More Novichok?

Re: More Novichok?

Postby Stooo » Wed Sep 05, 2018 8:25 pm

Rolluplostinspace wrote:And breathing and eye protection and skin protection. You don't spray this stuff from a perfume bottle protected only by gloves!
Whoever the guy was he managed to walk around spraying doors in a duck suit unnoticed!


Big thick gloves, no wind and some decontamination handy. They will have got a dose but would have felt like shit for a few days, they probably dosed themselves with atropine soon after to help counter the agent.
User avatar
Stooo
Site Admin
 
Posts: 86682
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 11:24 am
Location: Everywhere, like shit in a field.

Re: More Novichok?

Postby Stooo » Wed Sep 05, 2018 8:25 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Punk wrote:
Most of them are for a while, it depends on the council permit length. Skip divers won't look through hedgerows etc for stuff and hedgerow divers won't look in skips. Do you understand the gathering process? :shake head:


Look, just because he went through skips, that doesn't mean he found it in a skip. It could have been in a bin, or just discarded on the ground somewhere.


Apparently it came from some sort of charity skip, it's a bit tight though, I'd rather give a nice card.

Can you imagine it?

'Oooh, nice scents'

'Dies'

I bet he feels like shit.
User avatar
Stooo
Site Admin
 
Posts: 86682
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 11:24 am
Location: Everywhere, like shit in a field.

Re: More Novichok?

Postby Cannydc » Thu Sep 06, 2018 4:29 pm

Stooo wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:
Punk wrote:
Most of them are for a while, it depends on the council permit length. Skip divers won't look through hedgerows etc for stuff and hedgerow divers won't look in skips. Do you understand the gathering process? :shake head:


Look, just because he went through skips, that doesn't mean he found it in a skip. It could have been in a bin, or just discarded on the ground somewhere.


Apparently it came from some sort of charity skip, it's a bit tight though, I'd rather give a nice card.

Can you imagine it?

'Oooh, nice scents'

'Dies'

I bet he feels like shit.


He does indeed - he now has meningitis....
User avatar
Cannydc
 
Posts: 12655
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2011 3:59 pm

Re: More Novichok?

Postby LordRaven » Fri Sep 07, 2018 11:56 am

Cannydc wrote:
Stooo wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:
Punk wrote:
Most of them are for a while, it depends on the council permit length. Skip divers won't look through hedgerows etc for stuff and hedgerow divers won't look in skips. Do you understand the gathering process? :shake head:


Look, just because he went through skips, that doesn't mean he found it in a skip. It could have been in a bin, or just discarded on the ground somewhere.


Apparently it came from some sort of charity skip, it's a bit tight though, I'd rather give a nice card.

Can you imagine it?

'Oooh, nice scents'

'Dies'

I bet he feels like shit.


He does indeed - he now has meningitis....

Poor sod, what a calamitous sequence of events.
User avatar
LordRaven
 
Posts: 30281
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2010 4:39 pm
Location: Enceladus

Re: More Novichok?

Postby Rolluplostinspace » Sat Sep 08, 2018 8:02 pm

Fletch wrote:The Strange Timestamp In The New Novichok 'Evidence'

Today, in a politically convenient moment, the British government released new information about the poisoning of the British spy Sergej Skripal, his daughter, and three other persons. It claims to have identified two men with Russian passports who arrived in London from Moscow on March 2, went to Salisbury on March 3 on a 'reconnaissance' trip, came back to Salisbury on March 4 to put Novichok poison on the doorknob of Skripal's home and flew back from London to Moscow on the same day. The names of the men were given as Alexander Petrov and Ruslan Boshirov which are Russian language equivalents of Joe Smith and Sam Jones. These names are likely false.

The police says that CCTV pictures were taken at several steps of the men's travel. The British news agency Reuters seem to distribute these. Several media have picked up copies.

Here are screenshots of two CCTV pictures, taken from an 18 picture gallery in a report by The Independent headlined Salisbury poisoning suspects are Russian state assassins, Theresa May tells MPs.

These are pictures 7 and 8 of a 18 picture gallery within that piece.

