When Sergei and Yulia Skripal were poisoned in Salisbury back in early March, the May government claimed it was âhighly likelyâ that Putin and the Russians did it because the poison was âNovichokâ nerve agent, and Russia was the only country with a stockpile or the ability to synthesize it. That story quickly unravelled, when it became apparent that at least two dozen other nations - including Britain, the US and Israel - either had stocks or capability to produce the nerve agent.
Britainâs Porton Down, founded in 1916 and the oldest chemical warfare research institution in the world, is a mere eight miles from Salisbury. And a month after the Skripal poisoning, Porton Downâs boss Gary Aitkenhead refused to confirm or deny whether it had stocks of Novichok, merely stating that the substance could not have come from Porton Down because the facility had very good security measures to prevent unauthorised loss of CWs. But Aitkenhead did admit they had been unable to determine the origin of the substance.
This meant that British Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson and Laurie Bristow, British Ambassador to Moscow, were caught in a lie. They claimed Porton Down scientists told Johnson there was âno doubtâ that the substance was of Russian origin. And on the Wednesday that Aitkenheadâs interview was broadcast, a Foreign Office tweet about the âRussianâ origin of the poison was hastily deleted. Johnson would go on to say that he âmisspokeâ, but he denied lying.
The government then came up with a new piece of âevidenceâ as proof that the âevilâ Russians were to blame. They alleged that the highest concentration of the nerve agent had been found on the front door of Sergei Skripalâs home. And they claimed to have a âtraining manualâ for Russian spies that instructed them how to smear the poison on a door handle. Since they had the âmanualâ and the poisoner had supposedly smeared the poison on the door handle, this was a âsmoking gunâ demonstrating Russian state complicity, so the argument went.
The fact that any intelligence service such as the Mossad or MI6 could have fabricated a so-called âRussianâ âtraining manualâ was not mentioned in the lamestream media. Neither was any explanation offered as to why it had taken the authorities almost four weeks to come up with this âproofâ, or why, if they had the âtraining manualâ, they didnât do forensic checks on the door handle first rather than other locations like Zizziâs restaurant and the Mill pub.
A more serious problem with the new government narrative was that both of the Skripals would have to have touched the door handle at the same time, perhaps one of them going back inside to get something after the other had closed the door. Then, after being exposed to this âlethalâ âmilitary-gradeâ ânerve agentâ, they were both perfectly fine for hours - going to a pub for some drinks and then on to a restaurant for a meal. Then they both suddenly collapsed at the same time whilst on a park bench at the Maltings shopping area, which is a short walk from Zizziâs in Castle Street through Market Walk.
Even given these facts, it seems pretty obvious that the poisoner struck whilst the Skripals were resting on the park bench at the Maltings. The smearing on the door handle and traces at other places was probably carried out by Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey, who by a bizarre âcoincidenceâ was among the first on the scene on the Sunday afternoon as the Skripals became unwell, and he is cited as a âheroâ for supposedly risking his own life and trying to resuscitate them. Apart from the Skripals and the two latest victims of nerve agent poisoning, Bailey was the only other person to exhibit any signs of exposure. He recovered, and was discharged from hospital before either of the Skripals recovered sufficiently.
