Talk:Petrov and Boshirov

Police report

 * ''See mainpage

Russian response
It is rather unlikely that Russia really does not know who this people are. (1) They traveled on Aeroflot; would be surprising if passengers lists are unavailable (2)genuine Russian 'external' passports would be obviously issued by Russia (either foreign ministry, where Zakharova is, or interior ministry), and it should be possible to find out. They say that UK refused exact data, like passport numbers; that's a bit strange; and makes it more difficult to locate, but not an impossible task (3) if those passports were not genuine, it can be established in a similar way.

So it looks like Russia is complaining about lack of transparency of the UK investigation and is unwilling to participate in such. (Noted, there is an announcement that Russian FM will reveal some further information, 'in New York and Hague'; unclear whether this is something new). --Resup (talk) 00:32, 6 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Что «Фонтанке» известно о подозреваемых в отравлении Скрипалей -Fontanka, 5 September, 2018
 * (Some claims about the suspects made, DOB, address, etc. Sources of claims not explained) --Resup (talk) 10:41, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Alexander Petrov, the one found by Fontanka, denied having anything to do with this, denied visiting London/UK --Resup (talk) 13:38, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Boshirov and Petrov RT interview
Briefly, I do not see details which are impossible. But taking into account CCTV recordings placing them near the house (whether or not the rest of the story holds up); and the gravity of the event +its geopolitical consequences, the interview is felt by many as not particularly convincing; some would say, rather ambiguous. It may be that the interview was aimed at domestic audience and that has different objectives (briefly, more about acceptance or 'groove' than belief in the story as told). But the interview is seen internationally, and there are people in the world at large who can see problems with the Western narrative and overall Western ways and means. But those people certainly are not used to situation when they are told one thing, and it actually means another. Without evidence corroborating interview claims, with details like friends, family, clients, etc (or else, explaining what is the real situation with all this), those with an open mind in the outer world would be pretty frustrated, as was seen in the MH17 case already.

(Former) MP Gennady Gudkov issued a call to provide more details, like above, on top of his previous call to show Boshirov and Petrov. Unfortunately, his comments are presented sarcastically, and he does not have enough appreciation or influence among those with the real power. (It does not help to the case that Gudkov theoreticizes on exactly why GRU would do it. But the issue has nothing to do with Gudkov, and has to do with presenting the case which will be appreciated internationally (at least, giving it a thought and trying)

I do not see how I can do much about this myself. Perhaps those in Russia, Moscow can see to it. I appreciate how this is not easy. --Resup (talk) 18:44, 16 September 2018 (UTC)


 * The road they were spotted on is a main road, and the Skripal house is only about one-and-a-half KM away from the train station, in this direction. These guys clearly have something to hide - maybe gay, maybe grey anabolics dealings, something that can get them into trouble in their personal environment - but this comes on top of all the ridiculous story holes the Brits fed us with, and they are certainly not hiding a sophisticated murder attempt with some obscure substance. If they were, this interview wouldn't exist. My two cents. --CE (talk) 19:18, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

Margarita Simonyan interview to BBC: 'Маргарита Симоньян: у меня нет оснований верить Петрову и Боширову' -BBC Russian service, 14 September 2018 --Resup (talk) 20:16, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
 * They contacted her, not the other way around; 'first and last interview', a condition not to ask questions which will help to locate friends, family, or business partners; did not sent her the photographs from Salisbury yet.

Timeline

 * ''See mainpage

Timeline, weird. Sunday may be the best doorknob day, less mail deliveries. But alleged assassins arrive in the afternoon (not even the first train), after only a brief visit a day earlier. This is (nearly?) a failure, Skripals gone, and they are not supposed to know when they are back. It may be not a good idea to apply poison while target is away, because there is no guarantee who and when will first touch the knob. So likely they have to wait for them to return not applying poison (wait for this even if it's applied, or how they will know the 'operation' was successful?). OK, assume wait without application. Even if there was a miracle and Skripals were back home in that 'dark' timeslot, 9:13 to 13:30, what will 'assassins' do? Apply poison and wait for Skripals to leave (to be sure of success)? Knock on the door with 'hello, I am postman Pechkin, you have a delivery from Putin?' Looks weird. Real ones probably will keep things under watch for way longer, before striking at a good opportunity, not just arrive, eject, and leave, in 2 hours after noon. (Venediktov: a cover-up group? --But Venediktov is 'in bed' with Westernish--believes that it's as they say). -And how do we know that they did not come to see the Magna Carta, or whatever else they fancy? --Resup (talk) 22:41, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