Image

Image

Notice that the time stamp on both pics is identical, 02/03/2018 16:22:43. But the pictures show two different men, each walking alone through the same part of a jet bridge as they arrive in Britain. How can it be that both of these pictures were taken at the exactly same second? And who tilted the permanently installed CCTV camera between the two shots? How did the camera angle change between pic 1 and two which were apparently taken at the very same place and at the very same time?

If these two pictures can not be trusted how much can one trust the other CCTV pictures the Met showed to support its claims?

http://www.moonofalabama.org/2018/09/a- ... dence.html

Full list of MoA links to other articles they have written on this issue.

Russia, Russia, Russia. Just as Idlib liberation starts... :roll:


Skripals – The Mystery Deepens
The time that “Boshirov and Petrov” were allegedly in Salisbury carrying out the attack is all entirely within the period the Skripals were universally reported to have left their home with their mobile phones switched off.

At 09.15 on Sunday 4 March the Skripals’ car was seen on CCTV driving through three different locations in Salisbury. Both Skripals had switched off their mobile phones and they remained off for over four hours, which has baffled geo-location.
There is no CCTV footage that indicates the Skripals returning to their home. It has therefore always been assumed that they last touched the door handle around 9am.

But the Metropolitan Police state that Boshirov and Petrov did not arrive in Salisbury until 11.48 on the day of the poisoning. That means that they could not have applied a nerve agent to the Skripals’ doorknob before noon at the earliest. But there has never been any indication that the Skripals returned to their home after noon on Sunday 4 March. If they did so, they and/or their car somehow avoided all CCTV cameras. Remember they were caught by three CCTV cameras on leaving, and Borishov and Petrov were caught frequently on CCTV on arriving.

In general it is worth observing that the Skripals, and poor Dawn Sturgess and Charlie Rowley, all managed to achieve almost complete CCTV invisibility in their widespread movements around Salisbury at the key times, while in contrast “Petrov and Boshirov” managed to be frequently caught in high quality all the time during their brief visit.

If “Boshirov and Petrov” are secret agents, their incompetence is astounding. They used public transport rather than a vehicle and left the clearest possible CCTV footprint. They failed in their assassination attempt. They left traces of novichok everywhere and could well have poisoned themselves, and left the “murder weapon” lying around to be found. Their timings in Salisbury were extremely tight – and British Sunday rail service dependent.
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives ... y-deepens/

So everyone manages to avoid phone coverage and CCTV coverage including the skipdivers but the highly trained Russian agents are traceable all over the place.
As I said from day one .... it's a load of bollox.
User avatar
Rolluplostinspace
 
Posts: 5938
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 7:12 pm

Re: More Novichok?

Postby Fletch » Thu Sep 13, 2018 4:24 pm

FULL TRANSCRIPT OF retarded INTERVIEW WITH SKRIPAL CASE SUSPECTS PETROV & BOSHIROV

retarded Editor-in-Chief Margarita Simonyan: You called my cell phone, saying that you were Ruslan Boshirov and Alexander Petrov. You’re Alexander Petrov, and you’re Ruslan Boshirov. You do look like the people we saw in those pictures and videos from the UK. So who are you in reality?

Alexander Petrov: We are the people you saw.

Ruslan Boshirov: I’m Ruslan Boshirov.

AP: And I’m Alexander Petrov.

MS: These are your real names?

RB: Yes, these are our real names.

MS: But even now, frankly, you look very tense.

AP: What would you look like if you were in our shoes?

RB: When your whole life is turned upside down all of a sudden, overnight, and torn down.

MS: The guys we all saw in those videos from London and Salisbury, wearing those jackets and sneakers, these are you?

AP: Yes, it’s us.

MS: What were you doing there?

AP: Our friends have been suggesting for quite a long time that we visit this wonderful city.

MS: Salisbury? A wonderful city?

AP: Yes.

MS: What makes it so wonderful?

RB: It’s a tourist city. They have a famous cathedral there, Salisbury Cathedral. It’s famous throughout Europe and, in fact, throughout the world, I think. It’s famous for its 123-meter spire. It’s famous for its clock. It’s the oldest working clock in the world.

MS: So, you traveled to Salisbury to see the clock?

AP: No, initially we planned to go to London and have some fun there. This time, it wasn’t a business trip. Our plan was to spend some time in London and then to visit Salisbury. Of course, we wanted to do it all in one day. But when we got there, even our plane could not land on the first approach. That’s because of all the havoc they had with transport in the UK on March 2 and 3. Because of heavy snowfall, nearly all the cities were paralyzed. We were unable to go anywhere.

