For more and more Americans, the other side isn’t merely misguided in the extreme. It’s
evil in the absolute, and virtue is measured by the starkness with which that evil is labeled
and reviled. There are emotional satisfactions to this. There is also a terrible price.
Liars always become very touchy when confronted with their falsehoods. They will inevitably attack there accusers with more
lies to make them look bad. This is a fundamental reflex all liars respond to critics with. "I'm not lying, you are!" Those who
want to believe the real liar love this response, because it gives them an excuse not to investigate if the accuser may be right.
Then they can just turn on the accuser and blame them for false accusation – without the slightest proof, of course.
The capacity to disseminate misinformation, in order to paint the
opposition in wildly negative light, suppressing any rebuttal is not standard tactic of US MSM
and that allows sharp polarization of the electorate.
Over the past decade in
particular, the internet and social media have changed the game. They speed people to like-minded
warriors and give them the impression of broader company or sturdier validation than really exist.
The fervor of those in the anti-vaccine movement exemplifies this.
Admirers of a responsible
politician or righteous noca can cause coalesce quickly (like was the case during Sanders run), but
the same is true for the opposite side. Web
sites with forums of likeminded people create echo camera effect, “create a whole new
permission structure, a sense of social affirmation for what was once unthinkable...” If
words can inspire, then they can also incite or debase .
That’s true whether those words are spoken from the right or from the
left, and the monetization of partisan combat spans the ideological spectrum.
As the result, people are surrendering
restraint and a socially important thing called tact. And this "verbal extremism" guarantees to
widen the divisions between us
Discrediting the opponent as a favorite tactic of neoliberals
Whataboutism is a nickname MSM have given that dirty the tactic of discrediting the
opponent, when the opponent questions the USA objectivity because it commited similar or worse
crimes in the past. Which, of course, if nor deprive, but greatly diminish the USA status as an
objective judge.
Neoliberal channels are ready to come up with numerous conspiracy theories, painting the
opponent, especially Russia, as ruthless canning opportunists, devoid of any moral principles. But
unfortunately this is true about the USA too.
But the key idea of this cynical post-modern media strategy, perfected by neoliberal political technologists
is to block/suppress/dilute all opposing views in the "neoliberal noise" (like air dominance in war
the US MSM practice full airwave dominance). That's why Putin interview is edited in such a wya as
to hide any substantial criticism of the US policy. And not only Putin. This is a universal
strategy of deciet. Its
goal of the US MSM is to confuse what’s true with what’s not, to the point that the truth vanishes. What it
undeniable is that over the past year neoliberals created an artificial reality that matches or
exceed the one that existed in the USSR. Along with demonization Russia they also greatly succeeded
in demonization of Trump.
This color revolution that Clinton and their supporters in several intelligence agencies launched
against Trump in election would be painfully familar to one who observed , for example, Uninian
Orange revolution. Templates are identical. just the goals are different (in case of Orange
revolution delegitimization of elections to the extent that new elections were called; in case of
anti-Trump color revolution the appointment of the Special Prosecutor (aka Grand Inqusitor)
was the goal.
This is what must be done by free thinkers if they are to counter and reverse the collectivist
nightmare of neoliberalism.
Try to avoid false trick of "shaming" under some artificial labels like communist or
racist: Social justice relies on shaming tactics, usually by slandering
an opponent with a label that does not really apply to him, in order to control his arguments and
behavior. If you don’t care about being called a bigot, a racist, a sexist, a misogynist, a homophobe,
etc., then there is not really much that they can do to you.
Do not self-censor: This does not mean you should go out of your way to be antagonistic
or act like an ass, but the thought police have power only if you give power to them. Say what you
want to say when you want to say it, and do it with a smile. Let the PC police froth and scream until
they have an aneurism. neoliberals are generally weaklings. They avoid physical confrontation like
they avoid logic, so why fear them?
Demand facts to back claims: neoliberals tend to argue on the basis of opinion
rather than fact. Present facts to counter their claims, and demand facts and evidence in return.
Opinions are irrelevant if the person is not willing to present supporting facts when asked.
Do not play the game of "unconscious bias": If social justice cultists can't
counter your position with facts or logic, they will invariably turn to the old standby that you
are limited in your insight because you have not lived in the shoes of a - (insert victim group here).
I agree. In fact, I would point out that this reality of limited perception also applies to
THEM as well. They have not lived in my shoes, therefore they are in no position to claim I
enjoy "privilege" while they do not. This is why facts and evidence are so important, and why
anecdotal evidence and personal feelings are irrelevant where cultural Marxism is concerned.
Let neoliberals know their fears and feelings do not matter: No one is entitled
to have their feelings addressed by others. And, a person’s fears are ultimately unimportant. Whether
the issue is the nonexistent “rape culture” or the contempt neoliberals feel over private gun ownership,
their irrational fears are not our concern. Why should any individual relinquish his liberties in
the name of placating frightened nobodies?
Demand that banksters respect your inherent individual rights: Banksters message is that there is no such thing as inherent rights or liberties and that all rights
are arbitrary and subject to the whims of the group or the state. This is false.
I have
written extensively in the past on inherent rights, inborn psychological contents and natural
law, referencing diverse luminaries, scientists and thinkers, including Thomas Aquinas, Carl Gustave
Jung, Steven Pinker, etc., and I welcome readers to study my many articles on individualism.
Freedom is an inborn conception with universally understood aspects. Period. No group or collective
is more important than individual liberty. No artificial society has preeminence over the individuals
within that society. As long as a person is not directly impeding the life, liberty, prosperity and
privacy of another person, he should be left alone.
Maintain your rights as long as they do not hurt other people: PC cultists will invariably
argue that every person, whether he knows it or not, is indirectly harming others with his attitude,
his beliefs, his refusal to associate, even his very breathing. "We live in a society", they
say, "and everything we do affects everyone else...". Don’t take such accusations seriously;
these people do not understand how freedom works.
Say, for instance, hypothetically, that I refuse to bake a gay wedding cake for a couple and I
am accused of violating their rights in the name of preserving my own. I would immediately point
out that no one is entitled to a gay wedding cake, baked by me or anyone else and I have every right
to choose my associations based on whatever criteria I see fit. Now, a corrupt government entity
may claim I do not have that right. But the fact is I do, and no one — not even government — can
force me to bake a cake if I don’t want to. Also, I would point out that the gay couple in question
has every right in a free society to bake their OWN damn cake or open their own cake shop to compete
with mine. This is how freedom works. It is not based on collective entitlement; it is based on personal
responsibility.
Refuse to deny the scientific fact of biological gender: Gender is first and
foremost a genetic imperative. Society only partially determine gender roles; nature does the
most. A man who chops
up his body and takes hormone pills to look like a woman is not and will never be a woman. A woman
who tapes down her breasts and gets a short haircut will never be a man. There is no such thing as
“transgendered” people. No amount of social justice or wishful thinking will ever allow them to reverse
their genetic proclivities. Their psychological and sexual leanings do not change their inborn biological
reality.
By extension, we should refuse to play along with this nonsense. I will never refer to a man in
a wig and dress as a “woman.” I will never refer to a woman with identity issues as “transgendered.”
They are what nature made them, and we should not police our pronouns just to falsely reassure them
that they can deny nature.
Deny both neoliberal idea of "greed is good" and the illusion of Utopian equality:
"Greed is good" proved to be an effective instrument of destruction of the USA society in just 35
years. Now we have "Dis-united States of America." Not the "United States of America." Like
traffic light regulation perform a vital fuinction and removing vital regulations inflict a heavy
price of the society. Opposite is also true: too much regulations also inflict a price.
There is no such thing as pure social equality. It was never achieved in societies that try it,
such as early the USSR. Society is not a homogeneous entity, it is an abstraction built
around a group of unique individuals. Individuals can be naturally gifted, or naturally
challenged. But there will always be some people who are more apt towards success than
others and the success of the society depends of promoting such people to more important
roles. Financial remuneration actually can pray here secondary role, but different in status is
unavoidable. Primates-related concept of 'alpha male" is a precursor to social differentiation in
human societies.
I have no problem whatsoever with the idea of equality of opportunity, which is exactly what we
have in this country (except in the world of elitist finance which is purely driven by nepotism).
I do have a problem with the lie of universal equality through engineered means.
Standards of success should not be lowered in order to accommodate the least skilled people to
facilitate artificial parity. For example, I constantly hear the argument that more people
with victim group status should be given greater representation in positions of influence and regard
within our culture, from science and engineering, to media, to business CEO's, to politics, etc.
The key word here is "given", rather than "earned". There is nothing wrong with one group of
people excelling in a field more than another group, and there is nothing wrong with inequality when
it comes to individual achievement. We must begin refusing to reward people for mediocrity
and punishing success simply because the winners are not part of a designated victim group.
If you are a man, embrace your role: I am a man and cannot claim to know what
specific solutions women should take to counter cultural Marxism. I would love to read an article
written on the subject by a woman in the Liberty Movement. I will say that men in particular
have a considerable task ahead in terms of their personal endeavors if they hope to repair the destruction
of social justice.
For thousands of years, men have been the primary industrial force behind human progress. Today,
they are relegated to cubicles and customer service, to video games and Web fantasies, to drug addictions
and a lack of responsibility. If we have any chance of undoing the damage of cultural Marxism, modern
men must take on their original roles as producers, inventors, entrepreneurs, protectors, builders
and warriors once again. They should do this for their own benefit, and not for the validation of
others.
You don’t have to prove to anyone you do "manly things", just go out and do them. Most importantly,
become dangerous. Men are meant to be dangerous beings. That does not mean we are meant to be indiscriminately
violent (just as women aren’t meant to be indiscriminately violent), but we are supposed to be threatening
to those who would threaten us. Modern society has NOT removed the need for masculinity and I believe
people will begin realizing this the more our culture sinks into economic despair. Train in martial
arts, learn tactical firearms handling, go hunting and don’t take lip from people. In my opinion,
every man should know how to kill things, even if he never plans on using those abilities.
Resist neoliberal brainwashing of your children: It’s simple, if you don’t want your kids propagandized,
if you truly want them to be free from collectivist conditioning, then you will make the sacrifice
and extract them from public schooling. With the introduction of Common Core into U.S. schools in
particular, there is no other recourse but home schooling to prevent the brainwashing of cultural
Marxism. If you do not do this, you are relying on the hope that your children will escape with their
critical thinking abilities intact. Some do, and some don’t. Others turn into mindless social justice
zombies. You can give them an advantage by removing them from a poisonous environment, and that is
what matters.
The insane lie that neoliberals seem to have conned themselves and others into believing is that
their “activism” is somehow anti-establishment. In fact, social justice is constantly coddled
and supported by the establishment.
From politicians to judges to media pundits to the blogosphere, the overwhelming majority of
people in positions of traditional power (even in supposedly conservative circles) have been more
than happy to become the enforcers of the neoliberal agenda (including "fake democratization"
agenda). There is no establishment for the army of enforces of political correctness to
fight; the establishment bias works vastly more in favor of their ideology than any other. Neoliberals ARE the establishment.
Viktoria Skripal spoke to her cousin Julia by phone twice in July: the first time on the
4th, when the two argued and Julia blamed Viktoria for the publicity over the poisoning; the
second time towards the end of the month, when Julia apologised to Viktoria after getting
Internet access and reading what had been reported in the media. In one of these phone calls,
Julia revealed her father was still using a breathing tube.
"... The area of contest is now the rest of the world. America will try to convince the rest of the world to join its sanctions against Russia. Russia will try to convince them not to. ..."
Hello,
All of this revolves around the imminent fact that the "honest" British spooks are about to
get exposed when Trump declassifies the hoax documents about Russian interference (lol) in
elections.
I don't understand why Russian economists believe they have to belong to the corrupt,
bankrupt us monopoly dollar system? stop all exports of gas, oil to the europe cowards, and
any other country that continues to steal the wealth of the Russian resources from its
people. A very sick bunch in DC and London.
Turn all of these resources inward to allow the Russian people to prosper, with energy
infrastructure, farming techniques with heated greenhouses, etc... hey you have a lot of real
farmers in Africa that could spawn new agricultural developments in the east Russian
territory, about 15,000 farmers, unbelievable opportunity and resources for Russia to help
people from a racially, evil to the core, government in Africa. Boycott all of Africa. There
are real people getting killed there, no fake news .
This is exactly how the West operates ,especially the US and UK. There you have it , right
out in open for everyone to see.They have been doing this for a long time , especially since
the CIA , part of the shadow government , took control of the Western world. Now it is no
longer covert ,it is right in our face. And why they had JFK assassinated ,because he saw
what he was up against . Kennedy wanted to smash these covert and corrupted organizations
into pieces.
Colluding with West for so many years to put down smaller countries is certainly not a
quality of an angelic government and the country as Russia has been sometimes painted. Why do
we forget tens of millions of Russians abused just across Russian borders, never mentioned by
the government that seems only to care about wellbeing of the criminal oligarchs? Why do we
forget the collusion against Serbian people that lasted for approximately 20 years and led to
the destruction of that small nation? Why do we forget Russian support to numerous UN (
Western) sanctions against many nations around the world? Why do we forget betrayal of Cuba
in such devious way by Mr. Putin? Why such contempt towards own nation and its heroes by
honouring a Nazi-like figure like Netanyahu on the Victory Parade? Why strangulation of N.
Korea? Why ,why.. I actually tend to believe that God is finally acting upon many curses cast
on Russian government and is using the US as his chosen tool. Quite a justice.
I was excoriated and accused of being a liar on RI over the weekend because I quoted this
article, originally published in Pravda. The point was made by the one who did this that no
Russian or Russian sympathizer (such as the author of this article would want additional
sanctions on Russia.
The comparison was that a small amounts of certain types of medicine can be beneficial,
but in large doses can be fatal. The gist of the comment was that a small amount of sanctions
can be good to bring more independence to the Russian economy, but additional sanctions would
be harmful.
Well, now RI itself publishes the article from the idiot Hinchey in asking for more and
more sanctions because of how wonderful they will be for Russia.
The area of contest is now the rest of the world. America will try to convince the
rest of the world to join its sanctions against Russia. Russia will try to convince them not
to.
This is an interesting analysis shedding some light on how the US intelligence services have gone rogue...
Notable quotes:
"... Most recently, British "special services," which are a sort of Mini-Me to the to the Dr. Evil that is the US intelligence apparatus, saw it fit to interfere with one of their own spies, Sergei Skripal, a double agent whom they sprung from a Russian jail in a spy swap. They poisoned him using an exotic chemical and then tried to pin the blame on Russia based on no evidence. ..."
"... the Americans are doing their best to break the unwritten rule against dragging spies through the courts, but their best is nowhere near good enough. ..."
"... That said, there is no reason to believe that the Russian spies couldn't have hacked into the DNC mail server. It was probably running Microsoft Windows, and that operating system has more holes in it than a building in downtown Raqqa, Syria after the Americans got done bombing that city to rubble, lots of civilians included. When questioned about this alleged hacking by Fox News, Putin (who had worked as a spy in his previous career) had trouble keeping a straight face and clearly enjoyed the moment. ..."
"... He pointed out that the hacked/leaked emails showed a clear pattern of wrongdoing: DNC officials conspired to steal the electoral victory in the Democratic Primary from Bernie Sanders, and after this information had been leaked they were forced to resign. If the Russian hack did happen, then it was the Russians working to save American democracy from itself. So, where's the gratitude? Where's the love? Oh, and why are the DNC perps not in jail? ..."
"... The logic of US officials may be hard to follow, but only if we adhere to the traditional definitions of espionage and counterespionage -- "intelligence" in US parlance -- which is to provide validated information for the purpose of making informed decisions on best ways of defending the country. But it all makes perfect sense if we disabuse ourselves of such quaint notions and accept the reality of what we can actually observe: the purpose of US "intelligence" is not to come up with or to work with facts but to simply "make shit up." ..."
"... The objective of US intelligence is to suck all remaining wealth out of the US and its allies and pocket as much of it as possible while pretending to defend it from phantom aggressors by squandering nonexistent (borrowed) financial resources on ineffective and overpriced military operations and weapons systems. Where the aggressors are not phantom, they are specially organized for the purpose of having someone to fight: "moderate" terrorists and so on. ..."
"... "What sort of idiot are you to ask me such a stupid question? Of course they are lying! They were caught lying more than once, and therefore they can never be trusted again. In order to claim that they are not currently lying, you have to determine when it was that they stopped lying, and that they haven't lied since. And that, based on the information that is available, is an impossible task." ..."
"... "The US intelligence agencies made an outrageous claim: that I colluded with Russia to rig the outcome of the 2016 presidential election. The burden of proof is on them. They are yet to prove their case in a court of law, which is the only place where the matter can legitimately be settled, if it can be settled at all. Until that happens, we must treat their claim as conspiracy theory, not as fact." ..."
"... But no such reality-based, down-to-earth dialogue seems possible. All that we hear are fake answers to fake questions, and the outcome is a series of faulty decisions. Based on fake intelligence, the US has spent almost all of this century embroiled in very expensive and ultimately futile conflicts. ..."
"... Thanks to their efforts, Iran, Iraq and Syria have now formed a continuous crescent of religiously and geopolitically aligned states friendly toward Russia while in Afghanistan the Taliban is resurgent and battling ISIS -- an organization that came together thanks to American efforts in Iraq and Syria. ..."
"... Another hypothesis, and a far more plausible one, is that the US intelligence community has been doing a wonderful job of bankrupting the country and driving it toward financial, economic and political collapse by forcing it to engage in an endless series of expensive and futile conflicts -- the largest single continuous act of grand larceny the world has ever known. How that can possibly be an intelligent thing to do to your own country, for any conceivable definition of "intelligence," I will leave for you to work out for yourself. While you are at it, you might also want to come up with an improved definition of "treason": something better than "a skeptical attitude toward preposterous, unproven claims made by those known to be perpetual liars. ..."
In today's United States, the term "espionage" doesn't get too much
use outside of some specific contexts. There is still sporadic talk of industrial espionage,
but with regard to Americans' own efforts to understand the world beyond their borders, they
prefer the term "intelligence." This may be an intelligent choice, or not, depending on how you
look at things.
First of all, US "intelligence" is only vaguely related to the game of espionage as it has
been traditionally played, and as it is still being played by countries such as Russia and
China. Espionage involves collecting and validating strategically vital information and
conveying it to just the pertinent decision-makers on your side while keeping the fact that you
are collecting and validating it hidden from everyone else.
In eras past, a spy, if discovered, would try to bite down on a cyanide capsule; these days
torture is considered ungentlemanly, and spies that get caught patiently wait to be exchanged
in a spy swap. An unwritten, commonsense rule about spy swaps is that they are done quietly and
that those released are never interfered with again because doing so would complicate
negotiating future spy swaps.