They say, even bandits in the 90's used 3 different groups, like watch/strike/clean, or whatever is the play --Resup (talk) 22:46, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Cover? Whose cover?
It's hard to believe that Russian services will do it in the open without trying to make an appearance of it coming from elsewhere. (I can think of only one (remotely) plausible motif: there is 'that tape, and not of Ms Lewinsky', and Skripal is the one who revealed it. If it ends in a strike, no point to do it openly, as this just confirms a shaky, weird story. Open strike is to instill fear, and that is clearly not on the cards at all here. So GRU is not going to come from Moscow, do it, and nothing else, and leave. Visit a fucking museum at least. They should have enough brains to know about video cameras. In a coin shop, a camera will be in plain sight to see. Why would they put their funny faces into it? There is enough examples of strikes avoiding cameras, or using some cover-up, or whatever; why it needs to be so dumb here, unless it is a cover-up, aimed to look as 'evil Russian assassins' in the tabloids? --Resup (talk) 23:17, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Bellingcat
Skripal Poisoning Suspect’s Passport Data Shows Link to Security Services - Bellingcat, September 14, 2018
 * Claim is about Alexander Evgenievich Petrov, DOB 13.07. 1979, born in Kotlas, Arhangelsk region, citizen of Russia, single, living in Moscow (?from) 20.09.2007, applying for a new passport on 19 November 2009 for the reason that the old passport was rendered unusable. Passport issued on 26, received on 27 November 2009
 * 'Last-minute travel plans'
 * Appears to be bullshit. 01.03.2018 20:00 online registration, less that 24 hours before departure. I see no reason to consider this to be a record of the booking (=buying the ticket). Registration (online) is borrowed and means the same thing as in English--registration (online). For international flights, nothing unusual to have to do registration at the airport as well. It is unclear why it was done twice, but it could happen, for example, if they changed seat, added luggage, or reprinted boarding passes
 * “Do not provide any information”
 * A blank page shown with handwriting and a stamp. It is not shown that it is linked to suspects, and not shown it is genuine. It is not clear how they got access to this information; there is online service to check whether passport is genuine, and this requires to know passport series and number. Quoted Fontanka did not provide full passport number info.
 * It is not shown that info is not blocked because of the criminal case, not because of their alleged affiliation
 * Zakharova: disinformation.

--Resup (talk) 22:08, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

[https://www.bbc.com/russian/features-45510966 Bellingcat показал заявку на паспорт Петрова из Солсбери. На ней есть пометка от спецслужб] -BBC Russian service, September 14, 2018.
 * Alleged document is published, with a photo and partially blacked out text. "The "  Insider ", the first to receive the documents, writes that they were provided by a source from the Russian police. The BBC can not confirm the authenticity of the documents. Two sources working in the FMS (the service was disbanded in 2016, its powers were transferred to the Ministry of Internal Affairs), the BBC reported that documents of this form - No. 1P - are actually filed when replacing and issuing a Russian passport."
 * This may be a forgery. On the first page, details are provided. The only link between the first page and the second page is a stamp 'do not provide information', with a number, 195-79-66. This stamp, + brief unsigned handwriting, could be easily forged. (Seen in media, somewhere, saying that such stamp and way of handling this was not seen before. So it is not confirmed that this is proper way of handling such sort of cases. It may be forged as part of psychological warfare. No solid sourcing, while a spectacular claim, with no solid corroboration. We have this in 'Analysis' section on mainpage--well, this really appears to be something else...)
 * BBC Russian service claim on procedures: '' A source working for the Federal Migration Service told the BBC that such stamps are put to special services and high-ranking officials so that the FMS does not give their personal data to bailiffs and other services. However, another source of the BBC, involved in issuing passports, described this procedure: applications for passports from special services do not pass through ordinary employees, but are stored in separate safes and cabinets, so they may not need such seals.

Last updated --Resup (talk) 11:15, 15 September 2018 (UTC)


 * ATlantic council's fellow Higging and @bellingcat created a new opus on Petrov and Bashirov, implying that they are members of GRU, Russian secret service. Lets look at "facts" they provided to prove these allegations. (thread), Elena Evdokimova, September 15, 2018
 * The number in the stamp coincides with a phone number which is said to belong to RU MOD (I find this ridiculous, and I do not think it is ever done in this way on Russian documents. Does anyone believe such crap? --well, apparently yes, as it is picked up by Russian pro-Western media) --Resup (talk) 15:35, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

Skripal Suspects Confirmed as GRU Operatives: Prior European Operations Disclosed -Bellingcat, September 20, 2018