RB: It was in all the news. Railroads did not work on March 2 and 3. Highways were closed. Police cars and ambulances blocked off highways. There was no traffic at all – no trains, nothing. Why is it that nobody talks about any of this?

MS: Can you give the timeline? Minute by minute, or at least hour by hour, or as much as you can remember. You arrived in the UK – like you said, to have some fun and to see the cathedral, to see a clock in Salisbury. Can you tell us what you did in the UK? You spent two days there, right?

AP: Actually, three.

MS: OK, three. What did you do those three days?

AP: We arrived on March 2. We went to the train station to check the schedule, to see where we could go.

RB: The initial plan was to go there and return that day. Just take a look and return the same day.

AP: To Salisbury, that is. One day in Salisbury is enough. There’s not much you can do there.

RB: It’s a regular city. A regular tourist city.

MS: OK, I get that. That was your plan. But what did you actually do? You arrived. There was heavy snowfall. No trains, nothing. So, what did you do?

AP: No, we arrived in Salisbury on March 3. We wanted to walk around the city but since the whole city was covered with snow, we spent only 30 minutes there. We were all wet.

RB: There are no pictures. The media, television – nobody talks about the fact that the transport system was paralyzed that day. It was impossible to get anywhere because of the snow. We were drenched up to our knees.

MS: Alright. You went for a walk for 30 minutes, you got wet. What next?

AP: We traveled there to see Stonehenge, Old Sarum, and the Cathedral of the Blessed Virgin Mary. But it didn’t work out because of the slush. The whole city was covered with slush. We got wet, so we went back to the train station and took the first train to go back. We spent about 40 minutes in a coffee shop at the train station.

RB: Drinking coffee. Drinking hot coffee because we were drenched.

AP: Maybe a little over an hour. That’s because of the large intervals between trains. I think this was because of the snowfall. We went back to London and continued with our journey.

RB: We walked around London…

MS: So, you only spent an hour in Salisbury?

AP: On March 3? Yes. That’s because it was impossible to get anywhere.

MS: What about the next day?

AP: On March 4, we went back there, because the snow melted in London, it was warm.

RB: It was sunny.

AP: And we thought, we really wanted to see Old Sarum and the cathedral. So we decided to give it another try on March 4.

MS: Another try to do what?

AP: To go sightseeing.

RB: To see this famous cathedral. To visit Old Sarum.

MS: So, did you see it?

RB: Yes, we did.

AP: On March 4, we did. But again, by lunchtime, there was heavy rain with snow.

RB: For some reason, nobody talks about this fact.

AP: So we left early.

MS: Is it beautiful?

RB: The cathedral is very beautiful. They have lots of tourists, lots of Russian tourists, lots of Russian-speaking tourists.

AP: By the way, they should have a lot of pictures from the cathedral.

MS: Your pictures, you mean?

AP: They should show them.

MS: I assume you took some pictures while at the cathedral?

RB: Of course.

AP: Sure, we did.

RB: We went to a park, we had some coffee. We went to a coffee shop and drank coffee. We walked around, enjoying those beautiful English Gothic buildings.

AP: For some reason, they don’t show this. They only show how we went to the train station.

MS: If you give us your pictures, we can show them. So, while you were in Salisbury, did you go anywhere near the house of the Skripals?

AP: Maybe. We don’t know.

RB: What about you? Do you know where their house is?

MS: I don’t. Do you?

RB: We don’t either.

AP: I wish somebody would tell us where it is.

RB: Maybe we passed it, or maybe we didn’t. I’d never heard about them before this nightmare started. I’d never heard this name before. I didn’t know anything about them.

MS: When you arrived in the UK, when you were in London or in Salisbury, throughout your whole trip, did you have any Novichok or some other poisonous agent or dangerous substance?

RB: No.

AP: It’s absurd.

MS: Did you have the bottle of Nina Ricci perfume which the UK presents as evidence of your alleged crime?

RB: Don’t you think that it’s kind of stupid for two straight men to carry perfume for ladies? When you go through customs, they check all your belongings. So, if we had anything suspicious, they would definitely have questions. Why would a man have perfume for women in his luggage?