In recent years, the US intelligence agencies have decided that torturing prisoners is a
good idea, but they have mostly been torturing innocent bystanders, not professional spies,
sometimes forcing them to invent things, such as "Al Qaeda." There was no such thing before US
intelligence popularized it as a brand among Islamic terrorists.
Most recently, British "special services," which are a sort of Mini-Me to the to the Dr.
Evil that is the US intelligence apparatus, saw it fit to interfere with one of their own
spies, Sergei Skripal, a double agent whom they sprung from a Russian jail in a spy swap. They
poisoned him using an exotic chemical and then tried to pin the blame on Russia based on no
evidence.
There are unlikely to be any more British spy swaps with Russia, and British spies working
in Russia should probably be issued good old-fashioned cyanide capsules (since that supposedly
super-powerful Novichok stuff the British keep at their "secret" lab in Porton Down doesn't
work right and is only fatal 20% of the time).
There is another unwritten, commonsense rule about spying in general: whatever happens, it
needs to be kept out of the courts, because the discovery process of any trial would force the
prosecution to divulge sources and methods, making them part of the public record. An
alternative is to hold secret tribunals, but since these cannot be independently verified to be
following due process and rules of evidence, they don't add much value.
A different standard applies to traitors; here, sending them through the courts is
acceptable and serves a high moral purpose, since here the source is the person on trial and
the method -- treason -- can be divulged without harm. But this logic does not apply to proper,
professional spies who are simply doing their jobs, even if they turn out to be double agents.
In fact, when counterintelligence discovers a spy, the professional thing to do is to try to
recruit him as a double agent or, failing that, to try to use the spy as a channel for
injecting disinformation.
Americans have been doing their best to break this rule. Recently, special counsel Robert
Mueller indicted a dozen Russian operatives working in Russia for hacking into the DNC mail
server and sending the emails to Wikileaks. Meanwhile, said server is nowhere to be found (it's
been misplaced) while the time stamps on the files that were published on Wikileaks show that
they were obtained by copying to a thumb drive rather than sending them over the internet.
Thus, this was a leak, not a hack, and couldn't have been done by anyone working remotely from
Russia.
Furthermore, it is an exercise in futility for a US official to indict Russian citizens in
Russia. They will never stand trial in a US court because of the following clause in the
Russian Constitution: "61.1 A citizen of the Russian Federation may not be deported out of
Russia or extradited to another state."
Mueller may summon a panel of constitutional scholars to interpret this sentence, or he can
just read it and weep. Yes, the Americans are doing their best to break the unwritten rule
against dragging spies through the courts, but their best is nowhere near good enough.
That said, there is no reason to believe that the Russian spies couldn't have hacked
into the DNC mail server. It was probably running Microsoft Windows, and that operating system
has more holes in it than a building in downtown Raqqa, Syria after the Americans got done
bombing that city to rubble, lots of civilians included. When questioned about this alleged
hacking by Fox News, Putin (who had worked as a spy in his previous career) had trouble keeping
a straight face and clearly enjoyed the moment.
He pointed out that the hacked/leaked emails showed a clear pattern of wrongdoing: DNC
officials conspired to steal the electoral victory in the Democratic Primary from Bernie
Sanders, and after this information had been leaked they were forced to resign. If the Russian
hack did happen, then it was the Russians working to save American democracy from itself. So,
where's the gratitude? Where's the love? Oh, and why are the DNC perps not in jail?
Since there exists an agreement between the US and Russia to cooperate on criminal
investigations, Putin offered to question the spies indicted by Mueller. He even offered to
have Mueller sit in on the proceedings. But in return he wanted to question US officials who
may have aided and abetted a convicted felon by the name of William Browder, who is due to
begin serving a nine-year sentence in Russia any time now and who, by the way, donated copious
amounts of his ill-gotten money to the Hillary Clinton election campaign.
In response, the US Senate passed a resolution to forbid Russians from questioning US
officials. And instead of issuing a valid request to have the twelve Russian spies interviewed,
at least one US official made the startlingly inane request to have them come to the US
instead. Again, which part of 61.1 don't they understand?
The logic of US officials may be hard to follow, but only if we adhere to the
traditional definitions of espionage and counterespionage -- "intelligence" in US parlance --
which is to provide validated information for the purpose of making informed decisions on best
ways of defending the country. But it all makes perfect sense if we disabuse ourselves of such
quaint notions and accept the reality of what we can actually observe: the purpose of US
"intelligence" is not to come up with or to work with facts but to simply "make shit
up."
The "intelligence" the US intelligence agencies provide can be anything but; in fact, the
stupider it is the better, because its purpose is allow unintelligent people to make
unintelligent decisions. In fact, they consider facts harmful -- be they about Syrian chemical
weapons, or conspiring to steal the primary from Bernie Sanders, or Iraqi weapons of mass
destruction, or the whereabouts of Osama Bin Laden -- because facts require accuracy and rigor
while they prefer to dwell in the realm of pure fantasy and whimsy. In this, their actual
objective is easily discernible.
The objective of US intelligence is to suck all remaining wealth out of the US and its
allies and pocket as much of it as possible while pretending to defend it from phantom
aggressors by squandering nonexistent (borrowed) financial resources on ineffective and
overpriced military operations and weapons systems. Where the aggressors are not phantom, they
are specially organized for the purpose of having someone to fight: "moderate" terrorists and
so on.
One major advancement in their state of the art has been in moving from real false flag
operations, à la 9/11, to fake false flag operations, à la fake East Gouta
chemical attack in Syria (since fully discredited). The Russian election meddling story is
perhaps the final step in this evolution: no New York skyscrapers or Syrian children were
harmed in the process of concocting this fake narrative, and it can be kept alive seemingly
forever purely through the furious effort of numerous flapping lips. It is now a pure
confidence scam. If you are less then impressed with their invented narratives, then you are a
conspiracy theorist or, in the latest revision, a traitor.
Trump was recently questioned as to whether he trusted US intelligence. He waffled. A
light-hearted answer would have been:
"What sort of idiot are you to ask me such a stupid question? Of course they are lying! They
were caught lying more than once, and therefore they can never be trusted again. In order to
claim that they are not currently lying, you have to determine when it was that they stopped
lying, and that they haven't lied since. And that, based on the information that is available,
is an impossible task."
A more serious, matter-of-fact answer would have been:
"The US intelligence agencies made an outrageous claim: that I colluded with Russia to rig
the outcome of the 2016 presidential election. The burden of proof is on them. They are yet to
prove their case in a court of law, which is the only place where the matter can legitimately
be settled, if it can be settled at all. Until that happens, we must treat their claim as
conspiracy theory, not as fact."
And a hardcore, deadpan answer would have been:
"The US intelligence services swore an oath to uphold the US Constitution, according to
which I am their Commander in Chief. They report to me, not I to them. They must be loyal to
me, not I to them. If they are disloyal to me, then that is sufficient reason for their
dismissal."
But no such reality-based, down-to-earth dialogue seems possible. All that we hear are fake
answers to fake questions, and the outcome is a series of faulty decisions. Based on fake
intelligence, the US has spent almost all of this century embroiled in very expensive and
ultimately futile conflicts.
Thanks to their efforts, Iran, Iraq and Syria have now formed a continuous crescent of
religiously and geopolitically aligned states friendly toward Russia while in Afghanistan the
Taliban is resurgent and battling ISIS -- an organization that came together thanks to American
efforts in Iraq and Syria.
The total cost of wars so far this century for the US is reported to be $4,575,610,429,593.
Divided by the 138,313,155 Americans who file tax returns (whether they actually pay any tax is
too subtle a question), it works out to just over $33,000 per taxpayer. If you pay taxes in the
US, that's your bill so far for the various US intelligence "oopsies."
The 16 US intelligence agencies have a combined budget of $66.8 billion, and that seems like
a lot until you realize how supremely efficient they are: their "mistakes" have cost the
country close to 70 times their budget. At a staffing level of over 200,000 employees, each of
them has cost the US taxpayer close to $23 million, on average. That number is totally out of
the ballpark! The energy sector has the highest earnings per employee, at around $1.8 million
per. Valero Energy stands out at $7.6 million per. At $23 million per, the US intelligence
community has been doing three times better than Valero. Hats off! This makes the US
intelligence community by far the best, most efficient collapse driver imaginable.
There are two possible hypotheses for why this is so.
First, we might venture to guess that these 200,000 people are grossly incompetent and that
the fiascos they precipitate are accidental. But it is hard to imagine a situation where
grossly incompetent people nevertheless manage to funnel $23 million apiece, on average, toward
an assortment of futile undertakings of their choosing. It is even harder to imagine that such
incompetents would be allowed to blunder along decade after decade without being called out for
their mistakes.
Another hypothesis, and a far more plausible one, is that the US intelligence community has
been doing a wonderful job of bankrupting the country and driving it toward financial, economic
and political collapse by forcing it to engage in an endless series of expensive and futile
conflicts -- the largest single continuous act of grand larceny the world has ever known. How
that can possibly be an intelligent thing to do to your own country, for any conceivable
definition of "intelligence," I will leave for you to work out for yourself. While you are at
it, you might also want to come up with an improved definition of "treason": something better
than "a skeptical attitude toward preposterous, unproven claims made by those known to be
perpetual liars."
It could be the Trump was already deposed as a President by Pompeo.
I never understood appointment of Haley and appointment of Bolton if we assume that Trump is not a neocon and does not want to
continue previous administration policies. Haley is kind of Sikh variant of
Samantha
Power. Bolton is probably as bad as Wolfowitz. Pompeo also can be viewed as Hillary 2.0.
Notable quotes:
"... In addition, the US has delivered an ultimatum, saying that if Russia does not give assurances within 90 days that it will no longer use chemical weapons and allow international inspectors to inspect its production facilities, further sanctions will be implemented. But Russia denies it used chemical weapons. Unlike the US, it destroyed its chemical weapons stockpile in accordance with international treaties. ..."
"... The legislation gave a 60-day window to begin implementation of sanctions after the Trump administration determined that the now-British citizen Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia were poisoned by a strain of the Novichok nerve-agent. The US came to that conclusion following an initial determination by the British government. ..."
"... However, the US administration missed the deadline by more than a month. That prompted Rep. Ed Royce, R-Calif., chairman of the House Foreign Relations Committee, to write a letter to Trump some two weeks ago slamming the president for ignoring the deadline. ..."
"... Strangely, a government research facility at Porton Down in Amesbury, not far from Salisbury where the alleged March poisoning took place, examined the strain of Novichok. Porton Down lab does work for British Defense Science and Technology Laboratory, run by the Ministry of Defense, and the Public Health England. ..."
"... All of this makes makes the issue as to why Britain, and even the US, never wanted to share samples taken from the poisoning of the Skripals with Moscow more concerning. Yet, they all went ahead in lock-step to condemn Moscow for the poisoning, without any evidence, suggesting a more sinister reason for lobbying increased sanctions against Russia with the goal of further isolating the country. ..."
"... It reflects the need especially by the US to have a demon in an effort to justify its defense spending to bolster NATO up to the border of the Russian Federation in the form of a new containment policy that launched the Cold War in the first place. ..."
"... With even further sanctions against Russia in the recently passed Defense Department Authorization Bill about to go into effect, it is becoming apparent that the allegations against Russia are politically-motivated, false flag allegations to be used as an excuse for a greater geostrategic reason -- to contain Russia just as the Trump administration is increasingly finding its US-led unilateral world order being challenged more than ever. ..."
"... Trump talks about better relations with Russia, but the actions of his own administration in demonizing Moscow dictate otherwise. ..."
Forget about running the Empire or the American state. Trump isn't even in control of his team US President Donald Trump is not in
control of his own administration, as evidenced by the latest round of sanctions imposed against Russia for the alleged involvement
in the poisoning of the Skripals in the UK in March.
The sanctions came the same day that US Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky.,
announced
on a trip to Moscow that he had handed over a letter to Russian President Vladimir Putin from Trump calling for better relations
between the two countries. For that reason, the timing appears to be suspect, suggesting strongly that Trump has his own foreign
policy while the Trump administration, comprised mainly of bureaucrats referred to as the Deep State, have their own. Right now,
they appear to be in control, not President Trump, over his own administration, and it is having the adverse effect of further alienating
Washington and Moscow.
The neocons, led by National Security Advisor John Bolton, along with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and his United Nations ambassador
Nikki Haley, comprise the Trump " war cabinet " ostensibly aimed at directing a harder line toward Syria, North Korea, Iran
but also Russia. Bolton, in particular, has been outspoken in calling for regime change in some of these countries. Trump not so
much so. In fact, he has said just the opposite. Nevertheless, their anti-Russian flair in Washington has breathed new life into
the neocons who, along with the Democrats, Deep State and much of the mainstream media, have pushed the false narrative of collusion
between Russia and Trump.
This persistent anti-Russian rant and repeated sanctions which have been imposed have had the effect of leading to further threats
of sanctions for questionable reasons, raising the potential prospect of suspension of diplomatic ties.
Even at the height of the Cold War, relations between the US and Russia never reached such low depths as they have now. The latest
sanctions affect primarily dual-use technologies which are civilian products with potential military applications. They include gas
turbine engines, electronics and integrated circuits which will now be denied. Previous sanctions going back to the Obama administration,
however, already imposed bans on many of these dual-use technologies.
In addition, the US has delivered an ultimatum, saying that if Russia does not give assurances within 90 days that it will
no longer use chemical weapons and allow international inspectors to inspect its production facilities, further sanctions will be
implemented. But Russia denies it used chemical weapons. Unlike the US, it
destroyed its chemical weapons stockpile in accordance with international treaties.
Implementation of the sanctions stem from provisions of the Chemical and Biological Weapons Control and Warfare Elimination
Act of 1991.
The legislation gave a 60-day window to begin implementation of sanctions after the Trump administration determined that the
now-British citizen Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia were poisoned by a strain of the Novichok nerve-agent. The US came to that
conclusion following an initial determination by the British government.
However, the US administration missed the deadline by more than a month. That prompted Rep. Ed Royce, R-Calif., chairman of
the House Foreign Relations Committee, to write a
letter to Trump some two weeks ago slamming the president for ignoring the deadline.
Curiously, the British government hasn't implemented similar sanctions, although the US has. It may reflect the continued uncertainty
among some British politicians and experts over the origin of the Novichok and concern with Britain's trade dependency on Russia.
But since the Americans opted to implement sanctions due to existing legislation, there was apparently no objection from London even
though it initially implemented sanctions by kicking out Russian diplomats from the country.
Moscow, however, vehemently denied that it was involved in the poisoning of Skripal and his daughter. Novichok was created by
Russian scientists during the Cold War but never used on the battlefield. Russian officials asked Britain for evidence of Russian
involvement and called for a joint investigation to be conducted by the Kremlin and British governments.
The British government repeatedly turned down the offer, as did other Western members of the United Nations Security Council,
the US and France, when Moscow sought such a joint investigation.
The US claimed that the information linking the poison to Russia was " classified ."
Strangely, a government research
facility at Porton Down in Amesbury, not far from Salisbury where the alleged March poisoning took place, examined the strain
of Novichok. Porton Down lab does work for British Defense Science and Technology Laboratory, run by the Ministry of Defense, and
the Public Health England.
Results from the examination confirmed the poison was a form of Novichok but – importantly – could not determine where the poison
had been created or who had used it. This development created further confusion and prompted disputes among politicians.
It is known that samples of Novichok have been in the hands of many
NATO countries for years after
the German foreign intelligence service, the Bundesnachrichtendienst, or BND, had reportedly obtained a sample from a Russian defector
in the 1990s.
The formula was later shared with Britain, the US, France, Canada and the Netherlands, where small quantities of Novichok reportedly
were produced in an effort to develop countermeasures. Porton Down labs similarly had received samples to study. Czech President
Milos Zeman recently admitted that his country synthesized and tested a form of Novichok. Sweden and Slovakia also have the technical
capability to produce the nerve agent, according to Russian officials.
All of this makes makes the issue as to why Britain, and even the US, never wanted to share samples taken from the poisoning
of the Skripals with Moscow more concerning. Yet, they all went ahead in lock-step to condemn Moscow for the poisoning, without any
evidence, suggesting a more sinister reason for lobbying increased sanctions against Russia with the goal of further isolating the
country.
It reflects the need especially by the US to have a demon in an effort to justify its defense spending to bolster NATO up
to the border of the Russian Federation in the form of a new containment policy that launched the Cold War in the first place.
With even further sanctions against Russia in the recently passed Defense Department Authorization Bill about to go into effect,
it is becoming apparent that the allegations against Russia are politically-motivated, false flag allegations to be used as an excuse
for a greater geostrategic reason -- to contain Russia just as the Trump administration is increasingly finding its US-led unilateral
world order being challenged more than ever.
The reason, however, isn't due to anything that Moscow initiated but by Trump himself who isn't in control of his own administration,
and maybe never has been. Many of his campaign promises such as dropping out of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or Iranian
nuclear agreement, the threat of sanctions against any company that trades with Iran, his tariff war with US allies are in conflict
with each other, leading to increased world instability. At the same time, Trump talks about better relations with Russia, but
the actions of his own administration in demonizing Moscow dictate otherwise.
F. Michael Maloof is a former Pentagon security analyst.
The FAKE NEWS media (failing @
nytimes , @ NBCNews , @ ABC , @ CBS , @ CNN
) is not my enemy, it is the enemy of the American People! ~ Donald Trump
On Thursday, Mr. Trump expressed his distaste for journalists in more populist terms, saying,
"much of the media in Washington, D.C., along with New York, Los Angeles in particular, speaks
not for the people, but for the special interests."
"The public doesn't believe you people anymore," Mr. Trump added. "Now, maybe I had something
to do with that. I don't know. But they don't believe you."
President Trump has denounced and exposed the repeated deceits and ongoing fabrications of
the mass media. Never before has a President so forcefully identified the lies of the leading
print and TV outlets. The NY Times , Washington Post , the Financial
Times, NBC, CNN, ABC and CBS have been thoroughly discredited in the eyes of the
larger public. They have lost legitimacy and trust. Where progressives have failed, a war
monger billionaire has accomplished, speaking a truth to serve many injustices.
The announcement of sanctions on Wednesday came despite the fact that the US is entirely
aware that Russia was not responsible for the poisoning of Sergei Skripal in Salisbury, UK in
March, he said.
"This is a political demand... this is designed to undercut the overtures from the Trump
administration for President Trump directly and also Senator Rand Paul - now in Moscow - to
warm relations with Russia." Former Pentagon official Michael Maloof echoed that sentiment,
telling RT that "you have Donald Trump's foreign policy and you now have the Trump
administration's foreign policy."
He added that the sanctions are being orchestrated by the deep state to "make the president
look bad and basically to corner him."
[ Exactly. Poisoning was likely executed by MI6 or CIA, to sabotage the US relationship with
Russia at the behest of the Deep State .]
This is attack on ruble. Kind of Magnitsky II set of moves. Strange if view of Trump supposed
attempt to split Russia and China in Helsinki. You should chose a single target in such
cases.
