Is the UK Government Playing Russian Roulette?

I've been following the reports of the poisoning of two Russian nationals in Salisbury closely, as I suspect many others have. There seems to me to be some genuinely puzzling contradictions which need to be answered, but no-one from Government is answering them. The media seems focused on the Foreign Sec doing his war dance and shaking sticks at Russia and the fact that Jeremy Corbyn and a few others have requested evidence before making accusations against another nation (how very dare he?!)

Meanwhile, Craig Murray, a former British Ambassador to Uzbekistan (who was sacked for criticising Uzbekistan's human rights record, and for objecting to MI6's use of intelligence from the Uzbek torture chambers), has constantly maintained that the FCO officials he still has contacts with had told him there is no evidence that, whatever the substance is, it originated from Russia.

In a post on his own blog dated 20th March 2018, Craig said,

"I cannot in fact conceive of a more outlandish conspiracy theory than that the Russian government secretly manufactured and stockpiled novichoks, hidden from the OPCW, and secretly trained assassins, only to blow the whole operation on a retired spy they let out of jail ages ago."

The media has kept us updated with the "fact" that the nerve agent used was "of Russian origin", despite the destruction of the last of Russia’s stockpiles of chemical weapons being recorded in November 2017.

"Gen Ahmet Üzümcü, the director general of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), which works closely with the UN, was fulsome in his praise. “This is a major achievement,” he said. The 192-member body had seemingly overseen and verified the destruction of Russia’s entire stock of chemical weapons, all 39,967 metric tons." 

Earlier today, Rob Merrick, the Deputy Political Editor of the Independent, wrote in his article,

"In fact, as the Porton Down chief executive acknowledged on Tuesday, the centre had been unable to determine if the novichok had been produced in Russia." 

We are also told by various sources, including Gary Aitkenhead, the current head of the Porton Down lab, that it is not possible to determine where a batch of novichok is made, and that it is a nerve agent to which there is no known antidote...

"Speaking to Sky News, Aitkenhead said it was not possible for scientists alone to say precisely where the novichok had been created."  ... 

"Aitkenhead said: “We were able to identify it as novichok, to identify it was a military-grade nerve agent. We have not verified the precise source,"  ... 

"He also said there was no known antidote to novichok but said Porton Down had advised Salisbury district hospital on how to treat the Skripals."

That the British Police Sergeant who was admitted to hospital affected by it has now recovered and been released from hospital, that Yulia Skripal is making a good recovery in hospital and is able to speak, yet her father is still incapacitated by the same substance seems puzzling: why would 2 out of 3 people affected by the same substance recover so quickly, yet the 3rd remain so ill?

To raise further questions, today the Russian Embassy has released the following press statement on their website:

"Embassy press officer answers question on Skripal case 

Question: The head of the Porton Down military laboratory, Gary Aitkenhead, has told Sky News that there is no antidote to negate the effects of the substance he calls “Novichok”. On the other hand, it is reported that Yulia Skripal who, according to British official statements, was poisoned by that substance, is recovering. Is there an inconsistency here?

Answer: Indeed, we note discrepancies between various British statements. That’s why we have sought clarifications from the Foreign Office, together with samples of the substance used, something that has been refused. Our questions on treatment methods used by the medics remain unanswered. In other words, we have no opportunity to directly verify whether the British have correctly identified the substance, nor whether they are correctly treating our nationals. Among other things, it remains unclear why Sgt Bailey has recovered, Yulia Skripal is recovering (if one is to believe it) while Sergei Skripal remains unconscious.

By the way, in the same interview Mr Aitkenhead said that Porton Down experts had consulted the medics on the course of treatment. We would like to know what recommendations they gave.

We have sent another diplomatic note to the Foreign Office on this matter."

So, what is the truth? Is a deadly nerve agent responsible for the hospitalisation of these people? If it is, is there an antidote, and if so why doesn't the head of the Porton Down lab know about it? If it's not a nerve agent, then what is it? Who administered it and why? And why is the UK government so insistent it is all down to the Russians when the evidence does not yet appear to support that claim?

Meanwhile, the Labour Party has 

"... called on the prime minister to launch an investigation into whether Mr Johnson broke the ministerial code."

"Shadow Cabinet Office minister, Jon Trickett, said Mr Johnson had "serious questions to answer"."

Like many others, I'm keenly interested in answers to those questions!