?”
The Met are indeed aware that people might only have seen the box, and they specifically refer to the pink box in the article that you quoted (see below)
“If you think you saw the pink box or bottle anywhere in the Salisbury area during that time, then please get in touch with us.”
Sorry Paul, I missed the point of your question earlier. You are right – it is very likely that the bottle may have always been inside the box, and so you would expect the Met to show photos of the actual box. For them to have not done so is quite odd.
We have only Charles Rowley’s word for it. The Met may believe that the bottle was out of the box right from the start. They would want to believe that if they think it is the attack weapon in the case of Yulia and Sergej Skripal.
They said they asked Nina Ricci and Nina Ricci said the bottle was counterfeit ie did not resemble anything they produce.
That they rebuilt the bottle may mean that that the original bottle got broken. It is possible that Charles Rowley cleared his flat after Dawn went to hospital and was poisoned then which might explain why he did not fall ill immediately.
My experience with perfume bottles is that they are almost imposable to break even on tiled bathroom floors, I have never broken on especially the small ones because they are so lite.
And of all the perfume boxes I have and there are many. None are anywhere near the condition of Charlie’s even though some are many years old. I cant image how it could have got to look like it does.
Like most of the Skripal story, none one of it rings true.
The way they rebuilt it without any branding looks like they think the branding was put on the bottle afterwards.
Except that the bottle they show does not have anything in common with a perfume bottle.
So either the package of the first image was real and the Nina Ricci bottle just illustration of the size or the poison in Charlie’s flat was not found in a Nina Ricci bottle at all.
And they tried to intimidate Yulia with it.
Genuine perfume bottles are very sturdy, yes. But counterfeit bottles may very well be made of inferior glass, and so it likely to break more easily.
The box does look, to me, as one might expect if it had been in a large bin with a fair amount of weight squashing down on it. It is not torn to pieces and unrecognisable – just a bit deformed with creasing.
.
Denise,
I think the storytellers have been watching films again. I remember a scene in “The Night Porter” where Lucia breaks a perfume bottle. I think this has a hidden meaning.
Cleared his flat?
You’ve clearly got little experience of a junkie’s priorities. Having lived with heroin addicts, the idea of them, under stress, doing some household chores, stretches credibility.
He would if he thought the police might come to look for what made Dawn Sturgess ill.
Why would he think it was the perfume and not some dodgy gear they’d used? Throwing away their drug-taking paraphernalia, sure, but your theory makes no sense re perfume bottle.
Here’s an example of how drugs cause involuntary body movements [as the couple on the bench supposedly had, although they -supposedly- had a relatively mild ‘attack’] @ https://www.liveleak.com/view?t=awod9_1544307193
If Charlie have found the perfume bottle nearby the charity bin then this whole case may have very trivial explanation. I can tell you what have happened. Would you guys be interested or will seek complicated espionage and conspiracy theories everywhere.
Go ahead Anthony. All contributions most welcome.
I ‘s like to send festive greetings to Rob, and all indeed blogmirers, following our service of nine lessons carols at the only Victorian gothic building in Moscow, which has in its time served as Bolshevik machine gun post and Melodiya recording studio.
http://moscowanglican.org
We sung ‘In the Bleak Midwinter’ when outside snow had really fallen, snow on snow. The British Ambassador, as I think is traditional read the eighth lesson about the three Kings – diplomatic gifts. He stayed long enough at the reception afterwards for me to have the chance to raise with him one specific question about the BBC arising from discussions on the blogmire, which I have hopes may be productive.
Given the cold conditions you have there, Peter, the density altitude will be really, really, low – so it’s just possible, with a strong headwind, that the pig just might fly.
Cascadian, you seem knowledgable on technical issues, including weather. Can you tell me whether a relative humidity of 87% to 82% at a temperature of 9 degrees Celsius qualifies as ‘muggy’
https://www.timeanddate.com/weather/uk/salisbury/historic?month=3&year=2018
I’ll ask my other half which Russian word has been translated as ‘muggy’
@ Grigory
That’s an odd range – high to low.
For a colloguial word like that I would think of hot and humid not damp and cold.
That dampness would raise the density altitude, not good news for the pig.
Glider pilots need to understand the way the weather system works because there’s no engine to provide the energy required to stay aloft, so they steal it from the local weather systems.
The almost ‘nothing went wrong’ summary.
Sergei and Yulia visit the cemetery one last time on Sunday morning.
They have lunch at Zizzi’s.
Sergei makes a fuss there to be noticed as part of the “Russia did it’ hoax.
Sergei comes back from the toilets acting as though he was appearing affected by something as part of the hoax.
They both go to the Mill Pub and leave by the rear of the pub and wait in a car
for the Wiltshire Air Ambulance helicopter, with Charles Filmer the financial affairs manager in it, to arrive.
They both sign financial papers give Filmer control of their affairs and Filmer goes back to Minety in Nigel’s the Melksham taxi.
They both leave in the helicopter which goes over the cemetery for one last look and then they fly to a safe house within 20 minutes radius of Salisbury Hospital. They are off the begin a new life with new identities in another country. Why is another long story.
The MI56 operatives who are the imposter couple walk down Market Walk to the bench and put on the poisoned act after a witness or two arrive, other MI56 operatives arrive, doctor and first responders, to complete the completely staged Russia blaming hoax of two people being poisoned on the bench.
The two MI56 imposters are transported to Salisbury Hospiyal by ambulance, an hour later, to make sure that nobody other than MI56 and CBRN miltitary doctors and nurses are there when they arrive. They are supposedly treated at that time and they are isolated from Salisbury Hospital staff and everybody else, at all times, and are placed in the MI56 and CBRN military controlled Radnor ward.
The two Porton Down doctors who magically just happened to be on duty at Salisbury Hospital that night are part of the CBRN military people there to help with the hoax.
Only three senior medical staff only at Salisbury are part of the Hoax, how they became to be so we don’t know.
Neither Sergei, Yulia or the two MI56 imposters were poisoned with anything.
Nick’s job is to plant novichok as proof that ‘Russia did it’, late on Saturday night, on or in Sergie’s car but he spills on himself it and then spreads it all over Salisbury, at Sergeis house, Bourne Hill police station, in the Mill pub and possibly at Zizzis.
He is the only person poisoned at that day.
This spill and the spreading of the hoax evidence are the ‘wheels coming off’ part and causes major incompetence panic for MI56. The coverup begins and Nick’s life is over.
The Dawn and Charlie saga is still to come and the wheels really come off then.
Very interesting, Denise and mostly plausible. But I’ve always had one big problem with the idea that the Skripals or Skripal substitutes faked their symptoms. Very early in this saga, I read the Yulia had lost bladder and bowel control on the bench. Now I can ALMOST bring myself to accept that a substitute would urinate on herself to make a convincing case, but I can’t believe anyone would defecate to make it believable. A step too far.
Hi Robyn,
A relative of mine is a film and TV makeup artist. That person says that they could could easily create Yulia’s tracheotomy scar in about 15 minutes and that person also says that front and back soiling is sometimes done for film and TV and can easily be created in advance and released when required with simple devices. I wont go into all they told me but I believe them and it doesn’t sound that difficult.
Simple question: Why should they agree into a hoax if they can just disappear anyway?
Without all the problems as losing friends, contact to relatives, access to money in Russia ….
It has been said the Sergei ‘loved money’. He sold out originally for money why would he not participate in the ‘blame Russia hoax’ for that very same thing, money?
Anidea, Sergei only had two friends Ross and Mo and they weren’t that close, he was very lonely after his wife and son died, He didn’t have any access to money in Russia. Yulia did though and arrangements are underway to retrieve that now, I’m sure.
His only loss was phone contact with his very elderly mother. He could never travel to Russia anyway so he would never see her again in person.
The budgets MI56 have are enormous. They would have made him an offer he couldn’t not refuse.
couldn’t refuse
This makes sense until you get to Nick. If Novichok was to be applied, why not have an expert do it (they could wear whatever costume was required).
Secondly, why would you use someone who will visit all the locations related to the operation? It would be better to use an outsider.
Thirdly, if Nick was used, wouldn’t some precautions have been taken? Such as being ready with antidote/decontamination procedures, etc.
Fourthly, this scenario would mean Nick was unaware of what he was handling, as otherwise he wouod not have waited to go to hospital, nor would he have been surprised by his symptoms. But how does one provide instructions for handling and applying Novichok safely without acknowledging how dangerous the substance in question is?
Jason Ignorance, they told him to be careful and not spill any. all he had to do was put it on the car door handle and maybe a little inside the car. I think Nick was MI56. Thats why he went everywhere. He didnt know he was spreading it all around. He went to hospital because he pannicked.
I have interacted with the security services, and the ‘bumbling clowns’ explanation is highly improbable. Also, you don’t manage to address any of my points, you just wave them away.
Im sorry Jason, I’ve havent got precise answers for every occurrence in the Skripal saga, a lot of the pieces of the puzzle are slowing being revealed though and we will find out what Nick was up to soon I’m sure. I agree there are still a lot of unknowns with him.
Perhaps the Novichok was heavily diluted to make it non-lethal.
And now surprise …
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1056487/uk-terror-threat-isis-islamic-state-salisbury-attack-poisoning-novichok-skripal
“Terrorists are said to have been inspired by the Salisbury Novichok poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal at the hands of Russian agents, who used a perfume bottle of the deadly substance to carry out the attack. Senior ISIS members have been overheard plotting a similar attack on a Tube which could kill up to 100 people, the Mail on Sunday has reported. Before the attack in Salisbury in March, the Government’s Joint Terrorism Analysis Centre (JTAC) put the risk of a chemical weapons strike by terrorists at 25 per cent.”
Some group needing funding?
No worries, I’m a few of the recenly imported White Helmets will be able to help out with the planning and execution of it. Expect a stunning news item that either Iran or Syria was behind it as a revenge attack.
IS aka White Helmets already has and is using sarin which is much more appropriate for mass killings. What they have been inspired in Salisbury when this super-poison couldn’t kill anyone. It is another of the propaganda news, it stared to get too boring and too dumb even for the MSM standards.
The terrorists are allegedly planning to use chlorine gas. Easier to get than Novichok.
“I’d found it in a charity bin. I hadn’t heard of the brand and couldn’t read the name because I’m dyslexic, but she recognised it and said it was really good. The perfume was sealed, so I sliced the packet open and attached the bottle and dispenser”
Charlie in Sunday Mirror.
Sorry if posted before.
Amnesia-Meningitis-Dead Within Ten Years..Nice round synopsis!
Just Say No Drink-Drugs-Novihoax…It Don’t Work!!
Cant understand how Charlie keeps bouncing back from near death
when going gets tuff for Theresa?
I like the way he adopts the nonexistent phrase “charity bin” as if it’s a thing.
But let’s assume it was in the dumpster. Who put it there and why wait three months?
Patrick,
Dawn was targetted. Charlie was a regular visitor to those charity bins, so:
– watch Charlie, on days when he heads to Salisbury, have someone waiting near bins to put ‘package’ in bin (near the top and not hard to find).
– if Charlie looks like he is heading to Catherine St, insert package.
– Watch from a distance to make sure nobody else gets close.
– If Charlie does not visit, recover package and wait for another day.
So long as somebody is watching the bins, there is no risk of the package falling into the wrong hands. When Charlie arrives he will find it.
That part of the plan went smoothly, Charlie did find it but now nobody can explain how the package came to be in a bin that was emptied every week.
As for waiting 3 months: no, don’t think that happened at all. This was a deliberate act well after the events of 4 March.
Dawn was murdered. Charlie was just used to get the muder weapon into Dawn’s hands.
Speaking of hands, how did Dawn’s hands and face get injured?
Paul what would be the motive for murdering Dawn?
How can we know what the motive was? Somebody had a motive though and Dawn was the target because perfume would not be for Charlie.
The only thing we know for sure is that “They” did it. As Charlie said: “They killed my girlfriend!” Sounds like Charlie knew exactly what had happened.
Jack asked : “Paul what would be the motive for murdering Dawn?”
Well, there is perhaps a hint here :
[QUOTE]
” Both victims [= Charlie Rowley and Dawn Sturgess] had been in treatment after years of substance abuse, which compromises the liver’s function as the body’s detoxifier. That makes them more physically fragile than the three previous poisoning victims in Salisbury: the former spy, Sergei V. Skripal; his daughter, Yulia Skripal and a British police officer who took sick after responding to the poisoning in Salisbury.
If either of the two dies, it would present the British and Russian authorities with a new diplomatic scenario. (…)
The emergence of additional victims “will give it a renewed sense of urgency,” particularly if one of them succumbs, said James Nixey, head of the Russia and Eurasia program at Chatham House, a research group in London.
“The spines were weakening,” Mr. Nixey said of the British authorities, “and if there are new crimes or misdemeanors on the part of the Russian state, then it means that those spines can be restiffened.” If either victim dies, he added, “it becomes a murder investigation, and it’s involving a British national rather than a Russian national.” [/QUOTE]
Ellen Barry, “A Week After Novichok Exposure, 2 Britons’ Lives Hang in the Balance”, New York Times, 7 July 2018,
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/07/world/europe/uk-novichok-poison.html
The bin that was emptied weekly wasn’t a ‘charity bin’ – it was an ordinary rubbish bin supplied by the council. As far as I know, there were no such bins at that location. Charity bins are usually found on car parks along with recycling bins, certainly not at charity shops, and they tend to have swivelled ‘doors’ that don’t allow easy access to the contents. All this talk about finding the bottle in a charity bin is covernment disinformation, and I can’t imagine Charlie using that phrase – unless he’d been primed to. Let’s not forget that the bottle (original fake version) was allegedly found by the police on Charlie’s kitchen surface. The Panorama fake fake appeared more recently, without any explanation for the glaring discrepancy.
It wasn’t a bin for charitable donations Miheila, it was a flip top grey commercial waste bin at the charity shop – we have seen pictures of it and there is an ITV video on line where Charlie shows us the bins. The use of ‘charity bin’ is certainly confusing.
The bins are emptied according to the contract entered into between the collection company and the shop (usually weekly but does not have to be). Extra collections can be arranged by phone if the bins fill faster than usual.
I found the video:
https://www.itv.com/news/2018-07-26/novichok-charlie-rowley-amesbury-nerve-agent-exclusive/
Yes, Paul, I know he was supposed to have found it in a standard commercial bin. I’ve seen the photos of the Catherine Street bins several times. My whole point was to demolish the ‘charity bin’ nonsense.
It seems a very unlikely scenario for Charlie to have found a box containing a bottle of perfume in those bins. I think he knows how he got his hands on it, but is reluctant to say so, and is just giving a cover story concocted by the police. Let’s not forget that he said that ‘they’ had killed Dawn. If he’d simply found it in a bin, then he’d more likely blame himself. He associates her death, but not necessarily the bottle, with ‘them’. He knows more than he’s prepared to say, and is probably very afraid.
@ Patrick
“Charity bin” is a thing in the UK – almost everything upmarket supermarket has one, it’s used for food donations to food banks (oh, and they are not Rothschild banks, in case you were wondering).
Cascadian – I was unaware of this type of charity bin, but I have seen bins for pet food in supermarkets. I know of large metal charity bins in supermarket car parks for shoes, clothes and books. They have swivel cylindrical doors so that things can be put in but not taken out. Charlie couldn’t have rummaged in one of those, but nor could I imagine him rummaging about in the type found in up-market supermarkets.
@cascadian thank you, but if you look at my previous comments you can see I, unlike anybody else on here, went to Mark Urban’s talk in Salisbury, thus passing Turing test as a real person.
I am from the UK and am fully aware of donation points for food banks in supermarkets. They are not called bins.
There’s a local hospice shop that receives an unending supply of donations, far more than they have space to display and sell.
The bin at the back of the shop’s storage area is in the car park that serves the parade of shops, and there’s astonishingly good stuff to be found in that dumpster bin, if you can be there when it’s full and it hasn’t been raining. I once found the most wonderful travelling chess set which, when I got it home and checked, had all the original pieces. Although I gave it to a keen chess player, who was delighted with it, another set with a case in slightly better condition made around £60 on ebay.
I thought the box looked like a half set of apostle spoons, or a set of fish knives or even coffee spoons, but I was mistaken.
So Charlie have attached the dispenser. If B&P left it there why they would detach the dispenser and risking to poison themselves and then packing it and leaving it at a charity bin? Why not just throw it just after using it?
Interesting enough Borishov and Petrov were not charged for the death of Dawn Sturgess and this investigation is still open.
It is a three part bottle now.
So maybe it was not the perfume bottle after all …
I’m inclined to agree, Anidea. I never suspected the perfume bottle had any bearing on Dawn’s death. It’s a red herring leading us on wild goose chases – intentionally.
Patrick Mahoney
This is a reference to the cellophane packaging as he mentions “slice.”
You wouldn’t need to slice the packaging open once the cellophane was taken off it. You just open the box from the lid.
Here’s some questions though:
Did Charlie find it or nick it?
If he nicked it – then from whom and where did he nick it?
If he nicked it off a Brit – then that would be interesting to say the least.
If he is telling the truth there must be two perfume( poison ) bottles in play.
The official narrative is that the alleged assassins sprayed the door and then bunged the bottle complete with residue into a skip in a casual manner.
If Charlie isn’t lying again – how did this perfume package ( complete with wrapping to slice ) become re-cellophaned and full.?
The PTB are saying there was only one bottle/package for both deeds.
That is their only connection between the Skripals- DSB and Charlie and Dawn.
Notably today – we witnessed the two types of victims – one type to be looked after at all costs and two people who’s lives and living conditions are dispensable.
Of course I’m sure our patriotic MPs will race to Charlie’s rescue as he has suffered from Russian nastiness – you know those nasty Russians they rattle on about in Parliament.
Trouble is- I don’t hear the sirens from that quarter re:Charlie.
Wrong type of victim.
Disgraceful and callous.
Some very interesting points @ken ken
Lets not go down road of Minion or Spaceman dropping Police Radio
in Dawns place of residence during search.
By saying this we all may just admit Novihoax really happened-End Story!
Could We Please Have A True Explanation Regarding Police Radio Removed
From Property As Evidence Or Dropped By Minion-Spaceman.
No pictures of Dawn-Charlie as a loving item-couple. Together For Ever?
Strange how Charlie surfaced today when Theresa sinking fast.
New Daily Mail version
Perfume bottle that killed Dawn Sturgess “was found in a park”
Which is highly likely but was decisively denied by Charles Rowley.
Why?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6476069/Skripal-detectives-uncover-evidence-links-Kremlin-toTWO-killings-British-soil.html
Also new
“The perfume was laced with the poison.”
This ever-changing fairy tale is becoming tedious. Far safer to disbelieve every version spouted by the inept and corrupt mass media.
Now we appear to be back in QEG. Yawn… (The binary nerve agent having been mixed by the ruthless Russian assassins in their secret makeshift lab in the QEG public toilets, presumably).
Now the perfume is laced with the poison…
How ridiculous. Charlie earlier claimed that it smelt of ammonia, not perfume – so at that time there’s no way that it could have been perfume laced with poison. I can’t imagine that any sane woman would use perfume that smelt of ammonia!
Miheila, another small correction… Charlie did not say that it smelt of ammonia, Charlie’s brother said that Charlie had said that. In his interview, Charlie said it had “very little odour” – so it can’t have been novihoax becuase that is said to have an unpleasant smell.
Which means a mix…..implausable.
Are We back at Public Toilet contamination now before
Tap Incident?
On Charlie’s first Hospital release he straight out on Alcohol
[bender] pocket full of cash with no visible income funding it?
How does this work?
This article teaches me only one thing :
It´s dangerous to approach Bill Browder.
Browder seems to have a problem with everybody.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/british-critic-vladimir-putin-fears-13144253
“US-born Mr Browder, who is a British citizen, spoke to us from a secret address. We chose not to name the British firm involved in the spying, which refused to comment when approached.
It is thought the firm compiled legally gathered intelligence dossiers on him and tried to track him down.
Mr Browder said: “They were employed to produce intelligence on my whereabouts, my activities, my background. What you have is British operatives working with the Russian government indirectly to cause me harm.
“It was hundreds of thousands paid, and professionals tracking me. I don’t think former British intelligence officers should work for foreign adversaries chasing down citizens.”
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-06-29/hsbc-in-talks-to-pay-russian-claim-in-browder-linked-case
“HSBC Holdings Plc’s Russian unit is in talks with local authorities to pay 1.4 billion rubles ($22 million) in obligations related to the politically-charged case of investor William Browder.
…
Last year, a different Russian court ordered HSBC to pay the 1.4 billion rubles. At the time, the bank said it was disappointed in the ruling and would consider an appeal. An admission of guilt by HSBC could be a boost for Russian authorities’ efforts to legitimize their version of events as they pursue further charges against Browder.
“We believe we acted at all times in accordance with the law and applicable banking regulation.” HSBC said in a statement. “The matter is on-going and we make no further comment.”
Browder declined to comment.”
Just reminding everyone that Browder is a member of the Integrity Initiative’s UK ‘cluster’ – which should tell us more than enough about him to know that he cannot be trusted. He’s a player in the disinformation game.
Maybe it is a whole scheme by him against both countries…..
Some handy Street Lights outside 47 CMR. Just watching episode of
Taggart “Gritty Scottish Police Drama” Police dressed as Council Workers
put CCTV in street light protecting a safe house. Monitors-Recording equipment
within property.
Just an idea when looked at picture of SUV-Van outside 47.
Milheila congratulations! You have just solved the Wiltshire Air Ambulance, Distillery Farm Minety mystery.
Sergei and Yulia were about to disappear forever. MI56 were arranging this
An easy way to trace people who disappear is via any future financial transactions they may make.
What was needed was someone who was very experienced in taking charge of all the personal and financial affairs of people who were not going to be in the UK any longer.
Someone who knew about trusts, holding companies, paying bills, tax, winding up affairs and solving problems for people who are not located in the country.
Who do we know that is an expert in that? Why Charles Filmer, who just happens to live at Distillery Farm Minety, where the Wiltshire Air Ambulance just happened to land, just an hour before the Skripals disappeared
Charles Filmer’s wife Antonia has a MI5 connection.
It’s likely that Filmer flew in the Wiltshire Air Ambulance, down to Sainsbury’s carpark Salisbury, to get the Skripals to sign ‘Powers of Attorney’ allowing Filmer to act on their behalf to look after all their affairs in both UK and Russia after they went into hiding.
Charles Filmer’s company provides what is known as ‘family office services’. Forbes defines family office services as:
– A family office would be able to provide tax compliance work, access to private banking and private trust services, document management and record keeping services, expense management, bill paying, bookkeeping services, family member financial education, family support services, and family governance locally and overseas. –
Finally we now know what the Air Ambulance, with its trip to Minety, was up to on March the 4th.
More points:
Charles Filmer was possibly the passenger in Nigel’s Melksham taxi, sitting next to the helicopter in Sainsburt’s car park, waiting to be transported back to Minety after obtaining the signature/s.
The helicopter possibly took Sergei and Yulia to a safe house somewhere within 20 minutes radius of Salisbury Hospital, while its transponder was turned off, after the signing.
Sergei was possibly convinced of Filmer’s trustworthiness because of his other famous clients, the Goldsmiths and the Reuben Brothers.
Congratulations, Denise! I’d not taken into account Charles Filmer’s line of business, but yes, it all fits. It’s certainly possible that Filmer himself was on the helicopter (or would have been, if things had gone according to plan) and that he had been picked up rather than an MI5/6 officer as I suggested. (But then, for all we know, he could be one of their ‘assets’ anyway).
However, all the evidence suggests that something went wrong; things didn’t go according to the MI5/6 plan. The helicopter was still needed to complete the deception, but at least one Skripal had gone AWOL at 3.25pm.
You’re assuming that the MI5/6 plan succeeded. I’m not, and because of that I doubt that Filmer would have been needed on the helicopter. If the Skripals had both already disappeared they’d be unable to sign anything. But supposing only one had disappeared…
It’s possible that the plan had been for the helicopter to take the Skripals to safe house other than Distillery Farm. But equally, Distillery Farm could have been the intended destination, in which case Filmer would have flown back with them. If he was in the taxi, it would account for the helicopter’s return to Devizes – due to the change of plan. To assume that Skripals were still in Salisbury at the time of the helicopter’s arrival at 4.53pm is most unlikely considering the evidence that we have, however, a little less unlikely would be the possibility that they had been separated at the Mill. If true, one would have been used as a hostage against the other.
I’ll need to think a lot more about all this.
Thank you Miheila.
At 4.19 pm when the helicopter took off from Minety, they may not have known that the plan had gone wrong then. So Filmer would be on board ready to complete the original plan.
I’m still going with Lychett Manor Farm in Winbourne Rd Lytchett Matravers opposite the Dorset Pony club as the safe house they were taken too on Sunday.
There are five visable cameras on the front of the house alone, way too many for burglar security and a Blogmirer? visited it and said there were two or three black SUVs parked outside. There are black SUVs in Google Maps parked there too.
The Pony Club across the road would be good cover for helicopters of members coming and going regularly.
And two helicopters possibly called there on the Monday 5th when no Polo match was scheduled? One was the GZ100 the RAF VIP fleet helicopter.
I agree one or two Skripals, we dont know but I’m far more sure now that the two on the bench were not the Skripals.
I’ll go along with all you said, Denise. It is possible that the helicopter crew had been kept in the dark about the unforeseen events at the Mill, but we can’t ignore the fact that it was in no hurry to reach Salisbury. It was clearly awaiting further instructions whilst en route. It had to land at a particular time – say 4.55pm.
I would have expected the original plan was for it to land briefly at Distillery Farm at around 3.55-4pm, pick up Charles Filmer, and fly direct and at usual speed to Salisbury, landing at around 4.15-20 – a time more consistent with any faked airlifting of the poisoned couple. Instead, the landing at SCP was delayed until 4.53, by which time the police would have been on their way to 47 CMR. I wonder whether the delay in transporting the bench couple by land ambulance to SDH had any bearing on the delayed arrival of the helicopter. Was one dependent on the other?
As for the odd subsequent helicopter flights, RAF Northolt, the Polo Club, Ernie Drax, Porton Down, etc. – yes, I feel there’s probably a connection with events on 4th March.
Why do spies always have black cars? Isn’t it a bit obvious?
Let’s see whose cooperation your theory would take
– Yulia who is definitively Yulia and who insists that she was in Salisbury hospital.
– All the witnesses seeing Sergej and Yulia Skripal on the bench, who saw their images in the media afterwards (the snap fitness couple was never identified and never shown again. They look very different from the Skripals, their clothes are different “Yulia had a hood over her face” according to witnesses.)
– Salisbury and Metropolitain police who sure know how to take finger prints and will have compared them to Yulia’ s visa and Sergei’s files.
– Victoria Skripal who is sure that she has been talking to Yulia on the phone.
– Yulia’s grandmother who talked to Yulia and seems to have recognised her.
and what for? To protect two very dispensible human beings (from a secret service point of view) and sacrifice two highly skilled actors?
Because if the “replacement couple” was not poisoned with some acetylcholine inhibitor stuff you also need full cooperation of the hospital staff.
Apart from that – can you think of anybody who would volunteer as “replacement couple”?
Seriously?
That is nothing to the number of people who lied to keep 9/11 ‘hidden’ – there is even BBC video of WTC7 standing behind a reported saying it has collapsed… and until the MSM gets onto it nobody will care.
There is so much evidence that Salisbury was a total hoax, I don’t know why anybody would try to argue otherwise. You will never argue away all the evidence that says it was the CCTV couple on the bench – the truth can be ignored (WTC7) but it will not go away.
I did not notice anybody keeping quiet about their suspicions on 9/11 or witnesses not saying what they knew. There is some very scientific Swiss paper claiming that there must have been pre-knowledge by analysing the stock market flows of the time
The result is that
https://blogs.chapman.edu/wilkinson/2016/10/11/what-arent-they-telling-us/
“The most prevalent conspiracy theory in the United States is that the government is concealing information about the 9/11 attacks with slightly over half of Americans holding that belief. ”
If no one speaks up in Britain or Russia in somebody else being poisoned but not Yulia or Sergey Skripal it simply means it was them who got poisoned.
Not to mention that there is hardly any motive to poison other people and pretend it is them.
The 9/11 witnesses who have come forward are all anecdotal witnesses after the fact. What really happened and who did it, is as much guarded in secreacy today as it ever was.
The whole point of the hoax is that it was not the Skripals that were poisoned. If no one speaks up, it is not proof of who was poisoned, it is proof of the cover up.
What can you say about people’s motives? People do all sorts of stupid things for reasons we will never understand. Furthermore, you are assuming that the people on the bench knew they would be poisoned. I don’t think they did know that – they were probably told that something else was going to happen, which is why they looked relaxed in the CCTV only minutes before they were attacked.
Anidea. Paul is right, and you’d do well to bear in mind his words.
All the points you made have already been discussed at some length on these pages, but I’ll briefly address them again, if only for the sake of newcomers (no pun intended!) to this blog.
Yulia who is definitively Yulia and who insists that she was in Salisbury hospital.
Well, she would wouldn’t she? Wouldn’t you go along with at least the minimal demands of your captors if you cared for your father/life/returning home, etc.?
All the witnesses seeing Sergej and Yulia Skripal on the bench, who saw their images in the media afterwards (the snap fitness couple was never identified and never shown again. They look very different from the Skripals, their clothes are different “Yulia had a hood over her face” according to witnesses.)
On the balance of probabilities, the witness statements indicate that the Skripals were not the couple on the bench. This has been discussed ad nauseum, as I’m sure you know. And surely you must also know that only one (untraceable) witness mentioned the hood. In addition, when many anomalies surrounding the case are taken into account (such as withholding of CCTV images, changed timelines, etc.) everything relentlessly points to the same conclusion – the Skripals were not poisoned and were not on the bench. Nothing else adequately explains these anomalies.
Salisbury and Metropolitain police who sure know how to take finger prints and will have compared them to Yulia’ s visa and Sergei’s files.
Not relevant. There would be no operational reason to take their fingerprints. Do you honestly believe that the police – who are actively concealing the truth and sworn to secrecy – would disobey the orders of their superiors, and that, in turn, those superiors would disobey the government or ‘security services’?
Victoria Skripal who is sure that she has been talking to Yulia on the phone.
Of course she has.
Yulia’s grandmother who talked to Yulia and seems to have recognised her.
Yes, ‘seems…’ The Panorama cover-up charade can hardly be treated as authoritative – quite the opposite.
and what for? To protect two very dispensible human beings (from a secret service point of view) and sacrifice two highly skilled actors?
Hardly dispensible! They were/are extremely valuable for use as bargaining pieces in a ruthless geopolitical game.
Because if the “replacement couple” was not poisoned with some acetylcholine inhibitor stuff you also need full cooperation of the hospital staff.
If acetylcholine inhibitors were used, then nerve agents were used. There is no evidence for this, apart from what a few hospital staff have said – while Dr Davies’ letter of 14th March said, “May I clarify that no patients have experienced symptoms of nerve-agent poisoning in Salisbury”. The boys survived unharmed, so did the ducks, first responders and Uncle Tom Cobley. Very few hospital staff, if any, would have had access to the patients. External ‘experts’ would have dealt with them. Apparently, they were isolated under 24-hour police guard. Their Panorama stories cannot be relied upon, for many reasons – not least because of the propagandist, deceptive nature of the programme itself.
Apart from that – can you think of anybody who would volunteer as “replacement couple”?
Of course not – because nobody did. But a vulnerable couple were persuaded to be at a certain place at a certain time – maybe to exchange a bag. How were they to know that they’d become victims of ‘Russian assassins’? Do you honestly think that MI5/6 would have told them the full story? They never do – and they have a long shameful history of making scapegoats of vulnerable people who are down on their luck. These well-tried dirty little operational tricks have gone on for decades, and allow for plausible denial should things go wrong.
They were probably told they were taking part in a “candid camera” spoof.
I do wonder if the actors on the bench were Charlie and Dawn. This would explain their real poisoning later if they started to become too talkative.
So do I, Blunderbuss. I’ve wondered that for a long time, and keep on going back to it. Your explanation makes sense too. It’s got me wondering even more now. To rule this out, we need to identify anything that makes it unlikely or impossible. Dawn and Charlie are certainly the kind of people that MI5/6 would use as scapegoats.
ICYMI – Sutyagin and the Integrity Initiative :
https://sputniknews.com/europe/201811241070085425-russia-uk-integrity-project-sutyagin/
As well as his shady ‘clustering’ credentials, he also works as a researcher for the dubious Royal United Services Institute.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_United_Services_Institute
He was quite unruffled over the alleged Skripal poisoning, and had no fears for his own security. I wonder why 😉
Yes, this is probably the background – economic war against Russia and putting pressure on oligarchs to make them turn against Putin.
See Christopher Steele “trying to turn Deripaska”.
This from Malta
https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/russians-malta-oligarchs-rich-citizenship-1.4483144
He was quoted as saying that the attack was not in Putin’s interest.
Apologies if you have already seen this:
https://spectator.org/big-dots-do-they-connect/
It’s all pretty obvious really, and I’ve been saying it for a long time:
Quote (George Copley, editor of ‘Defense & Foreign Affairs’): The people who wished to see Skripal become quiet were people in Washington, the Democratic National Committee, the Clinton campaign, and people around Christopher Steele himself. I’m not saying necessarily that MI6 or the British government had a witting hand in it, but there are too many people who had an axe to grind to make sure that Skripal did not —”
He was cut off at that point, but I’d agree with the article that the missing word would have been ‘talk’. Everything still suggests that it was a US intel. faction who played a disappearing trick at around 3.25pm on 4th March.
There’s a quote from Morozov too:
He also claimed Mr Skripal was keeping “dangerous” company, which is why he later chose to distance himself.
“Every month [he was] going to the embassy to meet military intelligence officers”, Mr Morozov told Channel 4 News.
“For me being political refugee it is either certain danger or, frankly speaking, I thought that this concept is not very good for me. It can be bring some questions from British officials.”
I’ve no reason to doubt this, but Sergei would not have been physically visiting the embassy, (due to MI5’s permanent surveillance there), but rather he’d be meeting with GRU people in London parks or cafés. The embassy could also truthfully say they were not aware of any meetings there.
There is this other spook theory that suggests people would come out to suggest that Western Secret services had a reason to get rid of Skripal, simply because it was such an embarrassement that “their” double spy was not safe in Britain.