Sanctions weaken the effect of Iranian sanctions. While the goal is to undermine the Russian
economy -- the effect of negative expectations is always stronger than a onetime action -- 90
days allow to avoid big financial losses for major banks. The requirement of inspection of Russia
objects is from Iraq war textbook.
Notable quotes:
"... Russian Ruble has fallen to a new 2018 low against the American dollar. Trading went over 66 rubles to the dollar. ..."
"... This marks almost a 20% devaluation in the currency since April of this year, and the worst valuation since mid-November, 2016. ..."
"... For our part, we reiterated our principle [sic] stands on the events in the UK, which the Embassy had been outlining in corresponding letters to the State Department. We confirmed that we continue to strongly stand for an open and transparent investigation of the crime committed in Salisbury and for bringing the culprits to justice , ..."
"... This pattern of throwing out destructive slander while refusing to provide opportunity for a real answer has permeated American policy towards the Russian Federation with increasing intensity since 2013. ..."
sanctions was
apparently enough to create jitters on the Russian stock exchanges, and the Russian
Ruble has fallen to a new 2018 low against the American dollar. Trading went over 66 rubles to
the dollar.
This marks almost a 20% devaluation in the currency since April of this year, and the
worst valuation since mid-November, 2016.
This incident has not gone unanswered in Moscow. The Russian Embassy in the United States
called for documentation about the source and reasoning behind these new sanctions, as reported by TASS:
The Russian embassy in the United States has called on the US Department of State to
publish correspondence on the introduction of new sanctions on Moscow over the Skripal
incident, the embassy said in a statement.
" For our part, we reiterated our principle [sic] stands on the events in the UK,
which the Embassy had been outlining in corresponding letters to the State Department. We
confirmed that we continue to strongly stand for an open and transparent investigation of
the crime committed in Salisbury and for bringing the culprits to justice , " the
statement reads.
"We suggested publishing our correspondence on this issue. No answer has followed so
far," the Russian embassy added.
This pattern of throwing out destructive slander while refusing to provide opportunity
for a real answer has permeated American policy towards the Russian Federation with increasing
intensity since 2013. It reveals the machinations of a very divided American government,
with the "deep State" or establishment politicians and foreign policy makers completely
unwilling to even give Russia a fair shake at representing itself. This policy is shared by the
United Kingdom, as this
piece by The Duran's Editor in Chief, Alexander Mercouris shows, with this summary of
violations of due process the British authorities are committing with regard to Russia:
(1) The British government is interfering in the conduct of a criminal investigation, with
Prime Minister Theresa May and especially Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson pointing fingers at
who they say is guilty (Russia) whilst the criminal investigation is still underway;
(2) The British government has said that unless Russia proves itself innocent within a
specific time the British government will conclude that it is guilty. As I have explained
previously this
reverses the burden of proof : in a criminal case it is the prosecution which is supposed
to prove the defendant's guilt, not the defendant who must prove his innocence;
(3) The British government refuses to share with Russia -- the party it says is guilty --
the 'evidence' upon which it says it has concluded that Russia is guilty, the evidence in
this case being a sample of the chemical with which it says Sergey and Yulia Skripal was
poisoned.
This violates the fundamental principle that the defendant must be provided with all the
evidence against him so that he can properly prepare his defence;
(4) The British government is not following the procedure set out in Article IX (2) of the
Chemical Weapons
Convention to which both Britain and Russia are parties. This reads as follows
States Parties should, whenever possible, first make every effort to clarify and
resolve, through exchange of information and consultations among themselves, any matter
which may cause doubt about compliance with this Convention, or which gives rise to
concerns about a related matter which may be considered ambiguous. A State Party which
receives a request from another State Party for clarification of any matter which the
requesting State Party believes causes such a doubt or concern shall provide the requesting
State Party as soon as possible, but in any case not later than ten days after the request,
with information sufficient to answer the doubt or concern raised along with an explanation
of how the information provided resolves the matter.
(5) The British authorities are denying the Russians consular access to Yulia Skripal,
though she is a Russian citizen who the British authorities say was subjected to a criminal
assault on their territory.
This is a potentially serious matter since by preventing consular access to Yulia Skripal
the British authorities are not only violating the interstate consular arrangements which
exist between Britain and Russia, but they are preventing the Russian authorities from
learning more about the condition of one of their citizens who has been hospitalised
following a violent criminal assault, and are preventing the Russian authorities from
carrying out their own investigation into the assault on one of their citizens which the
British authorities say has taken place.
I would add that this obstruction of Russian consular access to Yulia Skripal has gone
almost entirely unreported in the British and Western media.
The Americans are playing the same game here, and, regrettably, President Trump's overtures
towards repairing this relationship are almost sure to be torn out from under him by the
actions of this virulent group of people. It is quite possible that this is the very reason for
these new sanctions.
The perspective of the American government as one divided, with a rabid force in favor of
continuing to isolate and vilify a great power in the world for no good reason, is sure to have
repercussions. However, given the gradual realignment of Russia and China to be in closer and
closer partnership, and Russia's increasing prominence in Asian and Eastern Hemisphere affairs,
the end result of this behavior is likely to damage the United States and its standing in the
world over the long run.
6. Focused on violence through brownshirt stormtroopers who beat up any who disagreed
7. Had an intelligence service which focused on crushing dissent and spying on its own
people
8. Placed more power in the central government and state then any Nation before it.
All of the above are things proposed or carried out by leftists. It is almost as if the true
parties espoused by people are those who support individualism and those who support
collectivism. Spoiler alert for the Leftist retards: Power corrupts and Absolute power corrupts
absolutely. Your Statist Sanders Utopia will never come to fruition. The "Kind Socialist
Politicians" will sell you out to the elite in a heartbeat.
All you are doing is focusing the
power of your society into one single glass for the Elite to sip as they assfuck you into
oblivion, Death toll of all of these Statist Nations, IE Imperial Japan, Soviet Union,
Communist China, the People's "Republic" of Korea, etc is over 200,000,000 and counting.
How is it that the acronym NAZI Literally has the word SOCIALIST in it and people still
think they were right wing??? Why is this such a hard concept to grasp for the average
individual?
Here are ten bombshell revelations and fascinating new details to lately come out of both Sy
Hersh's new book, Reporter , as well as
interviews he's given since publication...
1) On a leaked Bush-era intelligence memo outlining the neocon plan to remake the Middle
East
(Note: though previously alluded to only anecdotally by General Wesley Clark in his memoir and in a 2007
speech , the below passage from Seymour Hersh is to our knowledge the first time this
highly classified memo has been quoted . Hersh's account appears to corroborate now retired
Gen. Clark's assertion that days after 9/11 a classified memo outlining plans to foster regime
change in "7 countries in
5 years" was being circulated among intelligence officials.)
From Reporter: A Memoir
pg. 306 -- A few months after the invasion of Iraq, during an interview overseas with a general
who was director of a foreign intelligence service, I was provided with a copy of a Republican
neocon plan for American dominance in the Middle East. The general was an American ally, but
one who was very rattled by the Bush/Cheney aggression. I was told that the document leaked to
me initially had been obtained by someone in the local CIA station. There was reason to be
rattled: The document declared that the war to reshape the Middle East had to begin "with the
assault on Iraq. The fundamental reason for this... is that the war will start making the U.S.
the hegemon of the Middle East. The correlative reason is to make the region feel in its bones,
as it were, the seriousness of American intent and determination." Victory in Iraq would lead
to an ultimatum to Damascus, the "defanging" of Iran, Hezbollah, Hamas, and Arafat's Palestine
Liberation Organization, and other anti-Israeli groups. America's enemies must understand that
"they are fighting for their life: Pax Americana is on its way, which implies their
annihilation." I and the foreign general agreed that America's neocons were a menace to
civilization.
From Reporter: A Memoir
pages 306-307 -- Donald Rumsfeld was also infected with neocon fantasy. Turkey had refused to
permit America's Fourth Division to join the attack of Iraq from its territory, and the
division, with its twenty-five thousand men and women, did not arrive in force inside Iraq
until mid-April, when the initial fighting was essentially over. I learned then that Rumsfeld
had asked the American military command in Stuttgart, Germany, which had responsibility for
monitoring Europe, including Syria and Lebanon, to begin drawing up an operational plan for an
invasion of Syria. A young general assigned to the task refused to do so, thereby winning
applause from my friends on the inside and risking his career. The plan was seen by those I
knew as especially bizarre because Bashar Assad, the ruler of secular Syria, had responded to
9/11 by sharing with the CIA hundreds of his country's most sensitive intelligence files on the
Muslim Brotherhood in Hamburg, where much of the planning for 9/11 was carried out... Rumsfeld
eventually came to his senses and back down, I was told...
3) On the Neocon deep state which seized power after 9/11
From Reporter: A Memoir
pages 305-306 -- I began to comprehend that eight or nine neoconservatives who were political
outsiders in the Clinton years had essentially overthrown the government of the United States
-- with ease . It was stunning to realize how fragile our Constitution was. The intellectual
leaders of that group -- Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, and Richard Perle -- had not hidden their
ideology and their belief in the power of the executive but depicted themselves in public with
a great calmness and a self-assurance that masked their radicalism . I had spent many hours
after 9/11 in conversations with Perle that, luckily for me, helped me understand what was
coming. (Perle and I had been chatting about policy since the early 1980s, but he broke off
relations in 1993 over an article I did for The New Yorker linking him, a fervent supporter of
Israel, to a series of meetings with Saudi businessmen in an attempt to land a
multibillion-dollar contract from Saudi Arabia . Perle responded by publicly threatening to sue
me and characterizing me as a newspaper terrorist. He did not sue.
Meanwhile, Cheney had emerged as a leader of the neocon pack. From 9/11 on he did all he
could to undermine congressional oversight. I learned a great deal from the inside about his
primacy in the White House , but once again I was limited in what I would write for fear of
betraying my sources...
I came to understand that Cheney's goal was to run his most important military and
intelligence operations with as little congressional knowledge, and interference, as possible.
I was fascinating and important to learn what I did about Cheney's constant accumulation of
power and authority as vice president , but it was impossible to even begin to verify the
information without running the risk that Cheney would learn of my questioning and have a good
idea from whom I was getting the information.
4) On Russian meddling in the US election
From the recent
Independent interview based on his autobiography -- Hersh has vociferously strong opinions
on the subject and smells a rat. He states that there is "a great deal of animosity towards
Russia. All of that stuff about Russia hacking the election appears to be preposterous." He has
been researching the subject but is not ready to go public yet.
Hersh quips that the last time he heard the US defense establishment have high confidence,
it was regarding weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. He points out that the NSA only has moderate confidence in Russian
hacking. It is a point that has been made before; there has been no national intelligence
estimate in which all 17 US intelligence agencies would have to sign off. "When the intel
community wants to say something they say it High confidence effectively means that they don't
know."
5) On the Novichok poisoning
From the recent
Independent interview -- Hersh is also on the record as stating that the official version
of the
Skripal poisoning does not stand up to scrutiny. He tells me: "The story of novichok
poisoning has not held up very well. He [Skripal] was most likely talking to British
intelligence services about Russian organised crime." The unfortunate turn of events with the
contamination of other victims is suggestive, according to Hersh, of organised crime elements
rather than state-sponsored actions –though this files in the face of the UK government's
position.
Hersh modestly points out that these are just his opinions. Opinions or not, he is scathing
on Obama –
"a trimmer articulate [but] far from a radical a middleman". During his Goldsmiths talk, he
remarks that liberal critics underestimate Trump at their peril.
He ends the Goldsmiths talk with an anecdote about having lunch with his sources in the
wake of 9/11 . He vents his anger at the agencies for not sharing information. One of his
CIA sources fires back: "Sy you still don't get it after all these years – the FBI
catches bank robbers, the CIA robs banks." It is a delicious, if cryptic aphorism.
* * *
6) On the Bush-era 'Redirection' policy of arming Sunni radicals to counter Shia Iran, which
in a 2007 New Yorker article
Hersh accurately predicted
would set off war in Syria
From the
Independent interview : [Hersh] tells me it is "amazing how many times that story has been
reprinted" . I ask about his argument that US policy was designed to neutralize the Shia sphere
extending from Iran to Syria to Hezbollah in Lebanon and hence redraw the Sykes-Picot
boundaries for the 21st century.
He goes on to say that Bush and Cheney "had it in for Iran", although he denies the idea
that Iran was heavily involved in Iraq: "They were providing intel, collecting intel The US did
many cross-border hunts to kill ops [with] much more aggression than Iran"...
He believes that the Trump administration has no memory of this approach. I'm sure though
that the military-industrial complex has a longer memory...
I press him on the RAND and Stratfor reports including one authored by Cheney and Paul
Wolfowitz in which they envisage deliberate ethno-sectarian partitioning of Iraq . Hersh
ruefully states that: "The day after 9/11 we should have gone to Russia. We did the one thing
that George Kennan warned us never to do – to expand NATO too far."
* * *
7) On the official 9/11 narrative
From the
Independent interview : We end up ruminating about 9/11, perhaps because it is another
narrative ripe for deconstruction by sceptics. Polling shows that a significant proportion of
the American public believes there is more to the truth. These doubts have been reinforced by
the declassification of the suppressed 28 pages of the 9/11 commission report last year
undermining the version that a group of terrorists acting independently managed to pull off the
attacks. The implication is that they may well have been state-sponsored with the Saudis
potentially involved.
Hersh tells me: "I don't necessarily buy the story that Bin Laden was responsible for 9/11.
We really don't have an ending to the story. I've known people in the [intelligence] community.
We don't know anything empirical about who did what" . He continues: "The guy was living in a
cave. He really didn't know much English. He was pretty bright and he had a lot of hatred for
the US. We respond by attacking the Taliban. Eighteen years later How's it going guys?"
8) On the media and the morality of the powerful
From a recent
The Intercept interview and book review -- If
Hersh were a superhero, this would be his origin story. Two hundred and seventy-four pages
after the Chicago anecdote, he describes his coverage of a massive
slaughter of Iraqi troops and civilians by the U.S. in 1991 after a ceasefire had ended the
Persian Gulf War. America's indifference to this massacre was, Hersh writes, "a reminder of the
Vietnam War's MGR, for Mere Gook Rule: If it's a murdered or raped gook, there is no crime." It
was also, he adds, a reminder of something else: "I had learned a domestic version of that rule
decades earlier" in Chicago. "Reporter" demonstrates that Hersh has derived three simple lessons from that rule:
The powerful prey mercilessly upon the powerless, up to and including mass murder.
The powerful lie constantly about their predations.
The natural instinct of the media is to let the powerful get away with it.
08/06/2018 The British government has prepared an extradition request to Moscow for two
Russians they claim carried out the Salisbury nerve agent attack, according to The Guardian ,
citing Whitehall and security sources.
Former Russian double-agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia were found unconscious on
a public bench in Salisbury in early March - which UK authorities believe was due to a nerve
agent called Novichok.
Months later on June 30, nearby residents Charlie Rowley and Dawn Sturgess, a 44-year-old
mother of three, were subsequently treated for exposure to the nerve agent. Rowley recovered
while Sturgess died.
Authorities are operating on the assumption that the Skripals were poisoned using a
novichok-laced perfume bottle or a door handle smeared with the nerve agent, while Rowley may
have picked up said bottle and given to Sturgess, who applied it to her wrists.
Sturgess received a much higher dose than the other three after apparently smearing the
substance on her wrists, having sprayed it from the bottle. Rowley's recovery was helped,
according to a source, by one of the first responders being familiar with the nerve agent,
having been involved in helping the Skripals.
The Porton Down military defence laboratory near Salisbury has examined the novichok found
on the Skripals' doorknob and the perfume bottle, but police have not yet said whether they
are from the same batch. -
The Guardian
UK authorities believe they have pieced together the movements of the two Russians, from
their entry into the UK to their departure after the alleged assassination attempt.
Following the attack on the Skripals, European and US allies took Britain's side on the
attack, ordering the largest expulsion of Russian diplomats since the height of the Cold War,
reports
Reuters . In response, Russia retaliated by expelling Western diplomats, while the Kremlin
has repeatedly denied involvement in the attacks - while accusing the UK intelligence agencies
of staging the attack in order to inflame anti-Russia tensions.
Oddly, Sergei Skripal was linked by
The Telegraph to a consultant with former UK spy Christopher Steele's Orbis Business
Intelligence, who he reportedly had repeated contacts with.
The motive for trying to assassinate the 66-year-old skripal is unknown. Skripal moved to
the UK in a Kremlin-approved "spy swap" in 2010, causing many to question why they would
suddenly try to take him out a decade later.
In July, journalist Rob Slane compiled
10 questions for the UK authorities on the ever-confusing Skripal case:
***
The two most basic claims made by the Government and investigators regarding the method and
the mode in the Salisbury poisoning are these:
That military grade nerve agent was used to poison Mr Skripal
That it was applied to the door handle of his house
These claims raise a number of very obvious questions. For example, how did the assassin(s)
apply such a powerful chemical without wearing protective clothing? How did the people who are
said to have come into contact with the substance not die immediately, or at the very least
suffer irreparable damage to their Central Nervous Systems? How did this military grade nerve
agent manage not only to have a delayed onset, but also managed to affect a large 66-year-old
man and his slim 33-year-old daughter, both of whom would have vastly different metabolic
rates, at exactly the same time?
These are perfectly reasonable questions that deserve reasonable answers. I am aware,
however, that no matter how obvious and rational such questions might be, doing so places one
– at least in the eyes of the authorities – in the camp of the conspiracy theorist.
This is disingenuous. One of the marks of a true conspiracy theorist is that he is someone who
refuses to accept an explanation for an event, even after being presented with facts which fit
and explain it coherently . But when the "facts" presented in a case do not fit the event they
are supposed to explain, and are neither rational nor coherent -- as in the Salisbury case --
then calling the person who raises legitimate questions a "conspiracy theorist" is a bit rich,
is it not?
Nevertheless, for the purposes of this piece, what I'd like to do is work on the assumption
that the "Military Grade Nerve Agent on the Door Handle" claim is correct. And working from
this assumption, I want to ask some questions about how the authorities have handled the case.
The point is this: These questions are not really intended to challenge the official claims;
rather the intention is to ask whether the authorities have handled the case correctly on their
own terms .
1. Prior to the investigation's focus on the door handle, for a period of almost three weeks
there were at least nine other theories proposed by the authorities as to where the Skripals
came into contact with the poison. These included the restaurant, the pub, the bench, the
cemetery, the car, the flowers, the luggage, the porridge and even a drone. During that time,
police officers and investigators were entering and leaving the house, by the door, since it
was not known to be the place where the poison was located.
Can the authorities explain how these officers and investigators were not poisoned?
2. Once the door handle theory was established, those who had been in and out of the
property during the previous three weeks would naturally have been concerned about the
possibility that they had been contaminated.
Can the authorities tell us what steps were taken to reassure these officers?
