Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Friday March 09 2018, @03:09AM   Printer-friendly

Police Say Nerve Agent Was Used in Attempt to Kill Sergei Skripal

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.

After 15th Alleged Russian Hit in the UK, Counter Terrorism Command takes over Investigation

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


Original Submission #1Original Submission #2

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by khallow on Friday March 09 2018, @04:31AM (15 children)

    by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Friday March 09 2018, @04:31AM (#649856) Journal

    Nerve agents including Sarin and VX are manufactured by the British Government in Porton Down, just 8 miles from where Sergei Skripal was attacked.

    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:

    But I moved long ago past a world view where my country are the “goodies” and Russians are the “baddies”, and instead I reached an understanding that those in power oppress the people, universally.

    In other words, everyone is bad so it doesn't really matter who does what.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +4  
       Insightful=2, Interesting=1, Touché=1, Total=4
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 09 2018, @05:58AM (3 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 09 2018, @05:58AM (#649867)

    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

      by Osamabobama (5842) on Friday March 09 2018, @05:48PM (#650120)

      ...modding up a foe...

      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

      by DeathMonkey (1380) on Friday March 09 2018, @07:02PM (#650163) Journal

      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

      by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Saturday March 10 2018, @02:50AM (#650358) Journal

      I feel strangely dirty

      Well, yes, you are strange . . .

  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by Pav on Friday March 09 2018, @01:52PM (8 children)

    by Pav (114) on Friday March 09 2018, @01:52PM (#649949)

    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)

      by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Friday March 09 2018, @02:21PM (#649956) Journal

      So you're suggesting people should evaluate a narrative in isolation ignoring context?

      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.

      Frankly ANY happening that is too convenent should be suspect in this day and age.

      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.

      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.

      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)

        by Pav (114) on Friday March 09 2018, @02:40PM (#649969)

        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

          by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Friday March 09 2018, @03:05PM (#649989) Journal

          I wonder why the US doesn't have leaders like him anymore?

          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)

        by FatPhil (863) <pc-soylentNO@SPAMasdf.fi> on Friday March 09 2018, @03:37PM (#650021) Homepage
        > they went through considerable effort to free him

        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

          by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Friday March 09 2018, @04:01PM (#650038) Journal

          Exactly, so they've now paid for him, and can do with him what they want.

          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)

      by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Friday March 09 2018, @03:26PM (#650013) Journal

      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.

      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]:

      US relations with successive communist regimes in Af- ghanistan had been volatile since the April 1978 communist coup, the “Saur Revolution.” The accessible KGB record remains garbled on a key event in the downward spiral of the US-Afghan relationship prior to the Soviet invasion of 1979: the still-mysterious February 1979 abduction and subsequent killing of US Ambassador Adolph Dubs. The materials, provided to CWIHP by defected KGB archivist Vasiliy Mitrokhin (published as “The KGB in Afghanistan,” CWIHP Working Paper No. 40 , available at http://cwihp.si.edu [si.edu] [here [wilsoncenter.org] is the link to the actual PDF]), suggest that the Amin regime, against the advice of the US embassy in Kabul, had authorized the storming of the hotel where the ambassador was held by three terrorists associated with a radical Islamic group. It remains unclear why the KGB recommended the execution of the only terrorist who survived the hotel storming of the hotel before US embassy personnel could interrogate him. Dubs had in fact advocated a wait- and-see policy toward Kabul and had favored the resumption of Afghan officer training in the United States, which had been suspended after the communist takeover in 1978, eager as other State Department officials to avoid forcing Kabul to rely solely on the USSR.

      From "The KGB in Afghanistan":

      The mystery around [the events concerning] Dubs’ death has not yet been solved. This is what [we know] happened. On 14 Fe bruary 1979 some unknown people seized Dubs on the street and took him to the Hotel Kabul. The terrorists demanded that Bahruddin Bals and Faizani of the Setame Melli group should be released in return fo r the release of the ambassador (both Bals and Faizani had been s hot immediately after the April Coup). On the advice of the KGB, Amin ordered an assault group to storm the hotel room and kill the terrorists. The assault team, dressed in protective Soviet vests and armed with Kalashnikovs, showered the room where the te rrorists and hostage were with bullets. Dubs was fatally wounded and died. He had at least two bullet wounds. Two of the terrorists were killed, one was taken prisoner, and the other managed to escape. It became clear that the four terrorists had had only three pistols.