This was highly damaging to the spy business 1) there would be no more exchange of spies as 2) they could not feel safe after being exchanged.
Who would take such risks?
“Every month [he was] going to the embassy to meet military intelligence officers”
Is there an explicit statement, backed up by evidence, that it was the Russian embassy?
What about the American embassy???
If he was covertly dealing with any embassy, as an ex-spy trained in counter-surveillance techniques, he wouldn’t be foolish enough to physically visit the premises.
I agree. It also does not rhyme with the information that Skripal kept away from the Russian community.
Morozov also claimed that he met Skripal in the Russian shop near Waterloo, and that Skripal would go there once a month.
This here is Valery Morozov
http://www.playthegame.org/news/news-articles/2010/sochi-contractor-speaks-out-on-widespread-corruption/
Am I right thinking he is one the crowd surrounding Christopher Steele?
This here is Morozov, too.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2245316/How-come-alive-British-detectives-chilling-question-Russian-whistleblower-heightens-fears-fellow-dissident-murdered.html
Doesn’t his name make you feel just a little bit chilly ?
The last line in this story is so true “If only somewhere had a free press”.
Logic.
My idea is to give the BBC enough rope to hang itself. I’ll follow their logic,
Novichok deteriorates [relatively] rapidly in damp conditions [no evidence provided, of course]
Fine, but that means those who supposedly sprayed, smeared, spat the Novichok on the door handle had to wear protective gear to do so. I’ll direct them to Andrei Zheleznyakov, and his 1987 ordeal @ https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/novichok-effects-nerve-agent-russian-spy-attack-salisbury-sergei-skripal-if-survive-live-body-a8253976.html
“I don’t have high hopes, but keep rattling the cage. Don”t want TPTB to get the feeling they’re getting away with it.” – I run with wolves
Breaking news:
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/novichok-attack-survivor-charlie-rowley-13703922
But I think this is old news:
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/russian-hitmen-linked-two-suspected-13708209
Here is a new bit from Blunderbuss’ Breaking News story from The Mirror
They have added this to support their door handle rubbish.
Charlie: “I was okay after touching the bottle the first time because I washed my hands, but when I went back to the flat I think I got infected again from the tap.”
“Meanwhile, Charlie suffered further trauma when his home was burgled”.
I assume that was MI6.
@ Blunderbuss
I second your assumption. One of the Alphabet agencies, for sure.
If Charlie is in such a bad way, things don’t look good for the Skripals and the police officer.
I think its Charlie’s years of alcohol-drug abuse that’s his
issue not Novihoax!
Burst Out Laughing regarding “The Tap”….?
True, things don’t look good for the Skripals, but it’s extremely unlikely that their problems were ever caused by chemicals.
Well, it is possible (at a stretch) to regard an organism as a complex chemical agent, and home sapiens (I hesitate to use the word human in connection with our security services) is an organism. So you could say that the Skripals problems were caused by chemicals, very complex collections of chemicals, but chemicals nonetheless.
That’s one of those long articles by a general reporter, with lots of small paragraphs conveying an enormous amount of information that the reporter couldn’t have compiled himself. Plus a “how do I switch it off?” audio interview that kicks in a while after you’ve clicked on.
The Guardian runs something similar, but attribution is to the Press Association (via the Mirror). Their general reporter for Rowley stories is usually Steven Morris.
Thankfully there’s a lot of cyncism out there. From the comments:
This man is a long time drug addict and alcoholic -to be frank their health doesn’t tend to be good.
The payment for this interview is more likely to kill him than the Novichok if he spends it how you’d expect an addict to…
I don’t dispute he is generally a victim, but i do not trust this government in the slightest. And if it was the Russian’s, we should also blame the past government that allowed Sergei Skripal to live in this country in a trade deal for Russian secret information. It would be like an MI6 agent being paid a lot of money for years then going over to Russia and trading everything he knows, it’s wrong. We should not be making an enemy of Russia and there could be mutual respect if our leaders tried to make that happen
Strange how novickok farce is dragged up whenever the Tories are imploding.
Fentanyl is very dangerous, you’re lucky to be alive.
Also I see that the photo of the perfume bottle is the original fake version rather than the more recent Panorama fake fake version.
Timing. It’s the timing that always gets to me. These revelations always seem to emerge when the government is in trouble and a distraction from giving attention to them is required.
Oh my God, Charlie looks terrible.
Obviously, he gets no support from the state, neither psychologically nor financially. He is simply sentenced to die. I feel sorry for him.
Quote : „But Charlie feels he has received less attention from the authorities than the others. He said: “I’ve been left to get on with it as best as I can with no support. The system is flawed. I need counselling. If the authorities offered me help I would take it. I feel let down.”
Charlie once again confirms that the perfume was sealed and that he had to open it with a knife.
In the video he says „I had to cut it with a knife“ and „attached the pieces onto the bottle“.
Since Charlie even in his present state of mind stands to the sealed packet, no logical-minded person will believe that it is the perfume bottle that R & A supposedly used.
That’s a new statement :
“I was okay after touching the bottle the first time because I washed my hands, but when I went back to the flat I think I got infected again from the tap.“
Now, when Charlie admits that he came in contact with the Novichok again later, the hour-long delay of the effect is off the table.
The article confirms that Charlie has moved into the apartment shortly before :
„He got his own flat in nearby Amesbury shortly before the tragedy.“
And Charlie says in the video :
„It was a new adress, a new house. The emergency services didn´t have the adress on records. So they couldn´t find us. It took ages for them to turn up and when they did she wasn´t breathing.“
I still do not understand why Charlie has gotten this two bedroom flat for sole use from the community. That’s not common.
Charlie says : “I’m one of only a handful in the world to have survived Novichok, so it’s untrod territory. I feel like a guinea pig.“
Somehow I have the same feeling – he is a guinea pig.
Sam Hobson looked really bad too in Panorama, but that looked more like something to do with drugs. When he was first interviewed In July, he looked physically and mentally healthy but in Panorama you could barely recognise him. I was wondering before what someone like him was doing hanging around with a couple of middle aged recovering addicts, but it seems now that Charlie and Dawn helped him to stay clean. Now there’s no one to help him.
I found this pic while looking for black SUVs for Eleanor. lol
Black SUV and Thrifty removal van at Sergei’s on the 27th of September.
Would someone mind checking the number plates on them. Who owns the SUV and where is the Thrifty Van from?
What were they up to?
https://www.alamy.com/salisbury-uk-27th-sep-2018-salisbury-united-kingdom-september-27-2018-the-house-where-former-gru-officer-sergei-skripal-and-his-daughter-yulia-used-to-live-sergei-skripal-and-his-daughter-yulia-were-poisoned-in-salisbury-the-united-kingdom-in-march-2018-ilya-dmitryachevtass-credit-itar-tass-news-agencyalamy-live-news-image220639569.html
Also can anyone make out what you see in front window of the SUV?
@ Denise,
I isolated that part of the SUV @ https://i.imgur.com/1JPtb3Z.jpg
Looks like a road map [middle dashboard] and a piece of clothing on a box on the passenger side. I zoomed in to about 380% of the picture, then it gets too pixalated to see what’s what.
Thank you Daniel, that’s very helpful.
@ Denise,
You’re welcome.
Tip for those who might not know: if you have a mouse-wheel, press Ctrl/Cmd and scroll mouse-wheel to zoom in and out on pictures/page.
EO68BWZ
Black Hyundai 1800 Diesel
Registered 3 September 2018
Thank you Blunderbuss. So its a three week old black SUV outside Sergei’s. Any other info most welcome.
HJ65DKD
White Ford Transit Diesel
Registered 18 September 2015
The Transit is a Thrifty rent-a-car.
That´s odd ! They use a Thrifty to remove items of a house so contaminated, that you can not live in it any more…
Not so odd: if the Transit was first registered on 18 September this year, then it and probably it and the Hyundai are both involved in the clean up of 47CMR:
https://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/news/16695718.decontamination-work-starts-at-skripal-house/
eleanor, first : the Transit was registered 2015 !
Second : You know how many vehicles were buried at the landfill site, including the Ashley Wood vehicles.
That makes me wonder that there are companies left who rent their vehicles for work on possibly still contaminated sites.
But maybe Thrifty rent-a-car knows that there is no danger and never was.
Sorry, Liane and all, in scrolling up and down, I didn’t realise that both the vehicles were registered in September, albeit different years:
Blunderbuss wrote, and then separately added:
EO68BWZ
Black Hyundai 1800 Diesel
Registered 3 September 2018
HJ65DKD
White Ford Transit Diesel
Registered 18 September 2015
The linked SJ article says that the decontamination was undertaken by specialist military crews, who ‘may be supported by specialist contractors’. The decontamination started days after the identities of PnB were made public.
The Tass image found by Denise was uploaded on 27 September, by which time maybe the decontamination work was coming to an end (I’m bemused by the number of black bin liners lurking outside the site area, shown in the SJ gallery).
I imagine, but don’t know, that the vehicles were being used by the security-vetted specialist contractors who did the final cleaning up, and clearing out, of 47CMR. It’s a pity we can’t see what, if any protective clothing they wore, even though the property would have been deemed decontaminated by the time they attended.
The other residents of that part of CMR have had a summer like no other.
Lol, Denise, I believed you when you said it was a Range Rover and now I think you meant the black vehicle was an SUV!
Nonetheless, I can see your efforts are unfolding new areas of scrutiny, so thank you.
It’s just occurred to me to wonder whether the detail that the Skripals were at home when B and P came calling has been introduced to counter suggestions that B and P either had a rendezvous with one or both of the Skripals, or were delivering to or collecting something from an agreed location in a nearby park. This ref. from ‘security chiefs’ in July has the Skripals out when B and P arrive.https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6706913/salisbury-rain-saved-poisoned-sergei-skripals-life/
We haven’t been given any indication as to why it is now believed they were at home.
They had to be at home to make the door handle theory work.
I always understood the only image released of the couple with the red bag was a still photograph of the CCTV footage – but here’s video of the moving CCTV footage: https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/uk-news/salisbury-russian-spy-skripal-zizzi-14373551
Probably old hat to blogmire regulars, but it’s the first time I’ve seen it. The article is dated 06 March, but has lots of detail, analysis, and images.
Yes, it is interesting. It explains how this first image of “the Skripals” not looking like the real Skripals came into the media.
The CCTV was given (sold) to the media via the manager of snap fitness, not via the police.
It also shows why the image quality is so poor: it’s a video of a video.
and it appears that the actual video is of very good quality. I’ll tell you something else. That’s Dawn Sturgess.
I see, thanks.
Are there two couples with red bags or is it the same video twice?
This is how it was released by The Press Association at 9:08am, on 6 March:
https://twitter.com/pa/status/970949188417740801
The red bag really stands out in a very obvious ‘man wearing a red carnation’ type of way.
The Three Pictures-Photos of Bench Area. Could they have been taken
by Officer on duty at time protecting cordon…Just random?
Showing Wife-Girlfriend what he doing Sunday 04-03 Cold-Fed-up Board
Off Duty Soon…Want Sunday Dinner Yummy!
This Officer has a Conscience and realises what photo evidence he has
after BBC Panorama Propaganda-Rubbish-Misinformation.
You Cant Blame Troops On Ground Following Orders-Doing Job At Time.
“You Cant Blame Troops On Ground Following Orders-Doing Job At Time.”
I see your point, Mark, and, being ex-military myself, I am only too well aware of how difficult it is for a trained military person to disobey the orders of a superior officer (one reason being the oath one takes on being recruited into the military).
But, Principle IV (Nuremberg Trials) states:
“The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him.”.
So, IMHO (not that it’s worth much because I’m not so sure that I would have broke ranks in similar circumstances), at least some squaddy should break ranks or else we will never be able to break free from the current sea of lies and deceit.
To put it another way:
What sort of future would any whistle blower in the police or the armed forces have?
None, is the answer, Eleanor.
But that is not the point, is it?
We can all be good, law abiding, citizens, regardless of whether the laws are just, correct, and appropriate to the situation. And all that those in the military do is obey the law, military law, they are not bound by civil laws unless those in command of the military relinquishes their right to ignore it – it’s why military personnel are not normally accused of or prosecuted for murder, because that is the civil crime that they commit.
But it’s not about the law, whichever it is, is it? It’s about morals, the moral duty to stand for what is right, in the moral sense of things, not in the sense of the law.
‘their right to ignore them’ is what I mean
In a purely pragmatic sense, C’Ian, it is the point.
Conscience is one thing, but future employability following a change of career is a consideration, particularly if you’re young(ish) and may have dependents to support.
As you and Mark have pointed out, those who have been trained to be disciplined and obedient may find breaking the mould even harder than it might be for us sheeple-types. It may be a matter of temperament as much as training, as those who recognise that they tend to buck against authority either won’t apply or won’t succeed in getting to wear the uniform.
BTW I don’t think those outside the military/services believe that military law takes precedence over criminal law, although it may have parity with civil law (if they give it any thought at all).
From my point of view, any instance of someone putting their head among the parapet will be by a civilian who cares and dares enough to do so.
“or won’t succeed in getting to wear the uniform.”
True. But I have met, in the military, people who did put their heads above the parapet – it didn’t do them any good, as you say.
But I must insist, if we all behave as individuals with concern only for our own well being, then compliance with whatever is foisted upon us is the only option, and the inevitable result of that is a world such as has been envisaged in George Orwell’s 1984.
And military law does transcend civil law, even though the civvies don’t think so. When civil disobedience occurs TPTB WILL mandate that the military restore order, and there will be blood, it nearly happened back in ’77.
Throwing the towel in now – not because I’ve lost but because I don’t disagree except for minor off-topic quibbles!
Exactly, Cascadian:
But it’s not about the law, whichever it is, is it? It’s about morals, the moral duty to stand for what is right, in the moral sense of things, not in the sense of the law.
It’s a shame that so many people can’t (or don’t want to) recognise the supreme importance of those words. I was once a whistleblower. Suffered the long-term consequences too, but I don’t regret it at all, and would do the same again.
You don’t have to whistle blow.
What you can do without repercussions is refuse to lie for someone who is trying to cover his back.
Which most people seem to have done.
I did South Atlantic 82 and lost My Stripes for doing correct
honest duty under a Law but that Law did not help.
Its all very selective how and when certain Laws work for or
against you…….
240 witnesses. You would have thought one of two of them would have come forward by now and said the story we are being told doesn’t match what I saw that day.
I guess though there is no one to tell that too. The newspapers aren’t interested due to fear or corruption. I wonder what Rebecca would say, if you told her you were sure it wasn’t the Skripals on the bench that day? Or that you saw the two people on the bench get up and walk to a black Range Rover at 4.20 pm?
And what if you said those things to the police, what would they have to say to you?
“Police have identified more than 240 witnesses and are examining more than 200 pieces of evidence as they investigate the attempted murder of Mr Skripal, 66, and his 33-year-old daughter.”
https://news.sky.com/story/salisbury-spy-poisoning-police-identify-240-witnesses-and-examine-200-pieces-of-evidence-11284847
You do consider the possibility that your theory may be wrong, don’t you?
I do. I keep an open mind Anidea. For me it’s the best fit at the moment but I waiver back and forth. I just find too many holes in all the official stories we have been fed, to accept them.
e.g. why has Nick been un-heroed all of a sudden?
Because they cannot get their story straight. This story is full of people who don’t say what they are supposed to say.
Ross Cassidy saying Skripals were at home Sunday morning.
The military doctor treating Yulia saying she could detect no trace of nerve agent on her skin.
Yulia saying she wants to return to Russia.
Charles Rowley saying that the perfume was sealed.
Bailey saying he was in Skripal’s house at midnight and returned home after contaminating the police station.
I assume the helicopter was used for surveillance.
So did it arrive over Salisbury after the attack on Skripals or did it circle the area before?
The helicopter, while on the ground at Distillery Farm, received the emergency call at 4.19pm, and after a leisurely flight eventually landed in the car park at 5.03 pm. It didn’t circle the area beforehand, and there’s nothing to suggest that its role involved surveillance. Also, its purpose was clearly unconnected with the poisoned people at the bench.
Just a small correction Miheila: it landed in the car park at 4:53pm. We can track it to Tilshead at 4:46 but then the transponder was switched off and the last 7 minutes of the flight was untracked. It did not have time to land anywhere else enroute or circle Salisbury before it landed.
It was on the ground until 5:11pm – so only about 18 minutes. The transponder was switched on at 5:14pm and then off again at 5:17pm.
Is there any legitimate reason for switching off the transponder?
Can you think of one?
I’m wondering about these transponder logs – from recollection (when I was looking for reasons not to get one – for a glider), these transponders are the new mode C type and cannot, unless you pull the fuse, be switched off. Also, the logs are obtained (if I’m reading this correctly) from secondary radar returns. Now, again from memory, secondary radar rotates at about 3 revs (18 seconds per rotation) and it is possible, but flying below the beam to become invisible, hence not painted, hence no transponder return.
So, is it possible that the helicopter was just flying below the secondary radar beam??
We have 2 different flight trackers and they are returning different data sets but the flight routing of the AA matches on both of them. This is certainly not my area so I don’t know technically how you do it, but I do know that that on both trackers, the AA vanishes at Tilshead on the journey to Salisbury. It them ’emerges’ for a few minutes and then vanishes again – on both trackers at almost identical times.
As for ‘flying below the radar’, that is not what is happening, we can track it down to zero feet at Distillery Farm and then track it taking off again.
When it ’emerges’ at 17:14 at Bourne Park, it is at 1775ft and when it emerges flying over SDH at 17:50 it is at 1600ft.
What makes it even more suspicious is that it is actually a rare thing to happen. I have checked several days of flight data for the AA and it is certainly not a problem that happens every day… or even every week.
@ Paul
I do know a little bit about radar, airspace control and the onboard instrumentation of aircraft (when I was a private and glider pilot it was necessary to know some of it).
What you say eliminates blind spots of all types (flying in obscured areas and masking due to terrain). And the separate logs are probably derived from separate secondary radar installations. Secondary radar provides azimuth and range information, the transponder provides ident, altitude and other information in its response to being painted by the radar. If I recall correctly, mode C radars have built-in ident codes which are longer than the codes previously dialled in by the pilot in the older versions (mode A IIRC).
But it’s very curious that the pilot would pull the fuse, the sudden disappearance from the radar screen would certainly alert any air traffic unit tracking them.
Try this:
https://flight-data.adsbexchange.com/map?icao=406CBC&date=2018-03-04
Zoom in and click on the dots to reveal the point data. You will see that after Tilshead (16:46) the ‘orange line’ is interpolated straight to Bourne Park (17:14) – there is no record of landing in Sainsbury’s car park. There are several other interpolated lines, for example you will find data points timed at 17:51:31and 17:51:36 that are essentially ‘orphaned’.
It seems very likely that the helicopter was being used for non-medical purposes. This would probably breach the insurance conditions.
I need to study this a bit – it’s clear that the transponder code is mode A (0020) and the spacing of the returns is puzzling to, so this leads me to wonder where the flight trackers get their data from and how they process it.
That code is curious too, because it is 0020 and if they have not been assigned a code by air traffic then it would be 7000:
§ VFR standard squawk code when no other code has been assigned (ICAO)
§ UK: this code does not imply VFR; 7000 is used as a general conspicuity squawk.)
It’s piqued my curiousity
Good! In that case I will ‘land’ this one as well! This is the second tracker we have been using that provides a different data set:
planefinder.net
It is not as easy to use as Flight Data. Briefly, do the following:
1) Zoom in on the map to the Salisbury area – you need Malmesbury at the top of the map and Salisbury at the bottom.
2) Click ‘Map’ (top right) then select ‘Playback’
3) Set the date for 4 March
4) If you are in the UK, you can set the time for 16:20 – if you are not in the UK, set your local time to equal 16:20 GMT
5) Click the blue start button at left
6) Check the rolling clock at the bottom is at 16:20 GMT – if not hit ‘pause’ and adjust the timer at top right.
7) At approx 16:30 you will see a helicopter appear on the screen
8) Click the pause button to freeze the image
9) Click on the helicopter and the route for the day will appear
Note: you will also now see a panel on the left hand side giving details of G-WLTS. You MUST keep that panel, if you lose it, you need to go back and start again.
Plane Finder does not give you data points in the same way as Flight Data. If you click on the blue line it reveals the data for the point at the end of that line.
You will see that the fit between the 2 trackers is very good EXCEPT for the bit after it leaves Sainsbury’s. I think the reason for that is that you have 2 partial data sets – neither of them is complete but if you add the 2 sets together you get a reasonably accurate version of what happened between 17:14 and 17:17 and then again after 17:50.
Oops! Yes, you’re right. Thanks Paul.
I have a theory about that helicopter. It was part of the original plan, which was to pick up an MI5 officer at Distillery Farm to meet the ‘poisoned’ Skripals in SCP at around 4.15pm and to escort them back to Minety. Of course, that didn’t happen, for the Skripals had fled at 3.25. The deception was to make it appear to the public that it had arrived to take the Skripals to SDH. Instead, the poisoned bench couple would have been discreetly taken there by land ambulance – and were. However, the helicopter was still needed for that purpose and the media had been tipped off and were waiting for it with their cameras. Does anyone have any details about how the media knew that the WAA was due to arrive in SCP?
Due to the changed circumstances it left Distillery Farm late (awaiting the call at 4.19) and arrived at SCP much later than planned, due to ongoing instructions whilst in flight. Its arrival time needed to coincide with ongoing events at The Maltings. With the Skripals out of the equation there was less urgency involved, and it could afford to do a little PR en route. It arrived in Salisbury at around the same time as the police entered 47 SDH.
Anidea, I didn’t accept the British Government theory until they came up with pictures of Boshirov and Petrov in Wilton Road and B and P gave their crazy cover story. Then I was > 90% persuaded of their guilt and admitted to familty and friends in Britain that I had probably been wrong. Howeve since Panorama and subsequent duscussion here I think there’s only < 2% chance they are guilty.
I think you may find that the problem is associated with something that could be called The Accepted View:-
It’s that reluctance, built into every human being, to step out from the crowd. I’ve heard anecdotes, from union members that I’ve known, regarding how the hard core in union committees get their motions passed: stand all the meeting members against one wall and ask all those who disagree with the motion to move to the other wall.
It’s that pilot who, having very clearly witnessed the presence of a UFO and its extraordinary, known physics defying, behaviour, internalises it and keeps that knowledge to him/herself lest it invites ridicule by fellow pilots and the public at large (by the way, I don’t believe UFOs are craft carrying extraterrestrial visitors – after all, what intelligent being in their right mind would come to this …-forsaken hell of a planet?).
It takes immense courage to challenge an accepted view, and we should be aware that most people do not like to be shown that they have been fooled: as an example – an electrician who did some work for me put it to me that, if he was to accept as true what I told him at the time, regarding the truth about what was happening in Syria, he would feel like a fool for having accepted without question what was broadcast about it on the BBC and Channel 4, and he did not want to believe that he had been fooled.
I believe that William Kingdon Clifford provides a good guide:
“It is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone, to believe anything upon insufficient evidence.”
And there you have it – why should we believe the official line unless they show us sufficient evidence to justify the belief?
By not accepting the accepted view by default you may be just as wrong.
There are lot’s of shades in between.
Let’s assume MI5/6 knew what Skripal was up to and that “Novichok” was brought into the country. Let’ also suspect that Russia knew what MI5/6 knew and leaked the plan to the people involved. Let’s then assume that what Skripal got was designed to spill.
Let’s also assume that MI5/6 knew Borishov and Petrov quite well and vice versa which might have been known to Russia or not.
“There are lot’s of shades in between.”
Try making that argument in a court of law.
As I understand it “entrapment” is illegal in Britain.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/3104923.stm
The different stories mean a lot of people have to cover their back. Dawn Sturgess dying means this cannot be described as harmless spy fun.
Never mind the economic costs of the scare.
@ anidea
I don’t believe for one moment that any of those involved in this affair who have real power will be in the slightest degree worried about being prosecuted for their actions. There are many examples to draw from: Blair, Bush (all of them), Obama, Clinton (all of them), Churchill, I could go on, it’s a very long list.
Any insight as to what really happened will be delayed and delayed and delayed until it either disappears down the memory hole, or else it is so far removed temporally that only some very determined push will bring them to justice.
Pigs are wingless.
I am working on the assumption that this was not a public but a private enterprise.
So some of the people involved cannot count on protection of the state should there be a breakup of the Tory Party.
We live in hope.
I do recall reading somewhere that a bystander/witness said something to the effect that you couldn’t see much because the bench couple were hidden/obscured from view, being shielded by umbrellas to protect them from the rain.
Although I remember thinking that any umbrellas were being used as a screen (and recalling the transfer of the recently rescued Tham Luang boys, to a waiting helicopter – umbrellas had been used to block the view from distant cameras) and also thinking that no-one else had mentioned rain. It is possible, I suppose, that it was a bit damp and almost drizzly in The Maltings but surely umbrellas were to afford privacy.
Does anyone else have any recollection of reading anything like this?
” … a black Range Rover …” Yet another unmarked vehicle (sigh). Is there a published source for this, Denise? Just askin’.
—
Thank you, uncle tungsten, for the Kipling which nudged me towards the three rhyming couplets about the Dead Stateman
Hi Eleanor, I was just using a black Range Rover as an example of a stereotypical MI56 type vehicle that they might have used but I did find this pic at Sergei’s house though.
https://www.alamy.com/salisbury-uk-27th-sep-2018-salisbury-united-kingdom-september-27-2018-the-house-where-former-gru-officer-sergei-skripal-and-his-daughter-yulia-used-to-live-sergei-skripal-and-his-daughter-yulia-were-poisoned-in-salisbury-the-united-kingdom-in-march-2018-ilya-dmitryachevtass-credit-itar-tass-news-agencyalamy-live-news-image220639569.html
We have been lied to again! These are not the first people, exposed to Novichok, that initially survived. There is also Andrei Zheleznyakov from 1987.
Zheleznyakov was exposed after a ventilation pipe broke and the poison leaked into the air. Zheleznykov said:
“I saw rings before my eyes – red, orange. Bells were ringing inside my head. I choked. Add to this the feeling of fear – as if something was about to happen at any moment. I sat down and told the guys: I think it has ‘got’ me.
They dragged me out of the room and took me to the chief. He looked at me and said, ‘Have a cup of tea, everything will be fine.’ I drank the tea and immediately threw up. They took me to the medical unit, where I was injected with an antidote. I felt a little better. The chief told me: ‘Go home and lie down. Come back tomorrow.’
They assigned me an escort, and we walked past a few bus stops. We were already passing the church near Ilyich Square, when suddenly I saw the church lighting up and falling apart. I remember nothing else.”
Zheleznyakov, it seems, spent 18 days in intensive care but survived. His life, however, appears to have been ruined. He suffered after-effects for a long time, including chronic weakness in his arms, toxic hepatitis, epilepsy, severe depression and an inability to concentrate. The accident left him unable to work or be creative. He died five years after the accident.”
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/novichok-effects-nerve-agent-russian-spy-attack-salisbury-sergei-skripal-if-survive-live-body-a8253976.html
.
.
Thus, when SDH said that there is a total world experience of 3 cases of Novichok poisoning, that is not true. More importantly, however, did SDH seek assistance from Russia regarding antidotes and treatment? If not, why not?
Hello Paul,Contacted My Local MP yesterday. He unable for comments
due to On-going Investigations regarding Salisbury Poisoning.
I asked how BBC Panorama was aloud broadcasting misinformation
to UK Voters regarding a Case against Russia with One Sided Details.
Guilty until proven otherwise….Sorry…Cant Help…Prove Otherwise
Not My Constituency-Area Of Politics.
He was in Parliament on National Tv but will not get involved via
questions from a Voter putting Him In Position within HMG?
Theresa May Sinking…Strike Another Torpedo Now…
Deal The Fatal Blow……………….
Mark, They are all cowards. Afraid of losing their seat on the gravy train.
Normal transmissions on SW[shortwave] Russian Military Stations.
No Increase alleged Number Stations code-signals for Agents-Spies
deep within UK..[females with red hair-dangerous Gordon]
Reports of UK full of Russian Agents via TPTB-MSM is scare tactics
for The Sheep!
It has all been Engineered for Brexit Failings. We have gone from ISIS
Terrorist Threats within UK that seem to change sides like the wind when
it fits HMG propaganda agenda?
Alleged SW[shortwave] Stations normal-quiet..NTR..!
No, Mark. They were far from normal. I have the transmission logs, and over the few days following 4th March, there was a flurry of unscheduled transmissions (both GU and SVR, and in 3 modes), some carrying unusually long messages. This was almost unprecedented and the most recent comparable flurry took place in 1991 (the Moscow ‘coup’).
However, on 4th March there was no unscheduled traffic – only the expected transmissions and schedule numbers. All this suggests that the steep rise in activity came as a response to the events of 4th March. Scheduling analysis indicates that most of these additional transmissions were being sent to agents in the USA rather than to Europe.
If anyone is unconvinced, and is familiar with this arcane subject, I can post all the details. Even complete messages, for what it’s worth!
No,Miheila. I’m not referring to transmissions before Sunday 04-03 on this
date or after. My point is that TPTB are claiming UK is flooded with
Russian Spies and everyone should be active and alert in respect of this.
Scaring The Sheep tactics! If UK has all these Agents wandering around
the Secret Transmissions would be jamming the airwaves!
Not A Sausage?
Arcane Subject? Most secure method of Transmitting Information!
Miheila are you an Internet Listener receiving broadcast that can be
located?
Please do supply your information regarding increase of GRU
Broadcasts. Would be most interesting if you know so much more
than GCHQ-UK!
Gent sounds like a Hobby Listener who listens in on Known Russian
Stations?
Please enlighten Us Blogmire’s With Your Expert Knowledge regarding
Shortwave radio without Internet. I intrigued?
@ Rob/et al,
I sen the following complaint to the BBC, with the addition I’m not a British native and without reference to your web site [Rob]:
“Dear Sir or Madam,
In the BBC program Panorama, about the events in Salisbury, 4 March, 2018, the following statements were made:
“It’s very unique in its ability to poison individuals at quite low concentrations.” – Porton Down Professor Tim speaking about Novichok.
“The Russians called it Novichok. Thought to be 10X more toxic than any nerve agent created before or since.” – Jane Corbin.
“To kill a person, you need only 1mg. To be sure, 2mg.” – Vil Mirzyanov, who worked on the Foliant project.
“The Russians weaponised Novichok for the battlefield. The tiniest dose can be fatal.”– Jane Corbin.
“It’s difficult to say, you know, possibly into the thousands.” – Deputy Assistant Commissioner Dean Haydon when asked how many people could have been killed by the substance in the bottle.
*******
Given the above, how is it possible for three [3] individuals [Sergei/Yulia Skripal and DS Nick Bailey] to survive having been in contact with Novichok. Either the aforementioned claims are inaccurate or there was no Novichok involved. Which one is it?”
[][][][][][][][][][][]
Will keep you posted [in case I receive a reply]
This was explained in the programme. It breaks down in damp conditions. I think to have any chance of success a complain would have to focus on the claims that it break down in the damp and that it was rainy, both of which are questionable. The weather reports indicate it was fairly sunny and that there was no rain when the Novichok was on the handle.
https://www.timeanddate.com/weather/uk/salisbury/historic?month=3&year=2018
I am planning a complaint, I may take in this question, but I am planning to focus on the allegation that Putin declared an intention to kill traitors/Skripal, which is a falsehood apparently concocted by a Newsnight Team on 4th or 5th March and repeated with the last 30 days on Panorama. As a British national I am appalled that the BBC can spread such blatant lies.
.
@ GrigoryZinoviev,
The lying and cheating has been going on for centuries. It’s just getting a bit more in your face lately.
Good luck with your complaint.
Making deadly nerve agents that rapidly dissolve [regardless due to what circumstances] is like producing a fighter jet that’s only operable when the weather is right…
With respect, Daniel, but I think you’re missing the point.
What is the purpose of a chemical agent?
It is that it:
is easily deployed,
acts rapidly,
disperses rapidly,
rapidly degrades.
That last point is crucial. For an occupying force the objective is to advance and take your enemy’s positions rapidly and preferably without the destruction of infrastructure that could be of use to yourself. Add to that the feeling of horror induced in your opponent’s forces by your intent to use such weapons is also useful, in that it might frighten them sufficiently to induce their surrender or retreat.
What you don’t want is an agent that persists because it will become a threat to your own forces when they advance.
So, rapid degradation due to specific environmental conditions IS a useful attribute of a military grade chemical weapon, it is also a constraint on the conditions of its use – i.e. typically, one wouldn’t use it when it is likely to persist in the environment.
All of which makes it all the more puzzling that a supposedly very deadly and persistent agent used in Salisbury was deemed to be ‘military grade’.
But the point is that we have been told, on the one hand that it was degraded by the environmental conditions in Salisbury, yet, weeks later it was found in the environment very pure and very persistent.
This is the real issue.
Though – theoretically – the strategy might also be to restrict an area long term when you are in retreat as Israel did with cluster bombs in Lebanon.
This Australian expert obviously had no dog in the fight shortly after the attack on Skripals happened
https://pursuit.unimelb.edu.au/articles/the-science-behind-novichok
We know Novichok agents do persist in the environment for a short time (although this isn’t well determined)
Novichoks’ effects are rapid, usually felt within 30 seconds to 2 minutes.
@ Cascadian ,
The logic would be that the military grade nerve agent has a built-in self-destruct mechanism and is not dependent on degradation by outside forces, right?
I agree with the basic logic of your argument though.
Not built-in, just that it is not intrinsically stable when exposed to normal environmental conditions.
We were taught (yes, we who wouldn’t dream of using such things, were!) about the best conditions in which to deploy chemical agents: i.e. where the wind blows away from us and toward the enemy; that deployment in stable, no wind conditions is not a good idea, because there would be a lack of environmental actions/conditions to disperse/degrade the agent; etc.
The only reason the PM had for using “Military Grade” is that it had a certain cachet associated with the Shock! and Awe! of using such things.
” … very pure … ”
And hence very recently applied.
Precisely.
Cascadian,
The experts do not expect Novichok to degrade quickly. They also would be surprised that the “pure material” could be “stuck” on a door handle.
“How long they take to degrade is certainly not data that is publicly available, but from discussions with people at [the defence laboratory] Porton Down, I understand they are slow to degrade,” said Alastair Hay, an environmental toxicologist at the University of Leeds who investigated the use of chemical weapons against Iraqi Kurds in Halabja in 1988. “This is one of the reasons the Skripals were unconscious for so long – it doesn’t break down readily in the body.”