3. Every officer who entered the house after 4th March, and before the door handle became an
object of interest, should have been given a medical examination to check for signs of
poisoning.
Can the authorities confirm that this took place for every officer?
4. Initial reports about Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey stated that he was poisoned at the
bench, after coming to the aid of Mr Skripal and Yulia. However, on 9th March, Lord Ian Blair
stated that D.S. Bailey had actually become poisoned after visiting Mr Skripal's house. Since
he was thought to have been poisoned with a military grade nerve agent, and since it was
thought that this had occurred at Mr Skripal's house, the immediate next step should have been
to seal off the house and set up a mobile decontamination unit outside. However, numerous
photographs show officers in normal uniforms standing close to the door long after Lord Blair's
claim.
Can the authorities confirm why the house was not sealed off and a decontamination unit set
up immediately after it became known that D.S. Bailey had been there, and why officers with no
protective clothing on were allowed to continue standing guard outside the house for the next
few weeks?
5. Can the authorities explain how these decisions did not put the health and even the lives
of those officers in jeopardy?
6. Before the door handle theory was settled on, the majority of competing theories put out
by the authorities tended to assume that Mr Skripal was poisoned long before he went to Zizzis.
For example, the flowers, the cemetery, the luggage, the porridge and the car explanations all
assume this to be the case. What this means is that according to the assumptions of police at
that time, when Mr Skripal fed the ducks near the Avon Playground with a few local boys, at
around 1:45pm, he was already contaminated. Yet although this event was caught on CCTV camera,
it was more than two weeks before the police contacted the parents of these boys.
Can the authorities explain why it took more than two weeks to track down the boys, who
– as the CCTV apparently shows – were given bread by Mr Skripal?
7. Can the authorities comment on why they did not air the CCTV footage on national
television, in an effort to appeal to the boys or their parents to come forward, and whether
the delay in tracking them down might have put them in danger?
8. If the door handle was the place of poisoning, it is extremely likely that the bread
handed by Mr Skripal to the boys would have been contaminated. Certainly, areas that he visited
after this incident were deemed to be so much at risk that they were either closed down (for
example, The Mill and Zizzis, which are both still closed), or destroyed (for instance, the
restaurant table, the bench and – almost certainly – the red bag near the bench
have all been destroyed).
Can the authorities comment on how the boys, who were handed bread by Mr Skripal, managed to
avoid contamination?
9. It has been said that one of the reasons the Government is/was so sure that the ultimate
culprit behind the poisoning was the Russian state, is the apparent existence of an "FSB
handbook" which, amongst other things, allegedly features descriptions of how to apply nerve
agent to a door handle. Given that the Prime Minister first made a formal accusation of
culpability on 12th March in her speech to the House of Commons, the Government must therefore
have been in possession of this manual prior to that day. However, claims about the door handle
being the location of the poison did not appear until late March (the first media reports of it
were on 28th March). What this means is there was a delay of several weeks between the
Government making its accusation, based partly on the apparent existence of the "door handle
manual", and the door handle of Mr Skripal's house being a subject of interest to
investigators.
Can the authorities therefore tell us whether the Government's failure to pass on details of
the "door handle manual" put the lives of the officers going in and out of Mr Skripal's house
from 5th March to 27th March in jeopardy?
10. On 17th March, Metropolitan Police Assistant Commissioner Neil Basu said:
"We are learning more about Sergei and Yulia's movements but we need to be clearer around
their exact movements on the morning of the incident. We believe that at around 9.15am on
Sunday, 4 March, Sergei's car may have been in the areas of London Road, Churchill Way North
and Wilton Road. Then at around 1.30pm it was seen being driven down Devizes Road, towards
the town centre. We need to establish Sergei and Yulia's movements during the morning, before
they headed to the town centre. Did you see this car, or what you believe was this car, on
the day of the incident? We are particularly keen to hear from you if you saw the car before
1.30pm. If you have information, please call the police on 101."
Now that Sergei and Yulia Skripal have been awake and able to communicate for around four
months, these details are presumably now all known to investigators. In the normal course of
such a high profile investigation, details such as these would be relayed to the public in the
hope of jogging memories to prompt more information. And in fact, many such details have been
released to the public in this case. Yet, confirmation of Mr Skripal's and Yulia's movements
that day remain conspicuous by their absence.
Can the authorities confirm that the movements of the Skripals that day are now understood,
and that they will be made known shortly, in order that more information from the public might
then be forthcoming?
These questions have nothing to do with any conspiracy theory. On the contrary, they are all
based on the assumption that the two central claims made by the authorities regarding the mode
and the method used in this incident are correct. They are, however, very serious and perfectly
legitimate questions about the way the authorities have dealt with this incident, on their own
terms and on the basis of their own claims .
"Reports that the United Kingdom is planning to ask Russia to extradite suspects in a
Salisbury poisoning incident are nothing more than a "speculation," a spokesperson for the UK
Foreign Office told Sputnik on Monday.
"This is just more speculation. The police investigation is ongoing and anything on the
record will need to come from the Police," the spokesperson said."
The British government has prepared an extradition request to Moscow for two Russians they
claim carried out the Salisbury nerve agent attack, according to The Guardian , citing
Whitehall and security sources.
Former Russian double-agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia were found unconscious on
a public bench in Salisbury in early March - which UK authorities believe was due to a nerve
agent called Novichok.
Months later on June 30, nearby residents Charlie Rowley and Dawn Sturgess, a 44-year-old
mother of three, were subsequently treated for exposure to the nerve agent. Rowley recovered
while Sturgess died.
Authorities are operating on the assumption that the Skripals were poisoned using a
novichok-laced perfume bottle or a door handle smeared with the nerve agent, while Rowley may
have picked up said bottle and given to Sturgess, who applied it to her wrists.
Sturgess received a much higher dose than the other three after apparently smearing the
substance on her wrists, having sprayed it from the bottle. Rowley's recovery was helped,
according to a source, by one of the first responders being familiar with the nerve agent,
having been involved in helping the Skripals.
The Porton Down military defence laboratory near Salisbury has examined the novichok found
on the Skripals' doorknob and the perfume bottle, but police have not yet said whether they
are from the same batch. -
The Guardian
UK authorities believe they have pieced together the movements of the two Russians, from
their entry into the UK to their departure after the alleged assassination attempt.
Following the attack on the Skripals, European and US allies took Britain's side on the
attack, ordering the largest expulsion of Russian diplomats since the height of the Cold War,
reports
Reuters . In response, Russia retaliated by expelling Western diplomats, while the Kremlin
has repeatedly denied involvement in the attacks - while accusing the UK intelligence agencies
of staging the attack in order to inflame anti-Russia tensions.
Oddly, Sergei Skripal was linked by
The Telegraph to a consultant with former UK spy Christopher Steele's Orbis Business
Intelligence, who he reportedly had repeated contacts with.
The motive for trying to assassinate the 66-year-old skripal is unknown. Skripal moved to
the UK in a Kremlin-approved "spy swap" in 2010, causing many to question why they would
suddenly try to take him out a decade later.
In July, journalist Rob Slane compiled
10 questions for the UK authorities on the ever-confusing Skripal case:
***
The two most basic claims made by the Government and investigators regarding the method and
the mode in the Salisbury poisoning are these:
That military grade nerve agent was used to poison Mr Skripal
That it was applied to the door handle of his house
These claims raise a number of very obvious questions. For example, how did the assassin(s)
apply such a powerful chemical without wearing protective clothing? How did the people who are
said to have come into contact with the substance not die immediately, or at the very least
suffer irreparable damage to their Central Nervous Systems? How did this military grade nerve
agent manage not only to have a delayed onset, but also managed to affect a large 66-year-old
man and his slim 33-year-old daughter, both of whom would have vastly different metabolic
rates, at exactly the same time?
These are perfectly reasonable questions that deserve reasonable answers. I am aware,
however, that no matter how obvious and rational such questions might be, doing so places one
– at least in the eyes of the authorities – in the camp of the conspiracy theorist.
This is disingenuous. One of the marks of a true conspiracy theorist is that he is someone who
refuses to accept an explanation for an event, even after being presented with facts which fit
and explain it coherently . But when the "facts" presented in a case do not fit the event they
are supposed to explain, and are neither rational nor coherent -- as in the Salisbury case --
then calling the person who raises legitimate questions a "conspiracy theorist" is a bit rich,
is it not?
Nevertheless, for the purposes of this piece, what I'd like to do is work on the assumption
that the "Military Grade Nerve Agent on the Door Handle" claim is correct. And working from
this assumption, I want to ask some questions about how the authorities have handled the case.
The point is this: These questions are not really intended to challenge the official claims;
rather the intention is to ask whether the authorities have handled the case correctly on their
own terms .
1. Prior to the investigation's focus on the door handle, for a period of almost three weeks
there were at least nine other theories proposed by the authorities as to where the Skripals
came into contact with the poison. These included the restaurant, the pub, the bench, the
cemetery, the car, the flowers, the luggage, the porridge and even a drone. During that time,
police officers and investigators were entering and leaving the house, by the door, since it
was not known to be the place where the poison was located.
Can the authorities explain how these officers and investigators were not poisoned?
2. Once the door handle theory was established, those who had been in and out of the
property during the previous three weeks would naturally have been concerned about the
possibility that they had been contaminated.
Can the authorities tell us what steps were taken to reassure these officers?
3. Every officer who entered the house after 4th March, and before the door handle became an
object of interest, should have been given a medical examination to check for signs of
poisoning.
Can the authorities confirm that this took place for every officer?
4. Initial reports about Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey stated that he was poisoned at the
bench, after coming to the aid of Mr Skripal and Yulia. However, on 9th March, Lord Ian Blair
stated that D.S. Bailey had actually become poisoned after visiting Mr Skripal's house. Since
he was thought to have been poisoned with a military grade nerve agent, and since it was
thought that this had occurred at Mr Skripal's house, the immediate next step should have been
to seal off the house and set up a mobile decontamination unit outside. However, numerous
photographs show officers in normal uniforms standing close to the door long after Lord Blair's
claim.
Can the authorities confirm why the house was not sealed off and a decontamination unit set
up immediately after it became known that D.S. Bailey had been there, and why officers with no
protective clothing on were allowed to continue standing guard outside the house for the next
few weeks?
5. Can the authorities explain how these decisions did not put the health and even the lives
of those officers in jeopardy?
6. Before the door handle theory was settled on, the majority of competing theories put out
by the authorities tended to assume that Mr Skripal was poisoned long before he went to Zizzis.
For example, the flowers, the cemetery, the luggage, the porridge and the car explanations all
assume this to be the case. What this means is that according to the assumptions of police at
that time, when Mr Skripal fed the ducks near the Avon Playground with a few local boys, at
around 1:45pm, he was already contaminated. Yet although this event was caught on CCTV camera,
it was more than two weeks before the police contacted the parents of these boys.
Can the authorities explain why it took more than two weeks to track down the boys, who
– as the CCTV apparently shows – were given bread by Mr Skripal?
7. Can the authorities comment on why they did not air the CCTV footage on national
television, in an effort to appeal to the boys or their parents to come forward, and whether
the delay in tracking them down might have put them in danger?
8. If the door handle was the place of poisoning, it is extremely likely that the bread
handed by Mr Skripal to the boys would have been contaminated. Certainly, areas that he visited
after this incident were deemed to be so much at risk that they were either closed down (for
example, The Mill and Zizzis, which are both still closed), or destroyed (for instance, the
restaurant table, the bench and – almost certainly – the red bag near the bench
have all been destroyed).
Can the authorities comment on how the boys, who were handed bread by Mr Skripal, managed to
avoid contamination?
9. It has been said that one of the reasons the Government is/was so sure that the ultimate
culprit behind the poisoning was the Russian state, is the apparent existence of an "FSB
handbook" which, amongst other things, allegedly features descriptions of how to apply nerve
agent to a door handle. Given that the Prime Minister first made a formal accusation of
culpability on 12th March in her speech to the House of Commons, the Government must therefore
have been in possession of this manual prior to that day. However, claims about the door handle
being the location of the poison did not appear until late March (the first media reports of it
were on 28th March). What this means is there was a delay of several weeks between the
Government making its accusation, based partly on the apparent existence of the "door handle
manual", and the door handle of Mr Skripal's house being a subject of interest to
investigators.
Can the authorities therefore tell us whether the Government's failure to pass on details of
the "door handle manual" put the lives of the officers going in and out of Mr Skripal's house
from 5th March to 27th March in jeopardy?
10. On 17th March, Metropolitan Police Assistant Commissioner Neil Basu said:
"We are learning more about Sergei and Yulia's movements but we need to be clearer around
their exact movements on the morning of the incident. We believe that at around 9.15am on
Sunday, 4 March, Sergei's car may have been in the areas of London Road, Churchill Way North
and Wilton Road. Then at around 1.30pm it was seen being driven down Devizes Road, towards
the town centre. We need to establish Sergei and Yulia's movements during the morning, before
they headed to the town centre. Did you see this car, or what you believe was this car, on
the day of the incident? We are particularly keen to hear from you if you saw the car before
1.30pm. If you have information, please call the police on 101."
Now that Sergei and Yulia Skripal have been awake and able to communicate for around four
months, these details are presumably now all known to investigators. In the normal course of
such a high profile investigation, details such as these would be relayed to the public in the
hope of jogging memories to prompt more information. And in fact, many such details have been
released to the public in this case. Yet, confirmation of Mr Skripal's and Yulia's movements
that day remain conspicuous by their absence.
Can the authorities confirm that the movements of the Skripals that day are now understood,
and that they will be made known shortly, in order that more information from the public might
then be forthcoming?
These questions have nothing to do with any conspiracy theory. On the contrary, they are all
based on the assumption that the two central claims made by the authorities regarding the mode
and the method used in this incident are correct. They are, however, very serious and perfectly
legitimate questions about the way the authorities have dealt with this incident, on their own
terms and on the basis of their own claims .
"Reports that the United Kingdom is planning to ask Russia to extradite suspects in a
Salisbury poisoning incident are nothing more than a "speculation," a spokesperson for the UK
Foreign Office told Sputnik on Monday.
"This is just more speculation. The police investigation is ongoing and anything on the
record will need to come from the Police," the spokesperson said."
The Skripals' misadventure (contretemps, dust up, theater, bit of bother) is absurd but
did the U.K. government embrace it with alacrity and a vengeance or what? The only thing
missing was narration by Edgar R. Murrow. Not to mention the Skripals.
The very absurdity of it calls into question anything that preceded it with the same story
line, viz., "Russians are animals."
What anyone needs to be wary of is the people who push this and other "narratives":
"Animal Assad," "religion of peace," "multiculturalism," "propositional nation,"
"comprehensive immigration law reform," "living Constitution," "equality," "hate speech,"
"Iranchiefsponsorofterror," "regime change," "treason," "collusion," "McCarthyism,"
"humanitarian intervention," "global/climate freeze/warming/change/disruption,"
"anti-Semitism," "Judeo-Christian," "target civilians/hospitals," and such like.
I'm not a great fan of Marxist philosophy, but one thing it has got right is the
need to be sceptical when faced by what academics like to call 'normative' claims, and to be
aware that such claims often hide a bid for power. When faced by such a claim, one should
always ask ' Cui bono ?' – who benefits?
At present, politicians and political commentators are making much of the alleged threat to
democracy posed by social media, 'fake news', and 'disinformation'. This is leading to demands
for social media to be more tightly regulated and for action to be taken against those
supposedly guilty of spreading fake news, notably the Russian government. Yesterday's big
news was an
announcement by Facebook that it had removed 32 accounts 'believed to have been set up to
influence the mid-term US elections in November.' According to Facebook, these accounts were
responsible for 9,500 posts and had spent $11,000 on advertising. Personally, I don't regard
this as a big deal. In a country in which political campaigns cost billions of dollars, I
seriously doubt that $11,000 on Facebook is going to make any difference. For sure, there's a
lot of garbage to be found on social media, which also make it easier for people to hide their
true identity. But I remain utterly unconvinced that 'fake news' on Facebook, Twitter, or
Instagram is that important, if only because nobody has yet to produce any hard evidence that
such 'news' has actually swayed any significant number of voters.
Why then are so many people getting so worked up about it and demanding action? An interim
report
published last week by the British House of Commons Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee
provides some clues. Entitled, 'Disinformation and Fake News', the interim report says
that,
There are many potential threats to our democracy and our values. One such threat arises
from what has been coined 'fake news', created for profit or other gain, disseminated through
state-sponsored programmes, or spread through the deliberate distortion of facts, by groups
with a particular agenda, including the desire to affect political elections. We are faced
with a crisis concerning the use of data, the manipulation of our data, and the targeting of
pernicious views. In particular, we heard evidence of Russian state-sponsored attempts to
influence elections in the US and the UK through social media. In this rapidly changing
digital world, our existing legal framework is no longer fit for purpose. Our democracy is at
risk, and now is the time to act, to protect our shared values and the integrity of our
democratic institutions.
You will note how this is couched in terms of normative claims concerning 'democracy and our
values'. But if you dig a little deeper, you will see that there is something else going on
here. In its first two paragraphs, the report says:
In this inquiry, we have studied the spread of false, misleading, and persuasive
content, and the ways in which malign players, whether automated or human, or both
together, distort what is true in order to create influence, to intimidate, to make
money, or to influence political elections.
People are increasingly finding out about what is happening in this country, in their
local communities, and across the wider world, through social media, rather than through
more traditional forms of communication, such as television, print media, or the
radio.
Call me a cynic, but in my eyes, paragraph 1 simply describes democratic politics, a process
in which people 'distort what is true in order to create influence or to influence political
elections'. In an attempt to define 'fake news', the committee likewise describes a number of
things which to my mind sound just like normal political or journalistic practice, e.g.
'Manipulated content: distortion of genuine information or imagery, for example a
headline that is made more sensationalist.'
'False context of connection: factually accurate content that is shared with false
contextual information, for example when a headline of an article does not reflect the
content.' [As I can personally testify from having had my articles appear under utterly
misleading headlines put in by newspaper editors, this and the previous bullet point are
absolutely standard journalistic practice.]
'Misleading content: misleading use of information, for example by presenting comment as
fact.' [As I've pointed out before , this is also
completely standard.]
If the Committee were really investigating 'fake news', it would have to investigate itself
and all its members' colleagues, and indeed their entire profession. It would then have to
consider all the profound questions which such an investigation would raise. But that, of
course, is not going to happen. Likewise, the committee would have to investigate 'traditional'
forms of journalism, which are guilty of many of the dubious practices identified. But that
isn't going to happen either. Instead, the report focuses entirely on the new phenomenon of
social media, as if 'fake news' and 'disinformation' were primarily their fault, rather than,
say, the fault of politicians who mislead in order to win votes.
Paragraph 2 reveals what's really at stake here. People are now finding out about the world
in ways which the politicians aren't able to manipulate as successfully as the previous sources
of information. Power is shifting. They don't like it. And they want to stop it.
