Police say that they have identified a specific nerve agent as being used in an attempt to kill a Russian who once spied for the UK. They have not named the nerve agent that was used. Officers who responded to the scene have also been hospitalized:
A nerve agent was used to try to murder a former Russian spy and his daughter, police have said. Sergei and Yulia Skripal were found unconscious in Salisbury on Sunday afternoon and remain critically ill. A police officer who was the first to attend the scene is now in a serious condition in hospital, Assistant Commissioner Mark Rowley said.
[...] Mr Rowley, head of Counter Terrorism Policing, said government scientists had identified the agent used, but would not make that information public at this stage. "This is being treated as a major incident involving attempted murder, by administration of a nerve agent," he said. "Having established that a nerve agent is the cause of the symptoms... I can also confirm that we believe that the two people who became unwell were targeted specifically."
[...] Two other police officers who attended the scene were treated in hospital for minor symptoms, before they were given the all clear. It is understood their symptoms included itchy eyes and wheezing.
Mr Skripal, 66, who was imprisoned in Russia for working for British intelligence and later came to the UK as part of a spy swap, is currently in critical condition, along with his 33-year-old daughter who was also taken ill. Authorities say they are trying to determine if he was poisoned.
Russia has denied any involvement, but the case has put renewed scrutiny on a string of deaths in the UK in the past two decades. The chair of the home affairs select committee, Yvette Cooper MP, wrote to Home Secretary Amber Rudd on Tuesday calling for a review of 14 other cases.
... British police say they have found no evidence of Russian involvement in any of the cases barring Litvinenko's.
"British police are under no sort of political pressure whatsoever," Tony Brenton, the British ambassador to Moscow at the time of Litvinenko's death, told the BBC. "If they had found evidence of Russian involvement in those cases, we would have followed it up."
But the UK government has faced criticism over a perceived lack of action. In the wake of Litvinenko's death, the UK tried and failed to extradite two Russian agents alleged to have carried out the hit. Instead, several Russian diplomats were expelled, provoking a tit for tat response from Russia.
...
In Salisbury, counter-terror police have taken over the investigation. The park bench where Mr Skripal collapsed has been cordoned off and a restaurant where he ate lunch has been temporarily closed.
At BBC World.
Previously: Former Russian Spy Exposed to "Unknown Substance" in Salisbury, England
(Score: 5, Insightful) by khallow on Friday March 09 2018, @04:31AM (15 children)
Transporting nerve agent from anywhere on the planet is no harder than getting it out of a secure UK facility.
This is just a classic case of whataboutism without even bothering to support the claim with evidence. The problem with this narrative is that Russia has killed Russian defectors before. Meanwhile UK hasn't.
The second link is completely without support. Sergei Skripal is portrayed as a "traitor who sold the identities of Russian agents abroad to the UK, in exchange for hard cash". So what? It's all justified by:
In other words, everyone is bad so it doesn't really matter who does what.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 09 2018, @05:58AM (3 children)
I feel strangely dirty for modding up a foe, but for once the commentary is worthy.
(Score: 2) by Osamabobama on Friday March 09 2018, @05:48PM
I don't see Anonymous Coward on the list below...
CRCulver (4390)
danaris (3853)
Gravis (4596)
hoochiecoochieman (4158)
https (5248)
Nollij (4559)
rts008 (3001)
wantkitteh (3362)
Whoever (4524)
Appended to the end of comments you post. Max: 120 chars.
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Friday March 09 2018, @07:02PM
Don't. It's in humanity's best interest to give these folks that dopamine hit when they say stuff that's actually true.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Saturday March 10 2018, @02:50AM
Well, yes, you are strange . . .
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Pav on Friday March 09 2018, @01:52PM (8 children)
Whataboutism? So you're suggesting people should evaluate a narrative in isolation ignoring context? Basically "shut up and swallow the blue pill". Yes, Putin and his hangers on should be suspect, but I also suspect any of the US three letter agencies - gotta love that sweet Russia Russia narrative.
Frankly ANY happening that is too convenent should be suspect in this day and age. Perhaps the UK secret services are squeemish about attempting such a thing, but their US counterparts certainly aren't. There are too many known false flags to pick from, and plenty of verified lies to the public. There were even suspect chemical attacks in Syria quite recently, supposedly by Assad, with videos appearing before the actual attack etc... and, WHY would Assad use such weapons when he was actually winning the war? It never made sense. Additonally it's interesting that the US has given up on looking for a legitimate excuse to enter the theatre, and have just gone ahead regardless by setting up bases in northern Syria. This has displeased previous US ally Turkey which has gone as far as to threaten to attack these bases. Turkish media has even published detailed maps of these bases with the fondest hope that someone else will attack them first.