Novichok chemicals left in the environment would degrade in two main ways: through hydrolysis – being broken down by water – and evaporation. Traditional nerve agents such as sarin are relatively susceptible to these processes. The fact that sarin evaporates quickly means people are rapidly exposed through breathing it in during a chemical attack.
Novichok agents are understood to evaporate far more slowly. “They’ve been deliberately designed by chemists to be more robust and hang around for longer,” said Andrea Sella, a professor of inorganic chemistry at University College London.
The flip-side is that they pose a lower risk to people in the vicinity of a contaminated area. Hay said: “Direct contact is the most likely route of exposure.”
Thanks, Duncan, it all adds to dispel the level of ignorance with regard to the properties and potential use of these agents.
But there are a few things I don’t comprehend:
* A persistent agent isn’t much use unless its primary use is area denial because there would exist a high risk to one’s own forces should they advance into the contaminated area without adequate protection and awareness of its presence – not a good battle scenario.
* “it doesn’t break down readily in the body.” – this imples (to me) that, after all the AChE had been bound to by the agent’s molecules there would be a substantial quantity left over to bind to any further production of AChE. But if that is the case, why is the victim dead already? And from what you’ve passed on, the impression gained is that this agent is designed to inflict a slow lingering death on its victim. I’m a computer/math/physics type, chemistry isn’t my thing, so maybe I’m missing an essential point here.
* And, after donning the ever reliable tin foil hat, “The flip-side is that they pose a lower risk to people in the vicinity of a contaminated area.” sounds as though (not that I’m seeking to impugn Hay’s veracity) it’s a statement deliberately formulated to fend off the skepticism surrounding that folk (firemen, digger operators, etc.) could be safely stood nearby while minions and other folk clad in protective gear fiddle and prod at supposed contaminated ground and items.
But as I mentioned in the piece, the OPCW say they found a substance of “high purity, persistent and resistant to weather conditions”, so the dampness don’t enter into it!
In fact, here is a new working definition of Novichok that the Panorama programme and other official information have now concocted:
“Novichok: A battlefield nerve agent of such toxicity that 2mg is enough to certainly kill a person, but which breaks down within 80 minutes upon contact with the air to such an extent that it’s lethal toxicity is reduced to producing effects which more closely resemble an incapacitant, yet which regains its toxicity within 2-3 weeks due to it being both persistent and weather resistant.”
That, in a nutshell, is what HMG, The Met, and BBC apparently believe, and they think we should believe it too.
And as I noted below:
SDH said:
“We also used specialised decontamination techniques to remove any residual toxins.”
https://www.england.nhs.uk/south/2018/04/10/updates-on-the-salisbury-incident-7/
So, how did OPCW find anything in the bio samples?
What is happening is clear: there are several different agencies, all lying in an attempt to pretend that novichok was used but the lies are not properly coordinated. There isn’t a common version of who did what, or what novichok does, so they are all falling over each other in their ridiculous attempts to maintain the lie.
Just like I’ve already stated, they need a good editor – sack the existing clown and recruit another more skillful individual. Do we have any volunteers for this august post?
OPCW lying? Perhaps lies of omission. But I’m sceptical that they would fabricate.
So who is lying?
Even if such nerve agent exists, how the alleged poisoners knew when Skripal will get in or get out from the house within the time necessary before the agent to breaks down?
It was very annoying in Panorama when Novichok “expert” Myzayanov were explaining that it may decompose in damp conditions, dose may have not been enough, and so on…
This is a mockery with public. Why BBC didn’t asked PD about the nature of the substance? PD had 150 ml. additional budget and 9 mounts and the preserved perfume flacon filled with Novichok. Why they are not the ones answering such questions? Why not make experiments to observe this Novichok properties? Instead BBC asked some vague and retired Soviet era scientist, not practicing from at least 20 years.
Porton Down has been very quiet indeed in the media.
Much quieter still have been the DCBRNC, who undoubtedly played a bigger and more visible role in the ‘exercise’ than DSTL.
This Guardian revelation may be of interest.
“Mi5 Agents can commit crime in UK”
Dated 02 March 2018 & still available
Thanks, Alasdair.
And these more recent articles too:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/oct/04/mi5-sought-immunity-for-agents-criminal-acts-tribunal-told
https://www.scottishlegal.com/article/mi5-agents-authorised-to-commit-serious-crimes-on-british-soil
Made more interesting by a glaring omission, for MI6 should also be included here. They don’t only limit their crimes to foreign countries – occasionally they find the need to commit crimes on British soil.
Oh that Rob’s satire may be always bounded in a nutshell, then we may have a very potent weapon in this soundbite world.
Should have weitten ‘more often’ than always.
I think it would be better that some British citizens make an ofcom complaint.
We could use Daniels text and add the remarks of Rob about the OPCW.
Read the text here :
https://www.ofcom.org.uk/about-ofcom/latest/bulletins/broadcast-bulletins/audience-complaints
So it would be good that more than 10 people make a complain.
Daniel, I was trying to anticipate the likely response to your complaint. It’s likely you may not get a response until 30 days after the programme was first broadcast after which they may rule it too late to make another. Whatever complaint you make they may reject it, but you can at least try to make it as difficult as possible for them to reject it, so that whatever form of words they used to reject it can be used against them. I welcome anyone who has the energy to pursue complaints, I don’t have that much having used it up in the past, so I simply want to suggest how you can apply it most effectively. PS I have already made one complaint about Panorama which I intend to withdraw because of weaknesses. I am preparing another to go within the 30 day deadline
Seen My Local MP on Tv..Parliament Questions..In The House.
Acting like a Hooligan-School Kid…I not impressed!
Sent him email and phoned his Office today requesting Him for
answers from PM regarding Salisbury Fudge-Misinformation,
Detective Sargent Nicholas Bailey actions on 04-03 [Lack Of-Dodgy]
Who supplied Information regarding Bailey being First Responder?
I was asked what is my concern?
Said In My Opinion Its A Hoax-Discrediting Russia!
Lets see what evolves?
Mark, you could argue this way with the MP :
It´s fact that Bailey spread the poison into Skripal´s house, the police station, several cars and his own house.
IF Bailey acted like Urban wrote in his book and entered Skripal´s house by force and without a warrant and was unprotected – then he acted against all rules of the police.
As a member of the public you have the right to ask if the police violated all rules.
Not a bad idea Liane.
A complaint to Wiltshire Police Professional Standards about conduct Bailey has admitted to.
A midnight forced entry (warrant?) 7 hours later cannot be seen as a search for additional casualties.
There would be no expectation of finding bodies or people in harms way.
Did he really not turn the lights on?
Did he think there were victims stuck inside the computer keyboard?
…and it sounds like he drove a car when not fit to do so. But it’s my past experience about complaing to police, about collusion between police and a duty solicitor, who talked a Russian friend into accepting a caution, subsequently rescinded which makes me very sceptical about the complaints’ procedure of any public body in Britain. Nobody seemed interested in the fact that the police supressed a critical minute of CCTV footage.
Mark, at least your MP was there.
My chap is Nigel Adams.
Google him and see if he has said anything in the last two years about any topic.
How about this for shutting down discourse: British government classifies all circumstances of Skripal case, says Russian embassy.
More:
http://tass.com/politics/1034891http://tass.com/politics/1034891
You’ve concatenated the address with itself – that will get a 404 error.
http://tass.com/politics/1034891
http://tass.com/politics/1034402
@ ae,
One cannot but wholeheartedly embrace your sense of humor. To paraphrase me ol’ bud McD, “I’m luvin’ it.”
Thanks for your discatenation, allegedly anonymous Eleanor. (47 CMR had also been discatenated before the police arrived there at 5 on 4th March).
“No one has seen the Skripals alive for a long time, and we don’t know for sure where they are and how it is going with them”.
This is what I find the most shocking aspect of the whole affair. Two people have simply disappeared, and their family and friends are being mentally tortured by the British establishment, by their wilful lack of co-operation.
When you regard your opponent as sub-human, any treatment meted out to it is believe to be justified.
And note that Josh’s concatenated URL’s were both the same. Eleanor is guilty of invention, for which I am duly grateful.
There’s invention and ‘invention’. I noticed the eleanoristic invention, but forgot to mention it in my distracted disgust at reading No one has seen the Skripals alive for a long time…
Discatenation that leads to inventiveness is an added bonus, Eleanor. I wish I was blessed with such a Great Gift.
However, officialistic ‘invention’ is fake invention. Creativity certainly has its place on the world stage, but that shouldn’t extend to playing silly games with the truth. Facts are stubborn things.
” … (47 CMR had also been discatenated before the police arrived there at 5 on 4th March).”
Are you sure, really sure, of that Miheila? It’s not the use of ‘discatenated’ that I’m referring to …
Sounds trustworthy.
You people are a bunch of Putin-blowing swivel-eyed loons.
Someone trod on your foot, Jon?
Don’t hold it back, get it off your chest while you can товарищ.
@ JH,
44,000,000 Russians died during WWII [no museums around the globe to rub it in my face though], so I appreciate a statesman who tries to avoid setting the world on fire and uses force only when all other avenues have been exhausted.
The 44,000,000 number includes those who died of war related, indirect deaths.
What I think is so wonderful Jon is how the UK has such a wonderful free press, that only reports the absolute truth, never any propaganda, which never would dream of running (or mot running) any stories at the direction of the government and are always so totally balanced on each and every issue.
We are just so lucky to have The Times, The Guardian, The Sun, The Mirror, the Daily Mail, The Independent, the BBC and Sky. These bastions of the truth do us proud don’t they?
Not!
Something like a swivel eyed panopticon panting at the breast of the great minotaur. Devouring all truth and nibbling JH types as an after dinner mint.
I’d assumed the JH comment was a joke … hard to tell, sometimes.
It was the excessive use of hyphens that got to me, you can never trust people who do that.
Such as Admiral the Hon. Sir Reginald Aylmer Ranfurly Plunkett-Ernle-Erle-Drax, KCB, DSO, JP, DL.
A highly-suspect serial-hyphenator, ‘if-ever-there-was-one’.
Pathological apostrophiser’s need to be watch’d like hawk’s too. I ne’er trust over-or-under-zealous punctuator’s of any persuasion, ‘specially un-co-öperative grocer’s. Its no co-ïncidence that the ‘Skripal-affair’ attract’s these un-savoury type’s. I’m sorry, but if they ca’n’t moderate their dia-critic’s I wo’n’t have any dealing’s with’em.
Male-Female are within Police Cordon outside Card Shop.
Image 7485585 different angle-Female Uniformed Officer.
No Red-Orange bag on floor-No singe of Medical Emergency
as in packaging from medical items or bodily fluids on floor
being disregarded after use?
No evidence markers around bench,No CSI-Forensics checking
soft earth-grass around near bench for footprints-evidence and
No Police-Ambulance Crew-Public in area?
Ken Kenn asked me how many Helicopters in use? One as far
as I know unless he knows different?
How would I Know….?
area-
Mark, my opinion as super recognizer :
Male is not Bailey.
Female is neither Rebecca nor the woman in the Sarum incident.
In one of the other photos you see this couple talking to PC Alex Way and PC Alex Collins.
I think the couple witnessed something and told the police officers about it.
Liane,within official police cordon-taped off area.
The more I think about this and look at the pictures, the more I think you are right – there is something very wrong about the scene.
A patch of vomit to clear away, a red bag to pick up, one discarded thermal blanket and that’s about it. It is remarkably clean and tidy for what was supposed to have happened there… medics working for 45 minutes and not a wrapper to be seen, no rubbish on the floor from any of the people who had been there. Who tidied it all up so quickly? I thought the couple on the bench ‘lost control of bodily funtions’… so where is the mess? Where are all the used tissues, Jamie Paine used to wipe away the vomit. EVERYTHING has gone.
And nobody took a picture of anything? Not a single person took a picture? The only pictures we have seen are very careful to show nothing much at all…
Ambulance there but no paramedics; police allowing people into the cordon according to Thom Belk.
If this was a staged event, a hoax, then they would be careful to make sure there were no pictures. Maybe some police or others were actually stopping people from taking any pictures…
@ GR,
The police mentioned the existence of over 200 pieces of evidence. Wonder where that/they went…
And all that CCTV footage… It holds all the answers…
That’s why we will never see it.
25 years ago, when I happened to be n the UK, I watched a BBC Crime Watch program. A guy did something wrong/bad and drove off in a blue car. They showed footage/stills from CCTV and ATM cameras of the car moving through town…
No such thing from the Skripals though. 64, council funded [your tax $$$ at work] CCTV cameras and only a handful of stills…
And we’re supposed to sit on our hands and swallow all this BS quietly?
The second poisoned pair
On March 6 the DailyMail and the Sun mentioned a second pair that was poisoned in the Maltings :
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.
Officers taped off an area around a bench where one of the pair had been sick after arriving at The Maltings shopping centre on Sunday.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5467051/Was-Russian-spy-poisoned-Zizzi.html
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.
Dust, pollen and samples from the two latest victims are thought to be being examined at the MoD’s Porton Down labs, close to Salisbury.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5733372/ex-russian-spy-sergei-skripal-poisoned-salisbury-feared-life-cops/
I read this as follows:
Pair 1 was poisoned with fentalyl.
Pair 2 was poisoned with an unknown substance.
Both pairs were poisoned in the Maltings.
Are there more sources ?
There was this in the comments at the SJ:
“I think we all realise that this has nothing to do with drugs,you dont get fire fighters in NBC kit for puke on the ground twice in 24hrs in The City,what is going on? I guess we will never be told the truth.”
https://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/news/16064949.major-incident-at-salisbury-hospital-after-russian-spy-found-unconscious-at-maltings/?ref=ar
From the article you quote
” It was the second time in 24 hours that firefighters had been called out to decontaminate an area of Salisbury.
Last night crews were called to clean up part of the Maltings after two people collapsed in a suspected drug-related incident. “
What it refers to is 1. Skripals on the bench 2. the decontamination of the hospital area
Sorry, I posted the wrong link! The comment comes from the 4 March article:
https://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/news/16064949.major-incident-at-salisbury-hospital-after-russian-spy-found-unconscious-at-maltings/?ref=ar
It is the first listed comment from ‘scarlet banner’.
I read this as
1. Fentanyl was found near the bench
2. Fentanyl was delinked from Skripals by linking it to a fentanyl overdose that had happened near the bench
Liane’s remark is very interesting. I had read the articles from the Daily Mail and the Sun, but I hadn’t noticed this story of “another couple”.
Was the identity of this other couple published ? I assume that it wasn’t.
Were there really two couples ? Anidea wrote :
“I read this as
1. Fentanyl was found near the bench
2. Fentanyl was delinked from Skripals by linking it to a fentanyl overdose that had happened near the bench.”
I would add one word :
“I read this as
1. Fentanyl was found near the bench
2. Fentanyl was delinked from Skripals by linking it to a fentanyl overdose that ALLEGEDLY had happened near the bench.”
My point 2 wasn’t well formulated. It should rather be :
2. Fentanyl was delinked from Skripals by pretending that there were two couples.”
That actually sounds far too likely. If the ‘real’ Skripals had been on the bench, that was probably what was supposed to happen.
The police were telling people at the scene that they suspected a fentanyl o/d (and so was the Clinical Services Journal) and then 2 days later, stories are ready to go saying “Fentanyl? No, that was the other couple”, so they could then drop ‘nerve agents’ into the mix.
I seem to remember a facebook page showing the other couple ..fentanyl overdose ..same day…on an early Blogmire post
Do you recall anymore than that at all? I tried searching but couldn’t find anything. Does anyone else remember this?
Still can’t find the post you refer to but I have found this, which is interesting:
“I was driving to the local pub to pick up the other half around 5.00 – 5.30 when radio 4 news announced that a couple, believed to be known to each other, were found on a park bench in Salisbury, and had been taken to hospital with a suspected opioid overdose, after a concerned member of the public, a nurse, phoned emergency services (later both the police and UK Column said this person was a doctor, so that clears that one up). My question is why would it be on Radio 4 news, since it had not come out that he was a Russian double agent? Radio 4 announced that the next day. Wiltshire police are also on record as saying that there have been other Fentanyl poisonings in Wiltshire but not in Salisbury. So if there have been other Fentanyl poisonings in Wiltshire, and it was not know he was a double agent at the time he was taken to hospital, how did it end up in a Radio 4 news report on the same day? Did the other Fentanyl poisonings in Wiltshire make national news?”
https://www.theblogmire.com/the-salisbury-poisonings-time-for-a-review-of-the-official-timeline/#comment-7756
Liane, Taken from your 2 quotes:
1 – but this was later linked to an unconnected incident involving another couple in the shopping centre.
2 – But that was later linked to unconnected incident involving another couple coincidentally in the shopping centre.
The almost identical language strongly suggets that this came from a single source and was deliberately planted in the 2 stories. Had it been true, I think we would have heard more about it.
Have another look at Urban’s BBC Newsnight program and right at the end at 17:36, Dr Duncan Murray indicates that he will miss Sergei and Yulia, as he had become quite attached to them. If they weren’t in Salisbury Hospital, he is a very good liar then?
Even if he was treating imposters he would have known by the time Sergei was discharged
that the imposters weren’t Sergei and Yulia.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CwhR6wqNEis
He calls them “these two” – the names Sergei and Yulia do not cross his lips once in the whole programme. I wonder who “these two” were…
@ GR,
I got a buddy and he says, “The woman who takes care of my cat.”
He can’t bring himself to say, “My girlfriend.”
There’s this emotional threshold.
Ditto for this voodoo guy, who talks like a serial killer about his victims and calls them ‘Projects.’ [BTK-serial killer], when he uses the words, “These two.” He can’t say his ‘victims’ names, because they either are/were not there or when persons are/were there, their names aren’t Sergei and Yulia and he knows it. He jumps the shark by uttering the words, “These two…”
I can’t bring myself to watch any of this, so nice catch, GR.
That’s an odd comment for a doctor to make though.
sc wrote : “That’s an odd comment for a doctor to make though.”
Yes, it seems that the leitmotiv is “The victims of Putin are the best people on earth, Bailey a hero, Dawn Sturgess a good Samaritan, Charlie Rowley a tender partner, and you can’t speak to the Skripals without becoming quite attached to them.”
The route from Distillery Farm to Sainsbury’s car park:
16:03 G-WLTS arrives at Distillery Farm
16:15 member of the public calls 999
16:19 WAA alerted
16:30 G-WLTS departs Distillery Farm heading SW
16:34 overhead circuit Flying Monk Brewery, Hullavington, at 1,275ft
16:35 heads SSE at approx 125kts and 2,000ft
16:39 overhead and fly-by Lansdowne Arms, Derry Hill, at 1,350ft
16:40 overhead and fly-by Bowood Golf Course at 1,425ft
16:40 reverses course, heads NNW back towards Bowood Golf Course
16:41 reverses course, resumes SSE track and climbs to 2,000ft
16:42 heads S at 132kts and 1,950ft
16:44 heads SSE at 136kts and 1,725ft
16:46 signal lost at Tilshead heading SSE at 137kts and 1,500ft
16:53 G-WLTS arrives Sainsbury’s car park
Why such a curious route? Because G-WLTS was on a PR trip. The Flying Monk Brewery, The Lansdowne Arms and Bowood Golf Course are all significant contributors to WAA. A few days after the events of 4 March, the manager of The Lansdowne Arms visited WAA and handed over a cheque for £1,349 raised by the pub during the previous year.
https://www.gazetteandherald.co.uk/news/headlines/16080757.Airbase_appeal_given_cash_boost_by_pub/
They clearly knew that they would not be needed and were not in a rush, before they left Distillery Farm.
This all indicates to me that the role of G-WLTS on 4 March had nothing to do with the medical emergency in the Maltings but it had everything to do with other things happening that day.
@ GR/et al,
No police assistance?
Well, good sir, you seem to forget this is Salisbury, not just any ordinary city in the UK. Once you pull any picture taken in Salisbury, through a double negative, isotopic, anti-hue filter, you will see elements hitherto hidden from the human eye.
You will see two enormous, magical hands, guiding events in Salisbury in ways beyond our mere mortals’ wildest imagination. A Tinseltown fairy ground, where the deadliest, ‘military grade’ nerve agent doesn’t even kill two ducks. A place where everything’s possible and nothing left untouched…
Welcome to the BBC’s New Night, where, every day, we find new ways to deceive you!
What sort of PR benefit would there be in just flying over donor’s premises, at over 1200ft, do you think Paul?
@ DEnise,
Where I come from, choppers are used coz they’re a fast way/means of transportation and can do so in straight lines. As the first hour after any calamity is widely know as the golden hour, choppers can and do save lives.
Unless you go on a ‘Salisbury Magical Tour Company’ ride, where you feel like a walrus and dance on a yellow submarine…
Denise, I think you might find air shows rather boring. Flying low and slow is 90+% of what you would see.
– They circled overhead the Flying Monk Brewery
– they made a major ‘kink’ in the route overhead the Lansdowne Arms
– They flew by and then back and forth within sight of the clubhouse at the golf course
In each case, they flew lower and slower.
So long as the people on the ground knew it was going to happen, there isn’t much else they can do except actually land there.
Fom getting the call to arriving at Sainsbury’s was 32 minutes – they could have done it in half the time if they had needed to.
Denise, I was just looking at another point of the AA’s route on 4 March when I realised something about the ‘display’ over Bowood Golf course!
On Flight Data, the track is shown as 2 reversals of direction: i.e. down then up then down. But that is because there is a limited number of data points.
Imagine an circle with diameter A-B (A at the top, B at the bottom – approx 300m across) – Flight Data shows the AA crossing A and heading to B; where it reverses and returns to A; where it reverses again, and flies back over B. i.e. it is traversing the diameter. BUT the same 2 data points allow for a flight in which the AA flies to B but then circumnavigates the circumference of the circle, passing through A, until it reaches B and then flies off.
It is likely that this is what happened as the AA maintained a constant speed throughout.
From the ground, this would look quite impressive.
Assuming that the helicopter was part of the original MI56 plan to ‘disappear’ the Skripals, explains a great deal. (So does its visit to Distillery Farm). I won’t say any more on this for now.
Once MI56 learnt that their plan had failed, certain elements of it continued more or less as planned – the poisoning, the helicopter, the media presence at SCP, the continuation of Toxic Dagger as an urban exercise, etc. These elements continued, not because it was too late to put a stop to them, but rather because they were a necessary part of the Russian-assassin-Novichok myth and MI56 would have been in a state of frantic disarray. Although they failed in one respect, they were determined to make the most of a bad job. Losing control of the Skripals (or even a Skripal) must have seriously dented their egos and made them zealous for revenge.
Here is a picture of the army removing every last trace of BZ from Salisbury, so that the novichok hoax wont be uncovered.
https://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/newpix/2018/04/24/09/4B7C9C7400000578-5648859-image-a-27_1524557743165.jpg
@ Denise,
Fortunately, the backhoe operator is perfectly safe in his hermetically sealed cabin, and thus needs no mask to protect him…
You’ll be burned at the stake along with Paul.
Don’t worry Daniel, any burning at the stake will just be another hoax!
Speaking of hoaxes and fake news, I very much enjoyed this article. Well worth reading:
“Craig Murray calls [Luke] Harding an “MI6 tool“, but to this writer, Harding seems worse than an MI6 stooge: He’s a wannabe-spook, hanging from the coat-tails of anonymous intelligence officers and publishing their drivel as fact without so much as a skeptical blink. His lack of self-awareness and conflation of anecdote with evidence sets him apart as either one of the most blatant, fumbling propagandists of our era, or the most hapless hack journalist to stain the pages of printed news.”
https://disobedientmedia.com/2018/12/the-guardians-reputation-in-tatters-after-forger-revealed-to-have-co-authored-assange-smear/
Nothing to argue against there.
More items of equipment to be scrapped – is anyone aware of a military digger being added to the list of kit to be buried?
More theatre – is Equity going to raise a fuss about this, all these non-member actors, they’ll be having a fit (tee hee!).
Anyone care to speculate on who the two men in Nigel’s taxi might have been?
IMHO Laurel might have been one, the other, whose name I’m struggling to recall, had the same name as a very famous mathematician. But that can’t be right, mathematicians are clever.
I think Ernie Wise might be the one you are struggling to recall Cascadian.
Hardy(ly)
@ Cascadian,
I appreciate
worldwordplay.“You can lead a horse to water, but a pencil must be led.” – SL
Cascadian, Daniel T. Wise FRS FRSC (born January 24, 1971) is an American mathematician who specializes in geometric group theory and 3-manifolds. He is a professor of mathematics at McGill University. lol
And G. H. Hardy FRS was a famous (now deceased) pure mathematician at Cambridge (UK) – one might say that he was even more famous for his associations with John E. Littlewood and Srinivasar Ramanujan. I judged that his name would be a fitting accompaniment to Laurel due to the comedic association that Stan Laurel had with Oliver Hardy.
I live in desert.
Cascadian. I did get it immediately. I was being silly. lol
Cascadian, Anonymous is Denise above. lol
No! Really?
Starting at 11:20 in the following video, Udo Ulfkotte recounts the tale of what happened to a German helicopter pilot working for an air ambulance service in Germay, who refused to co-operate with the Foreign Intelligence Service when asked to work undercover:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGqi-k213eE
See also:
https://off-guardian.org/2018/01/08/english-translation-of-udo-ulfkottes-bought-journalists-suppressed/
Yes, the German case is interesting – this paper suggests the subcontractor employing the – Iraqi – helicopter pilot might have been a secret service front
https://www.lausitzer-allgemeine-zeitung.org/tarnunternehmen-arbeitgeber-in-wirklichkeit-der-geheimdienst/
I have found an archived copy of “Salisbury incident” page from WAA’s website:
http://web.archive.org/web/20180623172425/http://www.wiltshireairambulance.co.uk/salisbury-incident
Paul,
It reads that they are proud of their professionalism.
In their own version of events, they landed in a car park then took off, having taken a LOT longer than necessary to get there.
I am proud of them too.
The first 999 was at 4:15 but WAA was not called until 4:19? Why? What was the person who recieved the 999 call doing? I would assume that by 4:16, the ground ambulance and police had already been notified. What then? The 999 operator went for a cup of tea before calling the AA?
So who made the call to WAA in the first place? When the 999 came in, the AA was not called immediately… somone called WAA 4 minutes later. Why? By the time ‘someone’ called WAA, the ambulance and paramedics had already been seen running down Market Walk; they were already at the bench BEFORE WAA was even called. So who made that call? Whoever it was must have been waiting for the first 999 and then called out the AA…
Everywhere you look, you see a hoax.
Paul the helicopter was probably never really called out to the bench couple job. That 4.19pm call was just to let them know that the hoax was on. It was pre-booked to be at Sainsbury’s car park at 5pm.
The hoax was set for 4pm with the impostors and the helicopter was to arrive at 5pm, to take Sergei and Yulia into hiding. Except they may have lost Sergei?
That’s why the helicopter did the PR stunts on the way down from Distillery Farm Minety. They had a lot of time to kill.
Now its possible that the helicopter took off with only Yulia to Charlborough House, Richard Drax’s estate in Dorset. It flew past Salisbury Hospital in the right direction for Almer near Bournemouth and returned again over Salisbury Hospital where they turned their transponder back on again.
It would only take five minutes to get there (30miles) unload and return easily in 40 minutes?
From its last known location just to the NE of SDH, the AA could have gone at least 40 miles in any direction (N,S,E or W) and still have got back to overfly SDH on its way home. That also, for example, puts Fairford well within reach. It could have gone to LOTS of places.
” Whoever it was must have been waiting for the first 999 and then called out the AA… ”
I’ve been sticking firmly to the notion that the emergency services were already aware of the incident, via police radio rather than via a 999 call. This notion is based on anonymised-later-admitted DSNB having been described by the PM and the HO as a first responder.
Yet this conflicts with DSNB via the BBC saying he wasn’t there at all, at least not until later when everything was cleared up. The scene by then was just as portrayed in Thom Belk’s images and the complementary images from the other side of the cordon. Those images where the female might or might not be RH, or her male colleague might or might not be DSNB+large_tablet.
Now I’m left wondering whether DSNB became a hero because he became contaminated and, in beccoming contaminated, became a contender in the Anonymous First Responder category. By which perverse logic, I’ve also wondered whether the room used by PnB, at the City Stay Hotel, was identified by traces of nerve agent rather than their registered room being tested.
Now: about the other taxi driver, the one who may have been the first to name DSNB – the stickiness of the first notion is less binding than it was before …
Eleanor, the other taxi driver was a Twitter ‘time warp’! The taxi driver’s tweet was well after Bailey had been named BUT because Twitter uses PST not GMT, at first glance it looks like it was ‘too early’. Add on 8 hours to the time of the tweet and it all becomes clear…. ish.
But I did read the tweet in GMT, Paul, and it was late afternoon.
The article in the Independent was indeed published at 0902 but with a final update at 1936. Admittedly it there’s no way of knowing what was in the original version and admittedly Nick Bailey is named in the headline but it was updated at least once.
That Shaun Askew was the first to tweet him by name at 1748, as found by hooray-for-Liane, might suggest that the Independent and Shaun had the same sources (or he was their source). In fact, being bound by D-notices, the Independent couldn’t publish the name until a member of the public had previously put it in the public domain, on an international platform.
The undated official statement by Kier Pritchard, but known to have been issued on 8 March, mentions that he has “visited Nick in hospital this afternoon … “.
For those who haven’t seen it:
https://www.wiltshire.police.uk/article/1747/Statement-from-Chief-Constable-Kier-Pritchard-and-PCC-Angus-Macpherson-on-injured-officer
If Nick wasn’t visited until the afternoon, the statement would not have been issued until the end of his visit, at the very earliest.
And that’s why I think this other taxi driver might also be interesting.
17:39
Police officer named
The police officer harmed by nerve agent in the Salisbury poisoning has been named by sources as Sergeant Nick Bailey.
Authorities say that while he is still in a serious condition, he is now “talking and engaging” with people.
https://news.sky.com/story/live-poisoned-salisbury-cop-talking-and-engaging-11280674
Tweeted at 1739 but the Sky clip embedded in the tweet shows a clock time of 1732, during Kier Pritchard’s interview.
Shaun Askew might have only picked up the name on Sky News, and tweeted it 15 minutes later, and the Independent could have picked it up the same source.
Taxi driver now of less interest!
Kier Pritchard had just visited “our officer” at 2:06 pm GMT Thursday, March 8:
“I have just left the bedside of our officer and family in hospital. Conveyed all our thoughts and wishes, an amazingly courageous officer.”
https://twitter.com/wiltspoliceCC/status/971748878516178944
and at 4:53 pm Heart Wiltshire News gave Bailey’s name.
“BREAKING: @wiltshirepolice have confirmed the officer taken ill after the poisoning in #Salisbury is Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey”
https://twitter.com/heartwiltsnews/status/971812538026545152
Im still thinking Male with Female talking with Uniform within
cordon outside World Of Cards is DS Bailey and I think we
would see part of red bag on floor going off angle-location from
other picture?
Just my opinion. Considering what allegedly happened at bench
[medical emergency] where is evidence of used wrapping-packets
from syringes-needles-other used items. Biohazard Markers over
vomit-other bodily fluids?
Its as if staged in process of being setup.
Its as if its all being staged and setup.
Sorry for repeating..Meds kicking in..
Mark
If you look at the picture they are outside the cordon – not within it.
Could be DSb though.
Not out of the question.
Does anyone have any context on the Putin ‘traitors will kick the bucket clip’ from 2010. Is thereca precise date? It looks like he us responding to a question. It’s a fair bet that if the question related specifically to Skripal it would be shown.
The first answer in the replies here: https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/40900/did-putin-threaten-to-have-traitors-assassinated
It refers to archive.org: https://archive.org/details/RT_20101220_040000/start/720/end/780
Might give some context.
As usual, when the media want to paint a particular picture they extract sound bites and present them out of context, as you’ve implied.
Grigory,
The original video appeared, I think, on BBC’s Newsnight, can be seen at this link:
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5735518/vladimir-putin-choke-traitors-video-russian-spy-sergei-skripal-poisoning/
The original can be found at his 2010 Q&A session when he was PM. The relevant section begins at just after 3 hours 12 minutes, and lasts for about 3 minutes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E8B9wGcDWVI
As you will see, his answer is basically the diametric opposite to the one the BBC piece leads you to believe, since he denies that the Russian secret services carry out such killings (you don’t need to believe that to be the case – the point is that this is what he actually says). But the BBC basically took what he said, hacked it about to extract the bits they didn’t want their audience to hear, and then put it back together (with some scary music) to make it sound like he said something he didn’t actually say. It’s called propaganda.
Rob
Thank you Cascadian and Rob. Having just signed up for the Telegraph, for their Brexit coverage, I have been able to access the two Telegraph articles seven years apart,referred to in the Stack Exchange Post, and take PrintScreen cuttings showing that they give exactly opposite interpretations of Putin’s words. I’l try them on my ‘focus group’ and see what Private Eye makes of them. I have never come across such a black-and-white example of how British media twists things about Russia.
@ GrigoryZinoviev,
The western Fake Stream Media has no problem portraying H.E Mr. Putin as the man who was burying the Lindberg baby behind the grassy knoll on Elm Street, while JFK’s motorcade whisked by.
He’s quite a marksman, isn’t he?
/sarc.
Hmm, Rob, what you describe sounds to me more like fabrication (stuff made up) by the Beeb , not just propaganda (which can be ‘true’),
Here is an image found by our friend Peter Beswick:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dm-4kMQX4AEyM19.jpg
The helicopter pilot on 4 March was WAA’s Chief Pilot, George Lawrence:
https://www.gazetteandherald.co.uk/news/15609659.Teamwork_is_key_at_Wiltshire_Air_Ambulance__says_pilot/
George Lawrence is employed by Heli Charter Ltd (based at Manston in Kent). Heli Charter Limited provides the pilots and maintenance of the AA at the WAA base at Seminton:
http://www.heli-charter.com/meet-the-team.php
Recall that there was no police assistance for take off or landing and that no police cars or ambulances attended.
The helicopter landed at the far end of the car park – about as far away from the bench as was possible! It could have landed in Market Place, only 200 yards from the bench – it had previously done so in a PR exercise.
Paul,
That shot courtesy of Pete’s seem to bright.
If the AA is there, and still of course to take off, what time of day was that on the Sunday.