The question then is how to do that. The answer is to find some 'malign persons' or
institutions who can be associated with the shift of power and used to discredit it. This is
where Russia comes in handy. And sure enough, the interim report devotes several pages to
discussing the evil impact of Russia on British democracy, and in particular alleged Russian
interference in the Brexit referendum. The evidence provided for this interference is pretty
weak, much of it consisting of a discussion of businessman Arron Banks, who provided millions
of pounds to the Leave campaign, and who also held some meetings with Russian officials to
discuss business deals. Somehow, this connection is meant to show 'Russian interference', but
quite how is never explained.
What's clear is that the result of the Brexit referendum really irks the committee. It keeps
coming back to it, mentioning, for instance, connections between the Vote Leave campaign and
the companies AggregateIQ and Cambridge Analytica, which used data mining techniques to gather
information from Facebook for political purposes. This made me think that maybe there's a
hidden agenda here. In the USA, it's obvious that the paranoia over 'Russian interference' and
the malign influence of social media is driven by power struggles within the political elite,
prompted by the angst caused by Donald Trump's election. Is it the same in the UK?
To answer this question, I did a bit of investigating and looked up the members of the House
of Commons Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee, and whether they had supported Remain
or Leave during the Brexit referendum. The interim report lists 12 members of the committee.
Here are the results:
Damian Collins MP (Conservative, Folkestone and Hythe) (Chair) – Remain.
"... Some things are now clearer though. The settled narrative has been for months that the initial 'Novichok' attack on the Skripals had been via a "gel" ..."
"... The government claims that the #Novichok poison was a "gel" smeared onto Sergei Skripal's "front door handle". If the #Novichok was in the form of a gel, how could it be in a perfume bottle which are only designed to hold liquids? pic.twitter.com/BV0pUY5uAM ..."
"... More importantly, if this narrative were to be accepted, it doesn't explain how long (several hours) the substance took to work, nor the fact that it became effective on both Skripals at precisely the same moment – despite the huge divergence in their size, weight, age, and state of health. ..."
"... Mr Rowley of course was a criminal – he had been imprisoned for possession of 11 wraps of heroin in Salisbury only a couple of years before – and is still a daily drug-user. In those circumstances, in any normal police investigation, Mr Rowley would himself be a suspect rather than only a victim in this crime. So far as we know this is not the case, though no-one can ask him in his safe house, even through his non-existent television or undelivered newspapers. ..."
"... American filmmaker and radio host Lee Stranahan, who works out of Washington DC, was a house guest of mine last week. During his brief visit to England, he took his camera to Salisbury. Without wishing to spoil the documentary he's working on, I know he won't mind me saying that of the dozens of people he spoke to at the heart of the crime scene, not a single one of them believed the state version of events. ..."
"... "Russian criminals," ..."
"... "Not the Russian state then?" ..."
"... "They are the least likely suspects," ..."
"... "It was Ukraine." ..."
"... "military-grade deadly nerve agent." ..."
"... Think your friends would be interested? Share this story! ..."
'Novichok' survivor Charlie Rowley is in a "safe house" but has been denied
access to television and newspapers, according to his brother. The ever-stranger case of the
Salisbury-Amesbury poisonings gets curiouser and curiouser. Whoever said 'Novichok' was a
"military-grade lethal nerve agent" doesn't know their tables.
For a program which Boris Johnson told us had been 10 years in the making, had cost
(presumably) millions of dollars to develop (and "train" agents to put poison on a
doorknob), a 20-percent success rate must have been a bitter disappointment.
Four out of five of those affected by 'Novichok' – Sergei and Yulia Skripal, Detective
Sergeant Bailey, and Charlie Rowley – have survived the contact, with only poor Dawn
Sturgess, a homeless alcoholic, succumbing to its "deadly" effects.
A polythene bag would have been a rather more effective method of assassination.
Moreover, so little of their "training" had the assassins absorbed that they
apparently "discarded" this valuable deadly nerve agent in a perfume bottle in a park,
coincidentally close to the bench on which the Skripals had been found slumped four months
previous. The bottle miraculously evaded the dragnet of "hundreds of anti-terror police"
working on the case. Thus discarded, the perfume bottle carelessly provided evidence which
could well lead to the indictment of the criminals involved. Doubtless
such carelessness was not in the Russian "training manual" that Mr Johnson said was in
the possession of British intelligence.
No information has emerged as to when or where Mr Rowley and/or the late Ms Sturgess
happened upon this perfume bottle, or why in the middle of the swirl of the Salisbury events
they picked it up, took it home, but either waited until the fateful day to spray it or
alternatively the bottle had lain unattended for weeks – even months – despite the
fine-tooth-comb search of the park by the authorities.
Some things are now clearer though. The settled narrative has been for months that the
initial 'Novichok' attack on the Skripals had been via a "gel" on their front doorknob
(in accordance with the manual and the 10-year training program). Not many believe this any
longer, although unfortunately the taxpayer is committed to a way-above-market-price compulsory
purchase of the house.
Apart from anything else, it is difficult to envisage a gel being dispensed via a spray from
a perfume bottle.
The government claims that the #Novichok poison
was a "gel" smeared onto Sergei Skripal's "front door handle".
If the #Novichok was in
the form of a gel, how could it be in a perfume bottle which are only designed to hold
liquids? pic.twitter.com/BV0pUY5uAM
More importantly, if this narrative were to be accepted, it doesn't explain how long
(several hours) the substance took to work, nor the fact that it became effective on both
Skripals at precisely the same moment – despite the huge divergence in their size,
weight, age, and state of health.
It has always seemed much more plausible to me that the Skripals were attacked either in the
restaurant where they had a leisurely full lunch, and where Mr Skripal was initially reported
as behaving oddly towards the end of the restaurant experience, or on the short walk from the
restaurant to the park bench, or on the bench itself. This would be far more consistent with
their simultaneous collapse and, of course, would explain the perfume bottle discarded
nearby.
The perfume bottle being thrown away at all casts significant doubt that this attack was by
a state (any state) actor at all, unless that state actor wanted the substance to be found and
wanted false inferences of its provenance to be drawn. It makes it much more likely to me at
least that the assailants sprayed something at the Skripals for criminal rather than political
purposes and for reasons we can only, for now, speculate upon.
Mr Rowley of course was a criminal – he had been imprisoned
for possession of 11 wraps of heroin in Salisbury only a couple of years before – and is
still a daily drug-user. In those circumstances, in any normal police investigation, Mr Rowley
would himself be a suspect rather than only a victim in this crime. So far as we know this is
not the case, though no-one can ask him in his safe house, even through his non-existent
television or undelivered newspapers.
It will be evident that I think little of the official state narrative in the
Salisbury-Amesbury affair, but you'd be surprised at the kind of people who agree with me.
American filmmaker and radio host Lee Stranahan, who works out of Washington DC, was a house
guest of mine last week. During his brief visit to England, he took his camera to Salisbury.
Without wishing to spoil the documentary he's working on, I know he won't mind me saying that
of the dozens of people he spoke to at the heart of the crime scene, not a single one of them
believed the state version of events.
I myself spoke to a senior British Army officer at a black-tie event in London last week.
There were hundreds of them there, so I'm not giving his identity away. He asked me, who did I
really think was responsible for the 'Novichok' affair?
"Russian criminals," I answered. "Not the Russian state then?" he pressed. "They are the least likely suspects," I said. At which point this heavily decorated soldier leant over and whispered in my ear, "It
was Ukraine."
He offered no evidence, I should say, and – but for his rank and position – I
wouldn't even bother relaying it. But that is what he said.
Finally, I wish to place on record another of my dissident views on this matter. I do not
believe that the substance used to attack the Skripals, and which we are told killed Ms
Sturgess, was 'Novichok' at all – or any other kind of "military-grade deadly nerve
agent." I am on the trail of this matter and you will be the first to know when I've found
it.
Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author
and do not necessarily represent those of RT.
George Galloway was a member of the British Parliament for nearly 30 years. He presents TV and radio shows (including
on RT). He is a film-maker, writer and a renowned orator.
"... As it happens, the same writer – Marco Giannangeli – had disseminated a parallel piece of palpable fiction on 1 September 2013, in the 'Sunday Express', in relation to the Ghouta 'false flag.' ..."
More evidence for the at least passive complicity of GCHQ – for which Matt Tait used
to work, and which Robert Hannigan used to run – in corrupt 'information operations'
comes in a report yesterday on CNN.
'Police have identified two suspects in the poisoning of former Russian double agent
Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia, a source with knowledge of the investigation told CNN
on Thursday.
'The pair left the UK in the wake of the attack on what is believed to have been a
commercial flight, the source added.
'Their departure was revealed in a coded Russian message to Moscow sent after the attack,
which was intercepted by a British base in Cyprus, the source said. The British government
blames the Skripals' poisoning on Russia.'
The base in question is high up in the Troodos mountains, and is formally run by the RAF
but actually a key resource for both GCHQ and NSA in monitoring communications over a wide
area. According to an internal document from the former organisation, it has 'long been
regarded as a 'Jewel in the Crown' by NSA as it offers unique access to the Levant, North
Africa, and Turkey'.
That the quote comes a report in 'The Intercept' in January 2016 revealing that one of the
uses of the Troodos facility is to intercept live video feeds from Israeli drones and fighter
jets brings out how paradoxical the world is. For it also appears to have emerged as an
important resource in 'information operations' in support of 'Borgist' agendas.
The claim about intercepts incriminating the Russians over the Salisbury incident was
first made in a piece by Marco Giannangeli in the Daily Express on 9 April, which followed up
the claims which Colonel de Bretton-Gordon had been instrumental in disseminating, and was
then widely picked up by the MSM.
It was headlined: 'REVEALED: The bombshell Russian message intercepted on DAY of Skripal
poisonings,' and opened: 'AN ELECTRONIC message to Moscow sent on the day former Russian spy
Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia were poisoned with a nerve agent in Salisbury included
the phrase "the package has been delivered".'
Supposedly, this 'prompted a young Flight Lieutenant to recall a separate message that had
been intercepted and discounted on the previous day.' The messages were 'understood to have
formed "just one part" of the intelligence packet which later allowed Prime Minister Theresa
May to state it was "highly likely" that Russia was behind the attacks.'
As it happens, the same writer – Marco Giannangeli – had disseminated a
parallel piece of palpable fiction on 1 September 2013, in the 'Sunday Express', in relation
to the Ghouta 'false flag.'
This one was headlined, even more melodramatically, 'Senior Syrian military chiefs tell
captain: fire chemicals or be shot; BRITISH intelligence chiefs have intercepted radio
messages in which senior Syrian military chiefs are heard ordering the use of chemical
weapons.'
Part of the story of how bogus claims about 'smoking gun' evidence from 'SIGINT' were used
to support the attempt to use the Ghouta 'false flag' to inveigle the British and Americans
into destroying the Syrian government was told in my SST post on the incident. However, to
mix metaphors, I only scratched the surface of a can of worms.
In a report on the 'Daily Caller' site on 29 August 2013, Kenneth Timmerman claimed that
the sequence had started with an actual intercept by Unit 8200 – the Israeli equivalent
of GCHQ and NSA.
Claiming to base his account on Western intelligence sources, he suggested that:
'According to these officers, who served in top positions in the United States, Britain,
France, Israel, and Jordan, a Syrian military communication intercepted by Israel's famed
Unit 8200 electronic intelligence outfit has been doctored so that it leads a reader to just
the opposite conclusion reached by the original report.'
While I am not in a position to establish whether his claim is or is not accurate, an AP
report on the same day quoted 'U.S. intelligence officials' explaining that 'an intercept of
Syrian military officials discussing the strike was among low-level staff, with no direct
evidence tying the attack back to an Assad insider or even a senior Syrian commander'.
Meanwhile, Timmerman's claim that 'The doctored report was picked up on Israel's Channel 2
TV on Aug. 24, then by Focus magazine in Germany, the Times of Israel, and eventually by The
Cable in Washington, DC' is supported by links to the relevant stories, which say what he
claims they say.
Moreover, it seems clear that the 1 September 2013 report was an attempt to counter a
– somewhat devastating – critique made in a 31 August post entitled 'The Troodos
Conundrum' by the former British Ambassador Craig Murray, who had been closely involved with
the facility during his time at the Foreign Office (and has written invaluable material on
the Salisbury incident.)
Precisely because of the closeness of the GCHQ/NSA collaboration, Murray brought out,
there was indeed a major problem explaining why claims about 'SIGINT' had been central to the
case made in the 'Government Assessment' released by the White House on 30 August 2013, but
not even mentioned in the Joint Intelligence Community 'Assessment' produced two days
before.
The answer, Murray suggested, was that the 'intelligence' came from Mossad, and so would
not have been automatically shared with the British. But, given the superior capabilities of
Troodos, if Mossad had it, the British should have also. So his claims 'meshed' with those by
Timmerman and the AP, and the 'Express' report looks like a lame attempt at a cover-up.
Again however, one finds the world is a paradoxical place. As I noted in my SST post,
detailed demolitions of the claims about 'SIGINT' in relation to Ghouta were provided both
Seymour Hersh, in the 'Whose sarin?' article, and also on the 'Who Attacked Ghouta?' site
masterminded by one 'sasa wawa.'
Later, it became clear that this was likely to be the Israeli technology entrepreneur Saar
Wilf, a former employee of Unit 8200. So this may – or may not – be an indication
of deep divisions within Israeli intelligence.
Between 18 March and 31 April, a fascinating series of posts on the Salisbury incident
appeared on the 'Vineyard of the Saker' blog. The author, who used the name 'sushi', was a
self-professed IT professsional, who had however obviously acquired an extensive familiarity
with 'chemical forensics' and appeared to have some experience of 'SIGINT.'
In a 14 April post, 'sushi' produced a dismissal of the claims about 'SIGINT' implicating
the Russians over the Salisbury incident quite as contemptuous as that which 'sasa wawa' had
produced in relation to the claims about it incriminating the Syrian government over
Ghouta.
Pointing to the implausibility of the story disseminated by the 'Express', he remarked
that:
'It is doubted that any message traffic is processed on Cyprus. It is more likely that the
entire take is transmitted back to GCHQ in Cheltenham via a fibre optic link. There exabytes
of take are processed, not by a bored flight lieutenant, but by banks of high speed
computers.
'Clearly someone in Cheltenham has committed a programming error. Anyone with any
knowledge of secret communications knows that the code phrase used to confirm a murder in
Salisbury is "small pizza, no anchovies." '
Interestingly, another paper in the 'Express' group made a parallel claim in relation to
the Khan Sheikhoun incident to that about the Ghouta incident, but the story was not picked
up and may indeed have been suppressed.
On 9 April, the paper published a report headlined 'Brit spies' lead role in Syrian air
strikes; RAF BASE IS 'WEAPON.' This claimed that 'within an hour of the airstrike', Troodos
had intercepted communications revealing that nerve gas had been used, and had been delivered
by jets from the Syrian Arab Air Force's Shayrat Air Base.
I was drafting a response to the comment by 'Barbara Ann' – thanks for the link to
the recent posts by Adam Carter – before going out. Returning and reading some very
interesting comments, I think what I wanted to say has more general relevance.
One reason I am reading so much into 'this Dzerzhinsky thing' is the body of accumulating
evidence that people like Tait are part of a system of networks which combine
sanctimoniousness, corruption and stupidity in about equal measures. So some more examples
may be to the point.
Different cases in which I have taken an interest come together in a post by Tait on the
'Lawfare' site on 13 March, entitled 'U.K. Prime Minister's Speech on the Russian Poisoning
of Sergei Skripal: Decoding the Signals.'
In support of the claim that in accusing Russia of a pioneering act of chemical terrorism
Theresa May was relying upon accurate analysis from the 'U.K. intelligence community', Tait
wrote that:
'May then explained that Skripal was poisoned by a "military-grade nerve agent of a type
developed by Russia one of a group of nerve agents known as 'Novichok.'" She is laying out
the basic groundwork for the government's attribution to a nation state and, more
specifically, Russia. At Porton Down, the U.K. has one of the world's best forensic labs for
analyzing chemical, biological and nuclear weapons. With the poisoning of Alexander
Litvinenko in 2006, this lab not only established that Polonium-210 was used but also which
reactor in Russia it came from.'
In the event, as is by now well know, Boris Johnson's claim that Porton Down scientists
had told him that the agent which poisoned the Skripals came from Russia was specifically
repudiated by the head of that organisation, Gary Aitkenhead, on 3 April. Our Foreign
Secretary told a flagrant lie, and was exposed.
As I have shown in previous posts on this site, the 'Inquiry' conducted by Sir Robert Owen
into the death of Litvinenko was patently corrupt. Moreover, it seems highly likely that, in
fabricating 'evidence' to cover up what actually happened, Christopher Steele was doing a
'dry-run' for the fabrication of material in the dossier published by 'BuzzFeed.'
In fact, however, Owen's report made quite clear that the role of Porton Down was
marginal. Furthermore, 'Scientist A1' from the Atomic Weapons Establishment at Aldermaston
quite specifically rejected the claim that 'impurity profiling' made it possible to establish
that the source of the polonium was the Avangard facility at Sarov, her arguments being
accepted by Owen. Either Tait has not bothered to read the report or very much of the
coverage, or he is lying.
What Porton Down did do was to use 'impurity profiling', which can produce 'spectra'
identifying even the tiniest traces of substances, to frustrate the attempt to use the 'false
flag' attack at Ghouta on 21 August 2013 to inveigle the American and British governments
into destroying the Assad 'régime' and handing the country over to jihadists.
It may well be that this display of competence and integrity led to a 'clampdown' at the
organisation, which encouraged Boris Johnson to believe he could get away with lying about
what its scientists told him.
A general pattern which emerges is that the same small group of 'disinformation peddlers'
resurfaces in different contexts – and the pattern whereby 'private security companies'
are used to create a spurious impression of independence also recurs.
As I bring out in my piece on Ghouta, two figures who were critical in shaping the
'narrative' acccording to which Syrian government responsibility for the atrocity had been
conclusively proved, were Colonel Hamish de Bretton-Gordon, formerly the former commanding
officer of the UK Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear Regiment, and also NATO's
Rapid Reaction CBRN Battalion, and Dan Kaszeta.
Immediately after the story of the poisoning of the Skripals on 4 March broke, the same
duo reappeared, and have been as critical to shaping the 'narrative' about the later incident
as they were to that about the former.
(For the piece by Kaszeta on 'Bellingcat' which introduced the 'Novichok' theme four days
later, see
https://www.bellingcat.com/... .)
This makes it particular interesting to look at the website of Kaszeta's consultancy,
'Strongpoint Security Limited', in conjunction with the 'Companies House' documentation on
the company.