(1) No idea (2)If somebody was wondering, shows what BC is (3) Many thanks to the contributing unnamed Dutch source for creating thousand first Putin's apologist version: Petrov (and maybe Boshirov) were briefly arrested by the Dutch. Therefore, they were known and followed, making themselves available for use as a 'trailered Buk' of Skripals --Resup (talk) 16:15, 23 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Солберецкие, часть третья. «Бошировым» оказался «Герой России», полковник ГРУ Анатолий Чепига 'col. Anatoly Chepiga'

(1) No idea (2) is this a real photo from actual Chepiga passport, as alleged? (faking is easy, trust = none) (3) they went through maybe hundreds of photographs, until they found some resemblance. OK, some resemblance is there, but there are look-alikes out there too, and maybe out of several hundred photos it is quite likely to have one looking alike, in the manner presented (4) 'independent verification', bullshit. There is resemblance of the middle photo (allegedly Boshirov, stolen passport files) to right photo of 'Boshirov' (UK-released). So this is about whether or not those are photos of the same Boshirovs, quite likely yes The left photo is (allegedly) Chepiga. Some, but not strong, resemblance to Boshirov, in any of its two versions. But the two photos of the same Boshirov do not reinforce Boshirov=Chepiga theory (5) why do you send a decorated speznaz colonel with Chechnya and Ukraine experience to put some poison on the doorknob? (sloppy and unsuccessfully so, too).

It still remains plausible that although 'Boshirov' and 'Petrov' interview is quite misleading, they are not the assassins. They could be there on a delicate privately sponsored or services related assignment (which may have to do with drugs, for double, civ/mil use or sport, etc, and not necessarily in the way they portrayed it. They could be known to counter-services (especially so if it's true that they have been arrested). It could be used to set them up (as there is still no Russian state point to attack Skripals as alleged). It is outside of our depth and capabilities to know it for sure, and not much scientific or visual material to go by too.  --Resup (talk) 18:04, 26 September 2018 (UTC) Last updated --Resup (talk) 07:04, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

Quick computer comparisons, https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/services/cognitive-services/face/ compare https://i2-prod.mirror.co.uk/incoming/article13314257.ece/ALTERNATES/s615b/0_Skripal-Suspect-Boshirov-Identified-as-GRU-Colonel-Anatoliy-Chepiga.jpg and https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fc/Anatoliy_Chepiga.jpg result, 0.6741 confidence those are the same, which is not too high a score. (See https://twitter.com/mare_indicum for more) --Resup (talk) 07:36, 27 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Craig Murray tried betaface and got a probability of 2.8% of them being the same person. Chepiga to Murray himself gets 2.1% ;o) This is a typical Brown Noses stunt. --CE (talk) 12:03, 27 September 2018 (UTC)
 * btw, "Texas" told Rense in a recent interview that the bomb that killed Zacharchenko had a camera to it and a unit running face recognition software. It sat there waiting for him for maybe quite some time. --CE (talk) 12:09, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

"The true identity of the second suspect in the Salisbury nerve agent attack is to be revealed in the Houses of Parliament" --can be read in many sources. But how exactly this is supposed to work? The 'evidence' is clearly inadmissible in court, it is forged or hacked (in addition to not show what it is alleged to show). So, in a reasonable court it will be thrown out, moreover the sources (those who forged or hacked) will face legal problems and may be prosecuted, either for fraud or for unauthorized access to information/computer hacking/(data) theft. So it's not destined to court, and is a kind of alternative intelligence (and no longer an open source). But why to have an alternative intelligence agency, if there are official ones already? To crappy to touch, maybe? Anyway, Parliament can listen to anything and decide anything on any basis. But, problems with Bellingcat are well known (we tried to spell them out, somewhat too). On the other hand, MPs are not exactly known for investigative or forensic skills to be the proper judges of (very) questionable information. So what is happening here (apart from propaganda and PR)? And where exactly in the Parliament will it be revealed? Hopefully in the premises suitable for this glorious occasion ? --Resup (talk) 00:47, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

Info war aspects
Alexei Venediktov, in one of recent Echo Moskvy programs: attack on the Pope was never proved to be by KGB, but regardless it was believed and had enormous toll on the USSR, with further comments to the effect that Skripals will/can have very serious implications for Russia, whether or not it is actually proven. Vladimir Pozner related commentary, of the sort I am afraid it is already decided in the West that Russia is to blame, no matter what (he says with a goal of further worsening of relations between Russia and the West). --Resup (talk) 13:15, 15 September 2018 (UTC)