Sunset at 17:50pm so I suppose so?
Maybe its the skill of the photographer.
As has been commented on, victims on the ground,being treated for a while, no pictures….
That image is at approx 5:05pm.
One more piece of the puzzle.
Thank you, Paul and Peter !
From the link : Wiltshire Air Ambulance Unit Chief Pilot George Lawrence joined after a 17-year military career in the Army Air Corps.
The AAC’s HQ is at Middle Wallop, Hampshire not very away, and nor is the AAC base at Netheravon. The AAC are responsible for all SAS’s secret air movements too.
The operations manager of WAA is Kevin Reed who for 12 years served as ‘police observer’ in the joint Wiltshire Police-Ambulance service. With their connections, it’s quite likely that they’d be quite happy to use the WAA helipcopter for unorthodox, secret missions.
By the way, that odd flight to Manston airfield now makes sense.
I keep being drawn back to those three pictures. Don’t know what
it is but they just look staged-clinical somehow?
If you think that we are being asked to believe that 2 people were being treated for almost an hour at the scene, it is very odd that there isn’t a single picture of treatment being given. Never mind the CCTV, why is there not a single picture of a paramedic at the scene… or even a picture of an ambulance (except for the one still there half an hour after it all finished); or of the crowd that gathered there? Nobody was taking pictures… of anything?
Yes very strange especially when they were saying there are 200 witnesses.
“British police have identified more than 200 witnesses and are looking at more than 240 pieces of evidence in their investigation into a nerve agent attack on a Russian ex-spy and his daughter, interior minister Amber Rudd said on Saturday.”
From: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-russia/uk-police-identify-over-200-witnesses-in-nerve-agent-attack-minister-idUSKCN1GM0R7
All those helpful members of the public, who responded to the police appeal for witnesses, would have had their images ‘seized’ (police term, not mine) and each was sternly reminded that it would be regarded as contempt were they to put evidence into the pubic domain.
Those not intimidated, nor already bound the the Official Secrets Act, would have had any (additional) evidence impounded by those who were aware of the confidential D-notices.
And remember the police got the mobile phone records of EVERYBODY who was in Salisbury that day. I wonder why that was needed… [no I don’t wonder; it was to be sure they had traced everyone!!]
I don’t think I knew that, but I do now (thanks!).
Mark
How many helicopters turned up?
Were they expecting more victims?
If so – why?
Only one helicopter turned up, and I believe it was originally part of the original MI56 plan, that went so badly wrong.
Hello Ken Kenn. I not understanding your question?
Thanks
Duncan you seem to have done really well getting Rebeca to engage. Do you think there is any chance you could phone Nigel of Nigel’s Taxis Melksham and ask him what was happening at the Air Ambulance on March 4th in Sainsbury’s car park? His number is on 07976 165910.
Whatever his response is, it will be interesting. Just an idea.
Oh he knows everything Denise. His back seat passenger got in the AA and then his formerly front-seat passeneg got in the back (behind him) and made a phone call.
How do we know this Paul?
To start with Denise, check the pictures – especially what you can or cannot see through the back window of the taxi.
Part of his job will be knowing how and when to keep his mouth shut. I predict that calling him will yield nothing other than an increased awareness of his ability to be discreet.
Denise, I may have burnt my bridges with Ms Hudson.
My current tactic, which I must admit is not working, is to challenge her investigative powers and chase the big story.
If she did, and I believe she did, (although I don’t do Twitter) really delete Tweets from March 4th and 5th, then what possible reason could that be?
Other than HMG telling her that was “classified material which could hinder an ongoing investigation…”
Rebecca does admit it was the biggest story ever in her short journalistic career.
She went to London and interviewed the Russian ambassador, and just when it could have got interesting, she stopped.
At least you got her to respond Duncan. I was expecting that she would just ignore you.
Well done for attempting it.
In late March, WAA added a new page to their website:
“Salisbury Incident
Wiltshire Air Ambulance Charitable Trust continues to work closely with all partner agencies to support the ongoing investigation.
Wiltshire Air Ambulance Charitable Trust continues to provide emergency critical care to the public of Wiltshire and surrounding counties.
Wiltshire Air Ambulance Charitable Trust is immensely proud of our aircrew and wider team for all their professionalism, dedication and support of each other during these unprecedented events”
The original link was this but it has long since gone:
http://www.wiltshireairambulance.co.uk/salisbury-incident
Since WAA issued a statement to say that it had not transported the Skripals to SDH, how was WAA able to: “support the ongoing investigation” – what did WAA know? WAA hadn’t done anything (or even been involved… officially).
Is it just me or does WAA’s “Salisbury incident” statement (that didn’t stay online for very long) appear VERY defensive?
Why did so many MSM reports say that Yulia had been in the AA when it left Sainsbury’s car park? Maybe… because she was?
Which was why 5 minutes later the AA flew over London Road Cemetery, to give her one last look at her mother’s and brother’s graves.
Now that ‘is’ interesting Paul
That means then that Yulia went to Devizes helicopter base/police HQ that evening and then on somewhere else by car.
The AA started towards SDH after it left London Rd and then turned its transponder off again. I do not believe it ever landed at SDH on 4 March. It later returned to a position just south of SDH and then turned its transponder back on again as it flew overhead SDH before heading back to Devizes.
But it went to the cemetery after the SDH detour, so that means Yulia was still on board then?
Maybe Yulia got in the helicopter in Sainsbury’s car park and then they went to pick up Sergei from the ambulance he was in somewhere close to SDH?
Denise, recall that it has previously been mentioned that they were separated sometime after leaving the Mill but that came secondhand from another source and we have not been able to speak to the original source.
If flew to the cemetery straight from the car park – if you watch the video of it taking off, it starts off flying towards SDH but in the very last second you can see it begins a turn to the left. That took it on a route to Bourne Park where the transponder was switched on. It then flew north to do a lap of the cemetery and started flying back towards SDH again before the transponder was switched off. The transponder was switched back on again about 40 minutes later as it flew overhead SDH on its way back to Devizes.
Ok got it, thank you Paul. So they could have taken Yulia anywhere in that 40 minutes. In a 20 minute radius of SDH?
That’s 45 to 60 miles – those things can easily cruise at about 140knots.
A tad disingenuously, but WAA might truthfully assert that ‘Since WAA issued a statement to say that it had not transported the Skripals to SDH’ because both Skripals were not in the heli and/or the destination was not SDH and/or no patients were being transported and/or the heli was on private charter, from just before lift-off. Indeed, from the moment that the ‘fitting’ patient was land-assisted to hospital, the heli was either on standby or available for other work.
Paul has already made the point that there’s a paucity of of WAA assistance incidents but the heli itself flies almost daily.
I suspect that the official narrative needs a new editor, one who is able to ensure the consistency of all the various strands of the official explanation.
Here is Thom Belk’s image:
https://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/newpix/2018/03/08/18/4A020F9400000578-5476507-image-a-37_1520532905287.jpg
At bottom left, you can clearly see that the car is an ‘ambulance’. You can see the same car in all the other images linked below in Brendan’s post.
1) Why was an ambulance still at the scene, nearly half an hour after the patients had gone?
2) Where are the paramedics? We don’t see them in any of the images.
Paul,
Was there not Tweets with pictures from Rebecca? I seem to recall she had a picture of the AA taking off from Sainsbury’s car park.
The thread here related to who if anyone was in the departing air ambulance, and therefor who went by road ambulance.
I told Rebecca at the time, that if she was on the ground for the breaking story, with camera phone in hand, then she would know if either Sergei or Yulia were on-board.
Duncan,
The tweet you are referring to linked to the SJ, which had a picture of the AA departing taken by Spencer Mulholland. It is in the slide shown in this article:
http://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/news/16064166
Paul,
That link did not work.
Is it me, have you tried it recently?
Maybe it is history being re-written……
Sorry, Duncan, I cut off too much. Here is the whole link that should take you straight to it:
https://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/news/16064166.Russian_spy_is_one_of_two_in_hospital_after_medical_emergency_at_Maltings/#gallery24
Thanks Paul, that worked.
There was also a similar picture, which had more of a night time feel to it. Maybe from Rebecca’s phone which she then posted on Twitter.
I don’t do Twitter, can you look back at all of the postings for an individual? It had been mentioned that Rebecca had deleted some Tweats around the time of interest. Maybe the departing helicopter was one of them.
The other picture you refer to is also in the gallery – just click through the pictures in the above link. The other picture was credited to Marcus McNiven.
Nigel being near the Air Ambulance in his taxi is interesting.
He is based in Melksham
Why was a taxi from Melksham there?
Melksham is:
7 miles and 17 minutes from Divizes Police HQ and AA helicopter base
25 miles and 45 minutes from Distillery Farm Minety
35 miles and 55 minutes from Salisbury
37 miles and 1 hour 5 minutes from Porton Down
“Nigel is pleased to bring to Melksham “Nigel’s Taxi Service”; with over 20 years experience behind the wheel of another well-known taxi company in the area, Nigel continues to provide Melksham the unique, reliable and friendly service to the town that he has become extremely well known for, only now under his own name. If you see Nigel around the town give him a wave or say hello, even still if you need a taxi give him a call on 07976 165910.”
Also worthy of note is that the silver Ford?, on the right of the pictures, seems to move forward as soon as the AA has lifted off.
This is the silver Ford Focus:
https://www.regit.cars/car/dg05udh
The Focus doesn’t move. It is actually the taxi that moves back.
Well, one or other of the vehicles moved.
Far more interesting that the taxi went into reverse, because it suggests that it had had some kind of business with the AA, or someone near it.
Potentially it was already reversing, when the image was captured.
Could explain why the air ambulance dawdled down to Salisbury. No point getting there until the taxi arrived?
We may know why… I’ll put it in another post soonish.
In the ‘before’ image, it is sitting with its side-lights on (engine running?). It then moves back 10-15 metres or so.
I just re-read this update from SDH:
https://www.england.nhs.uk/south/2018/04/10/updates-on-the-salisbury-incident-7/
NOTE: “We also used specialised decontamination techniques to remove any residual toxins.”
So how did OPCW find anything in the bio samples they took on 22/23 March?
Heretic
No, I’m just asking for a friend! Are you not also just a ‘little’ bit curious? The OPCW was actually very clear about what it found… so how did they do it, if residual toxins had been removed?
They just use some that they got from the White Helmets in Syria Paul lol
And I really laughed at “heretic” Cascadian
I think the most relevant quote begins “What a tangled web we weave …”.
I suspect that who(or perhaps whom)ever, or whatever (is it human?), is that is in control of the official narrative is either losing, has lost, doesn’t care about, it.
I’ve been lurking, sometimes commenting, sometimes failing miserably at making a rye comment, sometimes attempting to help with the analysis (but I don’t give enough thinking time to it), since this I became aware of this blog, although I’d been reading various articles (on The Saker mainly) about what my have happened in Salisbury since mid March. The government is, without question, lying. But how to get the general populace to pay attention, are they all on drugs? Oh! WAIT!…
Cascadian,
One word describes exactly what happened… HOAX!
Definitely. But it leaves out the why? And Why? is geopolitical and it reinforces my belief that long and extensive preparations were made for that event, as they have been for other pointing the finger events such as those in Syria and other places that The Hegemon wants to control.
Totally agree! The Skripals could have vanished quietly (and that would have been that) but ‘somebody’ decided to make a big ‘show’ of it and blame Russia afterwards.
Given the political ramifications, I don’t think that ‘somebody’ was an underling… it was a decision taken right at the top’. Some ‘Hooray Henry’ in MI5/6 took this to someone with an address in SW1A 2AA, who thought they were all jolly clever and it was a great wheeze!
The rest we know.
If it was a combined services operation, in the broader sense, then that could explain the competing versions of events, and the defensive that’s also been observed here (from the reports, I mean).
I guess it was an operation by some semi-private, public cliques.
This guy here says he knows them
https://www.ukcolumn.org/article/skripal-russian-web-or-rusi-web
Rusi is a “charity”.
https://rusi.org/
https://rusi.org/inside-rusi/rusi-funding/supporters
“funding200,000 to £499,999
BAe Systems
HSBC
Qatar Ministry of Foreign Affairs
£100,000 to £199,999
Accenture UK LLP
Airbus Group
Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
Foreign & Commonwealth Office
Canada Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Standard Chartered Bank
Qatar Ministry of Defence
…”
And this is what has always bothered me about that ‘nice little old lady’ – some might say “Constitutional? My arse!!!”.
“Copy No. 1 always goes to HM The Queen”. Why would a Constitutional Monarch, with no real power other than the opening of parliament on the election of a new government, need to see high level intelligence assessments ??
Do we live in a democracy or not. Don’t answer that, it was rhetorical, I already know the answer.
Indeed, anidea, and ‘a combined services and quango(s) operation’, might be wordy but more accurate.
Please don’t let me start ranting but a ‘charity’ is a registered charity for taxation purposes; no shareholders, no dividends, and any surpluses ploughed back into the organisation; any notion of benevolence or altruism, excepting for public relations reasons, may be no more than an acceptable veneer. The exceptions may be the among smaller charities, staffed by volunteers and funded by goodwill and donations; yet deeply unpleasant but avowedly caring individuals can be found even in small scale operations.
I’ll get off me (sic) soapbox now.
The sound as if they are the sort of people that Rudyard Kipling had in mind on writing ‘Mesopotamia”
There were two very odd videos, Yulia’s and the Russian interview with the two alleged assassins. Could one or both be a kind of proof from one set of people to another that they had access to the people involved, knew who and where they were, and (at least in Yulia’s case) they were still alive? Like kidnappers do … and not just for the public. Yulia’s statement was stranger, but if the two from Russia were actually undercover someone must have found them or given their details. And not been particularly worried about them appearing.
not totally on topic I know …. but discussing with my sister, she said Russian side was a bit suspicious …. and I said they have just mainly been asking for proof … and she said but that R&A interview was weird.
I see the story that “Putin did not play by the rules” is still circulating.
In that, Sergei was in a swap, so Russia or Putin should have left him alone.
So said Younger, head of the SIS.
No journalist challenging that, with respect to Sergei going back into the spying game meant he had broken the rules and was now fair game.
A brief thought on Rus and Alex. This might be a unique perspective.
What id their Salisbury jaunt was at the request of, and paid for by the UK spy forces?
Along the lines that MI5/6 had an idea to boost their budget requests by getting a plan underway which could put Russia in the frame.
Rus and Alex did exactly what they were paid to do.
The UK paid them to do it.
They were hapless tourists in and around Salisbury, but never in CMR.
Putin was also correct that they were not on a mission, just not his mission.
Sergei had to go away, but he wanted Yulia to have the option to go with him.
Then came the rest of the team, the red bag and Bailey.
Many of us thought there were two events on that weekend.
Maybe Alex and Rus were indeed the “first event” but that was all part of the plan.
A plan which only involved HMG.
I’ve thought for a while, but avoided putting the argument because it’s a bit involved, that S&Y’s disappearance was planned by Sergei in cahoots with UK TPTB and that the whole thing was planned and coordinated to coincide with the closure of the CBRN exercise and also to be preceded by the strikeback episode that introduced the term ‘novichok’.
I think that it’s reinforced by the argument that Sergei is alleged to have had with Yulia – it may have been, given that Yulia was already in the throes of other life events back in Russia, that Sergei’s plan was to remove her from Russia and thus avoid any kind of revenge attack on her by elements within Russia, but that Yulia was convinced of the argument and was resisting – hence the bust up (wherever it was). It may also fit in with her apology to Viktoria – “I understand everything now”.
I suspect that they are both living a very nice life somewhere – possibly very unlike Mr. Bailey.
I also suspect that they are both fine, living somewhere in the United States – under the protection of the US military.
Correction “was not convinced”
If R&A are selling ‘body building’ products, they may have been lured to Salisbury by being given details of a likely ‘contact’ there. That way, HMG didn’t have to fork out for the flights to get them to the UK – times are hard after all…
paul
I’m not convinced that R & A were selling body building products but something more concentrated than that.
The burns on Dawn’s hands suggest to me that whatever the substance was it was not creatin or protein shakes.
It might have been something thattgoes a long long way 9 therefore highly profitable )
Concentrated Carfentanyl perhaps – pure speculation I know but something burnt Dawn’s hands and I’m not sure that Novichok would do that.
Charlie said it smelt of ammonia.
As far as I know Novichok doesn’t.
I’m tall and skinny by the way and the only ‘six pack ‘ I know of is available at the Off Licence.
Ken,
Charlie actually didn’t say it smelt of ammonia, it was Charlie’s brother who said that. Charlie said it had very little odour. Real novichok, howvever, is said to have an unpleasant smell.
Whatever was used on 4 March and whatever was used on Dawn and Charlie was not Novichok. They would all be dead! No nerve agents were used, the numbers of people involved are just too small.
Women would spray perfume on their wrists an then transfer it to their neck. Dawn’s injuries were said to be to her hands and face… it makes no sense and her injuries cannot be from applying perfume – more likely from something like using ‘doctored’ soap to wash her face.
As I have said elsewhere, I just don’t think R&A were involved at all with what happened on 4 March.
One other aspect of this might be explained.
On Russian TV, Rus and Alex seemed relaxed despite the fact that the “casual tourist” story seemed far fetched.
However, if they were paid to do exactly that, then they would be relaxed, because it was true.
Paid to go to London, spend a couple of days in Salisbury, (have some whoopee on the Saturday night) and make sure your are seen frequently on CCTV, but not at CMR.
The visas would not be a problem, as HMG was looking after the scheme.
It allows the Super Recognisers to earn their crust and show how valuable they were to the identification, plus the useful Apollo turned agents contribution too.
Even Putin is correct in calling them tourists, as it was not a GRU mission they were on.
They were being set up by HMG, and they probably do not know who paid them, or more correctly, who really paid them.
Home run for the SIS, Sergei saved, Russia blamed, budgets increased. Nation in fear – Nerve Agent.
Putin now aware, so sadly Rus and Alex now joining the disappeared list.
Duncan,
I think it fits the facts better than suggesting R&A were GU agents ‘on a mission’. They were duped.
” They were duped.”
Patsies
So how did they avoid to get arrested?
They were offshore before they were detected.
Being a tourist and then behaving quixotically is not enough to get you arrested.
So, here’s you hopin’ for a very ‘Merry Christmas‘?
Forget about it.
Your covenment wants you to have a very ‘Scary Christmas‘, with Russian bogeymen lurking behind every Christmas tree, buckets of Novichokolate at the ready to
killcull the large British herds of sheeple…Britain on red alert after warnings of fresh wave of Russian spy attacks – Link to The Telegraph.
Back in the day in the US, they had these idiotic, ‘Sesame Street’ color cards, indicating the ‘level of terror threat’ we were in at any given moment in time… I guess somewhere down the line they got retired….?
Be afraid. Be very Afraid!
cards = chards
OMG!
CHARTS!
What?
You mean there are more ex-Russian spies moonlighting in the UK??
I think Urban is falling down on his game – think of the ‘inside story’ revenue from books and newspaper articles.
Yes, most of them are on this blog.
Damn! Busted!
Say “Merry Christmas” while you can! In Malmo, Christmas is now being referred to as “The Winter Celebration”, by a local newspaper, so as not to upset the ‘you know whos’.
Children are, no doubt, looking forward to unwrapping their ‘winter celebration presents’.
I understand that there is as yet no plan to rename Ramadan as the “Starve yourself to Death Celebration”, so it seems only the indigenous culture is being targeted (again).
If I recall correctly – perhaps a better name for Ramadan might be “Eat Yourself Stupid Before Dawn Occurs, Celebration”.
Correct – but I am sure they won’t be doing that either. Sweden has been invaded, over-run and defeated without a shot being fired.
It is now nearly 3 months since the last election and a government still cannot be formed as none of TPTB parties will work with the Sweden Democrats – who won an ’embarrassingly large’ number of seats last time…
Wiltshire Police tweet [5:19 AM – 5 Mar 2018]
We received a call at approx. 4.15pm yesterday (4 March 2018) regarding concern for the welfare of a man and a woman in The Maltings, Salisbury. They were taken to Salisbury District Hospital & are being treated for suspected exposure to an unknown substance. #Salisbury.
https://twitter.com/wiltshirepolice/status/970649978011111425
Why tweet this message at 05:19 A.M. [13 hours after the event]?
Lol no, Daniel, Twitter displays Pacific Time Zone unless you are logged in, when it presents your geographical time.
In the UK, this tweet appeared at “1:19 PM – 5 Mar 2018”
@ eleanor,
Oh, darling [please don’t take this the wrong way], I happily stand corrected.
No problem, Daniel, I made the same mistake but was nicely put right by iirc Paul.
They all seem to have cranked up the bulletin devices, once it became apparent that it wasn’t a couple of overdosed addicts who had collapsed on the bench.
Jim was asking about carfentanyl and fentanyl:
“It would be interesting to know what locations those seizures have been, and if Salisbury was one”
I don’t know about the seizure locations but it has come to southwest England Jim.
“Rachel Britton, who works for the Addaction charity, said there was evidence to suggest that the dangerous mix had been found in Bath and Wiltshire and warned evidence suggested the cut will only “become more widespread” in the South West.”
From: https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/fentanyl-killed-tom-petty-prince-269005
Picture of AA Sainsbury’s [engine off-rear portside-tail] Red Taxi
parked. Is driver sitting in car? Be a good witness if he is.
Cant make reg-number out but maybe he could be traced?
Thanks
You are on the ball Mark! Greta news!!
This is the taxi:
Owner: Mr Nigel Crook
Vehicle Registration: WM17 PCV
Plate number: HCV2843
Colour: Red
Make: Skoda
Model: Superb
Issue date: 21/12/2017
Expiry date: 20/12/2018
https://www.taxyc.com/GB/Melksham/942088159205230/Nigel%27s-Taxi-Service
Can I ask for an update on the state of the art of the helicopter inquiries?
I think it was Denise and Miheila who put in most spadework, and their findings threw a tantalising light on the network of toffs, moneyed types, and spooks, in what seem to be militarised rural areas.
Hi Begob, Ive got nothing new on helicopter use in the area. There are RAF helicopters moving around quite a bit but they dont reveal anything in particular.
Maybe they are driving everywhere now because they now know from The Blogmire, that turning of the helicopter’s transponder doesn’t work very well for them. lol
The Salisbury Journal’s Head of News, Rebecca Hudson says – correctly – that the significant role of local media like the SJ in covering the Skripal case has been ignored by larger media organisations.
https://twitter.com/journalrebecca/status/1065731564393381888
https://twitter.com/journalrebecca/status/1065714113018585090
It’s a pity then that she didn’t boost the SJ’s profile by reporting more about what she saw at the Maltings on 4th March. This appears to be her in the top image shown here:
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/moment-police-ordinary-uniforms-probed-12149096
If that’s her (and it looks a lot like her), she walked right past the park bench where the Skripals had collapsed and were taken away soon before (that bench is obscured by the ambulance car on the left of the image).
In that case, it would have been good if she had given some information about the red bag on the ground that many people suspected as belonging to Sergei or Yulia.
The following photos were apparently taken when Rebecca arrived at the scene, at the opposite side from where Thom Belk took his photos later. The ‘Skripal’ bench is the one to the right of the tree in the first image, and ‘Rebecca’ is seen talking to an officer in the third image:
https://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/resources/images/7485585/
https://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/resources/images/7485647/
https://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/resources/images/7485578/
Those were part of the Salisbury Journal’s slide show from the scene from here:
https://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/news/16064166.Russian_spy_is_one_of_two_in_hospital_after_medical_emergency_at_Maltings
Does anyone know if that is RH? It is the same couple as photographed in the Mirror. It has always struck me as odd that the police allowed ‘passers-by’ to get so close.
The Mirror adds: “The pictures were taken at The Maltings shopping precinct in Salisbury, Wiltshire, just two minutes after Yulia was airlifted to hospital” – if that is correct it would be just before 5:15pm. Which is odd if it is RH because I am 100% sure I read somewhere that RH didn’t get to the scene until around 5:45pm.
In the SlowJournalism article, Toxic Shock, then-SJ editor Joe Riddle says he didn’t get the tip off about the AA until 1716 (so about 5 minutes after it had taken off again) and that’s what alerted him to an incident in The Maltings.
In Thom Belk’s images, you can see someone the other side of the police vehicles, and that presumably was the person who took the SJ images that Brendan linked.
IF it’s RH (and I’m not at all sure it is), then it doesn’t look like photographer Tom Gregory with her. Tom Gregory’s website is here, and I suspect he hasn’t gone bald since March this year:
http://www.tgregory.co.uk/
Interestingly, he was not only alerted to the bench incident, but it was him, driving to work the next morning, who noticed unusual-looking ambulances heading towards SDH.
This was what I was thinking of:
https://twitter.com/journalrebecca/status/971708161664176128
17:43 RH and Tom Gregory head to the scene.
I very confused now Paul. It still seems quite light,not going
dark as yet in the three pictures. How long had Sergei-Yulia
been taken away when these pictures taken?
Mark, The couple who were on the bench were taken away at approx 5:10pm. The lighting is almost certainly brighter in the images than it was in reality at the time. On 4 March in Salisbury, sunset was at 17:52 and dusk was at 18:26.
The fact that the sky in the first image is a lot brighter to the west than to the south indicates that it was before sundown.
The picture of red bag on floor taken from other angle with Officer
kneeling seems later in afternoon due to lighting.
I cant see red bag in any of the three pictures that look as if taken
earlier?
Silly idea but Male standing with Female looks like Bailey?
Sorry if I confusing matters Paul…Thanks!
The camera angle means that it can’t be seen, I think.
But I see what you mean, Mark, and if it was DSNB and a colleague, that would explain why they were allowed to be inside the cordon.
The only one of the 3 images that might possibly show the position where the red bag appears later is the first one, but in that image it could be hidden behind the tree.
And I can’t see anyone who looks at all like Bailey.
The two images I looked at, Brendan, are this one (that you linked, ex SJ, earlier):
https://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/resources/images/7485578/
and the grainier image by Thom Belk/Solent, that was published in The Mirror and the Daily Mail has better image resolution:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5476507/Poison-plot-police-officer-awake-talking.html
Eleanor, the Mirror and Mail images look like the same quality, and it still doesn’t look like Bailey to me.
Hmm, I know you’re right, Brendan, being the same image, both deteriorate when enlarged to a useful size!
I can see what Mark’s getting at and this has the erm serendipitous advantage in that it fits in with DSNB’s comment that he’d wander down to The Maltings and take a look, but there was nothing at the bench (any longer).
Just imagine, for months we’ve had no real interest in a couple strolling away from the bench area. Tonight we’re asking if it’s Rebecca and, if not, who is she; and then we (Mark, to be precise) the question is if that could be DSNB and his colleague.
Thanks Brendan! Yeah see what you mean about tree. Just thought
Couple inside cordon must be Police [plain clothed]
@ GR,
I’ve a small, Canon SX600 HS camera. One of the things that stands out about it is its ability to shoot clear pictures, even with minimal light present [be it natural or otherwise]. That might explain why the pictures are relatively less dark.
However, this being Salisbury, where more lies have seen the light of day than in your average Fake Stream Media articles, and where CCTV cameras do not provide ample footage, showing collapsing people on benches [or people feeing ducks], one has to keep an open mind as to other possibilities.
Why did the cops show up at the Skripal’s abode around 17:00? How did a ‘first’ responder come in last? Where did the ‘highly trained’ Air Ambulance paramedics go to/disappear [in] to [as I’ve never seen an AA take without its crew in full]?
Paul,correct The Couple..not Sergei-Yulia!
Glad to see you are on the ball today Mark!
Paul:
– “Does anyone know if that is RH? It is the same couple as photographed in the Mirror.”
Good question – since the image is not sharp enough to identify her with certainty. But if it isn’t RH, who is that woman who looks like her who appears on the scene at the start of the Salisbury Journal’s sequence of images?
– “The Mirror adds: “The pictures were taken at The Maltings shopping precinct in Salisbury, Wiltshire, just two minutes after Yulia was airlifted to hospital” – if that is correct it would be just before 5:15pm.”
The timestamps on the three images are 17:19, 17:22 and 17:28 in that order – fairly close to 5:15pm.
– “Which is odd if it is RH because I am 100% sure I read somewhere that RH didn’t get to the scene until around 5:45pm.”
Correct again, at least according to RH:
“Sunday, 5.43pm Reporter Rebecca Hudson and photographer Tom Gregory head to the scene”
https://twitter.com/journalrebecca/status/971708161664176128
But that isn’t Tom Gregory in the Mirror’s image. He looks completely different in his web site and also in a brief scene that RH shot on her smartphone that night (see a previous post of mine for the link).
As I said before, if it isn’t RH, who is it?
Brendan,
It is an excellent question because they are inside the taped off police cordon.
The caption of the image in the Mirror report above describes the woman and man as “passers-by”. Thom Belk, who took the photo, described them as “members of the public”:
“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.”
It would be very careless of the police to lift part of the cordon to let any member of the public through, considering how seriously they were taking the incident. Some police officers had already gone to Sergei’s house at 5pm, and the people in hazmat suits were going to arrive at the bench a couple of hours later.
Also, ordinary members of the public do not usually walk around on Sunday evenings with tablet computers (like the one that the man on the right is carrying).
Thom Belk has a profile page at the SJ:
https://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/author/profile/40600.Thom_Belk/
I think he would have recognised Rebecca if it was her (unless she didn’t want to be identified).
If they really were ‘passers-by’, then the ‘red bag’ cannot be evidence… can it? It is tantalising that Thom Belk actually referred to “the bag”!
Yes indeed, Thom Belk should have recognised RH, especially since she would have walked even closer to him in the Maltings. He seems to have quit writing for the the Salisbury Journal several months before she joined, but he should still know who she is and what she looks like. Thom still deals with the local media every now and then, because he is an event organiser, involved lately for example in a charity fundraiser and a music festival.
And a further question – who took those 3 photos on their iPhone 4S?
Tom Gregory’s photos of the hazmat team later that night were taken with a professional camera, Nikon D300S.
I am sure you checked but there is no copyright information in the EXIF data and there are no embedded comments or other data in the file – which would tend to indicate that it was not a professional photographer.
Paul, I thought at first that Tom Gregory might have taken the photos with his phone if he didn’t have his camera ready. But then why would it not be credited to him or the SJ, or to anyone else for that matter? The names of the three other people who photographed the air ambulance at Sainsbury’s car park are given in the slide show. Maybe the 3 Maltings photos were taken by a passer by who wished to remain anonymous?
And it’s strange that even if Tom Gregory arrived 20-30 minutes later, he did not take any pictures of the police cordon, or at least none that were published. The first images from him are from hours later when the hazmat team started the cleanup.
I guess the easiest thing to do is to ask Tom Gregory if he knows who took the pictures,
Brendan
The Red bag is truly intriguing.
In the Mall CCTV video of the blonde woman and the man it is definitely a Red bag in my view.
At the bench it is not so clear cut.
Logically can we say that if the Red bag was at the bench then witnesses would have noticed it? They noticed how the couple were dressed and some hair colour but not the bag.
The duck feeding woman says that Yulia had a Red bag and the mall CCTV woman had a Red bag.
Basically if it was at the bench then it belongs to the blonde haired woman.
They have been seen together.
If Yulia had a red bag it belongs to a copper haired woman.
They have not been seen together unless it was ” seen ” at SDH with items of clothing from the pair. Belongings.
It would be interesting to know what belongings accompanied the Skripals to Hospital.
The again the CCTV cameras would reveal a whole lot more.
We are never going to see them.
Then again, there was a large red bag carried by the dark haired, masked woman seen leaving Pret at 3:40pm… maybe it was hers?
I am begining to wonder if the ‘red bag’ in Belk’s image is a red herring… I realise that is heresy but if it was a possession, surely it would have gone in the ambulance? If it was ‘evidence’… evidence of what? And should it not have some police markers or ‘cones’ or something to denote that it should not be moved? I can’t see anything like that.
The only other thing I can see by or on the bench is a white roll, seen in this image:
https://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/resources/images/7485585/
And also in this image:
https://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/resources/images/7485910/
In that second picture with the minion scooping up material from the mound of sand/Fuller’s Earth by the bench perturbs me. The training given on the NBC course includes use of materials, such as Fuller’s Earth, to mop any excess residue of the agent that might have come into contact with one’s NBC suit. If I recall correctly, small pads with a porous wrapping are provided for this purpose.
So, why that huge mound (in relative terms) of sand/Fuller’s Earth on the ground by the bench? It seems a bit theatrical to me, in that dumping such a huge amount of the stuff, especially when one considers the supposed potency of ‘novichok’, is so unnecessary.
And why what there none dusted onto the bench??
Did the assissins bring a bowser of the stuff with them? Where is it?
Whatever it is they are scooping up, isn’t that potential evidence? Even if they didn’t know about novihoax at that time, if it was vomit or other fluids from the ‘victims’ should it not have been tested for toxins/drugs?
The whole idea behind using of Fuller’s Earth to mop up agent residue is to neutralize it, so that it’s no longer free in the environment. I’m sure there are better ways to collect fluids as evidence. As I’ve stated – it looks very theatrical to me.
I can’t say I’m really sure that the woman in Thom Belk’s photo is Rebecca Hudson, but she does look an awful lot like the pictures that appear on RH’s twitter page and accompanying her SJ articles. However those pictures look like they were taken years ago, and RH looks a bit different in recent images taken in the months after the incident.
Whoever the woman is, she’s very unlikely to be just a member of the public walking through the Maltings. the police would not allow anyone through the cordon without a very good reason. Maybe she was an eye witness or the nurse who attended the Skripals and was about to go home?
Loath as I am to mention hair again, RH’s choice of avatar image (and her brief appearance in the Panorama propadocu) suggests that she prefers a fuller hairstyle, that maybe being the natural tendency of her own hair.
The woman, with the man with the laptop / notebook / tablet, has chosen the sleek look (on that Sunday, anyway). Both are insiders imo, be they plain clothes police, off duty medics etc or even journos (but almost certainly not journos, because RH is not camera shy and Thom Belk would have recognised her, or Ellie Harries).
Funny it was the hair as much as anything else that made me think it was her – a combination of sleek/flat on top and more full around the sides.
While reading Liane posts it occurred to me that there is a very simple explanation how B&P neared the Skripal door unattended – they may have wanted to look like simple ads delivery guys. It gives them a perfect excuse to nears each house under the cover just to drop ads in the mailboxes. If someone asks them what they are doing and notices their Russian accent, it looks innocent enough – for such simple job they don’t even need knowing much English.