One would have thought from the website that his company was a small, but hardly
insignificant, player, in the field of 'physical and operational security.' As it happens,
having filed 'Total exemption small company accounts' since its incorporation in May 2011,
last December it filed 'Micro company accounts' for the year to 31 May 2017.
With a turnover of £20,000, staff costs of a bit more than half of that, and a
profit of £394, we can see that although unlike Matt Tait's, Kaszeta's company did
trade, if indeed it was his sole source of income, this pivotal figure in Anglo-American
'disinformation operations' was living on something less than $15,000 a year, at current
exchange rates. (Pull the other one, as we say in Britain.)
This is all the more ironic, as the website brings out quite how critical a figure Kaszeta
has been in obscuring the truth. From the bio he gives, we learn that having started as a
Chemical Officer in the U.S. Army, he worked for 12 years in the White House, dealing with
CBRN matters, before moving to Britain in 2008.
Among the articles to which he links on the site, we see his response in 'NOW Lebanon' in
December 2013 to Hersh's original 'Whose sarin?' piece on Ghouta, -- in which Kaszeta first
introduced the famous 'hexamine hypothesis.'
This – patently preposterous – suggestion that the presence of a single
'impurity' is a 'smoking gun' incriminating the Syrian government has echoed on into the
clearly corrupt OPCW documents purporting to demonstrate that it was responsible for the 4
April 2017 Khan Sheikhoun attack.
Of some interest in understanding where Kaszeta he is coming from is what he describes as
his 'oldest (and most footnoted on Wikipedia)' piece, which is an article published in 1988
on a site called 'Lituanus', on 'Lithuanian Resistance to Foreign Occupation 1940-52.'
As to Colonel de Bretton-Gordon, it is of interest to look at the attempt to 'finger' the
GRU over the Skripal poisoning published under the title 'UK Poisoning Inquiry turns to
Russian Agency in Mueller Indictments' in the 'New York Times' last Sunday, and the response
by the Russian Embassy in London to a question about it.
The response objects that 'while the British authorities keep concealing all information
concerning the investigation into the Salisbury incident, the newspaper has quoted "one
former US official familiar with the inquiry".'
It also asserts that that crucial evidence which has not been made available to the
Russians – and here, as with Ghouta and Khan Sheikhoun, the results of 'impurity
profiling' are critical – appears to have been shared not just with inappropriate
Americans, but with all kinds of others.
And indeed, the Embassy is quite right in suggesting that the claim made by the supposed
creator of 'Novichok', Vladimir Uglev, to the BBC in April about 'all the spectrum data I was
sent recently' has neither been confirmed nor denied. This seems a general pattern –
the 'spectra' which may actually be able to provide definitive answers to questions of
responsibility are only provided to people who can be relied upon to give the 'right'
answers.
The Embassy response also quite fairly refers to a report in the 'Times' also in April,
about the 'intelligence' which had been 'used to persuade world leaders that Moscow was
behind the poisoning' and that the 'Novichok' had been manufactured at the Shikhany facility
at in southwest Russia, which stated that de Bretton-Gordon, 'who had seen the intelligence,
called it very compelling.' He has a long history of lying about CW in Syria – so is
obviously the right person to lie about them in the UK.
It thus becomes interesting to probe into what lies behind the opening of de
Bretton-Gordon's entry on the 'Military Speakers' website ('Real Heroes; Real Stories.')
According to this, he is 'Chief Operating Office of SecureBio Ltd a commercial company
offering CBRN Resilience, consultancy and deployable capabilities.'
From 'Companies House', we learn that the liquidation of 'Secure Bio', which started in in
June 2015, was concluded in August last year. The really interesting thing about the records,
however, is that at the time of the liquidation the company had very large debts, which were
written off, of a kind and in a manner which suggested that de Bretton-Gordon's activities
may have been largely funded by loans from untraceable sources which were not meant to be
repaid.
Actually, with the 'NYT' report we come full circle. Among those quoted is Mark Galeotti
– apparently his admission that he had totally misrepresented the thinking of the
Russian General Staff has not him made more cautious about making extravagant claims about
its Main Intelligence Directorate (misreported as Main Directorate by the 'NYT.')
Also quoted are two figures who play key roles in Owen's Report – the Soviet era-GRU
defector 'Viktor Suvorov' (real name 'Vladimir Rezun') and the former KGB operative Yuri
Shvets. Both of these feature prominently in the posts on the Litvinenko affair to which I
have linked, and both were key members of the 'information operations' network centred around
the late Boris Berezovsky. This now seems to have taken control of American policy, as of
British.
The role of 'Suvorov'/Rezun in attempting to defend the interpretations of Stalin's policy
put forward by MI6 in the run-up to the Second World War, and those asserted later by General
Keitel, and the way he was demolished by the leading American historian of the War in the
East, Colonel David Glantz, and the Israeli historian Gabriel Gorodetsky, is too large a
subject to go into here.
However, it provides further reason to wonder whether the misreadings of Stalin's policy
which caused MI6 to give advice to Chamberlain which helped destroy the last chances of
preventing the Nazi-Soviet Pact, may still be the 'house view' of that organisation. It was,
obviously, the Pact which spelled 'curtains' both for Poland and the Baltics.
There is a pattern of abuse of formerly well regarded institutions to achieve the
propaganda aims of the Deep State establishment. The depths that were plumbed to push the
Iraq WMD falsehoods are well known. Yet no one was held to account nor was there any honest
accounting of the abuse. There have been pretenses like the Owen inquiry that you note.
We see the same situation of sweeping under the rug malfeasance and even outright
criminality through obfuscation and obstruction in the case of the meddling in the 2016
election by top officials in intelligence and law enforcement. Clearly less and less people
are buying what the Deep State sells despite their overwhelming control of the media
channels.
It seems that we are marching towards a credibility crisis similar to what was experienced
in the Soviet Union when no one trusted the contents in Pravda.
What is to be gained by the leadership in Britain in promoting these biological weapons
cases since Litvinenko? In the US it is quite apparent that the Deep State have become
extremely powerful and the likelihood that Trump recognizes that resistance is futile is very
high. Schumer may be proven right that they have six ways from Sunday to make you kowtow to
their dictats.
"... Look at the case, frequently discussed here, of British intelligence services and the fake rock , which had the guts of a Blackberry cellular telephone inside it, in Moscow. This 'rock' was strategically situated so that intelligence assets (you only call them 'traitors' if they are western citizens; Russians who betray their country are dissident heroes) could stroll past and flip messages to the rock, and every so often, British intelligence services could remotely extract it; the 'rock' only had to be touched to charge the batteries. ..."
"... But that was six years after the fact. For six years the British stonewalled and denied, and acted hurt that anyone would believe such an obvious Russian-bullshit story ..."
"... Tony Blair, for example, has never to the best of my knowledge admitted to having lied to influence public opinion in the UK in favour of committing with its partner, the United States, to the Iraq War, which was such a smorgasbord of lies that the weapons-of-mass-destruction whopper was only the biggest. Iraq was wrecked, hundreds of thousands of people were killed, and the liars were never punished, nor ever in fact admitted their guilt. In cases where the guilty must begrudgingly admit they lied, nobody does anything about it, the firebolts of celestial retribution never appear, and the liars go on to lie some more with increased confidence. An eager and gullible audience is always ready to swallow some more horseshit. ..."
"... Like now, with the Skripal case. We are supposed to believe mysterious Russian assassins daubed Novichok nerve agent on the Skripals' front doorknob, which transferred to their hands, and then they drove downtown, enjoyed a good meal in a restaurant, and then started feeling poorly, and collapsed on a public bench, victims of a nerve agent much more toxic than VX. Five to eight times, says FOX News . ..."
"... But the Skripals did not die. They were carefully shielded and monitored by the British security services so that they could not be questioned by the public, but they did not die. ..."
"... Perhaps of greatest concern, if chemical-weapons professionals were aware that Novichok could persist in deadly concentrations for months – that it was specially engineered to be not only virtually undetectable by NATO sensors, but to remain deadly through the deleterious effects of the elements why did they say nothing when the dozy police assured the public that it was in absolutely no danger? ..."
"... This article is a timely reminder that the UK never stopped fighting the Cold War. I had forgotten about the embarrassing spy rock incident. The (labour) government lies were accepted without question by the media. ..."
"... The Novichok issue – fits into this pattern of behaviour. ..."
Uncle Volodya says, "Stupidity is the same as evil, if you judge by the results."
I've been waiting for something to happen for a day, or a week, or a year; with the blood in the ink of the headlines
and the roar of the crowd in my ears. You might ask what it takes to remember but you know that you've seen it before;
when a government lies to a people and a country is drifting to war
Jackson Browne, from "Lives in the Balance"
"People never lie so much as after a hunt, during a war, or before an election."
Otto von Bismarck
During an hour or so of poring over quotes about lying (of course I don't make these up myself), before the snatch of lyric from
"Lives in the Balance" floated into my memory unbidden, I was struck as never before by the prevalence of belief in the
truth always coming out. Lyric after quote after stanza has it that you can lie and lie and lie, but eventually the truth will always
surface, and the liar will be caught.
Is that true? Was it ever true? Perhaps among the congenitally stupid, who labour simultaneously under their guilt and
a suspicion that smarter people (which is everybody else) can read minds; I'm reminded of a story which was set in the American southern
states, in which the probable perpetrator of some petty crime or other was brought into the rural sheriff's office for questioning.
He was told that he must take a lie-detector test. Accordingly, a metal colander, such as is used for washing salad ingredients,
was placed on his head, with wires from it leading to the photocopier. The deputies had put a piece of paper in the copier which
read, "He's Lying!!", and whenever they asked the suspect a question, they would press the 'print' button following the answer, and
out would come a paper which averred that the answer was a lie, which they would show to him. Eventually, confronted with his tapestry
of falsehoods and under the apprehension that he was being measured by other-worldly technology, he confessed. But the local law
enforcement was already well aware that he was guilty – they just wanted a confession.
So, perhaps in circumstances like that, in which the liar is a desperate fool, perhaps then the truth always comes out. But in
reality, not only does truth almost never come out, it only does when all possibility of further elaboration on existing lies has
been exhausted. But here's the real kicker – when the truth does come out, we are led by philosophers to believe that evangelical
vengeance will be swift to follow. Does that really happen? Perhaps after the liar is dead, he or she goes someplace featuring a
dancing-flames motif, where he or she is prodded the livelong day by imps with little pitchforks. But that sort of forestalls the
satisfaction of justice done in the here and now – punishment delayed is punishment denied, am I right?
Look at the case, frequently discussed here, of
British intelligence services and
the fake rock , which had the guts of a Blackberry cellular telephone inside it, in Moscow. This 'rock' was strategically situated
so that intelligence assets (you only call them 'traitors' if they are western citizens; Russians who betray their country are dissident
heroes) could stroll past and flip messages to the rock, and every so often, British intelligence services could remotely extract
it; the 'rock' only had to be touched to charge the batteries.
But that was six years after the fact. For six years the British stonewalled and denied, and acted hurt that anyone would believe
such an obvious Russian-bullshit story; the Foreign Office
scornfully retorted , "We are concerned and surprised
at these allegations. We reject any allegation of improper conduct in our dealing with Russian NGO's ." So receiving surreptitious
messages through a styrofoam rock is just the above-board, in-plain-sight honest dialogue in which foreign embassies everywhere engage;
why the outrage? And when Britain finally admitted what had been going on, minus all the holier-than-thou gilding of trying to build
a better world with Russia through an active and engaged civil society absolutely nothing was done. Not only does the truth not necessarily
ever come out – Tony Blair, for example, has never to the best of my knowledge admitted to having lied to influence public opinion
in the UK in favour of committing with its partner, the United States, to the Iraq War, which was such a smorgasbord of lies that
the weapons-of-mass-destruction whopper was only the biggest. Iraq was wrecked, hundreds of thousands of people were killed, and
the liars were never punished, nor ever in fact admitted their guilt. In cases where the guilty must begrudgingly admit they lied,
nobody does anything about it, the firebolts of celestial retribution never appear, and the liars go on to lie some more with increased
confidence. An eager and gullible audience is always ready to swallow some more horseshit.
Like now, with the Skripal case. We are supposed to believe mysterious Russian assassins daubed Novichok nerve agent on the Skripals'
front doorknob, which transferred to their hands, and then they drove downtown, enjoyed a good meal in a restaurant, and then started
feeling poorly, and collapsed on a public bench, victims of a nerve agent much more toxic than VX. Five to eight times,
says FOX News . Ten times more deadly than its better-known predecessors, says Anne Applebaum. But the Skripals did not die.
They were carefully shielded and monitored by the British security services so that they could not be questioned by the public, but
they did not die.
And that's possible – in the case of a mild dose of, say, VX (much less deadly than Novichok, remember), as a liquid through a
skin-contact vector, it might take up to two hours for symptoms (local sweating and muscular twitching) to appear, according to the
US Army's Armament, Munitions and Chemical Command Chemical Research, Development and Engineering Center's
Reigle Report . The trouble with that scenario
as applied to the Skripals is that the duration of those effects would be about 3 days for a mild exposure, and 5 days for a severe
exposure. The Skripals showed no such effects; they ate dinner in what must have been to all appearances a normal fashion, and then
collapsed unconscious on a bench outside. Some accounts suggested they had a quantity of foam around their mouths, which might result
from salivation. At least one report says Yulia Skripal had vomited. No reports mentioned excessive sweating and muscular twitching,
both of which are hallmarks of nerve-agent poisoning via liquid (as opposed to gas) exposure through the skin.
There are a couple of other problems with the British approach. We've all seen the pictures of the chemical-warfare types in their
green dung-beetle suits, meticulously taking samples, while unprotected firemen in simple turnout gear with no masks or breathing
apparatus stood just a couple of feet away. VX as a liquid could become a gas, but it'd have to be pretty hot. If that happened,
it would not be persistent beyond a couple of hours. VX as a liquid, under very cold conditions, can actually persist for a couple
of months. Quite a bit colder than it typically is in even England, though, in spring and summer.
Daily averages for Salisbury, UK in March are
above freezing, an average of about 45F, and it customarily gets much warmer going into summer. So you can't have it both ways –
if it's a liquid, it's more persistent in its toxicity over time, but that effect is greatly attenuated by temperature. If it's a
gas, breathing apparatus for anyone who might be exposed is an absolute rule.
Another discrepancy came up, in
a timeline of the Skripals'
movements . They left the father's home at some time close to but prior to 1:30 PM, and drove into town. This, it is estimated,
would take about 10 to 15 minutes. They are observed by CCTV entering a multi-story car park in Salisbury at around 1:32 PM. Here
one of the Skripals – both of whom apparently touched the front doorknob on the way out, the second one perhaps just for luck – then
touched the ticket machine with their bare hand. This machine remained unchecked for 8 days after the event. How many other people
touched it between that time and the time anyone checked it for toxicity? Yet nobody else showed any symptoms.
It was an extremely oddball event, which continues to inspire skeptical questions and scornful refutations. But I don't want to
get too bogged-down in the Skripal affair – instead, I want to focus a bit on the more recent incident, the 'poisoning' of Dawn Sturgess
and Charles Rowley, in nearby Amesbury. This incident, also, has featured a wildly-improbable British-government narrative and skeptical
questioning, and one of the foremost skeptical questions has been "How the hell could a nerve agent that did not kill the people
who were its targets accidentally kill a chance victim four months later?"
Enter, stage left, the American Chemical Weapons Expert, who announces that
Novichok was specially engineered to remain persistent over a long time . So that it could, you know, kill incidental victims
months later and further incriminate the country where it is supposed to have originated. That's why it is the go-to poison for Russian
assassins. It might not kill the people you wanted to kill, but it could kill someone totally unrelated, months later. True story.
There are a few things you should know about the expert quoted, Dan Kaszeta. One, he's the Managing Director of
Strongpoint Security (it seems like all the UK's
go-to commentators are executives in the security industry, like FireEye or Crowdstrike). Sounding off in the media, taking a position
which unreservedly supports the government narrative – no matter how nutty it is – is a good way to get noticed in the security business,
and Strongpoint is a fairly new operation. Two, he's the
resident CBRN expert at Bellingcat . Three, he is not a Trump fan,
broadcasting for his anti-Trump audience
how the President of the United States' motorcade and security detail might be confused, frustrated and sidetracked so that he would
get the message he was not welcome. I can hardly fault Kaszeta for that, since Trump is over-the-top unpopular just about everywhere
he goes, but it's a little unusual to see a former White-House consultant handing out advice on how to screw up a White House visit.
Four, he is a much bigger noise on the CBRN front than you might have imagined if you've never heard of him before, confidently
chatting up the wide-eyed press corps on all things chemical-warfare. And always supporting the UK government's contention that Novichok
was always Russian, only Russian, and that it could not have been anyone else. Here he is,
letting the WBUR
Boston audience know in no uncertain terms, "I don't know anybody who knows how to make it except these guys in Russia. They've
been a deep, dark secret." But their purported engineer, Vil Marzayanov,
claimed their precursors were
ordinary organophosphates which are commercially available; "One should be mindful that the chemical components or precursors
of A-232 and its binary version novichok-5 are ordinary organophosphates that can be made at commercial chemical companies that manufacture
fertilizers and pesticides [nerve agents, after all, arose from research into pesticides and are really advanced versions of
pesticides]. In my opinion, this research program was premised on the ability to hide the production of precursor chemicals under
the guise of legitimate commercial chemical production of agricultural chemicals . And if America was concerned that its manufacture
was devious and covert, it is kind of difficult to imagine why an American publisher
published a book which featured the
formula for making it, courtesy of Marzayanov, and which anyone can obtain for around $30.00. Is that how you keep something
a deep, dark secret? And obviously the Defense Research establishment at Porton Down, only a couple of miles from the site of the
Salisbury poisoning, had samples of Novichok, since they were able to identify it in a couple of hours. It's beginning to shape up
like the worst-kept deep dark secret in the world.
According to Dan, the Soviets wanted to engineer chemical agents that NATO equipment could not detect. Gosh! Those tricky sons
of bitches. So then they engineered it to be extra-persistent, so it would stay around for months, just to make it fair, so NATO
could have lots of time to take more samples. The thing is, the whole raison d'etre of a nerve agent is that it be non
-persistent; you want it to rapidly and efficiently kill off the enemy, but you want to move your own troops into that same
area in a matter of days, to consolidate your gains and establish your own military presence. Months just doesn't cut it.
Asked why an assassin would use such a distinctive agent, pointing straight back at his own country, Dan suggests that given the
historic secrecy of the project, someone might have reasoned that it would go undetected. Uh huh; sure – the Stimson Report came
out in 1995. And the agent used is 'specially engineered to remain a toxic menace for months'.
Here's Dan again , backstopping the White House's assertion that only Assad could have been behind an alleged sarin gas attack
at Khan Sheikhoun; the Russian version, he says, is "highly implausible". "Nerve agents are the result of a very expensive, exotic,
industrial chemical process -- these are not something you just whip up." Oh, dear – put John Gilbert, senior science fellow
at the Centre for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation, in the "Disagree" column: he says
all you would need to make sarin
is about a 200 square-foot room and a competent chemist.