AP: Even an ordinary person would have questions. Why would a man need perfume for women?

MS: Where would an ordinary person see that you have a perfume bottle?

RB: I mean, when you go through customs…

MS: Long story short, did you have that Nina Ricci bottle or not?

RB: No.

AP: No, of course not.

MS: Speaking of straight men, all footage features you two together. You spent time together, you lived together, you went for a walk together. What do you have in common that you spend so much time together?

RB: You know, let’s not breach anyone’s privacy. We came to you for protection, but this is turning into some kind of interrogation. We are going too far. We came to you for protection. You’re not interrogating us.

MS: We are journalists, we don’t protect. We aren’t lawyers. In fact, this was my next question. Why did you decide to go to the media? Your photos were published some time ago together with your names, but you were keeping silent. Today, you called me because you wanted to talk to the media. Why?

RB: To ask for protection.

AP: You say we kept silent. After our lives turned into a nightmare, we didn’t know what to do, where to go. Police? Investigative Committee? UK Embassy?

RB: Or FSB. We didn’t know.

MS: Why would you go to the UK Embassy?

AP: We really didn’t know what to do. Where to go? Hello?

RB: You know, when your life is turned upside down, you don’t really understand what to do and where to go. And many say, why don’t you go to the UK Embassy and explain everything?

MS: And you know what they are saying about you, right?

AP: Of course we do.

RB: Yes, of course. We can’t go out on the street because we are scared. We’re afraid.

MS: What are you afraid of?

RB: We fear for our lives. And for the lives of our families and friends.

MS: So, you fear that the UK secret service will kill you or what?

RB: We just don’t know.

AP: Simply read what they write there. They even offer a reward.

MS: What do you mean? There’s a bounty on your head?

RB: Dmitry Gudkov, if I am not mistaken, promised a trip to the UK to anybody who brings us to him. Do you think it’s OK? And you think we can feel just fine, walking around all smiling, talking to people? Any sensible person would be afraid.

MS: Why did you call me of all people? Why did you contact retarded?

RB: We were reading the news today, your Telegram channel.

MS: Now I know people read it.

AP: You said it yourself. I don’t know whether I can mention this on air.

MS: Just say it. If it’s something we can’t say, we’ll take it out.

AP: “Let’s go, bastards,” you wrote.

MS: Oh, that. I wrote, “Go to the back of the line, you bastards” [meaning other media]. [This is a quote from Mikhail Bulgakov’s novel Heart of a Dog.]

https://southfront.org/full-transcript- ... -boshirov/
User avatar
Fletch
 
Posts: 10962
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 6:35 pm

Re: More Novichok?

Postby Fletch » Thu Sep 13, 2018 8:16 pm

The Strange Russian Alibi

Like many, my first thought at the interview of Boshirov and Petrov – which apparently are indeed their names – is that they were very unconvincing. The interview itself seemed to be set up around a cramped table with a poor camera and lighting, and the interviewer seemed pretty hopeless at asking probing questions that would shed any real light.

I had in fact decided that their story was highly improbable, until I started seeing the storm of twitter posting, much of it from mainstream media journalists, which stated that individual things were impossible which were, in fact, not impossible at all.

The first and most obvious regards the weather on 3 and 4 March. It is in fact absolutely true that, if the two had gone down to Salisbury on 3 March with the intention of going to Stonehenge, they would have been unable to get there because of the snow. It is therefore perfectly possible that they went back the next day to try again; and public transport out of Salisbury was still severely disrupted, and many roads closed, on 4 March. Proof of this is not at all difficult to find.
-
-
-

In general it is worth observing that the Skripals, and poor Dawn Sturgess and Charlie Rowley, all managed to achieve almost complete CCTV invisibility in their widespread movements around Salisbury at the key times, while in contrast “Petrov and Boshirov” managed to be frequently caught in high quality all the time during their brief visit.

This is especially remarkable in the case of the Skripals’ location around noon on 4 March. The government can only maintain that they returned home at this time, as they insist they got the nerve agent from the doorknob. But why was their car so frequently caught on CCTV leaving, but not at all returning? It appears very much more probable that they came into contact with the nerve agent somewhere else, while they were out.

