Email
Password
Remember meForgot password?
    Log in with Twitter

article imageOp-Ed: U.K. authorities name suspects in the Skripal poisoning case

By Ken Hanly     Sep 5, 2018 in Crime
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has named their suspects in the poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal. The two are named Alexander Petrov and Ruslan Boshirov.
The names are regarded as aliases.
The two entered the U.K. on legal visas but are said to be travelling under aliases. Although, the two are charged with a number of offenses authorities have not applied to Russia for their extradition since the Russian constitution forbids it. The new facts are a useful addition to the official narrative for authorities but leave many unanswered questions as does the rest of the official narrative.
Back in June an article in Digital Journal discussed flaws in the official story. Disobedient Media has an extensive timeline of events as well as many links to other articles criticising the official version of events. Finally The Blog Mire has ten separate well-researched articles on ten holes in the official version of events.
I will just deal with a couple of the questions raised by the new facts. The two are said by authorities to be GRU, Russian secret service agents.
Why did the agents travel as they did?
The Off-Guardian asks: " Why did two alleged GRU agents travel under false names and fake passports, but still use Russian names and Russian passports? If they had used EU passports – say from Lithuania or Estonia for example – they wouldn’t have needed a visa, thanks to EU freedom of movement agreements, and could still have spoken Russian without raising suspicion."
Moon of Alabama notes: 'It also seems a bit curious that a 'Russian assassin' team, allegedly from a highly professional secret service, would travel together and use direct flights from Moscow to London and back. That seems extraordinary careless. Why not separate and fly via a third country?"
Instead of using the obvious strategy of traveling separately and from a third country, these professionals took a direct flight from Moscow using aliases enabling U.K. authorities to directly tie them to Russia. It seems that the GRU wants to help out the U.K. investigators.
The nature of the novichok used
We have never been given very clear information about the actual poison used. It was obviously not as deadly as novichok is supposed to be. According to the official narrative at present — it has changed numerous times — the poison was in a gel form and was smeared on the door of the Skripal's house. It has never been explained how it could be hours after the Skripals had left the house and had gone to a restaurant and pub that they were found unconscious on a park bench if novichok is as deadly as had been claimed.
The later Rowley and Sturgess poisonings involved novichok in a perfume bottle that was liquid and could be atomised. The two were never referenced as the same except today according to Off-Guardian. Scotland Yard Assistant Commissioner Neil Basu said to the BBC: "..the manner in which the bottle and packaging has been adapted makes it a perfect cover for smuggling the weapon into the country, and a perfect delivery method for the attack against the Skripal’s front door”.
Up to now the novichok was smeared and used as a gel. If Basu were correct then how did the perfume bottle get resealed? Rowley maintains he is sure the perfume bottle was in a sealed box wrapped in cellophane. Even Basu admits they aren't sure even about the details of the new story. Basu said: We don’t yet know where the suspects disposed of the Novichok they used to attack the door, where Dawn and Charlie got the bottle that poisoned them, or if it is the same bottle used in both poisonings.”
We know that in the Rowley and Sturgess case the bottle of Novichok was retrieved from a charity donation bin. Why would the poisoners put the poison there 8 miles out of their way?
Some comments on the news
Michael K says: "If one looks at the Guardian’s website, it’s practically bursting with articles about the Skripal Affair and today’s developments. It’s like they’ve been sitting around waiting and ready to go. And not a single word questioning any of the government’s claims and accusations. I seem to remember that after Iraq and the WMDs we were told they’d never accept anything at face value again."
Michael also adds caustically: "Big, strong, dastardly but dumb. Yes, it’s those Russian bears again! Knowing that the U.K. is the most watched country on the planet, with almost as many CCTV cameras as people, I’d be very wary walking about in broad daylight in Salisbury if I was planning to assassinate someone. I think I’d wear a disguise or a hood and arrive at night for my deadly mission, one that leaves a convenient chemical trail for the British police to follow. I’d be inclined to simply shoot Skripal in the back of the head using a silencer on my pistol and then dump it from a bridge into a river. But I suppose bears, sorry highly trained GRU assassins operating under deep cover in the UK don’t think like that?"
George Galloway is no less caustic in a tweet: "The Russian GRU are “so highly organised and disciplined” with such a “highly effective chain of command” they sent a couple of deadly incompetents with false RUSSIAN passports directly from MOSCOW to fail to kill their target and dump the poison in a charity skip. Aye right..."
This opinion article was written by an independent writer. The opinions and views expressed herein are those of the author and are not necessarily intended to reflect those of DigitalJournal.com
More about skripal poisoning, Alexander Petrov, ruslan boshirov
More news from
Latest News
Top News