Sergei back in the game.
This might have led to his downfall.
Either because Putin was angry that he was “unretired” even if Sergei’s new activities were not “anti-Russian”
Or, whomever was the target of the information, for example an oligarch, Russian or Ukrainian mafia, Russian state or even the UK authorities themselves.
It seems quite reasonable that Sergei would be wary, and protect his house with lights, security, cameras etc. and maybe he did, despite what DSB was able to get up to during the search.
As mentioned in other posts, DSB went there at midnight to look for other victims. Assuming pets were not on the list, that search would not have taken long.
When I consider that Alex and Rus were in town, and what we think of their real identities and roles, they must have been involved in something that led to the Sunday afternoon activities.
Early Blogmirers thought that two separate events took place on Sunday.
Rus and Alex delivered/brought/received something to/for the Skripals.
During this transfer, or shortly after it, a second event happened. The UK were involved in this second event. The details and specifics of the second event allowed Mrs May to promote the “bad Russians” story.
My other personal views, none of which I can substantiate:
Rus and Alex were involved in a rogue mission. “Rogue” in the respect it was not state sanctioned.
MI56 were watching Skripal and mobilised their counter plan when Skripal was observed to signal or attempt contact with Rus and Alex.
The red bag at the bench must be significant, as it has been disappeared from all official versions of the narrative.
I am still thinking intensely, thanks to Liane’s great work, WHY did DSB’s Panorama version contradict so much of the earlier versions of events?
Maybe, the BBC did not research the earlier versions, maybe they thought no one would notice.
In effect, no one other than the Blogmirers did notice.
Duncan,
I know it has consistently been your view that R&A “must have been involved” but I still have doubts about that. I can imagine lots of ways they could have met that didn’t involve 2 trips to Salisbury. If R&A had to deliver something what better place to hand over a bag than at a crowded airport… they could easily have met Sergei on Saturday afternoon at Heathrow.
R&A ‘missed’ Sergei in Salisbury on Saturday; a delay anywhere on the train on Sunday and they would have missed him on Sunday as well! What sort of ‘professional’ operation would leave anything important until the very last minute and be so haphazard?
I guess this boils down to gut-feeling because we know that we have been lied to about what R&A were supposed to be doing and we are now left with 2 choices:
1) The Met lied but R&A were part of somebody’s plan; or
2) The Met lied and R&A’s trip to Salisbury had nothing to do with Sergei.
My gut says it is the second option and that R&A have been fitted up by the Met with false allegations to further HMG’s agenda. They were just in the wrong place at the wrong time.
And how big is this supposed ‘team’? Four isn’t it? What about the other suspects? Where are they? What was their role? Were all four there to meet Sergei? I just don’t see a team of four being needed to do a bag swap/drop with Sergei.
Hmm, so your question is why if R&A were “mules” delivering something to Skripal they had to travel to Salisbury?
Skripal is old-fashioned spy. Why at first place he have chosen house in Salisbury? My guess is that because this is tourist town and there is a very big park nearby. He may have used the park to make “deliveries”. It is the most secure way noone will notice. At airports, restaurants, etc. there are hundreds of CCTVs and always someone can overhear something. How to make or get a delivery with zero risk someone will make photos? For an oldafshioned person the best is to put a package at the park at random time and to expect it be lifted from the recipient also at random time. There are necessary no meetings. No chance someone to see you with the other party. Why in Salisbury? Because only there Scripal is familiar with the park and locations where packages can be safely left for many days with very low risk someone else to find them. And where he knew all CCTVs positions.
So my theory is that on 3th March B&P have left or picked something at the park. At 4th they have made another delivery in the same manner. My guess was taht on 3th they have got some envelop with money, which explains their vigorous night with the prostitute. On 4-th they have left a package for Scripal somewhere in the park. There have not been any face-to-face meeting between the two parties.
Makes sense and fits with feeding the ducks.
But the whole transaction only makes sense if this was meant as a sting operation outsourced to private parties by both sides.
And something did not go as planned. In a sting operation you usually arrest people not have them poisoned.
This here is German on BND operation HADES. Use google translate.
https://www.heise.de/tp/features/Parallelen-zwischen-Salisbury-und-dem-deutschen-Plutonium-Skandal-1994-4009728.html
or this
http://www.spiegel.de/spiegel/print/d-9181696.html
Incidentally BND’s Hades affair started in Spain in 1995. The same year and place Skripal found employment in by MI6.
Which park are we talking about? I’ve come a bit late to this. Are B and P heading in the direction of a convenient park in the photo at the Wilton Road garage? Are they anywhere near park where ducks were fed when they were photographed in Fisherton Road? The idea that they were in Salisbury to leave something for Sergei seems, a first hearing, to be a plausible explanation, a plausible explanation for their presence in Salisbury. I doubt that Sergei would choose to live in Salisbury just because of convenient parks, I’d expect there would be similar parks in many towns of eqivalent size.
” WHY did DSB’s Panorama version contradict so much of the earlier versions of events?”
Supposing, just supposing, the Panorama piece presents the police* version of what happened and that’s why it doesn’t tally with other versions? There may be MI5/HO versions and MI6/FCO versions that have been doing the rounds as well (and maybe others too, including those of the emergency services) that afford, shall we say, different perspectives on what happened and each with a degree of wriggle room so that criticism can be levelled at other services / departments because no, guv, it wasn’t me or us that screwed up.
* I think I mean Wiltshire police rather than Met Counter Terrorism, but can’t be confident because whoever is supervising the management of DSNB’s role, vis á vis Sunday 4 March and its aftermath, is doing so with damage limitation as the primary objective and DSNB’s welfare much farther down the list of priorities.
DSB went to skripals house to take away all CCTV footage – among other things.
@ Duncan,
What’s also of interest is the stories that go dark [Steele dossier, anyone?], never to be heard of again…
Words like ‘mis-remembered’ and ‘re-purposed history’ sound fancy, but form reliable cornerstones in the lexicon of double-speaking politicians and other people of influence.
Duncan if Rus and Alex were involved in some rogue operation in the UK, Putin was worried about it at all because he said that what Rus and Alex were up to in the UK wasn’t “particularly illegal”.
wasn’t worried
Denise, I agree Putin was not worried or even interested
However, I have to believe he was aware.
Certainly after the mission, if not before.
In my logic, the only explanation for Rus and Alex to be in Salisbury and do what they did, i.e nothing, is because their trip was paid for by the UK SIS.
Not sure if somebody saw these articles before:
https://off-guardian.org/2018/11/29/the-incapacitation-of-salisbury/
“… the strictly scientific case I intend to make – or reinforce – on the apparent poisoning of the five Salisbury “Novichok victims” with the Incapacitant known as “BZ”, or 3-quinuclinidyl Benzilate.”
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2018-05-22/deadly-chinese-fentanyl-is-creating-a-new-era-of-drug-kingpins
“Synthesis takes about a week and requires neither heat nor skills more sophisticated than following a recipe. And in recent years, rogue chemists have unearthed instructions for analogues that researchers discovered decades ago but never put into legitimate use. Sellers offer these variations before governments can outlaw them. Potency and purity vary: One dose may produce a euphoric high, while another kills immediately.”
And the last one is about the vanishing credibility of our politicians and our media:
https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/12/03/the-west-slips-down-another-step.html
“Once upon a time truth was considered to be the best defence. In the Cold War there was little effort to silence Soviet propaganda. Anybody could listen to Radio Moscow, read Soviet newspapers or anything else. Most countries had a legal communist party working, under Moscow’s strict control, for a communist takeover and pumping out propaganda as hard as it could. Innumerable front groups pushed communist and Soviet policy under a variety of covers. We didn’t worry too much: truth was the best defence. But the USSR did worry and it spent enormous efforts jamming Western broadcasts. A child could figure it out: the side that’s blocking the other side is afraid of the truth, it’s afraid of dissent, it’s afraid of freedom.”
On the drugs issue I would point people to the recent comments by the head of the UK National Crime Agency that carfentanyl has been seized in small quantities in the UK:
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/dec/01/dark-web-dealers-voluntary-ban-deadly-fentanyl
It would be interesting to know what locations those seizures have been, and if Salisbury was one………..
I would have thought that a spy who was swapped and then quietly retired in the country that requested him was one thing but a spy who was swapped and them went on to work actively against his former country, after he was swapped, is entirely another.
Alex Younger Head of MI6 said:
“The head of MI6 says Russia broke one of the primary rules of espionage, and won’t be trusted again”
“Mr. Skripal came to the UK in an American-brokered exchange, having been pardoned by the president of Russia and, to the extent we assumed that had meaning, that is not an assumption that we will make again.”
https://www.businessinsider.com.au/mi6-head-alex-younger-russia-wont-be-trusted-2018-12?
And its going to get worse. I cant remember it being party policy on either side for MI6 to run a covert war against Russia. I can’t remember anyone proposing that publicly prior to any recent election.
Do we want some public servant declaring war on Russia on our behalf without us a least having a say in that, at an election?
Alex Younger Head of MI6 said:
“Speaking on Monday, Younger said Russia was in a “perpetual state of confrontation” with the UK and warned the Kremlin not to underestimate the UK’s determination to fight attempts to interfere with its way of life.”
What he really means is that MI6 hates Russia and is in a perpetual sate of confrontation with Russia because Russia won in Syria and with the pipeline to Germany and in the Ukraine which showed MI6’s hopelessness and its imperialist mentality.
Here’s a clip of some of what he said:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Os7wWA88XuY
Thank you for the link Eleanor, and what he means when Alex Younger Head of MI6 says:
“not to underestimate the UK’s determination to fight attempts to interfere with its way of life”
he really means:
“not to underestimate the UK’s determination to fight attempts to interfere with MI6’s interference (destruction of) with other countries way of life all over the would”
world
What I particularly relished is that it’s just a sound bite, Denise, and what else did he have to say? He can’t have needed notes for 1:16 of talk, and no talk is as brief as 1:16. Anyway, here’s The Guardian article to complement the clip:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/dec/03/uk-is-in-technological-arms-race-with-its-foes-warns-mi6-chief
I’d rather have read the transcript, even if Younger did deliver an ‘unscripted swipe’ and the only way you’d know it was unscripted was because …
And Eleanor did you see the hashtag on the front of the propaganda leaflet he had to hand out at the talk?
#secretlywerejustlikeyou
They’re like children. They live in a complete bubble. Detached from reality. Now I’m beginning to understand how the farce of the Nina Ricci bottle came about and the rest of Skripal shambles.
That ‘were’ bugs me, Denise, due to the lack of apostrophe.
Why not:
#secretlyjustlikeyou
My theory of russophobia crisis was elderly senior secret services people wanting their cold war experience to stay valued. Especially if now working in private security firms. Public primed by James bond etc. Lots of available memes and phrases, fellow travellers, intel, useful idiots … Idea of dangerous Russians an easy sell …. Even the Kremlin still same name as back then …
Кремль (Kremlin)
What does it mean?
Citadel, or perhaps, Fortress.
Lots of cities and towns in Russia have Кремль
The only really dangerous people are those who are treacherous, those who renege on previously signed agreements, those who will never agree to a comprise unless it is overwhelmingly in their interest. Now, who could that be?
“You looking at me?” – Tee Rump [lead character in ‘Taxi Writer’]
Who? Me?
Tsk!
The are behind you.
They
Here is the whole speech :
https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/mi6-c-speech-on-fourth-generation-espionage
In fact it was a recruitment speech, advertising the benefits of working for the MI6.
They need more Bellingcats…
Quote : „But I am speaking today because it is vital that people hear enough about SIS to know what we really do – as opposed to the myths about what we do – and because we want talented young people across our country to join us.
We are going to need the most diverse and skilled officers possible in the years ahead.
And that will require people with new perspectives, capable of harnessing their creativity in ways that we can’t yet even imagine.
It is why we are determined to attract people from the widest range of backgrounds to join SIS.
In particular, I want to speak to young people who have never seen themselves in MI6.
The stereotype is that we only want a certain “type” to join MI6. This is false. If you think you can spot an MI6 officer, you are mistaken. It doesn’t matter where you are from. If you want to make a difference and you think you might have what it takes, then the chances are that you do have what it takes, and we hope you will step forward.“
It is also amusing to hear how an octopus describes „the spirit of partnership“ inside the „concentric circles of partnership“ :
Quote : „We work more closely than ever before with our sister agencies M15 and GCHQ.
The spirit of partnership extends further, to the police and other domestic agencies, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and the Ministry of Defence, and the UK Armed Forces we often serve alongside.
We also draw on unparalleled partnerships overseas, including our Five Eyes allies.
When you consider these concentric circles of partnership, and the breadth of skill, experience and trust that they encompass, it is not surprising that adversaries seek to offset their relative disadvantage through hybrid means.
Our allies trusted in our intelligence in the aftermath of the Salisbury attack. We felt this as an act of solidarity and it meant a huge amount to us.“
Focus on the young – the church has known this for centuries. The young mind lacks experience, and that lack of experience limits its ability to question, to ask why? I think it is significant that they are focusing only on the young because only the young will provide the blank slates upon which TPTB will write their accepted world view.
Older people, who will certainly possess far more skill and experience than a yound graduate will not be acceptable because their experience – perhaps an acquaintance with some history – provides them with the ability to question and to question in a manner based on factual experience. It is that ability to question that makes them as unacceptable to SIS.
Very True,Good Stuff!
I had a friend at school who by the age of 16 was regularly completing (more or less) the cryptic crosswords of the 3 broadsheet papers in the library during morning break. He went on to study Greats at Oxford and graduated with a First. This was in the 80’s.
He was, predictably, “tapped on the shoulder” by the “appropriate” tutor about going into the “civil service”, and expressed interest. The intensive vetting process quickly discovered that he was a practicing homosexual, though not before I and quite a few of his other close friends had been interviewed. An Oxford lesbian friend of his had “spilled the beans”, at which point the men in macs ended the interview with unpleasant and sarcastic questions; “does he take it up the Garry?” was one, apparently.
Years later, when I recounted this to someone rather grand at GCHQ, she replied, roughly: “what a huge loss to the service, an incredible waste of talent. We have to recruit the young when they don’t realise how badly paid and draining that kind of work is. By the time you’re in your late twenties you wouldn’t touch it with a bargepole”.
My friend went on to great success in international Scrabble, sets fiendish crosswords for the Listener, but his day job is, strangely, accountancy. He was always rubbish at maths.
Thanks for the lesson in rhyming slang. I didn’t know that new terms were still being couned in my lifetime.
Rhyming slang evolves continuously, GrigoryZ, Jeremy Hunt being an unsubtle recent addition to the lexicon.
Garry was an autocorrect typo, and clearly should have been Gary. It was evidently well established by the 1980s, and probably dates back to 1971 when Paul Gadd adopted the name.
For the benefit of the prurient, my friend is/was a “top”, and his bean-spilling lesbian friend should have replied: “no”. She is, btw, now happily married with 3 children.
I was agreeing with Liane Theuer. Alex Younger’s St Andrews address is perhaps best interpreted as chiefly a recruitment exercise.
@ Cascadian,
Add the military to it as well.
“Burn the hamlet!!!”
“But, Sarge, that;s where Won Tong Hing pissed beside the pot in 327 B.C. It’s a sacrilegious abode-”
“FIRE!!!!”
Watch ‘Full Metal Jacket’ – the sequences in training are very instructive and bring back memories of my basic training. The whole effort is designed to break down individuality and mold the recruits into functional units who will; unquestioningly obey the orders of a superior officer. If you believe the myth about Lemmings then I suppose that Lemmings would integrate well into the military.
Cascadian, your comment explains why in my experience older people, and I mean 70 and 80 plus, in Britain seem more inclined to question the government line on this than younger. This originally came as something of a surprise to me.
@ Grigory
I’m not quite there yet, but my life experience has taught me to accept almost nothing as being what it is presented to be. Sadly, the few friends I have, many of them distant, and some older but who have not been exposed to the experiences I’ve had, have been dipped in the dye and it seems quite impossible to wash it out.
Perhaps I’m just too cynical.
@ Cascadian,
That would give it a negative connotation. You’re realistic. When people tell you 1 + 1 = 3, you ain’t buying it.
I have friends who sincerely believe that friends always have to be on the same page. I don’ t think so. And my answer is underscored by the universe, where energy consists out of two opposing forces. I’m a vegetarian, and for whatever reason, everybody thinks my wife is one as well.
She’s not.
Nature has given us a gazillion different plants and animals. None of them wants to be something else. Nothing wrong with differences, it only becomes a problem when some differences want to be prominent and dominate other differences. That’s now how it works.
——-
/end of rant
“When people tell you 1 + 1 = 3, you ain’t buying it.”
Yes, but there is a field having the property that 1 + 1 = 0 something to be aware of in vector space theory.
Thank you, Liane, that was a far more interesting read than what was reported.
For everyone’s sakes, I hope SIS fulfills its recruitment aims.
I was going to join but working Sundays in Salisbury was not what I was really looking for.
Apparently if you become Double Agent you get paid twice.
Three if you are really greedy and devious.
Plus private work – of course.
Denise, when I listened to Panorama and some of the other stories about Sergei, I myself thought that the former spy was taking a chance getting back in the game and becoming a cuurent spy.
With Putin making it very clear what he thought of traitors, then perhaps Sergei became a target once again.
I wonder if the Urban book and programs like Panorama are falsely “outing” Skripal so that any ideas of returning to Russia are well and truly scotched
Thanks Francesca, precisely the point. And Yulia trapped on the fly paper. Habeas corpus been suspended again?
Two interesting quotes I have found recently:
One was from a movie with Nicholas Cage where the bad CIA type character says:
“No operation goes exactly as planned. You stay calm and tie up loose ends.”
Lots and lots of loose ends to tie up in the Skripal story.
And this one from a story on BZ weapons:
“Propaganda should not look like propaganda. To be effective, it must be convincing, an edifice of facts laced with strands of fiction.”
The opposite of this one seems to be the case when blaming Russia with the Skripal story.
Indeed, Denise.
So why are there “lots and lots of loose ends to tie up in the Skripal story”?
To say that “No operation goes exactly as planned” doesn’t do justice to the MI6 operation, which failed catastrophically (in their view) – hence so many loose ends. So many, in fact, that in their frantic and hurried attempts to tie them up, the very tying up is flawed – thus creating yet more loose ends – which in turn they attempt to tie up… and so on…
What they tie up badly with one hand, they (or other state agencies) unintentionally untie with the other hand.
“In war-time, truth is so precious that she should always be attended by a bodyguard of lies.”
Said by Churchill, and resonating with Alex Younger’s comment on Monday about adversaries “who now regard themselves as being in a perpetual state of confrontation with us”.
Whether or not one agrees that a state of cold war exists, the ‘bodyguard of lies’ aspect explains the explicit and obvious disinformation that veils the Skripal incident, from March onwards.
PART 1 – Five questions the BBC has to answer.
Comparison of Mark Urban´s book and BBC Panorama.
1. Was Bailey at the bench while the Skripals were there or not ?
Urban :
Someone is looking through the two patients’ pockets for identification. A couple of CID officers, plainclothes people, have come over to the bench, having been nearby on an investigation of local businesses using illegal labour.
It doesn’t take them long to find ID: they are Sergei and Yulia Skripal.
BBC :
Comment : It was only when the patients clothes are searched for proof of identity, the first clue emerges.
Bailey : “I just started my duty at 3:00pm doing my normal work. The police tried to figuere out just what happened. The details were a little bit sketchy so I thought, well, I’ll have a wander down then. There was nothing around the bench that we could see.”
Note : Urban clearly says that Bailey searched the Skripals pockets at the bench.
The BBC is a little vage about that. Bailey’s statements leave some interpretation options open.
Note that he doesn´t say that he got the order to search the house. Instead, it was “his thought”.
Liane, These are great points but I like this one the best because Treasonous May has said in the HoC that Bailey was a first responder. It seems to me that Bailey himself has denied that he was actually at the bench until 8pm(ish)… in which case May has misled the House and MUST now correct the record.
If May knows the record is wrong, she is required to do something about it… otherwise she might find herself in contempt of the house (again).
This is not a mere technicality, if any Blogmirer has an MP who he/she thinks might be willing to ask the question in the HoC, it would be helpful if they could make themselves known to us and we could help drafting the letter if required…
What would be his “normal work.”..do DS’s stooge around on a Sunday..
he thought he would wander down…from where…..without informing bosses control or getting authorisation…curiouser and curiouser….if on the find an immigrant duty that would need to have been “signed off” so to speak…..
PART 2 – Five questions the BBC has to answer.
Comparison of Mark Urban´s book and BBC Panorama.
2. How they found out that Sergei was a spy ?
Urban :
The Ops room radios back to the officer on the scene: Sergei Skripal has a ‘Don’t Stop’ flag on the Police National Computer. On screen there is a note beside his listing and a number to ring. It’s a rare thing, that Don’t Stop, and the few officers on duty in Salisbury that afternoon, seven or eight of them, all take notice when they hear it over the radio.
The wires had been buzzing at Wiltshire Police. They had called the number in the police computer and found out that Sergei Skripal was a former Russian spy who had been resettled in Britain.
BBC :
Pictures of an officer searching in Google.
Paul Mills : “A police officer goes online and used the name Sergei Skripal. I had a call from the on duty Superintendent who said “you would want to sit down for this one”.
Note : In Urban´s version Sergei had a „Don’t Stop“ flag on the Police National Computer.
The BBC claims they found out via Google.
I think Urban’s version is more believable.
I, too, think that Urban’s version is more believable.
Lianne Theuer
What does the phrase ” Don’t stop ” mean?
I think it means “If you see this man doing something suspicious, don’t stop him”.
Ken Kenn, I googled different versions of ”Don’t stop” flag/order, but I couldn´t find out what it means.
I think it´s an advice to police in the sense “when this person attracts your attention in any way, don´t do anything, but inform MI5/6 instead”.
In the UK there is/was a ‘stop and search’ law (IIRC). It’s been controversial because of its use to target so called blacks. Regardless, police in the UK have the right to stop anyone and enquire what they are doing and why.
Liane Theuer
Thanks for the reply.
It does suggest that Mr Skripal ( or spies in general) are specially treated in some kind of way.
Of course, you have to know who they are in order not to stop them
as a Wikpedia search won’t be sufficent info.
they knew who Mr Skripal was straight away in my book.
As I said previously in a post a lot of emergency services were on hand for wet Sunday in March. A coin shop ( valuable coins?) on open display with no shutters down and so many first responders and members of the public but mobile phoneless.
Perhaps they were all kicking their heels waiting for the call?
Liane,
Most , if not all of the agencies listed can already be accessed through the current Police National Computer (PNC). The UK is one of the most surveilled state in the Western World through the aforesaid linkage plus the addition of private & public security cameras.
Why would DSB Google Sergie when the info would be instantly available through a normal linked police computer?
PART 3 – Five questions the BBC has to answer.
Comparison of Mark Urban´s book and BBC Panorama.
3. What did Bailey in Skripals house ?
Urban :
The two CID officers meanwhile went to Skripal’s house on Christie Miller Road.
Approaching the front door, Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey extended a gloved hand to grasp the front door handle – always worth a try. It wouldn’t open so he went around to the back of the property, where he managed to gain entry. What was he looking for? Signs that their house had been searched, perhaps, or maybe even the presence of a would-be assassin. Everything seemed to be in order.
BBC :
Insert „Around midnight“.
Comment : That night, Nick Bailey and two collegues are sent to the Skripals home.
Bailey : “We had to make sure that there were no other casualities at the house. It was vital to first find out what has happend. We decided to protect ourselves and to protect the scene. We wear full forensic suits. The house was in darkness. I was the first person in the house. There was nothing to see ontoward. We came out of the house, secured it again, took our forensic suits off, which we than bagged off, and than we went back to the station.”
Note : Urban claims it were two CID officers. The BBC speaks of three.
Urban has them entering via the back door.
The BBC claims they entered via the front door. But they don´t say it, they only SHOW it. Now forced entry, in the BBC version they had the keys.
IF they wore forensic suits, then Urban´s claim is absurd that they looked at the presence of a would-be assassin. In forensic suits ??? By the way – why should a would-be assassin in the house ?
IF Urban is right and they wore only gloves, then Bailey is simply lying.
Both, Urban and BBC, does not mention if Bailey took some items out of the house.
They also don´t mention the pets.
And it´s not explained HOW the house was secured. But we know that there was no cordon at that time.
PART 4 – Five questions the BBC has to answer.
Comparison of Mark Urban´s book and BBC Panorama.
4. When Bailey feels the first symptoms and when he rushed to hospital ?
Urban (translated from German version of the book) :
The next morning, Tuesday, the situation worsened. DS Nick Bailey had strange symptoms overnight and had been taken to the hospital.
After searching Skripal’s house on Sunday, he had driven to his Bourne Hill office and typed his daily report.
When he took off his gloves, he had come in contact with a small dose of the poison.
In his case, the symptoms did not appear until after about 24 hours.
Bailey, too, was sweating heavily and had heart and vision problems, but he did not need to be ventilated. His condition never became “critical”, presumably because he had been given a much lower dose of poison, but that only came out in hindsight.
Now on March 6, his illness put the clinic in alarm.
BBC :
Comment : After searching Skripals house, Bailey returned to Bourne Hill Police Station.
Bailey : “Once we came back from the Skripals house, my eyes were like pin… my pupils were like pin-pricks. And I was quite sweaty, hot, ehm. At that time I put that away being tired and stressed.”
Comment : “Nick goes home, hoping to sleep it off.”
MARCH 6
Comment : By now Nick Bailey is feeling terrible.
Bailey : “Everything was juddering. I was very, very unsteady on my feet. The sweating has gone from my forhead to my back. My whole body was just dripping with sweat.”
Comment : Nick´s family rush him to hospital.
Bailey : “I was concious throughout the whole time.”
Question : “Have you any idea how you got it on you ? I mean, if you were wearing gloves ?”
Bailey : “No, I don´t.. I don´t know. I don´t know weather.. it´s gone through the gloves. I don´t know weather.. I mean.. I could have.. adjusted my face mask, my goggles. Was it in the house, was it being on my hands.”
Note : Urban claims the first symptoms appeared overnight March 5 to 6.
The BBC has the first symtoms overnight March 4 to 5.
IF the BBC is right, Bailey drove home with pin-bricks pupils, which means a clearly limited view.
Both say that Bailey returned to Bourne Hill after searching Skripal´s house.
I would really like to see his daily report !
The other CID officer(s) were never named. WHY were they not contaminated ?
Urban´s „his condition never became “critical” is confirmed by the BBC.
All politicians, officials and media who have described Bailey’s condition as critical or even being in a coma, have lied.
Urban is quite sure that Bailey was contaminated at the police station „when he took off his gloves“.
In the BBC version Bailey himself has no idea, which speaks volumes.
Neither Yulia nor Charlie nor Bailey seem to know how they were poisoned. They were only able to recall what they had been told about it.
Yulia does seem to know how she and her father were poisoned. Otherwise it would be hard to explain as to why she was not told the officical narrative up to some time in July – between 3 July, when she called Viktoria and blamed the latter for making their story public and thus creating an obstacle for Yulia’s return to Moscow, and 24 July, when Yulia told Viktoria that she “got Internet and understood everything.”
Charlie indeed may have a very vague idea of what happened to him and Dawn.
As for Bailey, I think that he perfectly well knows how he was poisoned, but he has to tell a made-up story because, as he was told, it is necessary for the sake of the national security.
I suspect that Dawn’s death, on 8 July, was a game changer.
Yulia’s summer on retreat will probably have improved her English too, as much of what’s been published has been in English (I am assuming that too much hasn’t been blocked, on what internet access she’s been allowed to use).
DSNB’s world has been rocked as well but he’s sticking by whatever line is being currently briefed.
What has genuinely surprised me was some of the content of the Panorama programme: I expected to be familiar with much of the content and anticipated some new information. But I hadn’t foreseen that a new version of the events would be presented, in a version that is at odds with what was said by both the PM and the then Home Secretary, Amber Rudd, in the HoC.
If Charlie has gone to ground, it’d be entirely understandable.
Too little was credible before, and even less now.
According to Ross Cassidy, Yulia was fluent in English, so she did not need to improve her knowledge to read English-language stories on Internet.
That doesn’t mean it might not have been improved or expanded, Milda, so there’s no reason to suppose that she might not have benefited.
Me, I’m learning new things all the time. Trouble is, I tend to forget them. ‘Egregious’ is a relatively recent addition to my working vocabulary – I haven’t used it here yet but have been tempted; ditto ‘hubris’. Hadn’t encountered them until they became buzz words in the past few years.
eleanor:
“I hadn’t foreseen that a new version of the events would be presented, in a version that is at odds with what was said by both the PM and the then Home Secretary, Amber Rudd, in the HoC.”
And also at odds with Urban’s book! It’s incomprehensible why the story, which Bailey had to convey to Panorama viewers, was different from the story described in Urban’s book.
It’s probably being produced as ammunition for gish gallop responses to anyone who questions TPTB.
Bailey : “We had to make sure that there were no other casualities at the house…”
Bailey : “Once we came back from the Skripals house, my eyes were like pin… my pupils were like pin-pricks. And I was quite sweaty, hot, ehm….”
How long could it have taken for Bailey to see that there were no other casualities at Skripal’s house?
Perhaps no longer than 10 minutes. If we allow even 30 minutes for that and add about 20 minutes for Bailey to drive to Bourne Hill police station, it would make less than one hour between Bailey’s exposure to the “nerve agent” and his feeling unwell. Meanwhile, the Skripals got ill more than two hours after the alleged exposure at the door handle. Bailey is bigger than Yulia and younger and healthier than Sergei. Also, Bailey got a lower dose of the “nerve agent.” So, why did he get ill sooner than the Skripals? As I guess, because his story is a lie.
Milda
Seven hours is a long time for those in charge to check the house for more potential victims.
It’s also a long time to go to a house in “darkness ” and apparently not turn the lights on and witness nothing ” untoward. ”
All this based on an initial diagnosis of opoid poisoning.
Dangerous – maybe? but Hazmat suits should protect yo from that substance. Novichok is much more serious and highly dangerous. For all the plod knew their could have been a bucket of it to be kicked over in the darkened hall, but there you go.
Proceed with caution.
I think they have been watching too many TV dramas. In these dramas, people never switch the light on (even in their own houses) so it’s easy for assailants to creep up behind them.
@ Bunderbuss,
Word has it they <3 Keystone Cops footage…
Milda, you’re assuming without justification that Yulia and Sergei were poisoned – disingenuous to say the least. Interestingly, you exploit any excuse to support the official line in this respect. Truly open minds should be very cautious in accepting the covenment’s word without independent evidence.
I don’t see any justification for the claim that the Skripals were not poisoned.
I said many times: My theory is that the Skripals were poisoned with an incapacitant and that was a false flag operation to frame Russia.
PART 5 – Five questions the BBC has to answer
Comparison of Mark Urban´s book and BBC Panorama.
5. Where the Skripals at home when R&A allegedly approached the house ?
Urban :
It became clear to police that the Skripals went out that Sunday morning to visit Liudmila’s and Sasha’s graves at the London Road cemetery, came home briefly and then went out again at about 13.00. In as much as Sergei had a regular ‘pattern of life’, a Sunday-morning visit to the London Road cemetery was often part of it.
So had the poison been delivered while he was out by somebody who knew he would not be back for a while? Or maybe during the night, after Yulia had arrived but before they went out? The absence of contamination at the cemetery gave some weight to the idea that the Novichok was placed while they were there, not before.
By around three weeks after the attack, suspicions were finally focused on the front door.
At Porton, the technicians running items and swabs through the GC/MS equipment reached an important conclusion; concentrations of A234 were significantly higher on the front-door handle than anywhere else. It was ‘ground zero’.
BBC :
Dean Haydon : “So what the CCTV shows is the two suspects on the way to Christie Miller Road and on the way to the Skripals home.”
Comment : The Skripals are at home, oblivious of what is happening right outside.
Dean Haydon : “We believe the suspects actually took out the device which was containing the Novichok, move to the front door and used a pump to actually place the Novichok on the door handle of the home address. They would have been there for litteraly a matter of seconds.”
Comment : At 1:30pm father and daughter head out for lunch.
Dean Haydon : “Sergei came out first of all. He got Novichok on his hands. And then Yulia came out second and she also got Novichok on her hands.” [plural !]
Note : Obviously, at the time he was writing the book, Urban was not sure which version of events the Met would choose.
Urban claims the Skripals “came home briefly and then went out again at about 13.00”.
The BBC has the Skripals definitely at home at the time the doorhandle was sprayed. They left the house at 1:30pm.
What makes Dean Haydon that sure that they left at 1:30 and that Sergei came out first ?
Do they have CCTV ? If so, they must have R&A spraying the doorhandle on CCTV too.
But why not show it to the public ?
Liane,Absolutely Perfect! Excellent Work. Well Done!!
Liane, another example of your usual superb work.
It’s the detail that causes HMG to trip over themselves.
If I was the Russian superagent, then I would spray the driver side door handle of Sergei’s car.
Especially as the car was unattended in the driveway, or at Mo’s house on the Saturday or early Sunday morning.
The door handle is only needed because of DSB.
Keep at it.
Duncan, if I was the Russian superagent, then I would put a packet of buckweed in the mail box (or something like this).
That has the advantage if Sergei opens the door and ask what for they are here, they could say they have a delivery.
Liane Theuer
Curious all this activity on wet Sunday in Salisbury.
Coppers looking for illegal workers – coin shops closed with no shutters
down from the day before for the photoshoot of the alleged assassins – parcels being possibly delivered and tourists galore going ( or not going?) to Stonehenge and the Cathedral. Zizzi’s doing a good trade and the Mill Pub being the home of football watching witnesses who were never asked as to how Yulia and Sergei were dressed and whether she was carrying a big red handbag? Not to mention hair colour.
There is a mention of staggering but it is a pub after all and I’m reasonably Sergei as a good Russian likes vodka and maybe slung a few down him before visiting the Salisbury mass duck feeding ( traditional? ) at the pond and moseying on to a meal and the pub – or vice – versa.
All in all a very busy day on a wet weekend.
And all those police and medics at the ready too.
Phenomenal.
Then again they might be around if something was planned beforehand.
Sundays in the UK are not known for being that lively at the beginning of March.