Two other attributes compound sarin's insidiousness. First, it's not especially hard to produce, in terms of both resources
and expertise. "A competent chemist could make it, and possibly very quickly, in a matter of days," says John Gilbert, a senior science
fellow at the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation, who spent much of his Air Force career assessing countries' WMD capabilities.
Producing sarin doesn't require any kind of massive facility; a roughly 200 square foot room would do.
According to Dan
– yet again, this time in the Los Angeles Times – one form of Novichok is as a solid at normal temperatures, and it
might have been deployed as a dust or powder. Uh huh, might have been. But (a) that would have been the least-persistent method except
for as a gas, it would never have lasted four months outside, through rain, and (b) not even a rummy like Charles Rowley would have
tried to pawn off a bottle of dust to his girlfriend as perfume.
Because here we are again, at another 'Novichok' poisoning, and Dan helpfully dispels the myth that Novichok would not still be
around and deadly after four months, by announcing the Soviets specially engineered it to do just that. And not only that – they
made it especially for contaminating large areas of land, such as ports, and equipment, like tanks, so that they would be dangerous
for months. That was supposedly 'the idea' when they were developed.
Horseshit. Nerve agents are most effective against unprotected troops in the open, and if you want to contaminate an area the
size of a port, the only possible way you could do it would be with a spray – the least persistent form of all. All organophospate-based
nerve agents can be effectively dealt with – before unprotected personnel are exposed – by spraying and washing contaminated areas
with water; moisture makes them break down quickly. Nobody has engineered a miracle waterproof organophosphate nerve agent. Once
nerve agents are known to have been used, troops in the field are in TOPP (Threat-Oriented Protective Posture) Medium at least, in
full chem suits with breathing apparatus available for rapid donning. Nerve agents were not developed as a weapon of covert assassination,
although they have definitely been used in that role; they were developed as a weapon of mass destruction to be used against a military
adversary who presumably is trained in CBRN countermeasures. They were not developed to spray tanks, in the hope that some mook would
put his bare hand on it two months later, and fall over jerking and drooling. How the fuck would you disperse enough nerve agent
to contaminate an airfield? Fly over with a water-bomber and drench it from end to end? You don't think that might offer a bit of
a clue? If you want to disperse a large amount of nerve agent, it will have to be vaporized, and it will have to be carried in the
dispersal vehicle as a liquid. Liquids are heavy – the more you want to disperse, the bigger your dispersal vehicle will have to
be. The Soviet Union developed gas warheads, to be used on a ballistic missile, but if you can land a gas warhead next to an airfield
you might as well go the whole nine yards and blow it up, because a warhead that lies there hissing and dispersing a cloud of vapour
is kind of a giveaway. Unless, of course, you only want to kill the military personnel in the area, and not damage the airfield,
so you can quickly take it over and deploy your own aircraft from it. In which instance you would have been pretty stupid to envelope
it in a toxic nerve agent that is still going to be active next spring. And the whole idea of a nerve agent is to deploy a small
amount of it, using an unobtrusive dispersal vehicle, so as not to call attention to it until personnel in the target area are affected.
It's nice of Dan to try and fill in the blanks the way he did, but there are just too many blanks. The latest story from HM government
is that a perfume bottle was found in Charles Rowley's home, and tests revealed – surprise! – that it contained Novichok. The story
is that Rowley found it in Queen Elizabeth Park. Somehow, Dawn Sturgess is supposed to have sprayed the contents of the bottle on
her wrists and face, like perfume. Oops! now it's an aerosol, the fastest-acting form of nerve agent, and she probably would have
been affected in minutes at most, not hours. But she was not at Rowley's home, where the bottle was supposedly discovered. So he
either took the bottle with him to meet her, and after noticing her exhibiting symptoms of nerve-agent poisoning, took the bottle
home with him and put it in his house, or they were both affected at roughly the same time, and somebody thoughtfully posted the
bottle to his home address. If she was poisoned at his house, she would not likely have made it out.; remember, it was dispersed
as a vapor. So there is a question as to how the bottle got there, and another as to how it laid there in the park for nearly four
months, until Rowley discovered it.
And how it remained powerful enough to kill after all that time, when the fresh-off-the-shelf
Novichok, four months previously, failed to kill the Skripals. Not to mention how it got there in the first place – are we supposed
to believe that highly-trained assassins straight from the Kremlin did the Skripal job, and then tossed away their backup supply
in a local park?
Perhaps of greatest concern, if chemical-weapons professionals were aware that Novichok could persist in deadly concentrations
for months – that it was specially engineered to be not only virtually undetectable by NATO sensors, but to remain deadly through
the deleterious effects of the elements why did they say nothing when the dozy police assured the public that it was in absolutely
no danger?
Thanks, Al! Yes, Britain – like the USA – has a reliable stable of current and ex-military officers
to call upon whenever the broader public starts getting inquisitive or uncomfortable with the official storyline, to get us
back on the path with the uncompromising guarantee of military experience and exotic knowledge the average yokel can never
hope to possess.
General (Ret'd) Wesley Clark, for example, the affable and polished talking head for CNN during the Iraq War
and onetime presidential candidate.
Yes, the term CBRN replaced the old NBCD, Nuclear, Biological and Chemical Defense.
This article is a timely reminder that the UK never stopped fighting the Cold War.
I had forgotten about the embarrassing spy rock incident. The (labour) government lies were accepted without question by the
media.
The Novichok issue – fits into this pattern of behaviour.
I was drafting a response to the comment by 'Barbara Ann' – thanks for the link to
the recent posts by Adam Carter – before going out. Returning and reading some very
interesting comments, I think what I wanted to say has more general relevance.
One reason I am reading so much into 'this Dzerzhinsky thing' is the body of accumulating
evidence that people like Tait are part of a system of networks which combine
sanctimoniousness, corruption and stupidity in about equal measures. So some more examples
may be to the point.
Different cases in which I have taken an interest come together in a post by Tait on the
'Lawfare' site on 13 March, entitled 'U.K. Prime Minister's Speech on the Russian Poisoning
of Sergei Skripal: Decoding the Signals.'
In support of the claim that in accusing Russia of a pioneering act of chemical terrorism
Theresa May was relying upon accurate analysis from the 'U.K. intelligence community', Tait
wrote that:
'May then explained that Skripal was poisoned by a "military-grade nerve agent of a type
developed by Russia one of a group of nerve agents known as 'Novichok.'" She is laying out
the basic groundwork for the government's attribution to a nation state and, more
specifically, Russia. At Porton Down, the U.K. has one of the world's best forensic labs for
analyzing chemical, biological and nuclear weapons. With the poisoning of Alexander
Litvinenko in 2006, this lab not only established that Polonium-210 was used but also which
reactor in Russia it came from.'
In the event, as is by now well know, Boris Johnson's claim that Porton Down scientists
had told him that the agent which poisoned the Skripals came from Russia was specifically
repudiated by the head of that organisation, Gary Aitkenhead, on 3 April. Our Foreign
Secretary told a flagrant lie, and was exposed.
As I have shown in previous posts on this site, the 'Inquiry' conducted by Sir Robert Owen
into the death of Litvinenko was patently corrupt. Moreover, it seems highly likely that, in
fabricating 'evidence' to cover up what actually happened, Christopher Steele was doing a
'dry-run' for the fabrication of material in the dossier published by 'BuzzFeed.'
In fact, however, Owen's report made quite clear that the role of Porton Down was
marginal. Furthermore, 'Scientist A1' from the Atomic Weapons Establishment at Aldermaston
quite specifically rejected the claim that 'impurity profiling' made it possible to establish
that the source of the polonium was the Avangard facility at Sarov, her arguments being
accepted by Owen. Either Tait has not bothered to read the report or very much of the
coverage, or he is lying.
What Porton Down did do was to use 'impurity profiling', which can produce 'spectra'
identifying even the tiniest traces of substances, to frustrate the attempt to use the 'false
flag' attack at Ghouta on 21 August 2013 to inveigle the American and British governments
into destroying the Assad 'régime' and handing the country over to jihadists.
It may well be that this display of competence and integrity led to a 'clampdown' at the
organisation, which encouraged Boris Johnson to believe he could get away with lying about
what its scientists told him.
A general pattern which emerges is that the same small group of 'disinformation peddlers'
resurfaces in different contexts – and the pattern whereby 'private security companies'
are used to create a spurious impression of independence also recurs.
As I bring out in my piece on Ghouta, two figures who were critical in shaping the
'narrative' acccording to which Syrian government responsibility for the atrocity had been
conclusively proved, were Colonel Hamish de Bretton-Gordon, formerly the former commanding
officer of the UK Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear Regiment, and also NATO's
Rapid Reaction CBRN Battalion, and Dan Kaszeta.
Immediately after the story of the poisoning of the Skripals on 4 March broke, the same
duo reappeared, and have been as critical to shaping the 'narrative' about the later incident
as they were to that about the former.
(For the piece by Kaszeta on 'Bellingcat' which introduced the 'Novichok' theme four days
later, see
https://www.bellingcat.com/... .)
This makes it particular interesting to look at the website of Kaszeta's consultancy,
'Strongpoint Security Limited', in conjunction with the 'Companies House' documentation on
the company.
One would have thought from the website that his company was a small, but hardly
insignificant, player, in the field of 'physical and operational security.' As it happens,
having filed 'Total exemption small company accounts' since its incorporation in May 2011,
last December it filed 'Micro company accounts' for the year to 31 May 2017.
With a turnover of £20,000, staff costs of a bit more than half of that, and a
profit of £394, we can see that although unlike Matt Tait's, Kaszeta's company did
trade, if indeed it was his sole source of income, this pivotal figure in Anglo-American
'disinformation operations' was living on something less than $15,000 a year, at current
exchange rates. (Pull the other one, as we say in Britain.)
This is all the more ironic, as the website brings out quite how critical a figure Kaszeta
has been in obscuring the truth. From the bio he gives, we learn that having started as a
Chemical Officer in the U.S. Army, he worked for 12 years in the White House, dealing with
CBRN matters, before moving to Britain in 2008.
Among the articles to which he links on the site, we see his response in 'NOW Lebanon' in
December 2013 to Hersh's original 'Whose sarin?' piece on Ghouta, -- in which Kaszeta first
introduced the famous 'hexamine hypothesis.'
This – patently preposterous – suggestion that the presence of a single
'impurity' is a 'smoking gun' incriminating the Syrian government has echoed on into the
clearly corrupt OPCW documents purporting to demonstrate that it was responsible for the 4
April 2017 Khan Sheikhoun attack.
Of some interest in understanding where Kaszeta he is coming from is what he describes as
his 'oldest (and most footnoted on Wikipedia)' piece, which is an article published in 1988
on a site called 'Lituanus', on 'Lithuanian Resistance to Foreign Occupation 1940-52.'
As to Colonel de Bretton-Gordon, it is of interest to look at the attempt to 'finger' the
GRU over the Skripal poisoning published under the title 'UK Poisoning Inquiry turns to
Russian Agency in Mueller Indictments' in the 'New York Times' last Sunday, and the response
by the Russian Embassy in London to a question about it.
The response objects that 'while the British authorities keep concealing all information
concerning the investigation into the Salisbury incident, the newspaper has quoted "one
former US official familiar with the inquiry".'
It also asserts that that crucial evidence which has not been made available to the
Russians – and here, as with Ghouta and Khan Sheikhoun, the results of 'impurity
profiling' are critical – appears to have been shared not just with inappropriate
Americans, but with all kinds of others.
And indeed, the Embassy is quite right in suggesting that the claim made by the supposed
creator of 'Novichok', Vladimir Uglev, to the BBC in April about 'all the spectrum data I was
sent recently' has neither been confirmed nor denied. This seems a general pattern –
the 'spectra' which may actually be able to provide definitive answers to questions of
responsibility are only provided to people who can be relied upon to give the 'right'
answers.
The Embassy response also quite fairly refers to a report in the 'Times' also in April,
about the 'intelligence' which had been 'used to persuade world leaders that Moscow was
behind the poisoning' and that the 'Novichok' had been manufactured at the Shikhany facility
at in southwest Russia, which stated that de Bretton-Gordon, 'who had seen the intelligence,
called it very compelling.' He has a long history of lying about CW in Syria – so is
obviously the right person to lie about them in the UK.
It thus becomes interesting to probe into what lies behind the opening of de
Bretton-Gordon's entry on the 'Military Speakers' website ('Real Heroes; Real Stories.')
According to this, he is 'Chief Operating Office of SecureBio Ltd a commercial company
offering CBRN Resilience, consultancy and deployable capabilities.'
From 'Companies House', we learn that the liquidation of 'Secure Bio', which started in in
June 2015, was concluded in August last year. The really interesting thing about the records,
however, is that at the time of the liquidation the company had very large debts, which were
written off, of a kind and in a manner which suggested that de Bretton-Gordon's activities
may have been largely funded by loans from untraceable sources which were not meant to be
repaid.
Actually, with the 'NYT' report we come full circle. Among those quoted is Mark Galeotti
– apparently his admission that he had totally misrepresented the thinking of the
Russian General Staff has not him made more cautious about making extravagant claims about
its Main Intelligence Directorate (misreported as Main Directorate by the 'NYT.')
Also quoted are two figures who play key roles in Owen's Report – the Soviet era-GRU
defector 'Viktor Suvorov' (real name 'Vladimir Rezun') and the former KGB operative Yuri
Shvets. Both of these feature prominently in the posts on the Litvinenko affair to which I
have linked, and both were key members of the 'information operations' network centred around
the late Boris Berezovsky. This now seems to have taken control of American policy, as of
British.
The role of 'Suvorov'/Rezun in attempting to defend the interpretations of Stalin's policy
put forward by MI6 in the run-up to the Second World War, and those asserted later by General
Keitel, and the way he was demolished by the leading American historian of the War in the
East, Colonel David Glantz, and the Israeli historian Gabriel Gorodetsky, is too large a
subject to go into here.
However, it provides further reason to wonder whether the misreadings of Stalin's policy
which caused MI6 to give advice to Chamberlain which helped destroy the last chances of
preventing the Nazi-Soviet Pact, may still be the 'house view' of that organisation. It was,
obviously, the Pact which spelled 'curtains' both for Poland and the Baltics.
More evidence for the at least passive complicity of GCHQ – for which Matt Tait used
to work, and which Robert Hannigan used to run – in corrupt 'information operations'
comes in a report yesterday on CNN.
'Police have identified two suspects in the poisoning of former Russian double agent
Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia, a source with knowledge of the investigation told CNN
on Thursday.
'The pair left the UK in the wake of the attack on what is believed to have been a
commercial flight, the source added.
'Their departure was revealed in a coded Russian message to Moscow sent after the attack,
which was intercepted by a British base in Cyprus, the source said. The British government
blames the Skripals' poisoning on Russia.'
The base in question is high up in the Troodos mountains, and is formally run by the RAF
but actually a key resource for both GCHQ and NSA in monitoring communications over a wide
area. According to an internal document from the former organisation, it has 'long been
regarded as a 'Jewel in the Crown' by NSA as it offers unique access to the Levant, North
Africa, and Turkey'.
That the quote comes a report in 'The Intercept' in January 2016 revealing that one of the
uses of the Troodos facility is to intercept live video feeds from Israeli drones and fighter
jets brings out how paradoxical the world is. For it also appears to have emerged as an
important resource in 'information operations' in support of 'Borgist' agendas.
The claim about intercepts incriminating the Russians over the Salisbury incident was
first made in a piece by Marco Giannangeli in the Daily Express on 9 April, which followed up
the claims which Colonel de Bretton-Gordon had been instrumental in disseminating, and was
then widely picked up by the MSM.
It was headlined: 'REVEALED: The bombshell Russian message intercepted on DAY of Skripal
poisonings,' and opened: 'AN ELECTRONIC message to Moscow sent on the day former Russian spy
Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia were poisoned with a nerve agent in Salisbury included
the phrase "the package has been delivered".'
Supposedly, this 'prompted a young Flight Lieutenant to recall a separate message that had
been intercepted and discounted on the previous day.' The messages were 'understood to have
formed "just one part" of the intelligence packet which later allowed Prime Minister Theresa
May to state it was "highly likely" that Russia was behind the attacks.'
As it happens, the same writer – Marco Giannangeli – had disseminated a
parallel piece of palpable fiction on 1 September 2013, in the 'Sunday Express', in relation
to the Ghouta 'false flag.'
This one was headlined, even more melodramatically, 'Senior Syrian military chiefs tell
captain: fire chemicals or be shot; BRITISH intelligence chiefs have intercepted radio
messages in which senior Syrian military chiefs are heard ordering the use of chemical
weapons.'
Part of the story of how bogus claims about 'smoking gun' evidence from 'SIGINT' were used
to support the attempt to use the Ghouta 'false flag' to inveigle the British and Americans
into destroying the Syrian government was told in my SST post on the incident. However, to
mix metaphors, I only scratched the surface of a can of worms.
In a report on the 'Daily Caller' site on 29 August 2013, Kenneth Timmerman claimed that
the sequence had started with an actual intercept by Unit 8200 – the Israeli equivalent
of GCHQ and NSA.
Claiming to base his account on Western intelligence sources, he suggested that:
'According to these officers, who served in top positions in the United States, Britain,
France, Israel, and Jordan, a Syrian military communication intercepted by Israel's famed
Unit 8200 electronic intelligence outfit has been doctored so that it leads a reader to just
the opposite conclusion reached by the original report.'
While I am not in a position to establish whether his claim is or is not accurate, an AP
report on the same day quoted 'U.S. intelligence officials' explaining that 'an intercept of
Syrian military officials discussing the strike was among low-level staff, with no direct
evidence tying the attack back to an Assad insider or even a senior Syrian commander'.
Meanwhile, Timmerman's claim that 'The doctored report was picked up on Israel's Channel 2
TV on Aug. 24, then by Focus magazine in Germany, the Times of Israel, and eventually by The
Cable in Washington, DC' is supported by links to the relevant stories, which say what he
claims they say.
Moreover, it seems clear that the 1 September 2013 report was an attempt to counter a
– somewhat devastating – critique made in a 31 August post entitled 'The Troodos
Conundrum' by the former British Ambassador Craig Murray, who had been closely involved with
the facility during his time at the Foreign Office (and has written invaluable material on
the Salisbury incident.)
Precisely because of the closeness of the GCHQ/NSA collaboration, Murray brought out,
there was indeed a major problem explaining why claims about 'SIGINT' had been central to the
case made in the 'Government Assessment' released by the White House on 30 August 2013, but
not even mentioned in the Joint Intelligence Community 'Assessment' produced two days
before.