      At the time of the assault, [present] in the hotel were S. G. Bakhturin (code name ‘Volgin’), the security assi stant to the ambassador and Fi rst Secretary; Yu. I. Kutepov ('Krabs'), Second Secretary; and A. S. Klus hnikov, an adviser on crime prevention with the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the DRA. During the operation they had suggested that they stall for time, not inform correspondents, not en ter into negotiations w ith the terrorists but liquidate them instead and keep prying eyes away from the hotel. They did not allow the Americans, who had come to the hotel, to take any of the used bullet shells. In case the room was to be examined by experts, a gun of unknown origin similar to a Kalashnikov was planted in the room and registered as taken from the terrorists.

      On the following day Osadchy and Yuly visited Amin on instructions from the Center to agree on how to justify the affair to the Americans. They agreed to express their condolences to the Americans, to lower flags on government buildings and to print photographs of the four terrorists in the newspapers. In or der to frustrate requests from the Americans to question the detained terrorist and hunt down the one who escaped, it was decided to shoot the one who ha d been detained and to shoot another prisoner pretending The KGB in Afghanistan that he was the fourth terrorist. The story that all four kidnappers had been killed during the assault would be fed to the newspapers. During the night both the doomed men were executed. If the Americans were to ask for an explanation for the involvement of Soviet advisers in the operation to capture the terrorist s, Amin, Sarwari and Tarun were to say that the Afghan side had independently and without consultation decided to take radical action to deal with the terrorists and that there ha d been no Soviet advisers present at all. As soon as the Cheka got rid of Amin, the disinformation service planted a new version of the death of Ambassador Dubs in the foreign press.

      “During investigations into the crimes of the CIA agent Amin, it has become known that the four ‘terrorists’ were members of an Islamic Shiite organization and that they were reacting to Amin’s unjustified mass repression. By eliminating Muslims, Amin was acting as an imperialist agent and the terrorists were therefore prepared to take extreme measures in order to make the Americans acknowledge this. They had planned to kidnap the American ambassador and to force him under the threat of death to reveal his cards and acknowledge the ties between the embassy of the USA in Kabul and Amin. When Dubs was in the hands of the terrorists in the Kabul Hotel, Amin gave orders for the otherwise needless assault and ordered that no mercy should be shown. During the shooting Ambassador Dubs was fatally wounded, one terrorist killed and another wounded. Two were captured but they were killed on the following day. They were liquidated by Tarun at Amin’s orders. Tarun himself was killed in unexplained circumstances on 14 September 1979.

      By kidnapping Dubs, the group of extremists, who were members of an Islamic organization, intended to force the American ambassador to speak about Amin’s co-operation with the Americans and to expose him as a CIA agent. Amin took measures to eliminate all the members of the group and to save himself from exposure. The conduct of the Carter administration was s hocking. It found it easy to sacrifice the life of the American ambassador in order to keep secret Amin’s connections with the CIA.”

      • (Score: 1) by khallow on Friday March 09 2018, @03:48PM (1 child)

        by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Friday March 09 2018, @03:48PM (#650029) Journal
        Sorry, I didn't complete the whataboutism above. You mentioned a "plan" by the US for false flag terrorist attacks, ignoring that it was far from being something serious. Meanwhile, we have an likely false flag terrorist attack, the kidnapping of a US ambassador, with heavy Soviet involvement in 1979 (as part of more than a century of known bad behavior by Russian intelligence stretching back to the time of the Czars). It would have been similarly convenient for Russia to stage an assassination attempt, but make it look like a US false flag operation to frame the Russians.

        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

          by Pav (114) on Friday March 09 2018, @11:55PM (#650309)

          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

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 09 2018, @07:30PM (#650176)

    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

    by quietus (6328) on Sunday March 11 2018, @12:27PM (#650899) Journal

    The problem with this narrative is that Russia has killed Russian defectors before.

    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.