Examining, Correcting, and Clarifying Washington Post’s Latest Navalny Story
This article I’m writing is going to correct and clarify information presented in this Washington Post article:
This Washington Post article dramatization is mostly a retelling of information originally from September 16, but it asserts some things which are false.
I’ll address those things below this overview of what Novichok is and which countries have made it. And though the Washington Post article is hearsay and not evidence, as I’ve said before, if Navalny was poisoned then it is 100% certain that it was not by the Russian government — for the long list of reasons I stated in my previous post — but is the most obvious false-flag attack in the history of false-flag attacks.
My article contains the following sections:
- Basic information about the Novichok family of nerve agents, and who has made them
- Corrections and clarifications to Washington Post’s article
- Keeping in-mind Washington Post’s role for the CIA
1. Basic information about the Novichok family of nerve agents, and who has made them:
Based on early inaccurate claims made in 2018, the term Novichok has become used as a dog-whistle for confirmation bias indicting Russia. However, there is nothing uniquely Russian about Novichok: Many countries have made it, possess it, and most-any country is capable of producing it. Novichok was designed to be able to be created in the field from inexpensive, non-regulated, and readily-available materials.
The recipe to make Novichok has been available for purchase on Amazon since 2008 — included in a book about the USSR’s secret chemical weapons programs by one of its creators. People can buy it if they like right here.
Countries other than Russia which are believe to have produced Novichok include the US, UK, Czech, Iran, and Germany. And scientists from Canada, France, Sweden, and Nethelands have studied the chemical.
A UN weapons inspector stated in 2018 that several Western countries have created Novichok for testing purposes since 1992.
In 2018, German outlets NDR, WDR, Die Zeit, and Suedeutsche Zeitung reported that, according to anonymous sources in Germany’s BND (Germany’s counterpart to the CIA), “Some NATO countries were secretly producing [Novichok] in small quantities”.
Then-General-Director of the OPCW, Ahmet Uzumcu, told Russian comedians who posed as the Polish PM in a prank-call (the audio for which is public) that any state can make Novichok and that the US could “Absolutely” be the source for the Novichok used in the Salisbury event.
The claim that Novichok was only produced at one site in Russia was a false one, quickly discredited. The USSR’s Novichok wasn’t made in Russia at all, but was made in Uzbekistan. And when Uzbekistan closed its chemical-weapons facility after the dissolution of the USSR, the US was responsible for the cleanup of the facility, as the NYT reported in 1999, and took control of the USSR’s former stockpiles of Novichok.
And in 2018, Russia’s government claimed that the US state patented weaponized Novichok in 2015, saying this:
“On December 1, 2015, the United States Patent and Trademark Office turned to the Russian agency in charge of patents with a request to check the patentability of the invention made by US researcher T. Rubin.
This document confirms that nerve agents like Novichok were not only produced but were even patented as a chemical weapon in the United States. And this is not an old story, this happened just several years ago: the patent is dated December 1, 2015.
This document talks about the invention of a special bullet, the distinctive feature of which is that it has a separate cavity for equipping it with different kinds of toxic agents. When using the mentioned invention, the lethal effect is achieved due to the effect of this toxic agent on the human body. In other words, this ammunition falls under the jurisdiction of the CWC.
The principle of operation of the bullet consists in equipping it with binary components which interact with each other upon impact. And this is what we read on the page 11 of this official American document, “At least one of the active substances may be selected from nerve agents including… tabun (GA), sarin (GB), soman (GD), cyclosarin (GF), and VG, …VM, VR, VX, and [attention!] Novichok agents.
Moreover, searching by the key word “Novichok” on the digital source google.patents.com you can find over 140 patents issued by the United States, related to the use and protection from exposure to the “Novichok” toxic agent.”
And here is a statement made by a professor of organic chemistry at Cornell university:
“I asserted that any credible organic chemist could make novichok nerve agents. Here is my final exam in my 1st year graduate organic synthesis course. Only one kid of 15 lost any points. Uniquely Russian technology my ass….”
2. Corrections and clarifications to Washington Post’s article
The Washington Post article says, “Vladimir Uglev, one of Novichok’s developers, said in an interview the banned substance came in two forms: a liquid like vegetable oil and a solid that looked like salt. He believes the substance may have been put on Navalny’s clothing”.
