Salisbury Is Far from a Novichok Slam-Dunk!
JUSTICE, BRICS, EUROPE, 10 Sep 2018
5 Sep 2018 – For the British media and their parliamentary echo-chamber, today’s release of CCTV and other pictures, together with the murder charges against two “Russians” is game, set and match against the Russian state.
Moreover the British decision not to even seek extradition of “Alexander Petrov” and “Ruslan Boshirov” signals case-closed so far as London is concerned. All that remains presumably is the imposition of further national and international sanctions against Moscow which continues robustly to deny any involvement. But for a deeply cynical British public, soured by decades of dirty tricks disinformation and official lying which has caused the deaths of millions and spread extremism across the world, this case is far from closed.
Ruslan Boshirov and Alexander Petrov – Skripal poisoning alleged suspects.
Image processed by CodeCarvings Piczard FREE Community Edition
For the proverbial “moron in a hurry” today’s news is persuasive. Rather in the way that the pictures of “mobile chemical laboratories” parked under Saddam Hussein’s bed in the Iraqi Presidential Palace were persuasive. But now as then, all is not necessarily what it seems.
The first reason to be skeptical is that it has taken six months to publish these images. With the huge numbers of highly experienced and able counter-terrorism officers on this case it must or at least could have been possible for these suspects to have been identified and publicized long before now.
Moreover, images of two people with their (presumably false) names establish absolutely nothing. Even if it is accepted that they flew in and out of Moscow that doesn’t make them Russian. I myself frequently do and I’m not Russian. It certainly doesn’t make them state operatives and GRU officers. No evidence has been offered in support of this leap, but that didn’t stop the iron-clad consensus in the House of Commons from rallying to the Prime Minister’s unsubstantiated claims against Russia.
The head of the counter-terrorism branch of the Metropolitan Police, Neil Basu, whom I have known for many years hasn’t attracted much media attention for his statement on the new developments, and that undoubtedly is because he – who is in charge of the case – was asked at his press conference if he had any evidence that the two men in the images were Russian State operatives, he answered simply, “No”.
BREAKING: UK police Assistant Commissioner Neil Basu says no evidence to suggest Russian state involvement in #skripal .. seeks public help to establish any evidence
— Afshin Rattansi (@afshinrattansi) September 5, 2018
So the Police have no evidence that what Mrs May told the docile parliament was in fact true.
But there are other reasons for skepticism.
According to the timeline released today, the two men arrived in Salisbury at 2.25 pm on Saturday, the day before the attack, and left for London at 4.10 pm. This is described in the British media as a “reconnaissance” trip. What kind of “reconnaissance” is that? This timeline is much more suggestive of a meeting with someone else in Salisbury. It could have been for the collection of the chemical weapon – traces of that we are NOW told have been found in the tiny down-market and geographically inconvenient “hotel” in east London in which the men are said to have stayed – or identification of an accomplice or even a controller.
On that subject, it is said that after the deadly attack the two men relied on the notoriously unreliable Sunday train service to get them – just and no more – to Heathrow to catch their flight back to Moscow. If these are intelligence officers, the Russian state intelligence services have certainly lost the plot.
Read more: Salisbury plot thickens, questions without answers multiply
By the way this timeline means that the chemical agent was “smeared on the door” of the Skripal house in broad daylight on the Sunday. Yet no-one saw anyone do such a highly dangerous thing and of course no CCTV reveals any such thing. And what would the “GRU” men have done if Skripal had opened his door or seen them through the window thus wrecking the whole operation?
The recklessness of then discarding the chemical weapon in a perfume bottle just thrown away in the centre of Salisbury (which has killed one and may yet kill another victim) the carelessness about their egress from the country, the highly suspicious to fly from and back directly to Moscow, the failure to actually kill their targets all point away from Russian Intelligence as the culprits rather than point at them.
And above all the big political question of why the Russian state would carry out such a convoluted (simpler to kill their target with a plastic bag over his head) murder plot a week before the presidential election and 100 days before the World Cup rather than at any other time remains unasked never mind answered.
I have said from the beginning, long before we knew what we now know about the ongoing activities of Mr Skripal, that Russian involvement in his attempted murder could not at all be ruled out. But I also said here on these pages that Russian criminal elements were much more likely suspects than the GRU. London contains a nest of the nastiest Russians on the earth – the Oligarchs, many of them fugitives from their homeland, many of them living high on Russia’s stolen wealth. There is where Britain and Russia should be co-operating – and Russia is ready to do so.
Someone who wanted the blame for this dastardly crime in England’s green and pleasant land to be laid at the door of Putin and Russia did this. We all owe it to the victims and the frightened people of Salisbury to find the real criminals.
___________________________________________________
George Galloway was a member of the British Parliament for nearly 30 years. He presents TV and radio shows and is a film-maker, writer and a renowned orator.
DISCLAIMER: The statements, views and opinions expressed in pieces republished here are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of TMS. In accordance with title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. TMS has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is TMS endorsed or sponsored by the originator. “GO TO ORIGINAL” links are provided as a convenience to our readers and allow for verification of authenticity. However, as originating pages are often updated by their originating host sites, the versions posted may not match the versions our readers view when clicking the “GO TO ORIGINAL” links. This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
2 Responses to “Salisbury Is Far from a Novichok Slam-Dunk!”
Read more
Click here to go to the current weekly digest or pick another article:
JUSTICE:
- South Africa Files 750 Pages of 'Overwhelming' Evidence in ICJ Genocide Case against Israel
- Rethinking International Law after Gaza: A Symposium and a Call to Action
- Update on Julian Assange and Our Campaign for His Pardon
BRICS:
- How Can BRICS Reshape a Polycentric World Order?
- Everybody Wants to Join BRICS
- The BRICS Summit Should Mark the End of Neocon Delusions
EUROPE:
On this matter an editorial of The Observer argues that The Case against Putin is Irrefutable – so charge
him (9 September 2018)
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/sep/09/charge-putin-novichok-case-to-answer
A wonderful word: irrefutable. It is amusing to note that no account whatsoever is taken of the possibility that the latest evidence presented may arise from a false flag operation — which any competent lawyer would immediately consider. Cui Bono? Everyone seems very shy of asking that question.
How little would it take to arrange for 2 Russian-looking Caucasians to present themselves to CCTV coverage in various locations with fake passports? Cui Bono? A lawyer would seek to reconstruct the pattern in order to make that point.
It is sad to see the absence of critical thinking by The Observer, the UK government, its allies, and the UN Security Council — especially following the same pattern as the dodgy dossier presented regarding WMD. A knee-jerk syndrome? No pertinent questions asked?
George gives too much credence to the reports so far. PM May showed her hatred of Russia well before this incident, which came three days after Putin’ speech about Russia’s readiness for attack but willingness to negotiate with its “partners”. BoJo and “Defence Minister Gavin Williamson” were also rabid Russophobes, so to believe their words with NO evidence and NO chance to investigate the event shows the first clues to the whole elaborate procedure. NATO pals called in, diplomats expelled, avoidance of any cooperation with the “accused” Russia who naturally denied involvement while all the media rejoiced.
SIX MONTHS LATER, just in time for the opening of Parliament and grandstanding by Theresa Mayhem(sic) the mighty police forces of the UK found some pics of two stooges with false names, who are now apparently living back in Russia- Pres. Putin obviously forgave them instead of instantly killing them as is his wont, for the incompetent, stupid, easily recorded and spectacularly unsuccessful effort to kill two unimportant present or former Russians who have not been seen or heard from up to the present.