Ken Kenn, don´t forget an army nurse/doctor near the bench, a helicopter with two highly trained paramedics at the scene, hazmat crew at the bench at around 6:00pm, Porton Down ready to test blood samples at 9pm Sunday evening.
Indeed a busy Sunday.
@ Liane,
You’ve outdone yourself again. Topnotch detective work and the results are stellar [as per usual].
Hat in hand.
Lianne Theuer
America does flashing lights and drama – Salisbury doesn’t.
It’s all very strange.
Liane, Just a theory – Maybe B&A had some advertisement cards in their backpack, one of them – Alex with the better English, goes to the door of each house while to seems like is dropping advertisements in the mail boxes, the other looks around. If Skripal gets out just in the moment when Alex is nearing the house to smears the door handle, Alex can always shows the advertisement banners and tries to look like simple ads deliverer . It is so simple job that is not required to know very well English (explains the Russian accent).
I don’t believe in the door handle theory but by other reasons.
Your first para by Urban..pattern of life….who told the police and him…Pablo Miller? Sounds like. Because Skripals were incapacitated…..
Theresa’s Last Days In Bunker..Oh Please God..Please Get Her Out!!!
She Convinced She’s Winning.
Her Propaganda Machine Is Kicking In Robustly With Lies-Untruth’s Yet
She Demanding Open-Transparent Investigations Regarding Saudi Arabia?
How about Robust-Open-Transparent-No Lies Regarding Salisbury!
Stop Fitting Russia Up As The Bad Guys..
You Are A Lire Theresa May!
You look Pathetic On World Stage..Please dump them Leopard Print
Slippers Theresa….Your A Joke…Robust Fact!!
@Brendan, You said “there’s no evidence of any deleted tweets from those two days”. I beg to differ; there is evidence of ‘missing’ tweets from both days.
The SJ published 3 articles on 4 and 5 March:
1) 4 March at 17:48:03
Russian_spy_is_one_of_two_in_hospital_after_medical_emergency_at_Maltings
2) 5 March at 09:42:50
Major_incident__at_Salisbury_hospital_after_Russian_spy_found_unconscious_at_Maltings
3) 5 March at 18:08:24
Critically_ill_man_is_former_Russian_spy__BBC_reports
After each of those stories was first published, each of them was updated and revised. Early versions are ‘lost’ and only the latest version remains available online. The following is the currently available version on the Salisbury Journal website, of the first article from the evening of Sunday 4 March: http://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/news/16064166.Russian_spy_is_one_of_two_in_hospital_after_medical_emergency_at_Maltings/?ref=ar
The first part of that address is the file name and is enough on its own to access the webpage:
http://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/news/16064166
The rest of the address is the descriptor – this is memorandum information and is not required to access the webpage. For example:
Russian_spy_is_one_of_two_in_hospital_after_medical_emergency_at_Maltings/?ref=ar
Thus by logging the descriptors, a picture can be presented of the various updates to each article. I have found the following descriptors for the first article:
1a) BREAKING__Police_cordon_and_air_ambulance_at_Maltings_incident/
1b) BREAKING__Police_cordon_and_air_ambulance_at_Maltings_incident/
1c) BREAKING__Police_and_air_ambulance_respond_to_medical_emergency_at_Maltings/
1d) Two_in_hospital_after_medical_emergency_at_Maltings/
1e) LATEST__Two_in_hospital_after_medical_emergency_at_Maltings/
1f) Russian_spy_is_one_of_two_in_hospital_after_medical_emergency_at_Maltings/?ref=ar
In the above list ‘1b’ was an early update and the descriptor was not revised.
As each new version is published, it is accompanied by a tweet to advertise the fact a new or updated story is available. Remaining tweets in respect of those six versions are as follows:
10:03 AM – 4 Mar 2018 (18:03GMT)
https://twitter.com/Joe_Journo/status/970359004412235781
16064166.BREAKING__Police_cordon_and_air_ambulance_at_Maltings_incident/
10:42 AM – 4 Mar 2018 (18:42 GMT)
https://twitter.com/Joe_Journo/status/970368953859141639
16064166.BREAKING__Police_cordon_and_air_ambulance_at_Maltings_incident/
11:32 AM – 4 Mar 2018 (19:32 GMT)
https://twitter.com/Joe_Journo/status/970381496409317377
16064166.BREAKING__Police_and_air_ambulance_respond_to_medical_emergency_at_Maltings/
The other tweets are missing so we do not know the time at which those revisions were published.
For the second article (Monday morning) I have found the following descriptors:
2a) Salisbury_A_E_department_closed_over__major_incident_/
2b) Salisbury_A_E_closed_over__major_incident____triage_unit_set_up_for_emergency_patients/
2c)_Major_incident__at_Salisbury_District_Hospital_linked_to_medical_emergency_at_Maltings__police_confirm/
2d)_Major_incident__at_Salisbury_District_Hospital_linked_to_medical_emergency_at_Maltings__police_confirm/
2e)_Major_incident__at_Salisbury_District_Hospital_linked_to_Maltings_medical_emergency__police_confirm/
2f)_Major_incident__at_Salisbury_hospital_after_Russian_spy_found_unconscious_at_Maltings/?ref=ar
And these are the tweets to accompany those articles:
2:15 AM – 5 Mar 2018 (10:15 GMT)
https://twitter.com/Joe_Journo/status/970603618117324800
16064949.Salisbury_A_E_department_closed_over__major_incident_/
3:42 AM – 5 Mar 2018 (11:42 GMT)
https://twitter.com/Joe_Journo/status/970625612506427392
16064949.Salisbury_A_E_closed_over__major_incident____triage_unit_set_up_for_emergency_patients/
5:57 AM – 5 Mar 2018 (13:57 GMT)
https://twitter.com/Joe_Journo/status/970659572355563520
16064949._Major_incident__at_Salisbury_District_Hospital_linked_to_medical_emergency_at_Maltings__police_confirm/
6:04 AM – 5 Mar 2018 (14:04 GMT)
https://twitter.com/Joe_Journo/status/970661231525801985
16064949._Major_incident__at_Salisbury_District_Hospital_linked_to_medical_emergency_at_Maltings__police_confirm/
9:06 AM – 5 Mar 2018 (17:06 GMT)
https://twitter.com/Joe_Journo/status/970707031983362049
16064949._Major_incident__at_Salisbury_District_Hospital_linked_to_Maltings_medical_emergency__police_confirm/
Only the current version ‘2f’ which refers to ‘Russian spy’ was not accompanied by a tweet.
The Monday evening story was published at 18:08 which was shortly after the BBC had reported that the Salisbury incident had involved an ex spy named ‘Sergei Skripal’ – so thereafter it was fine for all SJ articles to mention that fact.
Some time ago, Duncan posted here that he had asked Rebecca Hudson how some of the SJ’s early articles had referred to ‘Russian Spy’ before that had been disclosed by the BBC. Duncan reported that Rebecca had said that, sometime after 18:02 on Monday 5 March, they had gone back and revised their earlier stories.
Now, why it was felt necessary, to go back and revise an old story is anybody’s guess. You might have thought that everyone was busy enough keeping the new stories up-to-date that they would not be concerned that yesterday’s story was ‘missing’ a detail but it seems the SJ must have done so. What is also curious is that when they revised the articles, they did not also name the spy but merely said that one of the people involved was a ‘Russian spy’. Had they not revised Sunday evening’s and Monday morning’s stories to include ‘Russian Spy’, nobody would ever have wondered how the SJ knew this at such an early date.
In passing I wonder how often the SJ revises old stories to include details that could not have been known when the story was written?
Another reason that it is odd that the SJ actually revised the stories is that each article links to follow up articles. When a new story is published, a link is added to the bottom of the old story so that readers can quickly go to the next story on the same subject. So you would expect a link forward to refer to the first version of the next story but a link back to refer to the last version of the previous story.
The final version of the Sunday evening article now has two links. One link is to the Monday evening article. The second link is to the first version of the Monday morning article. Which is what you would expect.
The final version of the Monday morning article also has two links. One link is to the Monday evening article. The second link is to the version ‘1e’ of the Sunday evening article. Which is not what you would expect – it should be version ‘1f’.
The final version of the Monday evening article also has two links. The first links to the version ‘1e’ of the Sunday evening article. The second link is to the version ‘2e’ of the second article. Which is again not what you would expect.
After the Monday evening article was published, the SJ went back and revised old articles, even producing a new descriptor for those articles but forgot to update the links.
The fact that the SJ has gone back and revised old articles probably explains why the tweet to article 2f is missing and also why the tweet to article 1f is missing. What is the point of tweeting links to stories that are already history? In fact what was the point in ‘updating’ those articles at all?
But where are the tweets to articles 1d and 1e? And why is there not a single tweet on Monday 5 March from Rebecca Hudson, about the Salisbury poisoning, until after the BBC disclosed Skripal’s identity at 18:02? Was she not at work that day?
@ GR,
Great detective work, good sir. I’m not going to choose, because Rob, Liane and you provide me [and others] with surgical precision info.
I’m very thankful for it.
Great job!
Oh pimple, when you have fresh information, information that’s not correcting or amending an unintentional error, then imo it forms all or part of an update bulletin or is contained in a new article.
To do otherwise is to create layers of news that is chronologically unreliable, at detail level. Some might think it a variant of fake news.
But this practice, used by the SJ and elsepress too, creates an illusion of quantity when little needs to be said or written. Worse, for the the reader, is that it means having to reread what is appears to be substantively the same article, again and again, whilst trying to remember to spot the difference between the current version and all-and-any other current or earlier versions in any number of publications. Think of it as Spot-the-new-News.
Yep: confusion, that’s what it causes. It’s like having to proofread and sense check something that you know you’ve already done several times.
The SJ makes things worse by not putting a date and time stamp on published items, let alone adding a date and time stamp for the most recent update. That’s not quite as bad as, for instance, the Wiltshire police publishing undated statements on their website; and of the Met simply removing webpages, for what forms part of the greater historical chronology of events.
Whilst news must by definition be ephemeral, the development of events that create a bigger picture with potentially far reaching consequences is in no way served by such practices.
Even some of what used to be tomorrow’s fish’n’chip paper is still tomorrow’s news.
Thank you, Paul, for this summary you’ve painstakingly put together.
eleanor, I absolutely agree with you and especially the first para – if you have new news it goes in a new article. The chronlogy and development of events is important; revising old stories destroys that information.
The only thing that I might add to the above is that those are the versions of the articles I have managed to find: there may still be more but without any tweet or other link or cross reference, we will only find them by accident or good fortune.
Presumably there are hard copies in Salisbury library, though it would take great dedication on the part of any blogmirer, even one living locally, to go there and take photos. It would be a lot if work and not many people are listening so I’m not going to ask anyone to do what I am not prepared to do.
The hard copy is produced weekly (I believe on Thursday) otherwise it is only available online.
Excellent Work! Well Done Sir!
Hi Mark, hope you are having a good day. We are just holding the fort until you are back to full battle fitness!
Great work, Paul !
I very much hope that the SJ thinks about it.
They don´t understand what “history of events” means and how important it is. Maybe they would have “updated” a September 10 article showing the Twin Towers coming down…
Thanks Liane, The BBC beat them to it by announcing that WTC7 had collapsed while it was still standing in the background of the shot…
Paul, your research shows that the Salisbury Journal’s process for updating stories is a mess. It does not show that that any tweets were deleted.
“But where are the tweets to articles 1d and 1e? And why is there not a single tweet on Monday 5 March from Rebecca Hudson, about the Salisbury poisoning, until after the BBC disclosed Skripal’s identity at 18:02? Was she not at work that day?”
First, about why there were no tweets about articles 1d and 1e:
– It would be perfectly understandble if Joe Riddle did not continue tweeting about the updates if, like most people, he does not like his Sunday nights being interrupted by work.
– Rebecca Hudson did tweet about article 1e ( https://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/news/16064166.LATEST__Two_in_hospital_after_medical_emergency_at_Maltings/ ) at 8:43 PM, 4 Mar 2018:
https://twitter.com/journalrebecca/status/970399346012381184
Next, about why Rebecca Hudson did not post any tweets on Monday 5 March before 6pm:
– She had been standing in the rain near the Maltings park bench the night before, so she might not have been in a mood for work – even less than most people on Monday morning.
– The main story that morning – the major incident at Salisbury District Hospital – was being covered by Joe Riddle, since he noticed the activity there while he was driving to work.
– The main story in the afternoon was the press conference about the incident, scheduled for 4.30pm. It would be understandable if RH wanted to wait until then before posting any reports.
– The press conference was then delayed, https://twitter.com/journalrebecca/status/970721023640383490
and the BBC broke the”Russian spy” story before it started.
Thanks for your reply. ‘1e’ was indeed tweeted by Rebecca… but we are now very obviously missing ‘1d’ and in the circumstances of the story, I find it hard to accept your suggestion that it was because it was a Sunday.
Unless someone has a before and after screenshot of the Twitter accounts, the whole point of deleting tweets is that you can’t subsequently find deleted tweets! It is trying to prove a negative – which is why I referred to ‘missing’ tweets above, instead of deleted tweets. It seems that we both agree that ‘1d’ is certainly missing.
I am afraid that I simply don’t agree that your explanation for Rebecca not tweeting on Monday. That she “might not have been in a mood for work” is not credible.
The main story in the morning was indeed at SDH but by the afternoon, the press was arriving; the BBC was interviewing Freya Church; other witnesses were being interviewed by the police: etc etc and Rebecca tweeted nothing? I find it impossible to believe that: ” RH wanted to wait until then [i.e. after the poress conf.] before posting any reports” – she is now a journalist… with no tweets!
In the last tweet Rebecca wrote : “BBC reports that one man in hospital after major incident was former Russian spy.”
“one man in hospital” – was there another man ? Bailey ?
Macron – May – Merkel
These M&Ms are all childless.
They have no bone or dawg in the future [as far as offspring is concerned].
Neither do I, and I am older than all three of them.
But I assume you are not actively trying to create a globalist, totalitarian world, which other people’s children will have to live in.
It is beyond irony that if you want to read about the current riots in France or elsewhere in Europe, one of the most reliable sources of information is RT – which is why globalists lie and pretend that RT is propaganda.
Hello Paul. RT only News I check now. I don’t pay BBC for
rubbish they spout and alarming cover-up lies.
Will not have BBC Tv-Radio in house-In car.
This Institute is bent-corrupt and a Mouth Peace for Lies.
Gill Dando was going to lift lid on Pit Of Lies within BBC.
MI56 Had Her Done…Much Like Skripals!
Jimmy Fixed It With MP’s….Dirty BBC Scum B******!
The good news is that more and more people, from all walks of life, are waking up to that fact. Ten years ago, the MSM had a stranglehold on the news – those days are gone.
Unfortunately there are still a number of people who believe the lies.
Has anyone see the blog “Dancing with Bears”? There was an interesting article concerning the Lockerbie disaster and flight M17.
Check BBC License Goons Youtube-Hilarious!
Deny Them Access…………….
Is Vehicle Insured For Business……..
Theresa’s Troopers…DO ONE!
I really admire Rob and all the commenters trying to get the truth of this whole business. But I wonder whether it isn’t time to move on to the over-riding question which is Where Are The Skripals? Things to consider:
Possible reasons for the Skripals voluntarily going into hiding
Possible reasons for the Skripals being detained against their will.
It’s hard to see Sergei voluntarily abandoning his old mother after faithfully keeping in contact with her over the years. When you have a loved parent over 90 you realise that every communication may be the last. If you MUST go into hiding, at least you would demand that word is got to your mother to minimise her distress. And Yulia was planning (and wanted) to go back to Russia. Who or what changed her mind?
I firmly believe that the Skripals are being detained against their will. Or, they were being detained against their will, until MI6 psychologists persuaded them to believe the official narrative of their poisoning.
The fact that Yulia planned to go back to Russia was confirmed by her own words in the Reuters-filmed statement of 23 May, in her phone call to Viktoria of 3 July and by her friend Diana, whom Yulia called on 22 May. Diana was overseeing the renovation of Yulia’s flat in Moscow. In the phone call of 22 May, Yulia asked Diana to continue the renovation and said that she would pay in full for the work upon her return to Moscow.
There were no phone calls from Yulia after 24 July, when she called her grandmother to wish her a happy 90th birthday. In that call, Yulia also apologized to Viktoria for her angry call of 3 July, when she blamed Viktoria for the public scandal which, as Yulia believed at that time, was an obstacle to her return to Moscow. Yulia told Viktoria that “now she got Internet and understood everything.”
So, after Yulia had learned what the UK government’s narrative was, she realized, or it was made clear for her, that she would never return to Russia. It was not her choice.
That leaves us wondering why TPTB have decided to detain Sergei and Yulia. The most likely explanation for the doorknob novichok wild-goose-chase cock-and-bull story is to add another angle to the anti-Russia propaganda, but WHY did the Skripals have to be silenced!
I assume the Skripals had to be silenced because they know what really happened. It would be good if Viktoria applied for a writ of habeas corpus but I expect there are obstacles.
Theresa Is Winning! Please Don’t Muddy The Waters
Why would they wish to talk? Lawyer’s good advice: Never talk. Everything is possible as long as you don’t talk.
Victoria highly likey caused problems by talking. She certainly also helped.
What problems did Viktoria cause by talking???
All the problems have been caused by the perpetrators and by the UK government who cover them up and demonize Russia.
Well Viktoria was the first to accuse Vikeev and his mother of being part of the security services… and she did accuse Vikeev’s mother of possibly being behind a plot to kill Yulia… apart from that I find myself agreeing with you!
I am of the same opinion as Blunderbuss:
“I assume the Skripals had to be silenced because they know what really happened.”
My guess is that the Skripals remember how they were attacked and that has nothing to do with the door handle.
Dated [2009], but still food for thought: Ranking the World’s Spies
Excerpt: “A final metric might be suggested by the current economic crisis. Intelligence services need money. Times may change, and if the economic crisis continues to worsen, states might make deep cuts in intelligence budgets. But so far, nothing of that kind has been recorded. Resourcing might become a metric in future, though for the moment it is a ghost. Willingness to spend on intelligence in a post-9/11 age seems a common denominator.”
The Sun also ran the story and said thecshower fell just before Sergei and Yulia returned home.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6706913/salisbury-rain-saved-poisoned-sergei-skripals-life/
I could only find it in the Sun and Mirror. I’ve had the impression for some time that TPTB tried out different stories in different newspapers to see how they went down. This near miracle replaced that of the two people from Porton Down who happened to present when the Skripals arrived at hospital, recognised their condition and specified the antidote.
Trying to find out more about reports that Sergei has died I found this from the Mirror in July saying there was a sudden shower around noon on 4th March which saved his life. I’d not heard it before.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/sergei-skripal-escaped-death-after-12861872
A squall with a west wind would mean rain on the doorhandle, but I’m nonetheless sceptical.
Did anyone else catch the statement issued by ITN news tonight in which they apologised for one of their reporters ‘mistakenly’ stating that Sergie Skripal was dead whilst presenting a news report on the lunchtime news earlier today? Did I hear right, as I was only half listening at the time?
No, but I thought I heard someone on the Radio 4 Today programme, possibly on the morning before the Panorama programme was aired. Later trails were far more wordy, whereas ‘died’ could easily have become ‘nearly died’.
Rubbish nonsense pay attention …
“No, but I thought I heard someone on the Radio 4 Today programme, possibly on the morning before the Panorama programme was aired, say that it was ‘when the former spy Sergei Skripal died.’ Later trails were far more wordy, whereas ‘died’ could easily have become ‘nearly died’.
Jack
Andrew Marr said it twice on his programme – sorry Show.
I want to come back to this article again :
https://www.slow-journalism.com/delayed-gratification-magazine/toxic-shock-salisbury-in-the-aftermath-of-the-skripal-poisoning
The article contains a passage that illustrates very well how the Salisbury Journal thinks about people like us. We are the „army of skeptics“ who spread Russian conspiracy-theory by questioning the official narrative.
And even worse : „Local people were jumping on their bandwagon“ and „were sowing the seeds of doubt everywhere“ !
Hey Blogmires, how dare you to ask the Salisbury Journal uncomfortable questions ?
Quote : „… Russian media and an army of skeptics on Twitter were going into overdrive to cast doubt on the UK government’s official line on the Skripals.
There were claims that Ukraine poisoned the Skripals to implicate Russia, that the Skripals weren’t poisoned at all and that if they were they couldn’t have been poisoned with Novichok as they would have died immediately.
At the Salisbury Journal, Joe Riddle and his team were being targeted by pro-Russian trolls.
“We were bombarded by Russian conspiracy-theory social media accounts who were just picking apart every aspect of the British media coverage and dragging us into it,” he says.
“Every time we put up a story they’d post comments underneath: you wrote this; why didn’t you write this; why didn’t you ask these questions… And because people like conspiracy theories there were local people jumping on their bandwagon – it was quite effective. They were sowing the seeds of doubt everywhere, calling us out in public on Twitter.”
Dragging the SJ into it??
Not really, I just want to know why Rebecca Hudson deleted all her tweets from Sunday afternoon until around 6pm on Monday.
She was there wasn’t she? And she does like tweeting? So where are her tweets? Surely she has nothing to hide…
Paul, there’s no evidence of any deleted tweets from those two days. However I do think that Rebecca Hudson should have reported more about her visit to the Maltings on Sunday evening. I’ll try to come back to that tomorrow.
The editor Joe Riddle definitely deserves criticism for publicly describing the skeptics as “Russian conspiracy-theory social media accounts”. He only makes himself look like a conspiracy theorist with comments like that. If he has any evidence to identify those critics he should present it, and not just indulge in name-calling.
Having said that, I think that the Salisbury Journal deserves credit for publishing a lot of information related to the Skripal case. It’s fair to say that we would know a lot less about it without the SJ’s reporting on the ground.
Brendan, Whenever there is a major change to a story (such as an update) the SJ tweets the new version. The first story about this saga was published on Sunday evening by the SJ. I have found six different versions of that story but only 3 surviving tweets.
I will put together a post for you that shows you the number of versions of each of the 3 stories I have found from: Sunday evening, Monday morning and Monday evening and how many of them are accompanied by surviving tweets. It will give you some idea of the number of missing tweets.
I will also show you how they messed up when they went back to try and ‘correct the record’
Yes, I know that the SJ has updated stories without even changing the date or time. I’ve pointed that out in the past and said how confusing it is. It would not be surprising if they sometimes also forget to tweet the update.
Unfortunately there is some information that turns out to be misleading or incorrect – in the SJ as well as the mass media – and we’re left to try to piece together the facts.
Frankly, in a story this big, it would be amazing if they forgot to tweet an update! And it isn’t only one update they ‘missed’.
Furthermore, we are being asked to believe that the updates were not to correct anything that was misleading or incorrect – it was to ADD information to an old story that could not have been known when that story was written. Isn’t that what new stories are for?
I will put it together but it will be quite a long post, so I will put it at the top and start a new thread.
Maybe he should be interviewed by a panel of blogmire experts….who should be entitled to present their “side” of the questions….would he have the courage to be a true journalist with an open enquiring mind? Worth asking him directly?
Treasonous May has been lying again. She has refused to publish the legal advice (dated 26 November) HMG received on her Brexit ‘deal’. So now it has been leaked and her lies fully exposed. She clearly should resign… but she will not!
https://moneymaven.io/mishtalk/economics/theresa-may-caught-in-massive-lie-leaked-brexit-deal-analysis-vindicates-trump-9KZclm8kXEO9kTxfiV7fLw/
The boyfriend done it,
https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/3571625/russian-spy-chief-and-answer-to-007-gadget-whizz-q-vanishes-amid-suspicions-novichok-guru-masterminded-the-salisbury-attack/
The author is a convicted criminal, after the UK phone hacking scandal.
With that in mind, how did the author know that Yulia’s boyfriend only made one call that day?
Also, why would Yulia be needed to find out where Sergei’s whereabouts?
Try the place where he lived. It’s usually a good starting point.
Hey, maybe I could be a super agent, although I really wanted to be a Super Recognizer, but I can’t remember what the application form looks like.
Is it in The Scottish Sun because Scotland is not under D notice restrictions, or because the D notices have been lifted, or have TPTB cleared this article as full of red herrings and dis- or mis-information?
Meant to add that I’ve thought the boyfriend might have been only a horizontal friend, and as Yulia may have now sadly realised.
No,no and probably yes.
The story is building that agent Apollo the turned agent, will have given MI6 the information that led to the recognition of Rus and Alex at Gatwick and their Salisbury jaunt.
All in all a good result for the Secret Intellegence Service.
Deserves a boost to the budget.
„a Sun investigation can reveal“
The only „investigation“ is the claim that Oleg Martyanov quit “at his own request” on October 5. But even this doesn´t seem to be true.
On October 30 for example he gave an interview :
https://infopro54.ru/news/skifu-uzhe-propisali-dve-ocheredi-stancij/
The rest of the „investigation“ is based on anonymous sources.
The sole purpose of this article is to recite mechanically the official narrative in the Skripal case.
But through endless repetitions, the story does not become truer.
Then why did he resign?
Was’nt he old enough to retire?
“Why did you resign?” This sounds like the Prisoner of Portmeirion.
It is another Oleg Martyanov who gave an interview on October 30. His patronymic is Nikolaevich, while the patronymic of Sun’s Martyanov is Viktorovich.
Nevertheless, The Scottish Sun’s article is a rubbish based on wild guesses and speculations by unknown sources. What I’ve read about Martyanov right now is that he was a co-founder of Special Operations Forces and their first commander (2009-2013). Later, up to his retirement, he was a member of the collegium of Russia’s Military Industrial Commission. This is, he was not the head of a “unit” described in the Sun’s article. Judging from his interview in February 2018, he supervised the development of naval robots. The only real fact in Sun’s story is that Martyanov retired on 5 October at his own request.
The Amazon Kindle price for ‘The Skripal Files’ has dropped from 6.99GBP to 1.19GBP since last Tuesday. I know because I attempted to buy a copy then and couldn’t download and so applied for a refund but tried again today with success. It’s the same branch of amazon EU Sarl. Bizarrely the user name on my Amazon account has switched from my real name to the name I use here: I didn’t consciously change it.
Do you use the same email for your Amazon account as for your blogmire sign-in?
Until yesterday, or at least before today, the name under the avatar was not that of the Grigory alias but another name. Now it’s disabled, deleted or switched off and I’d do the same if I thought someone was … interested in me.
Someone’s been ferreting around.
I used my own name for my Amazon sign-in, it changed itself. I guess a lot of posts to Blogmire from Russia might attract some attention. I do actually live only a couple of kilometers from GRU HQ in Yasenevo, but only so my partner can be close to her mother. The other thing that has happened is that my perhaps too frequent posts here have caused a redundant blog of mine to come up in first place when I google my name (which I do once or twice a year).
For the record Eleanor, I am not worried. I recently commented on a Mail Online article using GrigoryZinoviev and think that is how my Amazon name came to be changed. BTW I don’t receive notifications of replies to my comments so that if you or anyone ever reply to a comment of mine that is way down the page I may never see it.
When I said that someone had been ferreting, Grigory, I didn’t mean specifically here in blogland.
All the notifications option seems to deliver is email notification that Rob has published a new blog, so I just fill in my name now when I’m lengthening the blog roll.
@ Eleanor
I hereby notify you that I am considering sueing for injuries sustained while falling off my chair laughing.
Lest we forget:
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1014954/Salisbury-poisoning-MI6-Russian-agent-novichok-Sergei-Skripal-Yulia-Skripal
What??
“Other sources have told how the fake Nina Ricci fragrance bottle used to carry the deadly nerve agent had been especially engineered to the highest standards in Russia and included a non-return valve.”
The ‘highest standards'(!) – the same bottle and packaging is available online in Russia for about £4 – but you have to buy them a dozen at a time:
https://mistersmell.ru/catalog/originaly/original_parfyum_v_miniatyure/original_nina_ricci_premier_jour_5_5_ml/
any idea where I can buy them singly? they would make great Christmas presents together with the 2019 Putin calendar which has just hit the bookstalls!
I think the item is no longer available – I tried a few places without any luck.
It’s maybe irrelevant, but what is the significance of a non-return valve on an applicator designed to deliver a liquid??
They thought it sounded good… because they are stupid.
Oh, I don’t believe for one moment that ‘they’ are stupid, but I’m equally certain that they do believe we are.
I’ve worked for people like that, they are absolutely amazed when they are told that we knew all along what they were up to, but were either too apathetic or amused to let them know.
It’s probably genetic, eventually they’ll discover the “I’m not stupid, but they are” gene.
If ‘they’ think everyone else is stupid, does it not amount to the same thing? It takes a mixture of arrogance and stupidity to be that stupid.
True
Cascadian,
A non-return valve is a check-valve, a small ball in a wide place at the top of a delivery tube that lifts from its valve-seat to permit fluid to flow around it from a reservoir, then seats to prevent fluid back-flow from the valve point to the reservoir. A check-valve just below a nozzle pump maintains a ‘prime’, meaning a fluid head, at the nozzle so a first pump has fluid to deliver, so it is not necessary to pump and pump to fill the tube before having fluid at the nozzle to pump out. Check-valve/non-return valves are standard parts of virtually all hand-pump designs.
The flaws of the police-presented “Novichok-pump” are two, neither having to do with non-return: First, there is no provision in the design for the pump-sleeve to compress or telescope, between the delivery nozzle and the reservoir bottle; the sleeve shoulders on the bottle, so it cannot go down to allow a pump-stroke. This is a very good thing on that “Novichok-pump”, because, Second, the delivery tube on the output side of the nozzlle would collect the bulk of the output spray on its inside; almost no novichok would go out of the tube at the time of pumping. But it would remain residual in the tube. This means that when Petrov and Bosherov sidled up to Sergei’s front doorto surrepticiously dose the door-handle, slipped out their Nina Ricci look-alike “Novichok-Pumps” and each pushed several pumps, each to his side, then slipped the pumps back into their pockets and sauntered, whistling, away down the street, there was no “Novichok” ‘dew’ on the insides of their pumps’ nozzle–tubes to leak in their pockets, soak through to their skins and do them up dead as dorknobs.
It’s just a little lie to make it sound more technically sophisticated – as would befit a ‘military grade nerve agent of a type developed in Russia’ for use by ruthless GRU assassins.
But what about this newly turned Russian agent? Presumably he is as reliable (one wonders about the size of the bribe,… er, reward,… er, tip,… er, oh, to hell with it, they bribed him for his testimony) as the Iraqi who provided the low down on Saddam’s chemical weapons – you know, the stuff he described as loaded into glass spheres, go on,… you know,… like they had in that film Escape from Alcatraz, wasn’t it?
Is that the same as the ‘one-way’ applicator nozzle, described by an expert to the Mail? (no prizes for guessing who he is)
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6138471/Novichok-James-Bond-style-Perfume-bottle-used-Salisbury-assassins-scientists.html
The Novichok bottle is probably a hybrid of the fake Nina Ricci and the Teva antiseptic throat spray.
https://i6.otzovik.com/2018/03/31/6284328/img/44989569.jpeg
https://otzovik.com/review_6284328.html
Why did the Met have to create an exact replica when they could have ordered the two parts online for about £10?
It wasn’t even an exact replica, since its bottle part was opaque plastic, not glass as in the fake Nina Ricci.
Yes it is the same. Even being a one-way nozzle, novihoax will still run back and all over your hands when you remove the nozzle after use. They really didn’t think this one through did they?
(Snoopy thought)
Good grief …
… was the bottle always a genuine fake? (Excuse the oxymoron!)
That warrants a screenshot and a bookmark.
Yes it was a genuine fake. The GU spent £4 (they probably asked for a discount) and then filled the counterfeit bottle with novihoax. R&A were then sent to spray it on a door handle with a Heath Ribinsonesque applicator.
Cascadian did not agree with me when I said they were stupid… but I really think they are.
Sorry for the typo at a critical moment! Should of course be Heath Robinson (not Ribinson)!
Ribinson is fine by me, what’s a morphed vowel when a genius is at work?
They might have sourced a batch of 12 fake scents anyway, and a smaller number of Tevo throat sprays (for the applicators). However, if we’re still playing the applicator game, I don’t think the applicator was ever intended for squirting on door handles but it might be useful for squirting through letterboxes … although a contaminated keyhole, so that the key then spreads contamination to other items in the pocket, now there’s a thought.
Stop giving MU5/6 ideas Elianor. Morphed vowels aside, let them work out their own dirty-tricks techniques.
“(they probably asked for a discount)”
But they didn’t ask for a receipt. Aha! That’s always how you catch these amateurs – put the revenue commissioners on their tail.
Has anyone ever been stopped at Customs in the UK.
I have and they ask for a receipt for your fags and booze.
Just think – the whole dastardly plan could have been stopped with the words:
” Have you anything to declare sir?” and ” Have you got a receipt for the items in question sir?”
The Manual might have omitted that scenario so they got through.
See Monty Python’s Swiss Watches sketch for guidance.
But they would have looked so innocent – what with the “I’ve been decorated by Putin!” badges, and shapkas dangling from their belts, how could anyone believe they were assassins?
Paul,
Even for Alice-in-Salisbury this one is strange.
The teflon/plastic/3d printer version of the deadly container in Panorama confused me.
Was the original, as per the one found in Charlie’s, a glass Nina Ricci bottle, a white plastic looking container as shown by the BBC, or a cunningly engineered Russian contraption that cost £1000s so that it can look like a £5 bottle?
Why did the Met not show a glass perfume bottle?
According to the Met’s 5 September statement, the glass perfume bottle (pictured therein) was the one recovered from Charlie’s house.
But we have been laughing at them ever since, so the Met decided it had better spend thousands on a specially engineered copy of the counterfeit bottle, for use in the Panorama programme.
The Met has since published images of their white plastic copy bottle in case anyone can help them determine where the glass bottle (i.e. the real counterfeit) had been between 4 March and the date Charlie found it. Of course those new images are no use to anyone, because the bottle they are looking for was not made of white plastic – that was the glass counterfeit bottle that we have all been laughing at.
Duncan, it is proving extremely difficult for me to make sense of nonsense – I hope that helps you.
Paul, Now I understand,
Charlie found a sealed glass bottle in a cling wrapped container which need cutting open to access the fake Nina Ricci.
In order for the public to identify it, even though by that time it had been identified it, a special copy was made which looked nothing like it.
This dissimilar container was shown to help the public find was not actually able to be found because it was already found.
Even though the original was something different it was clear that the Russians had developed a fantastic container which could hold and transport the world’s most deadly toxin.