WaPo doesn’t include a quote of Vladimir Uglev demonstrating his belief of such. However, Vladimir Uglev did say this: “I believe that the use of chemical warfare substances: sarin, soman and Novichok (A-234) can be excluded from the list of possibilities. Apart from Navalny himself, the people around him would be also stricken in one form or another.”
The Washington Post article says, “In recent weeks authorities have stepped up harassment, freezing Navalny’s bank account and barring him from selling or mortgaging his home.”
WaPo is using disingenuous ambiguous phrasing to make people think this is tied to Navalny’s health situation. But this is actually concerning a 2019 court ruling which ordered Navalny to pay $1.2 million USD in damages to a restaurant and catering company which Navalny made a video about, saying the company was causing dysentery in schools. Obviously, the court found Navalny’s claims libellous.
The Washington Post article says, “Pevchikh said Russia would probably never open an investigation because it would automatically give Navalny access to all the investigation materials, including surface tests for poisoning, results of a police room check and hotel CCTV footage.”
Russia’s government has actually kept prodding Germany for cooperation on an investigation and for the data of what exactly was found in Navalny’s system. Germany has been refusing cooperation and hasn’t provided Russia with the information they’ve requested. Russia’s government has said that they have no information to investigate unless Germany shares its findings with Russia.
The Washington Post article says, “I guess they just wanted him to die in the hotel room, and we would find him in the morning. And then the poisoning would always be a conspiracy theory,” said Pevchikh. “Whereas now it’s a medical fact.”
It isn’t known to be a fact to him or to us. No evidence that he was poisoned, or of the method by which he may have been poisoned, has been made available to the public. Saying it happened, or saying it happened a certain way isn’t evidence establishing fact for the public, it’s hearsay. And when hearsay is presented as if proof, it’s being used for propaganda.
3. Keeping in-mind Washington Post’s role as a megaphone for the CIA
I think that when Washington Post’s article, which is written to give a misleading impression of things, is looked-at within the context of what Washington Post is, its intention becomes better understood.
Washington Post is owned by the CIA’s largest business partner, Jeff Bezos, who hosts the CIA’s spy network. Throughout its history, Washington Post has kept close ties to the CIA and worked in close partnership with it, and has often published anonymous CIA-insider reports while routinely engaging in writing that is deliberately McCarthyist.
During the 1950s, the CIA’s Operation_Mockingbird program, which successfully aimed to stack US media outlets with CIA agents, was headquartered at Washington Post and was directed by Washington Post’s then-owner, Phil Graham.
During the 2016 election, Washington Post notoriously pushed a xenophobic and McCarthyist media blacklist of news outlets that didn’t conform to CIA narratives, falsely calling them Russian propaganda outlets despite that they were actually US outlets with no ties to Russia. That blacklist was put together by disgraced group PropOrNot, which was later exposed as being a collaborative psyops propaganda project by the CIA and Ukraine’s intel agencies.
In 2018, documents belonging to a NATO-encompassing public manipulation program, ironically titled “Integrity Initiative”, were leaked. They showed that many known journalists working at outlets including Washington Post, BBC, The Guardian, Sky News, and many others, are partners in the “Integrity Initiative” disinformation program and receive articles pre-written by the institute and Atlantic Council, which they then publish in their respective outlets. The leaked documents were confirmed to be authentic by “Integrity Initiative”, which posted on Twitter acknowledging the documents, shortly before making their account private so that people could no longer see their posts.
You can read about some of the operational methods used by “Integrity Initiative”, and other such disinformation programs, in this article by Glenn Greenwald.
Atlantic Council, which “Integrity Initiative” is partnered with, itself serves as the propaganda and disinformation branch of NATO, which itself is a pro-war anti-Russia military alliance.
Former CIA director William Colby said, “The CIA owns everyone of any significance in the major media”.
Former CIA director William Casey said, “We’ll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false”
Former CIA director Mike Pompeo said, “I was the CIA director. We lied, we cheated, we stole… we had entire training courses.”
And Washington Post (as do some other major outlets) serves as a megaphone for the CIA’s objectives. As such, Washington Post is an unreliable source of information on many topics.
I also recommend this article by Caitlin Johnstone:
If you found this article enjoyable or useful, please consider sharing it. If you’d like to republish this article for commercial purposes, please contact me.