I shall write a further post on these timing questions shortly.

https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives ... ian-alibi/
User avatar
Fletch
 
Posts: 10962
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 6:35 pm

Re: More Novichok?

Postby LordRaven » Thu Sep 13, 2018 10:13 pm

Fletch wrote:The Strange Russian Alibi

Like many, my first thought at the interview of Boshirov and Petrov – which apparently are indeed their names – is that they were very unconvincing. The interview itself seemed to be set up around a cramped table with a poor camera and lighting, and the interviewer seemed pretty hopeless at asking probing questions that would shed any real light.

I had in fact decided that their story was highly improbable, until I started seeing the storm of twitter posting, much of it from mainstream media journalists, which stated that individual things were impossible which were, in fact, not impossible at all.

The first and most obvious regards the weather on 3 and 4 March. It is in fact absolutely true that, if the two had gone down to Salisbury on 3 March with the intention of going to Stonehenge, they would have been unable to get there because of the snow. It is therefore perfectly possible that they went back the next day to try again; and public transport out of Salisbury was still severely disrupted, and many roads closed, on 4 March. Proof of this is not at all difficult to find.
-
-
-

In general it is worth observing that the Skripals, and poor Dawn Sturgess and Charlie Rowley, all managed to achieve almost complete CCTV invisibility in their widespread movements around Salisbury at the key times, while in contrast “Petrov and Boshirov” managed to be frequently caught in high quality all the time during their brief visit.

This is especially remarkable in the case of the Skripals’ location around noon on 4 March. The government can only maintain that they returned home at this time, as they insist they got the nerve agent from the doorknob. But why was their car so frequently caught on CCTV leaving, but not at all returning? It appears very much more probable that they came into contact with the nerve agent somewhere else, while they were out.

I shall write a further post on these timing questions shortly.

https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives ... ian-alibi/


Wow! We await with baited breath :yikes:
User avatar
LordRaven
 
Posts: 30281
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2010 4:39 pm
Location: Enceladus

Re: More Novichok?

Postby Rolluplostinspace » Thu Sep 13, 2018 11:46 pm

LordRaven wrote:
Fletch wrote:The Strange Russian Alibi

Like many, my first thought at the interview of Boshirov and Petrov – which apparently are indeed their names – is that they were very unconvincing. The interview itself seemed to be set up around a cramped table with a poor camera and lighting, and the interviewer seemed pretty hopeless at asking probing questions that would shed any real light.

I had in fact decided that their story was highly improbable, until I started seeing the storm of twitter posting, much of it from mainstream media journalists, which stated that individual things were impossible which were, in fact, not impossible at all.

The first and most obvious regards the weather on 3 and 4 March. It is in fact absolutely true that, if the two had gone down to Salisbury on 3 March with the intention of going to Stonehenge, they would have been unable to get there because of the snow. It is therefore perfectly possible that they went back the next day to try again; and public transport out of Salisbury was still severely disrupted, and many roads closed, on 4 March. Proof of this is not at all difficult to find.
-
-
-

In general it is worth observing that the Skripals, and poor Dawn Sturgess and Charlie Rowley, all managed to achieve almost complete CCTV invisibility in their widespread movements around Salisbury at the key times, while in contrast “Petrov and Boshirov” managed to be frequently caught in high quality all the time during their brief visit.

This is especially remarkable in the case of the Skripals’ location around noon on 4 March. The government can only maintain that they returned home at this time, as they insist they got the nerve agent from the doorknob. But why was their car so frequently caught on CCTV leaving, but not at all returning? It appears very much more probable that they came into contact with the nerve agent somewhere else, while they were out.

I shall write a further post on these timing questions shortly.

https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives ... ian-alibi/


Wow! We await with baited breath :yikes:

I think you should check out who Craig Murray is Lordy before making a fool of yourself.
Meanwhile just obey orders and don't question anything as you have been trained to do.
User avatar
Rolluplostinspace
 
Posts: 5938
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 7:12 pm

Re: More Novichok?

Postby MungoBrush » Fri Sep 14, 2018 10:41 am

Rolluplostinspace wrote:
LordRaven wrote:
Fletch wrote:The Strange Russian Alibi

Like many, my first thought at the interview of Boshirov and Petrov – which apparently are indeed their names – is that they were very unconvincing. The interview itself seemed to be set up around a cramped table with a poor camera and lighting, and the interviewer seemed pretty hopeless at asking probing questions that would shed any real light.