They called it “Project Cheap Glass Bottle” which I believe in Russian means cheap glass bottle.
It is estimated that in today’s money this would cost around £4.
Duncan,
You understand it better than I do.
I have no idea what the Met thought it was doing and having read what you wrote, I still don’t understand what the Met thought it was doing – but since you clearly do understand it, I can only assume that my lack of understanding must be my fault.
Anonymous publish 2nd part of integrity initiative : Skripal , Catalan referendum and more
https://www.cyberguerrilla.org/blog/operation-integrity-initiative-british-informational-war-against-all-part-2/
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/dec/02/dont-underestimate-uk-capabilities-mi6-chief-to-warn-russia
MI6 chief Alex Younger will address students at St Andrew’s University.
He will say MI6 played a central role in exposing the men behind the Salisbury attack and in the expulsion of the Russian diplomats that followed.
Ah ah are they acknowledging that bellingcat is their asset ?
So Younger claims the MI6 identfied R&A before March 22 ?
Quote : „The service is trying to become more diverse and reach out to communities that might not see themselves as recruiting grounds for MI6.
Younger will ask them to think again, arguing that the agency will only continue to be operationally effective if it can appeal to a broader spectrum of people.“
That´s exactly what we see with Bellingcat and the „Integrity Initiative“. This are the new MI6 weapons.
When people believe that they are in command of the narrative they sometimes become very sloppy in maintaining it. If he is definitely saying that P&B were identified before 22nd March then it puts a big hole (below the waterline) in their subsequent drip feed of dubious factoids.
Liane,
Yes, I saw that the UK SIS is taking the credit for that.
Poor Basu, remember him?
Is there any hint of who was the retired ex spy…what was his provenance revealing news of Apollo returning from Embassy Rome safe home with his “confirmation”?
Two lies do not necessarily make a truth….
I don’t see how he would be claiming that MI6 identified them before 22nd March, but they may be reading this so don’t give him ideas on what not to say.
You may recall that Agent Apollo was giving MI6 the info in April. See my earlier post and note that only the Daily Express ran with this story.
By implication, this is how the London hotel raid came about in early May.
Agent Apollo along with the Super Recognisers then went back to Gatwick footage and snared Rus and Alex.
Meanwhile Dangerous Gordon has now got red hair
but still looks heavily pixelated
HAZMAT with Plastic bag pictures
Original
With Auto White Balance
It can be Made to Look Red, But Was It?
Hope this helps [cut off lights of car and Building].
Daniel, Here is a Sainsbury’s bag:
https://www.about.sainsburys.co.uk/~/media/Images/S/Sainsburys/content-images/blog-hub/bags-of-help-for-good-causes-and-the-planet-img.jpg
In your last image, you may have made the bag reddish but you now also have red light on the ground and on the back of the hazmat suit which I am pretty sure does not reflect reality… safe to conclude it is not a ‘red bag’ going into the bucket!
After looking at a few more images I’ve reached the conclusion that that bag is not red, it is orange. But, it has black lettering on it whereas the Sainsburys bag image posted by Paul has white lettering. And, there are images of minions and orange bags in other images too (see https://www.paimages.co.uk/image-details/2.35508463). And, the inside of that bag the minion is putting in the bucket is white – are the insides of Sainsburys bags white ?
Brendan posted something similar below and I agree with both of you – in one of the images you can see “8kg” – not what you would find on a Sainsbury’s bag. I believe that these are bio-hazard waste bags. Nothing to do with Sainsbury’s at all.
The bag that was lifted by the hazmat person is imo orange on the outside – it looks like a white bag but with an orange outer coating: turn it inside out and you have a white bag.
The Sainsbury bag is made of an orange plastic material with white overprinting: turn it inside out and you have an orange bag.
Hello Daniel! How things. Bag goes pinkish on my
screen but plastic bag-leather bag would have
different form would it not?
Purple on mine.
@ GR, et al,
Picture no. 2 is as close to reality as possible.
No. 3 is with an overblown hue of red [as can be seen in anything surrounding the ‘red’colors], thus playing havoc with your screen’s personal color scheme settings.
Mornin’ Skipper,
It’s always good to see you’re up/out and about.
Take a picture in the early morning, around noon and late afternoon of the same object and you’ll end up with 3 different color schemes. Of course, there are ways to correct this, so I think the bag is orange, not red.
Why put the bag in a bucket? This suggests to me that the bag contains white phosphorous, which needs to be kept under water to prevent spontaneous combustion. Has somebody been dumping white phosphorous around Salisbury?
@ Blunderbuss,
Q; Why put the bag in a bucket?
R: Coz that’s what Bucket ‘Wot’s up, Doc‘ Bunny wanted
Mmm I think I’ve cracked this case…. 🙂
The deadly poison was not on the front door handle. It was on the handle on the door at the BACK…. That’s how they both got it, when they went to look for the cat.
There is no truth to the rumour that when the police arrived at midnight (obviously because their Standard Operating Procedure is to visit crime scenes in the middle of the night and hope no ones sounds the alarm about burglars….) they found the cat licking the back door handle. Delicious.
Ian, that’s rubbish.
The guinea pigs would have called MI6.
They were disguised as moles.
I always suspected a mole was behind this.
Cascadian’s earlier post regarding who drove the vehicle. As a
Responsible Detective Sargent surly Bailey should have reported
not feeling well on his arrival back at the Police Station?
Due to events of the day arrangements should have been made
for either getting him to SDH or taken home.
What’s he doing driving himself in a possible unfit state-breaking
another law?
Did he report feeling unwell on his return or did he keep it quiet
because of some earlier dodgy actions?
I asked about this before but without result. I’m a bit suspicious of Freya Church’s evidence as to who was on the bench because of this photo.
Has anyone seen a witness take a policeman by the arm before?
Why would she do his?
https://www.gettyimages.co.jp/detail/ニュース写真/witness-freya-church-walks-with-a-policeman-near-a-forensic-ニュース写真/928053230
@ Denise,
That’s odd indeed. This is how people walk who’re [physically] intimate. She also pulls a face [perhaps because of the camera].
Weird.
Hi Daniel and it was at a time, early on, when MI56 were trying to pretend that the market walk couple were the Skripals.
Maybe Freya was promoting that on their behalf because of her possible association with that policeman.
The Market Walk couple seem to look at the camera in Snap Fitness when they pass it but were they really looking in to the Gym for Freya, to let her know that they are almost at the bench, so she could identify them as being the bench couple in later interviews.
Maybe that’s the reason for the large red bag too. So she knew which ones to identify later.
Freya became very short with the press asking so many questions soon after, I wonder why?
Its a riddle wrapped in an enigma all right. lol
I have forgottn who it was who posted it but a few weeks ago somebody said that the picture was taken on Monday, when the witnesses were being interviewed by police. It was suggested that Freya was being given a police escort to keep the press away while she was walking either to or from her interview. If you look, you will find several other images of the same policeman walking with Freya:
https://editorial01.shutterstock.com/wm-preview-450/9480837r/cebd64de/former-russian-spy-critically-ill-after-suspected-poisoning-salisbury-uk-shutterstock-editorial-9480837r.jpg
and here:
https://editorial01.shutterstock.com/wm-preview-1500/9480837s/c1e10a4d/former-russian-spy-critically-ill-after-suspected-poisoning-salisbury-uk-shutterstock-editorial-9480837s.jpg
Freya is fetching. What does the blue band on the policeman’s cap signify?
That he’s a PCSO?
@ eleanor,
Is that how we spell ‘PSYCHO’ nowadays?
Police Community Support Officer (PCSO). No authority, more appropriately named PGGMCO (Police Gopher and Get My Coffee while you’re at it Officer)
@ Cascadian,
What they can do must be very limited in scale then [like being the proverbial gopher].
Are these people paid and what’s their use if they can only walk up and down the pavement with a woman clinging on to their arm?
I believe they are paid a nominal amount, but they most definitely are NOT police officers. They provide a make up the numbers function for supporting the role of qualified police officers. I knew someone who was one, it’s a voluntary position fulfilled by citizens with a sense of duty.
So it may well have been that the plod in question was Freya’s bit of pash.
Correction. The ‘So’ in the last para is irrelevant.
https://be-a.co.uk/the-powers-of-a-pcso/
No super powers.
Thanks, Cascadian. Appreciated.
No superpowers but PCSOs are police employees and different to Special Constables, which you mentioned earlier:
‘I knew someone who was one, it’s a voluntary position fulfilled by citizens with a sense of duty.’
Eleonor (being correct – again, sigh!), yes, my mistake, sorry. I had assumed that they were more or less the same.
More or less the same, Cascadian, but not the same!
Getting it wrong is a technique I have now perfected so I know how you feel (sigh).
November 20th I wrote this :
The video is dated March 13. Look at the red (orange) shopping bags the man has in his hands.
https://ibb.co/f2h8eq
In terms of color, this is like the bag at the bench.
It looks like Sainsburys has (had) this shopping bags.
That would mean the Skripals were shopping before they went to the duck feeding.
The color does not match the red bag of the Market Walk couple.
https://www.theblogmire.com/where-was-detective-sergeant-nicholas-bailey-poisoned/#comment-19519
Now my observation gets some support by Joe Riddle (Paul´s link) :
“In one image, which would make the front page of the next edition of the paper, a man in a hazmat suit is gingerly placing what appears to be a bright orange Sainsbury’s bag of material into a metal bucket while giving the photographer the thumbs-up.”
https://www.slow-journalism.com/delayed-gratification-magazine/toxic-shock-salisbury-in-the-aftermath-of-the-skripal-poisoning
NEW THEORY :
The famous Thom Belk photo of the red bag at the bench actually shows NOT the red bag but a Sainsbury’s bag.
https://twitter.com/friendlyenp/status/977970301140127744
If we use this assumption, it has some consequences :
Yulia´s red bag described by Mrs Cooper was a Sainsbury’s bag OR
the Sainsbury’s bag at the bench didn´t belong to Yulia.
It could have been forgotten there by a bystander.
If Yulia had no Sainsbury’s bag but a real red bag, then her red bag could have taken away earlier.
Either by Bailey or it was in the ambulance with her.
As the red bag of the Market Walk CCTV couple doesn´t match a Sainsbury’s bag, the theory of an exchange of red bags becomes less likely.
A Sainsbury’s bag would also no longer support the theory that in reality the Market Walk CCTV couple were patsies at the bench.
Liane,
I really don’t think Mrs Cooper would mistake a red bag for an orange Sainsbury’s bag. I am sure she would know the difference.
The Sainsbury’s bag at the bench could have come from anywhere and TBH it is not the same colour (at least I don’t think it is) as the bag seen on the floor in Belk’s image.
You require a quantum leap to get from the Sainsbury’s bag seen in the images not matching the red bag seen in the CCTV, to say an exchange of bags becomes less likely. I don’t understand that at all.
If the Sainsbury’s bag had belonged to Yulia or the woman on the bench, it was evidence (and/or property)! You don’t dispose of evidence by putting it in a bucket!
The CCTV couple being on the bench does not rest on a bag at all – it is based on what the eye witnesses all said. Not a single one of the mentioned a Sainsbury’s bag.
I have no idea where the Sainsbury’s bag came from but seeing what happened to it, I don’t think it is an important piece of the puzzle.
Here is a better image of the red bag on the ground:
https://twitter.com/HisBlakeness/status/1017485699312967680
Compare the red colour of the bag with the orange stripes on the ambulance.
Do we know what type of streetlight was in use where the minion was loading ‘the bag’ into ‘the bucket’?
I’m wondering about white balance (it’s the factor in photography that ensures, when it’s correctly set, that the colours rendered in the image are correct).
Sodium lights impose a definite cast on the reflected colours of the lit objects and even LED lights have a certain spectrum of colours that could upset the white balance.
That said, the minion’s green suit seems correct, but I do wonder what the camera would ‘see’ as regards a ‘red’ bag.
Check out this copy of the image:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/content/dam/news/2018/03/05/TELEMMGLPICT000156474287_trans_NvBQzQNjv4BqGLLAPY3LddE1Qiv-bsIMYC997McQ_0KhKqWyoeUk6Dw.jpeg?imwidth=1400
The hazmat suit has red trimming at the cuff and 2 red valves(?) on the suit which are distinctly red against the bright orange of the plastic bag.
That is definitely an Orange [Sainsbury’s Type] Carrier Bag!
Its not a Red Handbag.
Picture of Bag next Bench is more solid in structure rather
than floppy plastic carrier bag if you know what I mean?
I going with Denise’s theory that Red Handbag was signal for
Freya. Was Mystery Couple looking for her rather than at
CCTV.
Think I mentioned that photo some time ago regarding Freya
arm-arm with Cop? Memory not 100%
I’ve looked at some other images and there is a definite warm (i.e. orange/red) cast from those street lights – you can see it on the white shop fronts.
But that’s not the point I’m going to make now – there is another image showing, what I think is, the inside of the bag, and it’s white. Not a Sainsburys bag, but something else a bit more substantial than their bags. Not a red bag, perhaps some sort of evidence bag?
“Not a Sainsburys bag, but something else [a bit more substantial than their bags.] Not a red bag … ”
I don’t think it’s a Sainsbury bag, and nor do I think it’s a red bag, substantial or otherwise:
http://www.theblogmire.com/as-dead-as-a-doornail-handle/#comment-20804
That’s not a Sainsbury’s bag in the Joe Riddle interview. It’s a bag that the hazmat team used for collecting dangerous material. Same bright orange colour as Sainsbury’s.
https://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/resources/images/7485921/
YES Brendan, you are perfectly right !
Now the question remains :
Is the red/orange bag seen earlier with the policeman such a collecting dangerous material bag, too ?
Or are that different bags ?
Liane, I sent this link to you above:
https://twitter.com/HisBlakeness/status/1017485699312967680
The ambulance has orange stripes – if you compare the orange stripes with the colour of the bag, you can see the bag is clearly red and not orange.
What that red bag actually is, goodness only knows, because it should not still be there if it belonged to the blonde woman seen on the bench.
The red bag was at almost exactly the same place beside the bench where the hazmat team scooped up some sand or powder later that night.
https://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/resources/images/7485910/
Here zoomed in: https://ibb.co/fxcWMfG
That sand/ powder was actually thrown on the ground earlier in the night. See 1:40 in the embedded video on this page, apparently taken by Rebecca Hudson on her smartphone:
https://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/news/16064166.LATEST__Two_in_hospital_after_medical_emergency_at_Maltings/
I suspect that its purpose was to absorb whatever was being collected, maybe the Skripal’s body fluids from when they collapsed.
The red bag may have been placed over that area earlier (before the Thom Belk photos) to cover it or to mark its location. It doesn’t look to me like the same type of bag as the orange one – it’s blood red rather than orange. It’s unlikely that the background lighting and the camera’s white balance correction would change the colour that much.
The standard kit issued back in the 70s for mopping up chemical agents was Fuller’s Earth – that ‘sand’ is most likely Fuller’s Earth.
The bag on the ground at the top of this page looks like the ‘Fuller’s Earth’ bag in the smartphone video:
https://news.sky.com/story/live-police-know-more-about-ex-spy-poison-11279801
What amazes me is that (seemingly) none of our mainstream “journalists”, even those with a military background – who most certainly would have been subjected to NBC training of one form or another – seem completely unmoved by the spectacle of a person in a hazmat suit (who I presume will have been handling the oh so deadly novichok nerve agent) apparently handing a bucket full of the stuff to a unclad fireman.
Do any of them not find this image to be just a little bit unbelievable? A bit like that nerve gassed Syrian that couldn’t resist lifting white sheet over him and scratching his nose.
So what the Salisbury Journal’s then editor Joe Riddle said about the cleanup was not really true:
“They started clearing something up, but you couldn’t really see what it was.”
The Salisbury Journal’s images, when put together, show a lot of what the hazmat team were doing, but it never described that in any article. Unfortunately the SJ just showed random pictures of the people in weird suits. I suppose the SJ did not have the time to study their own images since their staff was down to just a handful, as Riddle says in the interview.
It had a huge number of high quality images of that cleanup operation, some of which they showed in a slide show
https://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/news/16064166.LATEST__Two_in_hospital_after_medical_emergency_at_Maltings/
Other images taken that night pop up in various places like other web sites and in Panororama. I’m sure there are many more that are unpublished.
Rob, Please can you give references from Hansard for your quotes from Teresa May and Amber Rudd about Nick Bailey. The only statement I can find that he was a firstvresponder is in the House of Lords Hansard
08 March 2018 Volume 789 Statement 12.30 pm. Thanks
I found Amber Rudd in Hansard stating that Bailey was one of the firstvresponders
08 March 2018 Volume 637 11.37 am
But if he says he went down to the bench after the Skripals had gone I’m not sure we could make much of this. There are bigger discrepancies.
https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2018-03-14/debates/071C37BB-DF8F-4836-88CA-66AB74369BC1/SalisburyIncidentFurtherUpdate?highlight=“nick%20bailey”#contribution-0596238B-4D5E-444E-97D6-43B039D165EE
The Prime Minister
My hon. Friend is absolutely right. Of course, one other individual, Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey, was affected as a first responder,…
After R and A gave their interview I was about 90% convinced they were guilty as charged, but since Panorama I have reverted to my previous view that it’s all a hoax. I wonder if the powers that be considered that they had persuaded 99% of the population of their guilt they could afford a few changes to the narrative.
if anyone does have the energy it may be worth emailing Mark Urban’s publishers asking about discrepancies betwee his account and Panorama. I once had a long exchange with Hodder and Stoughton about Denis Avey’s ‘The Man who Broke into Auschwitz’ where the author’s central claim provoked much scepticism. I was surprised that rhey replied to all emails, at length, and prepared a response to many questions which was included as an appendix in the paperback edition. If Urban is in anyway advertising his BBC credentials in the book (I haven’t been able to obtain a kindle copy in Russia) the BBC would surely have to respond to contradictions between Urban and Panorama.(Excuse any typos in the first para, I can’t see what I wrote there)
My thoughts on Rus and Alex are that MI56 knew they were coming to Salisbury that weekend, March 3 and 4. They would have got this information from their visa application
MI56 would have then intercepted their phones in the weeks prior and so knew about their activities in the “fitness supplements” business and who they were going to see along Wilton Rd that weekend.
MI56 timed their hoax activities to coincide with them being nearby to CMR to set them up as the Russian culprits.
What I don’t understand is why they withheld releasing that information in support of their “Russia did it” hoax until July. Five months later?
It’s important to keep one’s powder dry and conserve until required.
Standard British Army training, At most two rounds at a time, never fire bursts and recklessly use up one’s ammo.
Of course, the American’s never obey this basic rule, so it’s probably not them.
Got the giggles………..
Denise
You ask why the info about R & A wasn’t released until July. I haven’t got a link but I recall one of the first things mentioned at the outset of the investigation was that there were hundreds of hours of CCTV footage (!! not that we’ve seen any of it) to trawl through and study and it would take a team of [x] people many, many weeks to complete the job. Seeing that R & A were supposedly identified as suspects from the CCTV footage, TPTB would have to withhold that ‘evidence’ until a time that was (a) credible, and (b) appropriate to coincide with other world events in order to reinforce the “Russia is evil” narrative.
Both were known and welcome or they would not have got visas.
I looked at the British tourist visa application form. You must say where you are staying, but not where you are going on day trips.
https://www.gov.uk/standard-visitor-visa/documents-you-must-provide
It might be argued that they stayed in London to conceal the fact they were visiting Salisbury.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-wiltshire-46420206
Now another death in Amesbury and a Salisbury man arrested.
Novichok, parachutes, Magna Carta, helicopters, mystery deaths – I suspect Dan Brown.
Thank you Patrick but Dan Brown would at least be coherent and believable with just a small effort.
Skripal’s front door is protected by two brick walls at either side making it a sort of porch. So the rain, if there was any, wouldn’t have touched the door handle unless there had been a howling gale.
It is west-facing and it might not require that much wind to blow rain into the door handle, but there’s no sign of rain in the photos of R and A. Thecfront of the house would be exposed to winds which may account for the installation of a porch and it would seem a wood-burning stove after MI6/Skripal acquired the house.
Yes, although there were parts of Panorama that were deeply frustrating, it did give us the opportunity to see and hear DSB for the first time.
He has many strange phrases in his interveiw, starting with “just doing my normal work” such that he must have been reading or poorly ad-libbing a rehearsed story.
However, as Rob has detailed very well, it deepens the contradictions between the March version and now.
But why? Why did the police/Met/MI5/6 not insist that Baileys Panorama version matched what Mrs May and all the others stated in March?
If Bailey’s recent version had anything of emphasis it was:
“I was NOT at the bench when the Skripals were collapsed, no, not me.”
By implication, not at the Mill Pub, and seemingly not at CMR at 5pm either.
Sunday is usually a three glass Chardonnay night, (minimum) so I will think some more.
“just doing my normal work” Uhm? I would say “just doing my job”.
The normal work bit sounds like he up to no good because what
he doing wasn’t normal work on Sunday 04?
Emphasizing Normal Work a bit strange Your Honour…!
Mail On Sunday..Russian TV Spies UK Military Base!
What ever next?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6450575/Russian-TV-spies-caught-secret-UK-army-psychological-warfare-unit.html
S-400 S.A.Ms being stationed Crimea [allegedly Fox News]
Lets see what evolves Wednesday?
The S-400s look to be for real:
https://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/styles/inline_image_desktop/public/inline-images/S-400-missile-1.jpg?itok=Fb0lNNnd
Nothing there in April but by November…
Interesting…Lets await!
It is getting hysterical. This “spy in your neighbourhood” phenomenon IS psychological warfare.
Yes…Don’t forget..Check Under Your Bed!
The Sheep are lapping it up as Theresa trying
every dirty trick in Her Book Of Novihoax.
Here is a good description of what first responders do when facing a suspected o/d:
“First responders start by applying ventilation to help the victim breathe. If the victim shows other telltale signs of an opioid overdose – pinpoint pupils, lack of responsiveness – first responders prepare a naloxone injection.
By administering naloxone in 0.4 mg increments, and waiting 3 to 4 minutes between doses, they avoid accelerating the patient’s heart rate or causing them to vomit. They also buy themselves time to lay the patient on a stretcher and apply cloth restraints, reducing the chances of a struggle.”
https://www.nola.com/health/index.ssf/2016/05/heroin_overdoses_new_orleans.html
Elsewhere, discussing how long paramedics keep patients at the scene, you find comments such as:
“Typically, the patient encounter lasts 20-30 minutes, or less if the transport is nearby.”
So, why were the bench couple kept there for nearly an hour? 4:15pm to 5:10pm? And if an o/d was suspected (as Joe Riddle says he was told by police at the scene), then presumably the paramedics were treating the bench couple as such. So the paramedics would have known before they left the scene, whether the treatment was working or not. In which case, what was SDH doing? Surely, whether or not it was an o/d was known by 5:10pm before the bench couple ever arrived at SDH.
Note also the use of ‘pinpoint’ pupils – this is an American journal. As CharlieFreak mentions below, this is not what English medics would say – so if Bailey, Charlie Rowley and others have been coached about what to say, was the coaching done by American and not British agents? Is the US controlling the ‘show’?
Attention : CharlieFreak said : ” ‘pin prick’ is not the correct terminology to use. ‘Pin point’ is the correct expression.”
By the way, I’m not sure that “pin-prick pupils” is incorrect.
In Franz Worek, John Jenner, Horst Thiermann : Chemical Warfare Toxicology: Volume 1: Fundamental Aspects, Royal Society of Chemistry, 2016, chap. 3 (Toxicology of Organophosphorus Nerve Agents, written by Helen Rice, from… Porton Down), p. 96, you can read : “nerve agent induced miosis (pin-prick pupils)”
See here :
https://books.google.be/books?id=270uDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA96#v=onepage&q&f=false
Thus : the expression “pin-prick pupils”, used by Bailey and Sam Hobson, is in use at Porton Down…
Just to add to the confusion, here is a paper from The University of Southampton:
http://www.academia.edu/23949251/Seizure-induced_miosis
In the abstract, it says:
“During seizures the first semiologic feature was noted to be pinpoint pupils as annotated on theEEG (Fig. 1B),”
But if you then look at Fig, 1B, it says:
“B) Increased amplitude of sharpened fast activity and spikes over the left central region, associated with pinprick pupils at seizure onset.”
I still think CharlieFreak was correct, however, when he said that in general, the term ‘pinpoint pupils’ is more common in everyday usage.
Paul
Undoubtedly there can be the less official use of the term “pin prick” and I could accept it if, say, one of the victims or witnesses used the term. But what stood out to me was the fact they all used that description (even Bailey who one would imagine would be more versed in the medical terms ie. “pin point” or “constricted”) and, most significantly, that (as I commented earlier) it was right at the top of the list of symptoms they chose to refer to when, from the victims’ and witnesses’ perspective, it would have been the least noticeable and disturbing of the ‘novichok’ symptoms supposedly afflicting the victims.
CharlieFreak
I entirely agree with you. Regarding your last point, I would simply ask: “How did Bailey know he had ‘pinprick/pinpoint’ eyes?” Did he check for himself, or was he told?
Paul
“Did he check for himself, or was he told?” Denise also alluded to this in an earlier comment. Begs the question whether he was told long after he had ‘recovered’ that “of course, Nick, remember when you speak to the BBC that you had all the symptoms consistent with novichok poisoning, especially pin prick pupils. Mention anything else you can think of but be sure to emphasise that”.
What’s most interesting is the non reference to breathing difficulties.
Even with contamination if it was enough to engender pin prick pupils that must mean it was having some effect.
Why wasn’t one of them breathing difficulties?
This was what supposedly affected all the other four victims.
Was DSB special?
Anyway – that’s the end of my doormat theory.
Lessons for warmongers with Novichok of any sort – kill people on a sunny day.
These are the charming s*** we are paying for across the globe.
All of us.
Never mind the breathing, multiple incontinence and vomiting would also occur. Recall that ACT Esterase inhibitors result in extreme muscle stimulation, all the body’s muscles would be activated.
Ken
That’s right. It struck me that the symptoms he described (ignoring ‘pin prick’ pupils which I regard as a red herring) could apply equally to a case of flu. I don’t recall him mentioning ‘loss of bodily functions’ either but maybe the BBC thought that would be ‘TMI’ for their sensitive viewers!
Listen HOW Bailey said it :
“Once we came back the Skripals house, my eyes were like pin… my pupils were like pin-bricks. And I was quite sweaty, hot, ehm. At that time I put that away being tired and stressed.”
Bailey corrected himself. For me, this is another indication that he has been persuaded of this formulation.
@Inquirer
“the expression ‘pin prick’ pupils is in use at Porton Down”.
Must be just a coincidence…surely? (lol)
You are 100% correct. My mistake – profuse apologies!! Please ignore.
@ GR,
One only knows one has pin-prick sized pupils when one look into a mirror [or other, strongly reflecting surface]. An outsider will see it right away. But Bailey can’t be his own outsider now, can he…?
You would be aware that something IS wrong with your vision, Daniel. Recall what I wrote elsewhere about the physiological functions regarding the eyes’ adaption to light: chemical changes within the retina and modulation of the iris opening. Rapid adaptation is accommodated by modulation of the iris diameter, long term adaptation by chemical changes in the retina.
If the iris in your eyes’ pupils close down you will perceive the light level getting lower. And if they really close down a lot things will get very blurry.
Even if you had a mirror, you probably wouldn’t be able to resolve any detail.
C,
Thanks for providing here and earlier this very interesting info about the physiological impact of constricted pupils. I would imagine that unless this technical info was known to someone suffering from blurred vision they would be unlikely to put any vision problems down to constricted pupils. That being so, and – as you say – the effects would make it difficult to see one’s reflection clearly, all the more reason to doubt that Bailey would have been in a position to see his pin point pupils for himself.
I agree with you on this, CharlieFreak. If this story of constricted pupils had not been scripted, Bailey surely would have said : “All seemed dark to me”, and perhaps he would have added : “That came from the contraction of my pupils, which was noticed by the hospital staff.”
Note that Sam Hobson also told of “pricked eyes” about Rowley, see the video here :
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-44719639
Clearly, Hobson recites a script : his tone of voice is unnatural and he didn’t understand correctly what he was expected to say about this “prick” thing.
Inquirer
Totally agree.
You could indeed kill thousands of people with a small perfume bottle filled with Novichok, but only if you apply the correct amount to each person individually. That dosage of 1 to 2 mg is roughly one fortieth of the size of a typical drop of water (60 mg). It’s more than a little difficult to produce that tiny dosage with a perfume spray.
Even if Russian poisoners managed to go around Salisbury applying the required amount to thousands of door handles, that would not be enough – because only some of the nerve agent would be absorbed by the hand of any victim.
The Daily Telegraph went even further than calling Nick Bailey a “first responder”, as PM May and many others did. On 9 March, its chief reporter and senior reporter wrote a piece which stated:
“Det Sgt Bailey became ill after attempting to resuscitate Miss Skripal as she lay in a “catatonic” state on a public bench.”
https://www.pressreader.com/uk/the-daily-telegraph/20180309/281479276926689
The resuscitation story was backed up by a cousin of his who said “His first instinct would have been to assist them. A policeman is never off duty.”
Another acquaintance of Bailey’s said “He ran towards danger.”
Unfortunately for the Telegraph, on the same morning that the story was published, ex Met Chief Lord Blair told the BBC that Bailey was more likely poisoned by something in Sergei’s house.
It is simple.
Nick spread BZ all over Salisbury.
They are terrified that we are going find out it was BZ not novichok.
That’s why all the clothes were picked up and burnt, all the cars were destroyed, the bench was destroyed, Zizzi’s table burnt. Houses are being completely decontaminated and demolished. Bourne Hill police station, The Mill Pub and Zizzi’s completely rebuilt.
All we need is to do is find one swap of BZ at one of the locations around Salisbury and its over for them.
Considering how poisonous novichok apparently is. but no one died immediately and how Porton Down and the OPCW did not directly confirm it was novichok then I assume it was not novichok but something much less lethal.
It’s really very simple. No mass casualties, no millitary nerve agent. End of.
The first mention I can find of anybody suggesting the door handle is 9 March:
Wild thought, but wondering if the doorknob at the house might have been contaminated somehow?
It would presumably be one of the last things touched when exiting the house and likely the first thing the policeman would have touched when he went there to investigate.
imo, speculation.
https://www.websleuths.com/forums/threads/uk-sergei-66-yulia-skripal-33-poisoned-salisbury-4-march-2018.367437/
Might the Met have picked up on the idea…
Wow he was on the ball, wasn’t he Paul on March 4th?
The comment was actually posted on 9 March. Here:
https://www.websleuths.com/forums/threads/uk-sergei-66-yulia-skripal-33-poisoned-salisbury-4-march-2018.367437/#post-13980582
Ok thank you, I see, his post was March 9th
They could well have picked up the idea from that post,
More likely MI56 than the Met though.
They needed somewhere to plant the novichok for the OPCW to test.
And it had to be somewhere where it was possible for Sergei, Yulia and Nick to come in contact with it.
And the added the Russian novichok doorknob application manual for good measure.
An interview with Joe Riddle (editor of SJ) I had not seen before. The first 5 or 6 paras are interesting – the rest of the article… not so much:
https://www.slow-journalism.com/delayed-gratification-magazine/toxic-shock-salisbury-in-the-aftermath-of-the-skripal-poisoning
Police told Hudson and Gregory that they were investigating whether the incident was related to drugs. Fentanyl – an opioid used as pain medication and which is 50 times more powerful than morphine – was mentioned.
Then something strange happened. “People came down and started putting on these special biohazard suits that made them look like Minions,” says Riddle. “They started clearing something up, but you couldn’t really see what it was.”
If 47 CMR is a safe house would MI56-Local Police have
duplicate keys for the property?
If this the case it would mean Police knew very well who
Mr Skripal was throwing the Wikipedia search into the bin.
It wasnt a safe house Debbie but the house was bought for him by MI56 and they dont need keys to open locks, there are simple electric lock picking tools that they have that open most locks in seconds.
Some police would have known who Skripal was but not necessarily all police would, but the Wikipedia story is a bit suspect but possible.
Having duplicate keys or a lock picking tool, is all well and good but what about the house alarm system?
I cannot believe that Sergei’s house would not have had a alarm, so how did Bailey silence it?
There MI56 they knew the code Paul.
They’re
Excellent points both.
Thanks Denise-Paul
I think some very important issues have been highlighted in this post which deserves commendation, if there is a weakness it is the lack of emphasis of the observers viewing position.
Things can appear very different from varying angles and perspectives. Then there are, of course, lies.
So removing these contentious points, a starting point might be identifying which different perspectives or “realities” are in play. (Some of them with strong emotional attachments).
To start to make sense of the confusion Rob has employed an extremely useful tool, on a number of occasions, which is effectively a comparative analysis. You put two competing hypotheses next to each other and compare their properties with the observations of the problem under analysis.
In the case of the Novichok poisonings one of these comparator tests might be the;
Contradictions of “Facts”, Conflicts of Evidence, Incongruities of Conclusions, Irreconcilable Assertions and Irrational “Logic” – for a selection of target elements.
The authors case is point or element (the door handle) is just one example of many.
One of the features of the puzzle that will help with the conundrum of the door handle and can be applied equally well to other tests that some might have in mind is “Novichok”. What is it, what does it do, how many variants are there?
And here is the feature / property I should like to bring to your attention; the time it takes from exposure to symptoms. (of course the dose, concentration, exposure route(s) + + are important aspects) but generally speaking here is what the OPCW and PHE had to say:
OPCW: From their website on the general effects of nerve agents; contact through the skin produces symptoms within 20 – 30 minutes (through inhalation significantly more rapidly)
PHE: From one of their Directors addressing a Public Meeting in Amesbury (he didn’t actually call it Novichok) – This “stuff” acts in a Minimum of 3 hours (when heavily contacted through the skin) to 12 hours.
Then apply these in a test of reaction times to; Ms Sturgess, Ms Skripal and Messrs Skripal, Bailey and Rowley (plus the play area children and all others that were exposed to immediate secondary exposure)
There are a whole raft of tests you can put together, the results are invariably rather dismal or enlightening depending on you perception / reality.
Here is where I am, with it all today.
I wont go into the reasons for it all in this post.
While Sergei and Yulia were at the Cemetery on Sunday morning, MI56 entered their house, police and MI56 don’t need keys to open locks. They placed BZ poison on many items throughout the house that they thought the Skripals were likely to touch on their return.
