[Peace-discuss] Russiagate continues: Discovery's "Secrets of the Salisbury Poisonings" echoes government narrative

[J.B. Nicholson]

Discovery TV's "Secrets of the Salisbury Poisonings" ("Secrets") echoes the UK/US 
government narrative that the Salisbury poisonings of 4 March 2018 in Salisbury, 
Wiltshire, UK were the Russian government carrying out a revenge attack on Sergei 
Skripal via what the UK government insisted was one of the Novichok nerve agents.

On 4 March 2018, Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia were found slumped over on a 
city park bench. Det. Sgt. Nick Bailey from the Wilts Police (local police) was 
called in to investigate. Bailey found the Skripals slumped over, got the Skripals 
medical attention, and Bailey was also made ill with whatever substance had adversely 
affected the Skripals.

"Secrets" said that local firefighters were also brought in on the scene at the park 
bench and says that these firefighters donned hazmat suits to clean up the vomit on 
the scene (presumably the Skripals' vomit). "Secrets" never identifies how anyone 
knew to put on hazmat suits for cleaning up vomit. "Secrets" interviewed Rebecca 
Hudson, a local reporter working for a local paper that generally printed feel-good 
stories but also covered the Skripal case. She also said "One of the police officers 
said, 'You might want to stay because something interesting is going to happen.'". 
How would anyone know this?

"Secrets" doesn't interview people who are the closest to the situation and not in a 
position to echo the government line, such as Yulia & Sergei Skripal. Both are 
recovered and out of the hospital by the time this show was made in 2021. We only see 
the Skripals in still images or footage made by others. A second poisoning incident 
also in Salisbury killed Dawn Sturgess (whom RT once claimed had been getting over a 
drug addiction) and Charlie Rowley who survived. Charlie Rowley is interviewed but 
mainly about the guilt he carries feeling that he inadvertently poisoned his 
girlfriend Dawn Sturgess. This means that the only interview subjects in "Secrets" 
are in two categories:

1. People who know too little to say anything that would seriously challenge the 
state narrative (like Viktoria Skripal, a relative of Yulia & Sergei Skripal and Ebru 
Ozturk, a shopkeeper of a shop where Sergei Skripal shopped) and uncredited people 
who speak as if they just happened to be on the scene at that time.

2. People who have a connection to the UK government -- local police, a NATO worker, 
UK Home Secretary Amber Rudd, Head of UK Counter Terrorism Policing Mark Rowley, etc. 
-- who repeat the government narrative and don't raise challenging questions.




Here are some of the questions that should have been raised but would never be raised 
because "Secrets" is first and foremost establishment propaganda furthering the 
(apparently ongoing) Russiagate narrative:

- How was it that a government nurse and her daughter (also training to be a nurse) 
just happened to be on the scene at the time the Skripals fell ill? Why aren't we 
told about this nurse and her daughter?

- We're told right from the start of and throughout "Secrets" that a small amount of 
Novichok will kill people. But here we have 4 out of 5 people who allegedly came into 
contact with a Novichok substance (per the evidenceless UK government claim) who 
lived. Dawn Sturgess died, but for all we know, she died because her body had already 
been weakened by other means (perhaps the drug addiction RT once claimed she had).

- Who owns Sergei Skripal's house and everything in it? Last reported was that the UK 
government bought that house and all its contents. Why?

- What proof does the UK government have to back its repeated claim that the 
substance involved in these poisonings is one of the Novichok nerve agents?

- The alleged substance involved reportedly requires a chemical lab to make, one 
can't make a batch at home. We're told that the powder form of the alleged substance 
used loses potency quickly when exposed to air, and Salisbury is 8 miles from such a 
lab -- Porton Down. We're told that the Porton Down workers are experts in chemical 
warfare. But to dismiss any suspicion we're also told that it's just "a quirk of 
fate" (30m 31s) that Porton Down has the means to make Novichok substances, houses 
other lethal substances, and the expertise to carry out making Novichok substances. 
Was the nearby lab used to make some substance used against the victims (keeping in 
mind that we don't have any evidence but UK government word that Novichok is 
genuinely involved here at all)?

- Establishment media (such as "Secrets" and Wikipedia's entry on this case) call the 
substance a "Soviet-era nerve agent" but RT has shown us documents indicating that 
it's no secret how to make this and other Novichok-class substances. The information 
was published many years ago worldwide. Who benefits from repeatedly tying the 
substance involved to Russia? Why did "Secrets" not tell viewers that the Novichok 
nerve agents are a) a class of substances and b) published? In fact, "Secrets" 
claimed that "we knew that only Russia possessed that kind of capability" (28m 2s) 
but that was not true. "Secrets" later admits that the British government can also 
make Novichok substances.

- Why wasn't Seymour (Sy) Hersh questioned about what he knows about this case? He 
gave an interview to The Independent 
(https://www.independent.co.uk/news/long_reads/seymour-hersh-interview-novichok-russian-hacking-9-11-nerve-agent-attack-a8459596.html) 
and RT (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJgTiP6WBss) where Hersh said:

 From 
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/long_reads/seymour-hersh-interview-novichok-russian-hacking-9-11-nerve-agent-attack-a8459596.html

> Sy Hersh: The story of novichok poisoning has not held up very well. He [Skripal]
> was most likely talking to British intelligence services about Russian organised
> crime.
 From https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJgTiP6WBss regarding the two Russian men 
famously interviewed on RT which establishment media outlets have tried to raise 
suspicion on (without clear evidence):

> Sy Hersh: Those two [the two men interviewed on RT] were helping the British 
> intelligence services with information about the Russian mafia. That's what they 
> were doing here [in the UK]. In other words, the people that were high on the
> list of people who would want to hurt him [Sergey Skripal] would be the Russian
> mafia. Russians, but not the Russian government.
> 
> Afshin Rattansi, RT host: Do you mean the Skripals?
> 
> Sy Hersh: Yeah, I mean that was the understanding. There was also some reporting 
> out of Europe about that that's been pretty much widespread. [...]

- Who benefits from conflating the difference between some Russians doing something 
and the Russian government doing that thing?



It seems clear to me that "Secrets" is not a good review of what we can learn about 
these poisonings, "Secrets" is overwhelmingly in line with government narrative, and 
"Secrets" is another beat of the drum aimed at preserving the Russiagate narrative 
where we should all fear and blame Russian government operatives for so many ills 
that befall westerners. But for those that paid some attention to these cases as they 
happened, there's quite a bit missing from "Secrets" which calls the entire show into 
question.