I don't know what happened there but the official version leaves some serious doubts open. For example there was a long time talk of a "nurse" that found them. Only by accident it was revealed that this nurse was the head-nurse of the UK forces, i.e. in the rank of a general, well versed in chemical warfare.
Also why was never the full tracks of the two Russians the victims revealed? There is CCTV on every corner in the UK. The story of the Russians was bogus but so is the official story.
It wouldn't be the first time the gov stretches the truth. See for example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nayirah_testimony
Edit: downvoting because it doesn't fit your world view? At least have the balls to reply.
The official story would always be vague. This is spook territory not regular police. A Scotland Yard team went to interview Litvinenko's assassins (One of whom was being treated for radiation poisoning - fancy that!), and they were completely outgunned by the FSB.
Also, as to CCTV, it is extremely prevalent in London but not as omniscient in places like Salisbury.
Security services sit on information like this for years, possibly never to reach daylight i.e. it's at best 50/50 whether MI5's director(Hollis) in the 50s and 60s was a double agent for the GRU, but we will never know what is in the archives. It is undeniable, however, that the Russian's did it - a Russian nerve agent just happens to turn up in the middle of Salisbury!?
Read Spycatcher by Peter Wright, incredibly interesting story of a working class MI5 scientific intelligence officer (engineer) turned literal spycatcher - largely spending his time chasing the work of naive upperclass communists of years gone by.
During Hollis's tenure, the KGB and GRU were just one step ahead every single move they made, to the point that they broke up a spy ring and the KGB didn't even phone home to Moscow that day. Other examples include bugged rooms suddenly being vacated or bugs in walls being filled with needle-like precision. They gradually worked up the tree until they realized there had to be a mole very high up in MI5 (or not at all, but it's not as neat).
British intelligence had been completely rocked by the Cambridge Five - communists had infiltrated pretty much everywhere in British intelligence until people like Peter Wright modernized the service largely by running around chasing leads from 40 years ago (in the 1970s) from people like Anthony Blunt who had given up fighting. The British establishment had to be dragged kicking and screaming towards the notion that an Englishman could be a communist despite his upbringing and public school training.
Can you imagine the fuss then, when it turns out that Hollis - who is already a very conservative (unambitious, won't step on toes etc.) leader of the service - is suspected of treachery? He had spent years in China in his youth, possibly having contact with known Russian assets. If he was really a spy, the smoking gun is that it turned out that when he was sent to interview Igor Gouzenko (A defector now residing in Canada), he apparently showed almost no interest in what Gouzenko had to say and was wearing a disguise. This may sound relatively innocuous but remember that a defector could quite possibly recognize you on from photographs of their agents.
The main case against this hypothesis relies on a few fairly not overly strong but nonetheless useful points: Oleg Gordievsky (Briefly Deputy Head of the KGB in London) clearly stated that his station chief stated that this rumour around Hollis must've been some British trick. This is potentially very strong evidence, however, it is the word of one man. Gordievsky is reliable, however, but more importantly he was KGB and Hollis was always supposed to be GRU (and he was definitely inactive long before Gordievsky would've been able to speak English let alone stationed in London). ELLI is a currently unknown cryptonym (alleged to be Hollis), it may apparently be Leo Long but that doesn't add up with the leaks from MI5.
MI5 (via Andrew) and MI6 (via Macintyre's book) - both had official archive access, extremely rare for MI6 - both claim its smoke without fire, Misguided conspiracy. It could well be, but this glosses over that there was a (according to Wright at least) an investigation that lasted the best part of a decade neither indicted nor exonerated him (https://www.margaretthatcher.org/document/104603) but on balance said it was more likely that not that he was not a spy. However, the proceedings of said investigation are not public as far as I can and the investigation-investigation thatcher speaks of in the speech linked to was run by a friend of Hollis. Chapman Pincher seems to allege that Hollis's family spoke openly of his work for the USSR but Pincher is now dead, and I don't really believe him at face value.
The real story here isn't really whether Hollis was a spy or not (he was incompetent as far as I can see), but that the Russian's are unbelievably good at espionage (but not unbeatable - see Operation PIMLICO).
> A Scotland Yard team went to interview Litvinenko's assassins (One of whom was being treated for radiation poisoning - fancy that!), and they were completely outgunned by the FSB.
From a BBC documentary into the investigation at the time. One of the members of the scotland yard team suggested they were poisoned by the russians (Laxatives in the water or similar not Po)
The fact that it was invented in Russia doesn't mean that this sample was Russian made. Every decent chemist can produce that stuff.
We were also shown powerpoint slides of Saddams truck-mounted labs of WMD - they just didn't exist. The second mission was to "win hearts and minds". Result: 1,000,000 people dead. Women, old people, children and toddlers included. Just watch collateral damage again. Do it 100,000 times and you know what happened in Iraq. Plus a dash of abuse and torture of prisoners of war in the Abu Ghraib prison. There are plenty of things I doubt when I hear about them.
After reading, "Novichok agents: a historical, current, and toxicological perspective"[1] it looks like the only places to have produced such agents are Russian chemical weapon labs and the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons Central Analytical Database.
Maybe someone who works in the field can provide some more evidence either way?
I am pretty sure that the Porton Down military research facility next to Salisbury is capable or producing it too - but that doesn't mean they produced the specific poison used to attack the Skipals.
The same for VX gas that was used to kill Kim Jong Un's brother in Malaysia. VX was indeed invented by the brits but I would seriously doubt that they killed Kim Jong-Nam.
Edit: this is just factual information. What kind of fscking loosers do downvote this? Go get a reality check.
You're right - any well-equipped state could have synthesized the nerve agent used on the Skripals. But that's not the only evidence: two suspects were identified, who traveled from Russia and stayed at a local hotel. The nerve agent was found in their hotel room.
Of course, you could argue that British intelligence framed those Russians during the investigation, and poisoned the Skripals themselves as some sort of ruse for expelling diplomats. But if you deny the evidence and proceed down that path, you've made the decision not to alter your beliefs and no discussion will change your mind.