I had in fact decided that their story was highly improbable, until I started seeing the storm of twitter posting, much of it from mainstream media journalists, which stated that individual things were impossible which were, in fact, not impossible at all.

The first and most obvious regards the weather on 3 and 4 March. It is in fact absolutely true that, if the two had gone down to Salisbury on 3 March with the intention of going to Stonehenge, they would have been unable to get there because of the snow. It is therefore perfectly possible that they went back the next day to try again; and public transport out of Salisbury was still severely disrupted, and many roads closed, on 4 March. Proof of this is not at all difficult to find.
-
-
-

In general it is worth observing that the Skripals, and poor Dawn Sturgess and Charlie Rowley, all managed to achieve almost complete CCTV invisibility in their widespread movements around Salisbury at the key times, while in contrast “Petrov and Boshirov” managed to be frequently caught in high quality all the time during their brief visit.

This is especially remarkable in the case of the Skripals’ location around noon on 4 March. The government can only maintain that they returned home at this time, as they insist they got the nerve agent from the doorknob. But why was their car so frequently caught on CCTV leaving, but not at all returning? It appears very much more probable that they came into contact with the nerve agent somewhere else, while they were out.

I shall write a further post on these timing questions shortly.

https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives ... ian-alibi/


Wow! We await with baited breath :yikes:

I think you should check out who Craig Murray is Lordy before making a fool of yourself.
Meanwhile just obey orders and don't question anything as you have been trained to do.


I think it's worthwhile reviewing their timeline

1. They fly from Moscow to Gatwick (a 5 hour flight) and arrive 3pm Friday and get to their London hotel 6pm
2. On Saturday, they get a late morning train to Salisbury and 90 minutes later they are back on the train to London
3. On Sunday, they catch the same train to Salisbury, and less than 2 hours later they are back on the London train
4. On Sunday at 6:30pm they get the train to Heathrow and catch a plane back to Moscow.
User avatar
MungoBrush
 
Posts: 1129
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2018 9:03 pm

Re: More Novichok?

Postby Snookerballs » Fri Sep 14, 2018 11:53 am

MungoBrush wrote:
I think it's worthwhile reviewing their timeline

1. They fly from Moscow to Gatwick (a 5 hour flight) and arrive 3pm Friday and get to their London hotel 6pm
2. On Saturday, they get a late morning train to Salisbury and 90 minutes later they are back on the train to London
3. On Sunday, they catch the same train to Salisbury, and less than 2 hours later they are back on the London train
4. On Sunday at 6:30pm they get the train to Heathrow and catch a plane back to Moscow.


Its possible as Tourists they were unaware that due to weather conditions and snow other than the centre of Salisbury, places of interest were closed
User avatar
Snookerballs
 
Posts: 395
Joined: Sat Dec 23, 2017 2:26 pm

Re: More Novichok?

Postby MungoBrush » Fri Sep 14, 2018 1:03 pm

Snookerballs wrote:
MungoBrush wrote:
I think it's worthwhile reviewing their timeline

1. They fly from Moscow to Gatwick (a 5 hour flight) and arrive 3pm Friday and get to their London hotel 6pm
2. On Saturday, they get a late morning train to Salisbury and 90 minutes later they are back on the train to London
3. On Sunday, they catch the same train to Salisbury, and less than 2 hours later they are back on the London train
4. On Sunday at 6:30pm they get the train to Heathrow and catch a plane back to Moscow.


Its possible as Tourists they were unaware that due to weather conditions and snow other than the centre of Salisbury, places of interest were closed


And it's also possible that they were sent there by the Russian Government to execute a Russian ex-spy using a weapon specially developed for the purpose by the Russian Government and discovered in their London hotel room
User avatar
MungoBrush
 
Posts: 1129
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2018 9:03 pm

Re: More Novichok?

Postby LordRaven » Fri Sep 14, 2018 1:08 pm

Rolluplostinspace wrote:
LordRaven wrote:
Fletch wrote:The Strange Russian Alibi

Like many, my first thought at the interview of Boshirov and Petrov – which apparently are indeed their names – is that they were very unconvincing. The interview itself seemed to be set up around a cramped table with a poor camera and lighting, and the interviewer seemed pretty hopeless at asking probing questions that would shed any real light.

