An article on the Skripal case appeared in the Times Newspaper on 03.05.18 that was so ridiculous I had to check it wasn’t April 1st. According to their ‘journalists’ it is now believed that Sergei and Yulia Skripal left the Zizzi restaurant before eating their dessert which, their secret inside source says, must have been a sign that they were feeling ill. However, despite this supposition, rather than going home to rest as most normal people would do if not feeling well, they went to the park to feed bread to the ducks. It is not mentioned if they had the bread with them at the outset or they purloined it from the restaurant. Either way, instead of going home to bed or calling for an ambulance, they decided that giving immediate sustenance to a flock of mallards was more important.
But wait, it gets better. Obviously they would have contaminated the bread by touching it and they went on to give some of this contaminated bread to three random children in the park. It is suggested that they did this so that the boys could also feed the ducks but this must be questioned as one of the boys, rather than giving it the starving waterfowl, decided to eat it himself. So perhaps the Skripals’ altruism stretched to hungry children as well as hungry birds.
These intrepid investigators from the Times go on to tell us that the boy thankfully suffered no ill effects. That’s right - the truly terrifying, all-powerful novichok which allegedly totally incapacitated two adults for weeks after they had simply touched it and has resulted in half of Salisbury being sealed off, had absolutely no effect on a young child who supposedly ingested it. Commenting on the strange lack of symptoms shown by a boy who just consumed bread contaminated with, according to all the ‘experts’ in the media , one of the most deadly nerve agents ever invented, the journalists simply said that it ‘exposes the limits of novichok.’
So Novichok is either extremely deadly or too innocuous to even give someone a slight cold, depending on which narrative the media want to spin.
Supernatural Powers or Russian Agent?
There can only be three explanations for the boy suffering no ill effects -
1. The Skripals’ hands never came into contact with novichok – making the novichok on the door handle theory unlikely.
2. The young boy had some sort of supernatural powers that made him immune to being poisoned from a toxic, chemical weapon.
3. The young boy wasn’t actually called Aiden, as the Times claim, but rather Anatoly and he was an underage spy kidnapped and trained in espionage by Vladimir Putin to keep an eye on the Skripals in case they got involved in any activities deemed dangerous to the Russian state – like the subversive act of duck-feeding. The reason why he didn’t suffer any ill effects was because he had already taken the antidote to novichok. Obviously only Russians would have this as they are the only country in the world that produced this extremely classified over-the-top secret agent, the formula of which was only available to a select few i.e. anyone with 30 dollars and an Amazon account who could have purchased a book, written years ago by Vil Mirzayanov, the Russian dissident now living in in the USA, who said, within its pages, that it was he who actually created the toxic agent and published its formula for all the world to see.
There is, of course, no prize for guessing which of these alternatives the main stream media would believe.
Thankfully, the Times have published a photo of ‘Bread Boy’. We know it is him because he is rather helpfully posing with a bit of bread. One would like to think this is not the actual bread the Skripals gave him as, apart from being a potentially deadly chemical weapon, it wouldn’t smell particularly pleasant after being in the boy’s trouser pocket for the last 6 weeks.
For those of you out there who are animal lovers, unfortunately there is no mention as to the current health situation of the ducks. This may be because the birds in question couldn’t be located by MI6 as they claim they had been secretly whisked away by Russian agents in an attempt to conceal evidence.
Unknown and Anonymous Sources
This will no doubt be verified in time when an ‘unknown source’ will say they saw two burly men in fur hats speaking a language that sounded suspiciously like Russian, loading sickly looking ducks into an unmarked van and speeding off. Further proof will then come to light when a video, produced by the ‘White Helmets’ and purporting to show these nefarious activities of the Russians, appears on YouTube. Despite the fact the two protagonists in the video being indentified by locals as Bill and Dave, two local drunks, who had donned false beards and moustaches, and despite the fact that the language they were conversing in was actually inebriated gobbledygook and not Russian at all and despite the fact that the ducks looked suspiciously like plastic garden ornaments, the British Government and ‘experts’ within the intelligence service will categorically confirm the video’s authenticity and will immediately expel a number of Smirnoff distillers from the country in case they are using vodka-making as a cover for espionage.
Anyway, back to the story. In the Time’s article the ‘journalists’ also mention a nurse who allegedly treated the Skripals by giving them mouth-to-mouth before the ambulance arrived. In the process of her resuscitation efforts she was vomited on by one or both of the patients. Where she came from nobody knows. Neither do we know who she is because she rather conveniently wants to remain anonymous. Like ‘Bread Boy’, she did not suffer from any ill effects either so presumably she has the similar supernatural genetic make-up. Maybe she was his mother. Who knows?
Another mysterious figure then appears in the narrative. A local shop manager saw the Skripals whilst putting out the bins. He basically said they were on the bench, silent and unconscious – hardly revelatory news at this point. He too, just like the nurse, prefers to remain anonymous obviously terrified of revenge by Russian agents intent on doing harm to all shop-keepers that dare to make completely un-enlightening statements with regards to this case.
No Suspects, but the Russians are Guilty Anyway
The only sensible thing in the Times article is the statement that the police have no suspects as yet. Well how could they? There was no motive, no witnesses, no fingerprints and no CCTV footage because, despite the fact that Sergei Skripal was allegedly in regular contact with MI6, there were no security cameras monitoring anyone who called to his house. In any case, the police’s lack of ability to find the culprit is of little consequence as we already know, due to the diligent work of the super sleuths Mrs May and Mr Johnson, obviously both highly qualified in forensics, investigation techniques and chemical weapons, that those evil Russians did it.
It wouldn’t at all surprise me that the guilt of the Russians and Mr Putin’s own complicity in the incident will be fully verified in the near future. The proof will come with the discovery of a Russian passport, a video tape of a Russian secret agent admitting full guilt and the instruction manual, ‘101 Things to do With Novichok' signed ‘with love, from Vladimir, hugs and kisses,’ which will all be found at the scene by some postman or pizza delivery man who will, of course, want to remain anonymous. The fact that the man in the passport and video will look suspiciously like Reggie, a friend of the local drunks, Bill and Dave, will go largely unnoticed. After all, when did the truth ever get in the way of a good story?
One more thought. I can’t understand why the intelligence agencies haven’t brought in the Foreign Secretary for questioning yet. His first names is Boris, for God’s sake. How more Russian can you get?
Did you like this article?
Thank you for your vote!
10 September 2018
US jets strike Syrian town with banned white phosphorus bombs – Russian Defense Ministry
7 September 2018
UK accusation of Russians in Skripal case ‘cocktail of lies’ timed with Idlib false flag op – Moscow
From our advertisers
15 hours ago
Trump says Khashoggi death ‘unacceptable’, but he ‘prefers’ to keep defense contracts with Saudis
From our advertisers