What is it I hear you say? The US wouldn't do something this drastic (ie. a nerve agent attack) on such a good allies turf? Just browse the old declassified stuff - they were planning on a false flag goddamned terrorist campaign on **US soil** just so they could attribute it to Castro. I'm sure they don't value British citizens too differently.
Note : I'm not saying I have strong suspicions one way or the other. My point is I suspect Putin. I suspect the CIA. I'm sure there are half a dozen other groups and agencies I'm not knowledgable enough to suspect also.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by khallow on Friday March 09 2018, @02:21PM (4 children)
The exact opposite actually. As part of that context you are ignoring, the UK and US traded a number of spies caught in the US for him (and several other spies). So they went through considerable effort to free him in the first place.
Then they're going to stage his attempted murder for what? What is so "convenient" about it?
Let us recall as part of that context you are ignoring, that Russia does have a history of assassination and that other members of his family have died [bbc.com] in the past few years.
So bottom line is that didn't happen [wikipedia.org] and it was in 1962 which is a long time ago without such false flag operations from then to now.
Evidence is the only context I'm interested in and you don't have that. Get that or GTFO.
(Score: 2) by Pav on Friday March 09 2018, @02:40PM (1 child)
A long time ago, yes... often a prerequisite for declassification. Kennedy personally rejected the plan. I wonder why the US doesn't have leaders like him anymore?
(Score: 1) by khallow on Friday March 09 2018, @03:05PM
First, there aren't many leaders who could survive the gantlet that it would take to get to the US presidency. Second, Kennedy died before the ugly parts could get out.
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Friday March 09 2018, @03:37PM (1 child)
Exactly, so they've now paid for him, and can do with him what they want. If that includes being renta-victim, so be it. Successful false flag operations can be valuable, it's just a trade, that's all. What else would they do with him.
I'm not saying it is a false flag operation, just that you can't dismiss that idea as quickly as you seem wont to do.
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 1) by khallow on Friday March 09 2018, @04:01PM
Doesn't work that way. Even merely being sloppy with his security will have negative effects on the recruitment of would-be spies and defectors. If it is seen that the US or UK deliberately tried to kill someone under their protection, the blowback would be immense, including loss of a significant portion of the current spy network.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Friday March 09 2018, @03:26PM (2 children)
As an aside, look into the murder of Adolph Dubs [wikipedia.org]. Dubs was the ambassador to Afghanistan during the Soviet takeover of Afghanistan in 1979. He was kidnapped and then died at some point prior to a big shootout with Afghan police acting in conjunction with Soviet officers. For example [archive.org]:
From "The KGB in Afghanistan":
(Score: 1) by khallow on Friday March 09 2018, @03:48PM (1 child)
Hell, half a dozen intelligence agencies could have done that, amirite? I didn't mean to present this as a serious argument, but instead to remind people that a) Russian intelligence has a long history of nasty schemes, and b) insinuation is not evidence.
At some point, you have to go with actual evidence, not "it could have happened" arguments backed by a really weak military plan (the US military plans everything including wars with our allies and fighting off alien invasions) from back in 1962. After all, I can point to a seedy murder of an ambassador in 1979. That's more recent!
(Score: 2) by Pav on Friday March 09 2018, @11:55PM
Context is important. Someone in Russia would say the US security establishment has a history of bad behavior up to and including the assassination of a president (which is of course why I mentioned Kennedy). Someone in the US might point to the many (well earned) suspicions around the KGB and its successors, say the whole Kennedy thing is a conspiracy theory, mention Russia is literally ruled by an ex KGB guy, and say the FBI/NSA/CIA Wikileaks stuff is just a Russian psyop. Others on both sides might eye both their own and other security establishments with roughly equal suspicion, especially in instances where a "happening" might advance an official agenda.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 09 2018, @07:30PM
Concerning "In other words, everyone is bad so it doesn't really matter who does what."
Since there are so many bad actors on all sides, it matters more than ever "who does what".
One should not be artificially blind to bad actors just because they feign being on "your side".
(Score: 2) by quietus on Sunday March 11 2018, @12:27PM
Skripal was not a defector. He didn't flee to the West, but was unmasked as an MI6 spy by Russian counter-intelligence (a hugely efficient one, as he blew the cover of about 300 Russian operatives in the west). Only in 2010 Skripal came to the UK, as part of a spy swap with the United States.
The point now is that there's an unwritten rule that spies exchanged in such a swap have nothing to fear: which explains why he didn't have any body guards, and his dining out in a pizzeria.