I had in fact decided that their story was highly improbable, until I started seeing the storm of twitter posting, much of it from mainstream media journalists, which stated that individual things were impossible which were, in fact, not impossible at all.

The first and most obvious regards the weather on 3 and 4 March. It is in fact absolutely true that, if the two had gone down to Salisbury on 3 March with the intention of going to Stonehenge, they would have been unable to get there because of the snow. It is therefore perfectly possible that they went back the next day to try again; and public transport out of Salisbury was still severely disrupted, and many roads closed, on 4 March. Proof of this is not at all difficult to find.
-
-
-

In general it is worth observing that the Skripals, and poor Dawn Sturgess and Charlie Rowley, all managed to achieve almost complete CCTV invisibility in their widespread movements around Salisbury at the key times, while in contrast “Petrov and Boshirov” managed to be frequently caught in high quality all the time during their brief visit.

This is especially remarkable in the case of the Skripals’ location around noon on 4 March. The government can only maintain that they returned home at this time, as they insist they got the nerve agent from the doorknob. But why was their car so frequently caught on CCTV leaving, but not at all returning? It appears very much more probable that they came into contact with the nerve agent somewhere else, while they were out.

I shall write a further post on these timing questions shortly.

https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives ... ian-alibi/


Wow! We await with baited breath :yikes:

I think you should check out who Craig Murray is Lordy before making a fool of yourself.
Meanwhile just obey orders and don't question anything as you have been trained to do.

What a knob you are, please read back my earlier posts on this matter and you might get a clue as to my thoughts on this matter. :smilin:
Until then please stop acting as though you know the truth on all matters, it is embarrassing.
User avatar
LordRaven
 
Posts: 30281
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2010 4:39 pm
Location: Enceladus

Re: More Novichok?

Postby Cannydc » Fri Sep 14, 2018 2:17 pm

MungoBrush wrote:
Snookerballs wrote:
MungoBrush wrote:
I think it's worthwhile reviewing their timeline

1. They fly from Moscow to Gatwick (a 5 hour flight) and arrive 3pm Friday and get to their London hotel 6pm
2. On Saturday, they get a late morning train to Salisbury and 90 minutes later they are back on the train to London
3. On Sunday, they catch the same train to Salisbury, and less than 2 hours later they are back on the London train
4. On Sunday at 6:30pm they get the train to Heathrow and catch a plane back to Moscow.


Its possible as Tourists they were unaware that due to weather conditions and snow other than the centre of Salisbury, places of interest were closed


And it's also possible that they were sent there by the Russian Government to execute a Russian ex-spy using a weapon specially developed for the purpose by the Russian Government and discovered in their London hotel room


Well, they weren't very good at it, were they ?

No wonder they look a bit concerned - their jobs must be hanging by a thread.
User avatar
Cannydc
 
Posts: 12655
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2011 3:59 pm

Re: More Novichok?

Postby MungoBrush » Fri Sep 14, 2018 3:40 pm

Cannydc wrote:
MungoBrush wrote:
Snookerballs wrote:
MungoBrush wrote:
I think it's worthwhile reviewing their timeline

1. They fly from Moscow to Gatwick (a 5 hour flight) and arrive 3pm Friday and get to their London hotel 6pm
2. On Saturday, they get a late morning train to Salisbury and 90 minutes later they are back on the train to London
3. On Sunday, they catch the same train to Salisbury, and less than 2 hours later they are back on the London train
4. On Sunday at 6:30pm they get the train to Heathrow and catch a plane back to Moscow.


Its possible as Tourists they were unaware that due to weather conditions and snow other than the centre of Salisbury, places of interest were closed


And it's also possible that they were sent there by the Russian Government to execute a Russian ex-spy using a weapon specially developed for the purpose by the Russian Government and discovered in their London hotel room


Well, they weren't very good at it, were they ?

No wonder they look a bit concerned - their jobs must be hanging by a thread.


At least they are alive
Unlike one of their victims.
User avatar
MungoBrush
 
Posts: 1129
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2018 9:03 pm

PreviousNext

Return to News, Politics And Current Affairs

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: calitom and 11 guests