This picture contains a list of things in the house that needed to be tested for poison. It not a random list:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/mar/23/police-swab-sergei-skripal-home-clues-salisbury-nerve-agent-attack#img-1
So that when Sergei and Yulia returned they both touched some, if not many of the poisoned items, things like the keyboard, CCTV equipment and various door knobs including the front door. (see list in picture above)
Why BZ, well its the only chemical that I have seen where the symptoms include this incredibly strange action and its exactly what Sergei did on the bench.
“One of the strange but apparently characteristic symptoms of BZ intoxication, described in this document from the US Military, is a reaching up action, as if “picking clothes” or “wool-gathering”. ” (from – see link below)
This was described by Freya Church and it doesn’t occur with novichok or fentanyl.
Freya said: “He was gesturing at the sky, doing some kind of movements with his hands.”
And
“Hallucinations and bizarre behavior, fast heart rate for two days, dilated pupils with dry eyes, red-hot flush, disrobing, senseless speech, delirium and stupor.” are also symptoms of BZ and they fit Nick, Dawn and Charlie’s symptoms too.
An example of bizzarre behavior is Dawn needing to go and lay in the bath fully clothed.
The Skripals headed off to Zizzi’s and then the Mill pub where they had a few drinks and alcohol exacerbates reactions people have when mixed with chemicals like this.
They both left the Mill Pub and made it to the bench and collapsed there as they had both been poisoned at the same time and drank alcohol at the same time.
What about the Market Walk couple also with a red bag? Were they the supposed husband and doctor wife out shopping but were really the MI56 doctor and minder ready to make sure Sergie and Yulia didn’t choke or have complications. Was this why it was the only picture that the police took from the Snap Fitness CCTV in Market Walk?
The red bag probably contained the doctors medical kit.
The other masked people were from the MI56 ready to bundle Sergei and Yulia into one of their black Range Rovers, if their condition had got worse. The masks were to protect them from the BZ and they would have had gloves on too.
As said in the link below, I think the Skripals and Nick were put in a induced comas in Salisbury Hospital. The plan was for them to die. See Theresa May’s claims in parliament, but for some reason that didn’t happen and they all recovered. Maybe there was a revolt at Salisbury Hospital? Salisbury Hospital did object to their blood being taken without consent, without a court order.
Here is the link to the BZ information. Its a good read:
The Incapacitation of Salisbury by David Macilwain:
https://off-guardian.org/2018/11/29/the-incapacitation-of-salisbury/
Thank you Denise, that is mighty plausible. Perhaps they were never intended to leave home but there was a dose miscalculation and a further urgent plan had to be concocted. The later Dawn episode is peculiar and is perhaps a second live trial for assessment.
Perhaps that is why BZ turned up in the OPCW tests.
Good points Uncle T, thank you too.
Very interesting, Denise, but note that “dilated pupils” doesn’t agree with the symptoms officially displayed by Bailey and Rowley : we are said that their pupils were contracted, which is a symptom of nerve agent. Now, as I already said, I don’t believe this story that the pupils of Bailey and Rowley were contracted, I think it was scripted in the lectures Bailey and Sam Hobson got from police. Perhaps you are right when you conjecture that BZ was used.
Hi Inquirer,
I agree and I ignored Nick’s statement that his eyes were like pin pricks. Who ever describes there own eyes when describing their own symptoms. That only comes from someone else. So yes he was definitely schooled to say that wasn’t he..
Denise (& Inquirer)
I agree with both your posts.
Also, I have made the point previously (as @Paul will recall) that ‘pin prick’ is not the correct terminology to use. ‘Pin point’ is the correct expression. The fact that every ‘victim’ and ‘witness’ is reported as using the incorrect term suggests very much to me that they have been ‘directed’ in what to say from one and the same source. And why is it always the first thing they all appear to mention? It’s not a symptom that is that apparent unless someone is medically trained and staring closely into someone’s eyes and it does not cause any tangible physical sensation in its own right. Surely someone talking about their physical discomfort would mention all the other symptoms first and foremost.
As Leonardo DiCaprio said in the movie Catch Me If You Can. “I concur” Charlie. lol
Rob, it really is a delight to read your blog posts. IMHO, as an analyst your skills are clearly supreme, as are the analytical skills of many of the blog’s commenters.
Please keep going – I believe that the plasterers who have been engaged to paste over the cracks in the official narrative may soon be running short of plaster. An indication of this may have been the intervention of a certain son of william.
Hi Rob,
You could have insisted on the stange simultaneity of Mr and Mrs Skripal symptoms.
Not only it is well-known that delay of symptoms resulting from dermal exposure of a nerve agent widely depend on:
* The intensity of the exposure,
* The behavior and metabolism of the exposed;
but we have learned from the tragedy of C. Rowley and D. Sturgess that a different exposition has led to a standard deviation of symptoms delay 15 min to 8h and a different aftermath.
On the contrary, the two Skripals did start to experience symptoms after 3h on a time range of maximum 10 min, probably few minutes (see what happened at the bench, and the fact that a pretty large amount of people were passing by). This gives a time precision of at least 1/18.
This is remarkably high precision. In the Rowley/Sturgess case, the precision is at minimum 32/1 .
For this to happen, it would imply :
* An extremely similar contact with the door handle, as well as the assumption that the first contact managed somehow to not remove the substance too much.
* A lot of luck, assuming a quite optimistic time precision of 1/4 i.e. 30 min due to an improbable similar exposure and metabolic reaction, it requires a 1 against 4 dice throwing luck for simultaneous symptoms to appear.
Of course, this is possible in theory. Events with once-in-a-blue-moon probabilities happens from time to time just because we are facing a very large amount of events.
But it is suspicious that such a coïncidence did happen PRECISELY to the most dubious and weak part — the door handle theory — of the Skripal saga.
Yes indeed, the door handle story was already dead the day it was announced, even before all the other impossibilities were added to the official narrative. The Novichok would have had to affect Sergei and Yulia very quickly and at almost exactly the same time.
Neither would have had time to call for help, either by dialling 999 or by alerting a passerby (there were quite a number of people going past around that time, if the CCTV recordings from Snap Fitness and Jenny’s restaurant in the nearby Market Walk are anything to go by).
It’s true that organophosphates, including nerve agents, can take hours to seep through the skin before reaching the blood vessels and taking effect. However, it’s unbelievable that after that time it would suddenly attack two people who were of different age, weight and gender, and very likely received different dosages.
It’s almost like two alarm clocks that were set hours earlier to go off at the same time. It was clear from the beginning that no nerve agent behaves that way.
Here is where they make up all the lies:
“Derelict Scottish mill is shadowy hub in UK’s fight against Putin’s propaganda machine”
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/derelict-crumbling-scots-mill-shadowy-13674992
“Derelict Scottish mill is shadowy hub in UK’s fight against Putin’s propaganda machine”.
Whenever you come across such claims, the thing to do is replace “Putin’s propaganda machine” with “the truth”.
Thus:
“Derelict Scottish mill is shadowy hub in UK’s fight against the truth”.
Perfect Tom
Gorgeous logic.
But I’m going to speculate here: the winner of Strictly Come Dancing will be the MI6 candidate. Hint: the mysterious red head, minder to the Bellingcat internet dude.
Hoho what fun! Well let me try this test with the door handle theory. Sergei closes the door by the tainted handle. They drive to zizzis.
Sergei pays for the meal using cash.
– tainted cash register and the neighbouring notes and coins perhaps.
– tainted customers accepting cash from register spread novihoax everywhere.
Incinerate the cash register and its contents: Nope that didn’t happen and besides it is sacrilege to incinerate the tokens of the state let alone the ark of the capitalist system: the register.
Ok so Sergei pays with a credit card that he inserts in the reader slot on the terminal (assuming such things are in UK) so that spreads novihoax to heaps more credit card users.
Incinerate the card swipe and to hell with yet another ark of anti capitalist heresy. Nope that didn’t happen.
The more I think about it I say the eastern uberchems sneaked into Sergei’s backyard and sprayed the underwear on the clothes line using a repurposed drink bottle. There is no book yet published by FSB or CIA on this long standing devious ploy. (copywrite me).
I have another theory that is likely to be fully provable by the beeb AND blundercat: the eastern uberchems swapped Seregei’s anti-perspirant spray as they fully knew that they would get Yulia given their secret knowledge of her underarm sniffing fetish.
I have more theories but they need refining and approval by blundercat and his friends. The Higgins bosun theory is highly probable believable too and I bet Elliot will love it. It has a sort of techo cache about it don’t you think?
“Ok so Sergei pays with a credit card that he inserts in the reader slot on the terminal (assuming such things are in UK) so that spreads novihoax to heaps more credit card users.”
I love the way you’re not sure if we have “reader slot on the terminal” in the UK, like it’s some futuristic invention that us backwater folk on this island haven’t caught up with yet!! In reality, most people in the UK no longer put their card in the machine, they use contactless nowadays, no need to touch the terminal at all (unless the Skirpal’s bill came to more than £30 as you can’t use contactless on anything over £30).
“they use contactless nowadays”. Something which the Dutch had back in the early to mid 90s.
How do I know? I worked on a project associated with the introduction of them.
We are backward, but not quite as backward as Uncle Tungsten would have people believe.
Robs argument is very good for eliminating the door handle, if the substance on the door handle was novichok but what if it was fentanyl or something similar.
Fentanyl and similar have a delayed start and their effects are severely increased when mixed with alcohol and we know Sergie and Yulia had drinks at the Mill pub that day.
Medical use fentanyl patches take several hours to take effect for example.
I’m fairly sure that the poison was not applied by Rus and Alex so that takes away the tight timeline for its application to the door handle then doesn’t it.
I’m still not sure how Yulia got contaminated but in any case, the door handle can only be ruled out for novichok.
There’s no reason to believe that the door handle was used for anything other opening and closing the door – that’s at least until the OPCW became involved. All the stories about chemicals being smeared/sprayed on it on 4th March are simply that: stories – which originated in that imaginary GRU assassins’ handbook of which no evidence exists. (Such a timely ‘discovery’!)
I’m still not sure how Yulia got contaminated.
But just supposing she wasn’t, ever, and nor was Sergei. That would clear up your uncertainty.
At the moment I tend to a agree Miheila but I’m just keeping an open mind. Ive got some other information though, which I post as soon as I can today.
Miheila is right, of course. The only thing that’s easy about this whole affair is saying what we do know for certain.
1. The Skripals were taken to hospital, and since have been detained incommunicado elsewhere.
2. Two people, probably, were found on the park bench in a poorly state.
3. Er… that’s it.
As Sherlock Holmes famously said, it’s a capital error to theorize in advance of the facts. And ironically, in spite of the shower of publicity, we have almost no facts at all.
Based on the above, and the apparent “links” between Mr Skripal and various unsavoury British secret service leftovers – and in turn to the absurd “Trump dossier” – my best wild guess is that Skripal was believed (probably wrongly) to be a loose cannon, and had to be taken off the board. Some cover story was cooked up – incompetently and with utter contempt for the public intelligence, as usual – and got completely out of hand.
Much as I have come to suspect happened to Alan Turing. If you look at what has been published about his death, I think you will notice a distinct resemblance to what has been said about the Skrpial case.
To raise this with your MP you need precise references from Hansard forvwhat TM and Amber Rudd said and Nick Bailey’s precise words and the time in the BBC IPlayer recording at which he says them. Send it to BBC complaints, though it’s not a complaint as yet but a disrepancy which must be resolved. Rob, can youngive us chapter and verse from Hansard?
I will write as follows. Subject line. Contradiction between ministerial statements and BBC. Text. There is a clear contradiction between statements made tonthe House by the PM and Home Secretary regarding DS Bailey’s role in events in Salisbury which have led to bring charges against two Russian National and DS Bailey’s own account of his role as given on BBC Panorama… Details to be given here… Please can the PM and either the then or present Home clarify this matter in the house, were ministers misinformed or is DS Bailey’s account in the BBC incorrect? (Possible final sentence) It is inportant to do this so that the public can have full confidence that thecaccusations which HMG have made against the Russian government are correct. I don’t see how any MP can refuse to pass it on. I don’t see how any MP can refuse to forward it if you give proper references.
It is pretty clear when you consider what Theresa May said.
She accused the Russian state – Putin – to have either done it “or the Russian government lost control of this potentially catastrophically damaging nerve agent and allowed it to get into the hands of others”
The BBC admit now that Skripal was involved in investigating the Russian mafia. This was “highly likely” done by sting operations. Just this particular sting was intended to blow up into the face of the Russian state.
The continuously changing narrative suggests that it blew up in a different way from planned.
It is “highly likely” that Bailey and both Skripals came into contact with the poison in the same way – by incorrectly handling a sample. It is obvious that people could not get ill by this poison via skin contact.
I have a hunch that the sting was done via Glushkov.
“The BBC admit now that Skripal was involved in investigating the Russian mafia.”
With so many lies by BBC, why this “involvement” should be true?
Skripal used to work in GRU, this is in military intelligence. He is not like Litvinenko, who used to work in FSB, in their anti-organized-crime department.
I guess there is only the British military to spy on in Salisbury :-))
This here is the claim the BBC has taken back via the Spanish investigator (“no systemic connection between Russian crime groups and the Russian state could be shown”)
https://www.dw.com/en/russian-mafia-groups-reportedly-operate-in-europe-on-behalf-of-the-kremlin/a-38617828
Here is the correction which Kollerstrom extracted in the House from the then Home Secretary
The official account that we provided to the House states that the train on which the bombers travelled left Luton station at 7.40 am. The police have now told us that that is incorrect—the train in fact left Luton station at 7.25 am. It did, however, arrive at Kings Cross at 8.23 am, as recorded in the official account. Although that does not appear to affect anything else in the official account, it is nevertheless an error, which is why I report it to the House.
Even Slim Virgin left the reference/link to it in his wiki bio. The government will have eirher force the BBC to retract or retract themselves.
This site only accepts short comments from me, hence multiple comments. Just complain that the BBC contradict the PM and Home Secretary. Don’t start saying that you don’t believe the Novichok theory. You can raise it with the BBC too. If the BBC contradicts government ministers something has to give. You can efen let your MP think that you are concerned that the contradiction helps conspiracy their sites like this flourish. Politicians can getcaway with all sorts of slippery and evasive language in the House, but blatant factual contradictions have to be remedied.
I think that few MP’s will start to read anything of this length, they have TM’s 500+ deal to wade through right now. However if the BBC is contraducting statements made by the PM and former Home Secretary it can’t stand. Nicholas Kollerstrom (who IMO talks nonsense about the Holocaust) once managed to extractcsuch a correction in the Commons, see his wiki bio and ref.
“According to the BBC, Kollerstrom found that the Luton–London train on which the bombers were at first said to have travelled had been cancelled, which led the government to correct the official account of the men’s movements.”
Hello all.
Can I repeat the request I made earlier to UK residents about questioning your M.P. or others in authority with the exact points that Rob has made above. I posted the contents of a letter I sent to my M.P. (and the negative response) in the last section. I will continue hounding them. Send your M.P. etc copies of the Blogmire and insist on answers. This farce is still live in the public domain. Act now or else it goes down the memory hole. Thank you to Rob and others for giving us the ammunition, you are heroes.
Nice one, Rob, and thanks!
Another point is that when the police arrived, sometime after 9:00pm but probably that same day (‘Around midnight’, as the programme put it, and around timeline 6:15), here’s what the audience was told:
Jane Corbin: “That night [‘around midnight’] Nick Bailey and two colleagues are sent to the Skripal’s home, in a quiet suburb of Salisbury.”
DSNB: “We had to make sure that there were no other casualties in the house, it was vital for us to find out what had actually happened. We decided to protect ourselves, and to protect the scene, we would wear full forensic suits. (sfx repeated soft knocking and then a creaking hinge). I was the first person into the house. The house was in darkness, it just looked normal, there was nothing untoward. We came out of the house, secured it again, took our forensic suits off which we then bagged up, and then we went back to the station. Once I’d come back from the house, the Skripal’s house, my eyes, my pupils were like pin pricks, I was quite sweaty and hot, at the time I put that down to tiredness and stress.”
Jane Corbin: “Nick goes home, hoping he’ll sleep it off … “
What’s odd:
Having knocked on the door, they go in. No mention of the ‘messily applied’ stuff on the door handle that had earlier allegedly contaminated the Skripals.
No mention of the door having to be forced.
No mention of using keys to get in. But keys they had because when they left they “came out of the house, (and) secured it again … “.
No mention of at least one cat, complaining that it was really hungry.
Also, there’s been no mention by the neighbours of the police donning forensic suits outside the house, at midnight. That’s because at least one neighbour noticed the police being there by 1700: how did they do that, was it a squad car including possibly one plain clothes officer (DSNB?), or an umarked vehicle with at least one uniformed officer? Apparently the door hadn’t needed to be forced on this visit either, and it must have been secured again because there’s no hint of observable damage to the midnight door.
I too think that the toxic door handle is a myth. But if I’m mistaken, then either Sergei himself intentionally but unobtrusively contaminated the door as he and his daughter went out at lunchtime, or the contamination was put on the door by the police (or even ‘looked like police’) who turned up at 47CMR while the bench couple were still receiving attention at the bench. The BBC version of events also presents a third possibility: that a messily applied substance was applied, under cover of darkness, before the midnight callers turned up.
Of the pair that supposedly attended the Skripal’s house at midnight, who was driving?
Some of the things one must learn for the performance and limitations pilots exam is that our eyes regulate the response to light falling on them in two ways: i) through chemical adaptations in the cells comprising the retina, and ii) by closing or opening the iris. One is taught that the chemical adaptation is slow whereas the iris’ adaption is rapid.
Thus, if the iris closes down to a pinprick we can expect two effects: i) the chemical changes in the retina will have no immediate effect, ii) one perceives that someone has either turned the lights off or turned them down. Also, the now tiny opening in the iris introduces diffraction effects – the effect is that one’s visual perception becomes somewhat blurry.
DSNB drove home ?
WOW!! Was that a low flying pig?
Tsk, Cascadian, please keep up.
In the BBC version of the Skripal Affair, presenter and narrator Jane Corbin* clearly states that:
““That night [‘around midnight’] Nick Bailey and two colleagues are sent to the Skripal’s home, … ” in either a car or a van, rather than by bike or on foot.
Your point about the effect of contamination affecting ability to drive is well made though (meaning: oooh I had’t thought of that!), particularly when night vision is involved. By implication, DSNB’s eyes had observably contracted pupils sometime before he drove home but this might not have been until after he hadn’t slept it off.
Beware the solitary flying pig, there’s a flight of them.
* The BBC doesn’t seem to do robust investigative reporting any more, not like back in the day when Panorama warranted its’ flagship status. Gone are the days when I made a point of watching the programme, now I find something else to do when it’s on. Sorry, Ms Corbin, but you’re not imo acting as anything other than a presenter, narrator and sometimes a soft interviewer in this BBC propaganda piece – don’t flatter yourself that you’re the only one, you’re just the one in this particular piece of audio visual meringue.
Hi Eleanor! I like this…Very Good!!
A little correction:
“Salisbury Nerve Agent Attack: the
Inside</strike. Outside Story”If/when you’re [BBC] going to cover an attack, invite at least those who’re supposedly attacked, as guests onto this freak show-
What?
They’re gone?
Well, show me all the [Salisbury] CCTV footage of those 64 council funded cameras, shot on Saturday, 3rd of March, 2018 and Sunday, 4th of March, 2018 and I might be tempted to believe you, provided those images support your version of the story.
Of course, the fact you don’t, is evidence in and of itself, of your inability to mix your verbal lies with the visible truth [the CCTV footage].
You ain’t fooling me [and countless others].
Oops!
A little correction:
“Salisbury Nerve Agent Attack: the
Inside. Outside Story”If/when you’re [BBC] going to cover an attack, invite at least those who’re supposedly attacked, as guests onto this freak show-
What?
They’re gone?
Well, show me all the [Salisbury] CCTV footage of those 64 council funded cameras, shot on Saturday, 3rd of March, 2018 and Sunday, 4th of March, 2018 and I might be tempted to believe you, provided those images support your version of the story.
Of course, the fact you don’t, is evidence in and of itself, of your inability to mix your verbal lies with the visible truth [the CCTV footage].
You ain’t fooling me [and countless others].
P.S. Rob, is it possible to add a preview window to the comment section or a 5 minute window to edit text? Thanks in advance [either way].
I like your earlier version best, Daniel!
@ eleanor,
The first draft resembles reality quite nicely, doesn’t it?
Rob, The door handle is dead. It has been hanged, drawn and quartered – which I also consider to be an appropriate reward for some of the individuals named in your piece. But that is the start, not the end of the story.
The self-congratulatory clowns at the Met and the gormless cretins at the BBC, have a very serious problem. So much has been invested in the door handle theory that the rest of the story now lies in tatters too.
– What were R&A doing on Wilton Road? Their role was to put the non-existant novihoax on the uncontaminated door handle. They are now unemployed.
– The door handle, was supposed to be ground zero. If it was not poisoned then there is no reasonable explanation for anything else that followed that day.
– Bailey cannot have been poisoned at all.
I could go on but it is pointless. If the Skripals were not poisoned at the door handle, with a substance called Novichok, then the whole thing is a hoax. There is no alternative explanation. It is all a pack of lies. Nobody can say: “If it wasn’t the door handle, then where were the Skripals poisoned?” – because the Met has done all the work and they say the door handle is the only possible place they could have been poisoned. The OPCW has said: “it was the door handle.”
The Skripals were not poisoned; they were not in SDH; Freya Church (and others) correctly identified the CCTV couple on the bench, incapacitated in a hoax poisoning; no tables, chairs, bread or anything else were contaminated by the Skripals – everything is a hoax.
If the Skripals were not poisoned at the door handle, then they were not poisoned anywhere.
Of course, Paul. What I suspected long ago has only been further confirmed by the idiotic Panorama programme.
Unintentionally, that hour’s worth of sensationalist ‘disinfotainment’ provided further evidence to support what I have suspected for many months:
1. The Skripals were not poisoned.
2. They had left Salisbury by the time of the bench incident.
3. They two people on the bench were not the Skripals.
4. Neither ‘novichoks’, nor any other nerve agents were used in Salisbury.
5. DS Nick Bailey was never a ‘hero’.
6. The UK establishment (MI5, MI6, police, MoD, UKG, parliament, PHE, NHS, DSTL, DCBRNC, DEFRA, etc.) are all wilfully covering up, in varying degrees, a hoax – and treating the people as gullible fools.
I’d welcome any convincing evidence that suggests that I could be wrong over any of these six points. So far, it’s not been forthcoming.
“1. The Skripals were not poisoned.
2. They had left Salisbury by the time of the bench incident …”
What I don’t understand, Miheila, from this version is what expands and explains these assertions. In no particular order, some of the confusion is about:
Specifically, the who by, and where the Skripals were taken?
If competing teams divided the Skripals, who had/has which?
If DSNB was admitted to SDH, which Skripal was in the room next to him (important, if S&Y really were separated)?
How Yulia and now DSNB have been ‘seen’ by the public but not in real time, but not Sergei?
Were the not-Skripal couple actually those in Radnor Ward?
Do PnB have any role in this?
What happened at the bench?
As you can tell, there’s a swamp of non-understanding on my part as to why you, and others, are adamant about the counter-narrative you present. I know the answers to some of this but don’t seem to be able to string the pearls into a necklace … and I suspect others are wondering too.
Much here has been revisited so now might be the time to again review the version of events in which the Skripals disappeared from The Mill.
eleanor, It is funny that some of us will cling onto a single detail from some reports yet when presented with evidence from every major newspaper in the country on 6 March, for reasons I do not understand, want still more proof. If an alien crash landed in Salisbury tomorrow and read the news from 6 March, it would be convinced that the CCTV couple was on the bench. There isn’t a single report that argues against it until late that evening when the Sun published its story about Yulia and her red-brown hair. But by the time we looked at those reports again, the official narrative’ was in wide circulation and “it is easier to fool someone, than to convince them that they have been fooled” applied.
To accept that the Skripals were not on the bench, we have to be willing to discard some of what we thought we knew.
The version of events that sees the Skripals leaving from the Mill is completely outside the scope of the official narrative. Some of it comes from interpreting known facts (we know the police spent a lot of effort in the Mill car park – why?) and some of it comes from people that I and others have spoken to – who will remain nameless! We can discuss the first category but not the second.
We know that the press reports, claiming to be from witnesses in the Mill, are fake because there were not enough people there that day to account for statements that subsequently appeared. The initial statements said “everything was normal” with the Skripals. There isn’t a single witness that claims to have seen them walking from the Mill to the bench, which is odd if they were already feeling ill – surely someone would have noticed. If the CCTV couple were the ones on the bench, then, where did the Skripals go? That they left via the car park fits all the details I think are true – and I don’t have a single detail I believe to be true, that argues against it.
Those who seek to dismiss the idea because of the lack of known sources are welcome to do whatever they wish. I have disclosed a few bits of information that are not in the public domain – but only when I am sure that I can do so without any risk to the source and I am confident that it is true (for example by finding 2 sources who offer independent confirmation).
Such is the case with the story that S&Y were separated at some point after leaving the Mill – but as to why, where, or who took them, we do not yet have the full story… but if true, it supports the idea that they were indeed not the couple on the bench.
If we provide the identity of the sources, to support the idea, it is very unlikely that others will be willing to share anything with us at all!
Our advantage is that the truth will not change and time is on our side. There are a finite number of ‘facts’ from that day. Each new ‘fact’ that we uncover means there is one less to find.
We don’t yet understand what everyone was doing, or who everyone was but there are a few bits that we do know and we need to fit them together.
Here is a very small detail that we have, that as yet does not make a lot of sense but may eventually fall into place. All of it comes from one source and part of it is confirmed by a second:
While the AA was on the ground (with its engines off) the pilot got out and at one point approached and spoke to one or more of the people waiting on the ground, on the far side (as seen from Sainsbury’s) where the photographers were standing.
The AA was only on the ground for a few minutes. Finding out who got off and who got on will help us to put the whole story together. I have also already said that the paramedics left and did not return to the AA but I really don’t want to say any more until I am absolutely sure what happened… but there are not many minutes of timeline to fill and several people were watching.
OK I’m with all that, Paul, and still keeping an open mind – I’m quite willing to work with the idea that there were a couple on the bench, and they may not have been S&Y.
Oh and I can’t cite the timeline but the Panorama programme included a paramedic saying something to the effect that ‘when we were going back, the three of us in the back of the ambulance, we were discussing what it was and decided it was an overdose’.
This is a précis because what I noticed was that there seemed to be three of them in the back of the ambulance. Afaik an emergency ambulance usually travels with two paramedics, one of whom is the driver. Here there seem to be three of them plus a driver, presumably with Sergei, in the back and I wonder whether this explains why the AA departed without the two paramedics it had landed with. The AA log claims that there was only one call to Salisbury on 4 March, where someone (a female?) was fitting and this implies that their arrival was coincidental to the bench incident; I’m not sure.
Hmm, maybe I’ll do what the smart lurkers do: watch, wait and keep quiet – but I’m far from dismissing all this alternative narrative (not least because the official version is so very … tatty).
The AA log does not actually show the helicopter’s participation. As you said, it refers to a patient fitting and then says “land assisted to hospital” and shows an image of a car rather than helicopter in the left hand box… all rather odd.
Paul, I looked at the log on the AA website and thought that what’s listed there refers to incidents that were attended, and funded though public donations or some other public or charity funding.
Which means that it’s nothing like a real log, that includes the helicopter’s other activities. Based on the record of its activity, on the website, it spends a huge amount of time doing nothing much at all (and I don’t think that can be the case) – other than being on display on open days, for kids to crawl over etc (as it did, on Mon 5 March, for some of the Melksham kids).
eleanor, you are correct. There are only 34 items listed in that log showing that the helicopter was used, in the period from 5 Sept 2017 to 4 March 2018! That does not seem like very many trips.
On the day I copied the details, there were only 4 trips in 2018 up to and including 4 March:
Patient fitting, land assisted to hospital. 04/03/2018
Not breathing, land assisted to hospital. 28/02/2018
Cardiac arrest, helicopter conveyed to hospital. 24/02/2018
Broken leg, land assisted to hospital. 22/02/2018
What does the AA do with the rest of its time?
Indeed: attends four times but three land assists to hospital.
That’s an extraordinarily expensively furbished bit of expensive kit, used to do what? Land paramedics? Surely an ordinary helicopter, if really needed, could do that.
We know from the flight data websites that it flies most days… so what are they doing? And would the good people of Wiltshire (who pay for it) be happy if they knew where their money goes? I have also checked WAA’s annual reports, WAA says there that the flights are in the hundreds each year… but that certainly does not show up on the online log (which has been revised 2 or 3 times now since March!)
Top marks, Mr. Slane, thank you.
If only the Government, or even just the police, were smart enough to hire you as a consultant.
Mostly fictitious, in large part fabricated, almost fully a fake, that’s what the official version of the events is, but it did the job well. The majority of the public are convinced the poisoning was a Russian job. Even if the Skripals were to surface tomorrow, free, confirm what you’ve figured, it would not change anything at all. We live in a post-truth time, no question about it. Will it last though?
Baron, my strong impression on studying the official story is that it is very similar to the plots of TV dramas such as CSI and NCIS. They more or less work until you start thinking about them. Then they instantly fly apart.
And wasn’t Novichok brought to the public notice in one of those American TV shows not so long ago?
Tom,
“…wasn’t Novichok brought to the public notice in one of those American TV shows not so long ago?”
– more accurately, a joint US/UK drama series called ‘Strike Back’.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?V=f9uwpQCDAkA
Yep. It is conspiracy theory trolling.
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Predictive_programming
There is of course the upload of the Skripal in a cage video before the assassination by “Group M”
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/skripal-attack-youtube-videos-analysed-disinformation-campaign-link-53fwb6pl9
Has anyone seen a breakdown of the materials in the perfume bottle? Presumably the bottle was not pure poison. Was the carrier ethanol or something else? These additional materials have a big impact on handling characteristics. I realise the package was supposedly unopened but why would its putative mate be any different.
It is almost as if every sample of nerve agent was added after the incident in the park. Certainly nothing we know about the chain of custody would refute that.
No, Persse. UKG are not willing to provide the public with important details of that type, and they also prevent the OPCW from doing so. They only seem to provide us with lies upon lies.
“It is almost as if every sample of nerve agent was added after the incident in the park. Certainly nothing we know about the chain of custody would refute that”.
Exactly! There was no nerve agent used in Salisbury. The bottle/s were invented long after 4th March. The Skripals were never poisoned.
Charles Rowley said it smelled of ammonia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ammonia#As_a_stimulant
“highly likely” they mistook the stuff for a drug.
This is what Charlie said according to the Mirror:
“My hands were covered in the stuff. It was an oily substance with very little odour.”
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/breaking-novichok-charlie-rowley-interview-12974102
I am not sure where this idea that he said it smelt of ammonia comes from. It is not what he said in his TV interview.
Which is also interesting because real Novichok is not odourless – it is said to have an unpleasant odour.
It comes from the brother quoting Charles Rowley
https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/717821/novichok-victim-charlie-rowley-released-hospital-salisbury-russian-spy-poisoning
TBH I am not going to hang onto Charlie’s every word… but if it indeed had “very little odour”, it could not have been novihoax.
He did say very little odour.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFaGuqHb7f4
Yup, I know he did – which as I just posted above would mean it could not be novihoax (if Charlie can be relied upon…)
Isn’t it entirely possible that what Dawn sprayed on herself was not actually from the bottle later recovered from Charlie’s flat?
Entirely possible. I still do not believe that Dawn could possibly have thought it was a normal bottle of perfume with such a ludicrous applicator.
You’d have snapped that hand, while I was still thinking about it … SNAP, anyway!
But, given your latest find, it is possible that she used a different Russian market version of Premier Jour – different modification, different contents.
Whose humour was it anyway, to use Premier Jour, as in ‘today is the first day of the rest of your life’? For poor Dawn, it seems to have been and not due to applying a variant of Dior’s Poison.
Oh eleanor, I can’t claim credit for finding it (although I honestly forget who was the first to show the counterfeit bottle) – somebody else suggested it was actually manufactured in the UAE (which does make sense because a lot of fake fragrances do come from there).
I tried to buy it from several different online stores in Russia but none of them replied to me. I guess someone suggested it should be taken off the market. Pity.
I’ve just bought some, but not the mistersmell stuff and not 5.5ml. I confess that it was a little more than 4 squid but hey it might actually be real Nina Ricci. Time will tell.
So: an inauthentic fake in more ways than one!
The OPCW said in September that it was 97-98% ‘toxic chemical’, presumably Novichok A-234, plus impurities.
” 9. During the second deployment, the team collected a sample of the contents of a small bottle that the police seized as a suspect item from the house of Charles Rowley in Amesbury.
10. The results of the analysis of this environmental sample conducted by OPCW
Designated Laboratories show that the sample consists of the toxic chemical at a
concentration of 97-98%. The sample is therefore considered a neat agent of high
purity. The OPCW Designated Laboratories also identified a number of impurities
constituting the remaining 2-3% of the sample.”
https://www.opcw.org/sites/default/files/documents/S_series/2018/en/s-1671-2018_e_.pdf
“sample” does not necessarily mean the bottle. Would it mix?
https://www.health.ny.gov/environmental/emergency/chemical_terrorism/nerve_agents_general.htm
What are the properties of nerve agents?
Some properties of nerve agents include:
Nerve agents are liquids at room temperature; VX is more oily than the others.
Nerve agents can mix with water and most other solvents.
Sarin evaporates nearly as fast as water, but other nerve agents evaporate more slowly. VX evaporates most slowly, like motor oil.
The vapor of nerve agents is heavier than air, so vapors tend to stay close to the ground, floors or to low-lying areas.
Nerve agents are either odorless or have only a slight odor.
To get the nerve agent to stay on the door handle and not drip off it would have to have been of a certain viscosity. I think that would have made it impossible to atomise like perfume, it would have to have been more of a gel and smeared on the handle, even less probable.
Correct, GFL. All V-series nerve agents have a high viscosity (VE, VG, VM, VX), and the Novichok series are chemically related to these, but as you say, it would be impossible to atomise like perfume. This is another flaw in the official explanation for the door handle could never have been sprayed with ‘novichok’ from that bottle with its ridiculous applicator – a bottle which now has two competely different official descriptions.