While I agree that the "tourist" excuse was likely bullshit, I suspect someone that recently visited a tourist site would know more about it than someone who lived near it all their life. They just learned about it, how often do you think about it?

And if they had been visiting the spire, which they probably weren't, it's likely they would have gotten information about it in their native language which would use meters.

The question would have been asked in immigrations upon their arrival, so it would be before visiting the tourist site.

So any assassin targeting somebody in any other location would be fine, it has nothing to do with the famous case as those people were interviewed after the trip, and now I would be suspect because I read this thread and know it's 123 meters. As an American I'm sure I'd be fine, but it's just a silly entry question.

Lol this is typically something locals don't know yeah. I've also been reluctant to even visit tourist hotspots in the places I've lived. Never felt like waiting an hour in a queue with busloads of Chinese snapping photos and listening to a tour guide with a flag to make sure her herd doesn't lose their way :P Friends visiting me in Amsterdam would be appealed I never saw the Anne Frank House.

It's just not really a fun thing to do in your own town. And to be fair most tourist attractions are hugely overrated.

The touristy areas of the world are de facto international property now. Because of rising income across the globe anyone that wants to can “travel”; all that jump in traffic the touristy areas were just not designed to handle.

IMHO the decline started with the jetliner. Before then, who travelled by cruise ship and who by steerage was clearly delineated and a natural cap on overwhelming numbers of tourists.

Salisbury cathedral houses the Magna Carta, and that is why tourists go there. Literally nobody cares about the height of its spire.

The “tallest church” explanation is kind of like of someone saying they buy playboy magazine for the articles. It’s transparently false to the point of absurdity.

> He quoted the height of it to quite a degree of accuracy as proof of his touristic intentions

Doesn't really prove anything. Could just be a really strange individual who memorises statistics. To 3 significant figures doe.

Bellingcat identified their real names and the fact that they worked for the GRU... it's not remotely in question whether they were there assassinate Skripal. One of the benefits of a hopelessly corrupt Russian state is that just about every government database is available for sale.

https://www.bellingcat.com/news/uk-and-europe/2018/09/26/skr...

It's possible they were just chemistry hobbyists & afficionados of obscure nerve toxins, and the rest was just an unfortunate accident.

It's 123m and that's an easy number to remember. (404ft).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tallest_church_buildin...

There's a rounding error there. I recall the interview and I'm pretty sure the height was quoted to 1 decimal place which is pretty mad.

I doubt that very much, could you provide a reference? I also remembered the height of 123m from the original poisoning reports, because it is rather a memorable number.

They said 123m in the interview, at least in the translation. But the point of the released interview was not to refute that they worked for the GRU. It was obvious to everybody. The point of that interview was to spite the West, by making it even more obvious that they were not tourists. Russia does this a lot, they don't even pretend that the stuff they put out is true. It's basically adding insult to injury.

I'm Russian, travelled to UK once, didn't get asked that. Sorry if that was a joke and I ruined it...

A joke that bad can't be ruined any further.