The answer, Murray suggested, was that the 'intelligence' came from Mossad, and so would
not have been automatically shared with the British. But, given the superior capabilities of
Troodos, if Mossad had it, the British should have also. So his claims 'meshed' with those by
Timmerman and the AP, and the 'Express' report looks like a lame attempt at a cover-up.
Again however, one finds the world is a paradoxical place. As I noted in my SST post,
detailed demolitions of the claims about 'SIGINT' in relation to Ghouta were provided both
Seymour Hersh, in the 'Whose sarin?' article, and also on the 'Who Attacked Ghouta?' site
masterminded by one 'sasa wawa.'
Later, it became clear that this was likely to be the Israeli technology entrepreneur Saar
Wilf, a former employee of Unit 8200. So this may – or may not – be an indication
of deep divisions within Israeli intelligence.
Between 18 March and 31 April, a fascinating series of posts on the Salisbury incident
appeared on the 'Vineyard of the Saker' blog. The author, who used the name 'sushi', was a
self-professed IT professsional, who had however obviously acquired an extensive familiarity
with 'chemical forensics' and appeared to have some experience of 'SIGINT.'
In a 14 April post, 'sushi' produced a dismissal of the claims about 'SIGINT' implicating
the Russians over the Salisbury incident quite as contemptuous as that which 'sasa wawa' had
produced in relation to the claims about it incriminating the Syrian government over
Ghouta.
Pointing to the implausibility of the story disseminated by the 'Express', he remarked
that:
'It is doubted that any message traffic is processed on Cyprus. It is more likely that the
entire take is transmitted back to GCHQ in Cheltenham via a fibre optic link. There exabytes
of take are processed, not by a bored flight lieutenant, but by banks of high speed
computers.
'Clearly someone in Cheltenham has committed a programming error. Anyone with any
knowledge of secret communications knows that the code phrase used to confirm a murder in
Salisbury is "small pizza, no anchovies." '
Interestingly, another paper in the 'Express' group made a parallel claim in relation to
the Khan Sheikhoun incident to that about the Ghouta incident, but the story was not picked
up and may indeed have been suppressed.
On 9 April, the paper published a report headlined 'Brit spies' lead role in Syrian air
strikes; RAF BASE IS 'WEAPON.' This claimed that 'within an hour of the airstrike', Troodos
had intercepted communications revealing that nerve gas had been used, and had been delivered
by jets from the Syrian Arab Air Force's Shayrat Air Base.
"... By creating an extremely anti-communist state, the elite will never have to worry about losing control over society because their wealth and power remains safe and sound. ..."
It is an evolution of conspiracy theory, not requiring any kind of convoluted logic or
story telling that used to be required for conspiracy theory to stick. Fake News allows for
simple, truthful, and logical information to be dismissed out of hand, without
examination.
Here's an ad about COCs (PDF) from
1942. They're used for tanning leather, in soaps and perfumes, as insect repellents, for
dying cloth, as antiseptics, and for many, many other commercial and industrial
purposes.
Damn those Syrian butchers for dropping perfume on civilians!
Fake News is the 21st century version of Conspiracy Theory.
It is an evolution of conspiracy theory, not requiring any kind of convoluted logic or
story telling that used to be required for conspiracy theory to stick. Fake News allows
for simple, truthful, and logical information to be dismissed out of hand, without
examination.
@The Voice In the
Wilderness In the dim reaches of pre-history, when Walter Cronkite was reporting, a
real journalist wouldn't report that someone launched a chemical weapons attack unless the
journalist had at least two credible, independent sources providing solid evidence that the
story was true. Newspaper editors and television producers knew their reputations were on the
line and that their competitors would make sure the egg on their face stuck if they reported
something blatantly wrong.
Nowadays, there are no competitors, because journalists and news outlets are mostly
hanging out together in one big cheery cartel, every member of which will defend every other
member to protect the reputation of the whole. The goal is not to outdo competitors and gain
more eyeballs or a greater distribution or greater authority over public opinion. The goal is
to defend the status quo by any means necessary, while somehow maintaining the credibility of
the press.
But no, they shouldn't have published a story that Assad had launched a chemical weapons
attack unless they had a significant amount of solid evidence that it was true.
I have a hard time understanding how people can even begin to credit this crap, given how
close it is to what they told us about Saddam Hussein. But it's actually even worse, because
at least Hussein did, at one time, use chemical weapons on the Kurds. I mean, at least he did
it once, even if he didn't have weapons of mass destruction ready to aim at Israel, or the
Saudis, or the U.S.
#7
It was big news. But failure to report it as false with just as much (or more) attention
and timing was journalistic malpractice. They should have been outraged to have been
conned into spreading false propaganda. IF they were legitimate journalists.
@Cant Stop the
Macedonian Signal
I don't know that anyone waits for confirmation anymore. And the two sources could
be the CIA and VOA or one of their tame journalists.
Credibility is in the eye of the beholder. After they all jumped on Saddam's WMD one can
hardly compare them with Cronkite.
I do remember web blogs asking to please wait for the UN inspectors report. When that
report did come out, anyone with integrity, even if not a professional journalist, would have
highlighted that report and retracted the original and not figuratively bury it on page
56.
But we are substantially together on this. They reported is as fact not as an
unsubstantiated claim.
Chomsky's Five News Filters: A little dated but a good starting point.
The first filter is Size, Ownership, and Profit Orientation of the Mass Media. Mainstream
media is essentially owned by corporations and the government, because those are the very
agents who fund them. Any favourable studies, studies or information that the government or
corporations want the public to know (or don't want them to know) either ends up being aired
or buried as a result.
The second filter is Advertising License to do Business. Mass media isn't interested in
attracting viewers to educate them, but rather to sell them on something. They're more
interested in engaging an audience with higher buying power than actually making a difference
through education and information. Chomsky provides an excellent example, explaining: "CBS proudly tells its shareholders that while it "continuously seeks to maximize audience
delivery," it has developed a new "sales tool" with which it approaches advertisers: "Client
Audience Profile, or CAP, will help advertisers optimize the effectiveness of their network
television schedules by evaluating audience segments in proportion to usage levels of
advertisers' products and services." In short, the mass media are interested in attracting
audiences with buying power, not audiences per se."
The third filter is Sourcing Mass-Media News. Whatever is aired on mass media needs to be
100% credible, meaning it's viewers need to completely trust what's being aired, without the
need of them using their critical thinking skills. Since the majority of the public trusts
the government and mass corporations, AKA the propaganda machines, most of the "news worthy"
content comes from them. Plus, whatever's aired needs to be approved by corporations or the
government and/or mass media must avoid airing anything that would offend their contributors
and funders.
The fourth filter is Flak and the Enforcers. "Flak" refers to negative responses to a
media statement or program aired on the network. Perhaps the most influential producers of
flak are corporations and the government. Corporations have created large scale organizations
whose sole purpose is to produce flak. The government is also a large producer of flak, as it
constantly corrects or threatens the media based on their interests.
The final filter is Anticommunism as a Control Mechanism. Everything at home seems to be a
lesser evil if there's something on the news that seems much worse (fake terrorist attacks,
false enemies, and/or "radical" states). Anything that sounds too left can also be dismissed
if it sounds too much like "communism." By creating an extremely anti-communist state, the
elite will never have to worry about losing control over society because their wealth and
power remains safe and sound.
@fakenews
namely big, opinion-policing non-profits and their lobbyists and followers, ranging from
religious denominations, to AIPAC and the NRA, to the ADL and SPLC.
@Blueslide@Blueslide
The investigation ain't over till it's over, and I'm still willing to hear new data, but
this:
No organophosphorous nerve agents or their degradation products were detected in the
environmental samples or in the plasma samples taken from alleged casualties.
Doesn't look good for your (and the U.S. media's, and the U.S. military's) version of
history. I'm also noticing that the evidence of chlorine is limited to two sites. I want to
know what's up at those two sites, and what's up with those canisters. But that sounds like
only limited parts of the attacked area demonstrate evidence of chlorine. If it were a
chlorine gas attack, wouldn't we expect to find evidence of chlorine in most of the attack
zone? I'm not a chemist, but if you spray poison gas on people in an open area, wouldn't
residue of that poison spread throughout the area? If it is confined to two sites, doesn't it
bear asking whether the chlorine found was, in fact, weaponized? As edg mentioned above,
people use chlorine, unlike sarin, for many things other than killing people.
Then there's the question of credibility. We're living in a time where this happens:
Millions of YouTube viewers have been captivated by the 'Syrian hero boy' who manages
to rescue a little girl while under gunfire. Now a group of Norwegian filmmakers have told
BBC Trending they are behind it. They say it was filmed on location in Malta this summer with
the intention of being presented as real .
Lars Klevberg, a 34-year-old film director based in Oslo, wrote a script after
watching news coverage of the conflict in Syria. He says he deliberately presented the film
as reality in order to generate a discussion about children in conflict zones.
"If I could make a film and pretend it was real, people would share it and react with
hope," he said. "We shot it in Malta in May this year on a set that was used for other famous
movies like Troy and Gladiator," Klevberg said. "The little boy and girl are professional
actors from Malta. The voices in the background are Syrian refugees living in
Malta."
Were they comfortable making a film that potentially deceived millions of people? "I was not
uncomfortable," Klevberg said. "By publishing a clip that could appear to be authentic we
hoped to take advantage of a tool that's often used in war; make a video that claims to be
real. We wanted to see if the film would get attention and spur debate, first and foremost
about children and war. We also wanted to see how the media would respond to such a
video."
A tool that's often used in war; make a video that claims to be real. Well, that sounds
like warmongering propaganda to me, but hey, if Norwegian filmmakers want to wrap it up in a
candy coating of concern for children, well, that, too is a tool that's often used in war.
When all else fails, the proponents of war always pull out "save the little children." It
used to be "keep that brute from molesting your women," but now that women are emancipated,
sort of, it's usually "save the little children."
So once the film was made, how did it go viral? "It was posted to our YouTube account
a few weeks ago but the algorithm told us it was not going to trend," Klevberg said. "So we
deleted that and re-posted it." The filmmakers say they added the word "hero" to the new
headline and tried to send it out to people on Twitter to start a conversation. It was then
picked up by Shaam Network, a channel that features material from the Middle East, which
posted it on YouTube. Then it began to attract international attention.
It didn't get enough hits? Add the word "hero" to it. That should do it. Regular Mother
Teresas these folks.
Since being uploaded to YouTube on Monday the video has been watched more than five
million times and inspired thousands of comments. There has been a big debate about whether
it is genuine. How those viewers will react to learning that it's a work of fiction remains
to be seen. "We are really happy with the reaction," Klevberg said. "It created a
debate."
If you were concerned with the fate of children in war, would you want a debate over
whether or not your film was real? Why would that make you "really happy?" Won't at least
some of the viewers "react to learning that it's a work of fiction" result in people becoming
cynical and jaundiced about similar images, rather than passionately inspired to stop war, or
at least to get more children out of war zones?
Why couldn't you just use one of the many pictures of actual children in war zones? Like
this:
Oh, I'm sorry. That was a Palestinian kid. They don't count.
Actually, images from Gaza are very useful in promoting the war in Syria:
A
Cleveland-based user who goes by the name of Sami Sharbek has posted two photos on his
Twitter account – one showing Middle Eastern-looking residential blocks being bombed
from the air; the other depicting a man carrying a crying child. "This is not a movie. This
is Syria," he wrote in the caption.
The post was widely retweeted and liked. As of Wednesday morning, it had racked up
over 125,000 shares and 154,000 likes. However, what many people failed to notice is that the
photos portraying the perils of war were shot outside Syria.
Some users have shared the links to news stories featuring the original photos.
"Wrong," John Mangun, BusinessMirror Columnist, tweeted, sharing a link to a 2014 Independent
story covering Israeli air raids on Palestine.
This photo shows the same airstrike featured in the photo tweeted by Sharbek. It
comes from Reuters' coverage of an Israeli strike on eastern Gaza city.
So that's the world we live in. People make movies and music videos with images of war,
and those images are circulated as real, sometimes with the consent of the filmmakers,
sometimes not. People take footage from other times and other places and hold them up as
documentary evidence of something happening in Syria. Interestingly, those other places seem
often to be Gaza, Iraq, or Yemen.
Under these circumstances, it's hard to blame people for being skeptical and not simply
leaping to the conclusions they are offered. It's not surprising that some are unwilling to
say "Oh, a witness said it was the Syrian government? OK by me. It must have been the Syrian
government." How the hell do I know who that witness was, or whether or not he was actually
in the pay of someone? How much goddamned corruption and how many lies are we supposed to
swallow before we become suspicious? Aren't the people who are spreading these stories in
many cases the same people who spread stories of WMDs in Iraq?
#9.1 I did...then I
went on to read the analyses about Saraqib (not mentioned here).
The FFM determined that chlorine, released from cylinders through mechanical
impact, was likely used as a chemical weapon on 4 February 2018 in the Al Talil
neighbourhood of Saraqib.
So I get that the witness testimony claiming a helicopter dropped gas is not "proof"
that Assad did it, but it's good enough for me. And the fact that the identical m.o.
appears to be at play in Douma is speculative on my part.
Speculating that this is all a made up conspiracy to justify attacks against Assad
tends to fly in the face of evidence provided by OPCW. But that's just my opinion.
"... Repeated requests by Russia to obtain a sample of the alleged nerve agent for testing were rejected by the British government in spite of the fact that a military grade nerve agent would have surely killed both the Skripals as well as anyone else within 100 yards. As the latest British account of the location of the alleged poison places it on the door handle of the Scripals' residence, the timetable element was also unconvincing. That meant that the two would have spent three hours, including a stop at a pub and lunch, before succumbing on a park bench. Military grade nerve agents kill instantly. ..."
"... Nevertheless, the politically weak May government, desperately seeking a formidable foreign enemy to rally around against, insisted that Russia, almost certainly acting under orders from Vladimir Putin himself, carried out the killing of a former British double agent who had been released from a Kremlin prison in a spy swap and who was no longer capable of doing any damage to Russia. Putin apparently did all that in spite of the fact that he had an election coming up and would be the host of the World Cup in the summer, an event that would be an absolute top priority to have go smoothly. ..."
Poisoning enemies has a long history with Augustus Caesar's wife Livia allegedly a master of the art, as were the Borgias in Renaissance
Italy. Lately there has been a resurgence in allegations regarding the use of poisons of various types by several governments. The
claims are particularly damaging both morally and legally as international conventions regard the use of poisonous chemical compounds
as particularly heinous, condemning their use because they, when employed in quantity, become "weapons of mass destruction," killing
indiscriminately and horribly, making no distinction between combatants and civilians. Their use is considered to be a "war crime"
and the government officials who ordered their deployment are "war criminals," subject to prosecution by the International Criminal
Court in The Hague.
There are two important poisoning stories that have made the news recently. Both are follow-ups to reporting that has appeared
in the news over the past few months and both are particularly interesting because they tend to repudiate earlier coverage that had
been largely accepted by several governments as well as the media and the chattering class of paid experts that appears on television.
The first story relates to the poisoning of former Russian intelligence agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia in March.
There was quite a bit that was odd about the Skripal case, which
relied from the start " on circumstantial evidence and secret intelligence." And there was inevitably a rush to judgment. British
Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson blamed Russia less than forty-eight hours after the Skripals were found unconscious on a bench in
Salisbury England, too soon for any chemical analysis of the alleged poisoning to have taken place.
British Prime Minister Theresa May threw gasoline on the fire when she addressed Parliament shortly thereafter to blame the Kremlin
and demand a Russian official response to the event in 36 hours, declaring that the apparent poisoning was "very likely" caused by
a made-in-Russia nerve agent referred to by its generic name novichok. The British media was soon on board with a vengeance, spreading
the government line that such a highly sensitive operation would require the approval of President Vladimir Putin himself. The expulsion
of Russian diplomats soon followed with the United States and other countries following suit.
Repeated requests by Russia to obtain a sample of the alleged nerve agent for testing were rejected by the British government
in spite of the fact that a military grade nerve agent would have surely killed both the Skripals as well as anyone else within 100
yards. As the latest British account of the location of the alleged poison places it on the door handle of the Scripals' residence,
the timetable element was also unconvincing. That meant that the two would have spent three hours, including a stop at a pub and
lunch, before succumbing on a park bench. Military grade nerve agents kill instantly.
The head of Britain's own chemical weapons facility Porton Down
even contradicted claims made by May, Foreign Minister Boris Johnson, and British Ambassador in Moscow Laurie Bristow. The lab's
Chief Executive Gary Aitkenhead testified that he did not know if the nerve agent was actually produced in Russia, a not surprising
observation as the chemical formula was revealed to the public in a scientific paper in 1992 and there are an estimated twenty countries
capable of producing it. There are also presumed stocks of novichok remaining in independent countries that once were part of the
Soviet Union, to include Russia's enemy du jour Ukraine, while a false flag operation by the British themselves, the CIA
or Mossad, is not unthinkable.
Nevertheless, the politically weak May government, desperately seeking a formidable foreign enemy to rally around against,
insisted that Russia, almost certainly acting under orders from Vladimir Putin himself, carried out the killing of a former British
double agent who had been released from a Kremlin prison in a spy swap and who was no longer capable of doing any damage to Russia.
Putin apparently did all that in spite of the fact that he had an election coming up and would be the host of the World Cup in the
summer, an event that would be an absolute top priority to have go smoothly.
Now there has been an actual death in Amesbury near Salisbury that has been attributed to novichok. On June 30 th ,
Charlie Rowley and Dawn Sturgess were admitted to hospital after being found unconscious. Sturgess died eight days later. The May
government has not yet blamed it on Putin or even on a clumsy Russian operative that might have
inadvertently left behind a vial of poison or a used syringe,
though Home Secretary Sajid Javid came close to that when he suggested
that Russia was using Britain as a "dumping ground for poisons." Police suggestions that the poisoned couple appear to have handled
novichok infused material of some kind before succumbing appears to be contradicted by inability to find the actual source of the
alleged exposure.
British government dancing around the issue notwithstanding, there have been suggestions that the closest source of more novichok
might well be the U.K. government labs at nearby Porton Down, only seven miles from Salisbury and Amesbury, which increases suspicion
about the original story promulgated by Downing Street. Would the British government actually poison an expendable ex-Russian spy
and his daughter to divert attention from a domestic political problem at home? It's worth considering as the "blame it all on Putin
narrative" becomes even less credible.
The second story comes from Syria, where there is also a Russian hand as Moscow is aiding the government of Bashar al-Assad. The
by now notorious April 7, 2018 alleged chemical attack on the rebel-held Syrian city of Douma was widely blamed by Western countries
and the mainstream media on Assad's forces. This resulted in a decision by U.S. President Donald Trump to order massive U.S.-led
retaliatory airstrikes against targets reportedly involved in chemical production in and around Damascus.
Trump blamed
"animal Assad" for
"using nerve agents" and both the media and most European governments followed that line, concluding that Damascus had ordered
the chemical attacks a mere moments after videos purporting to show scores of chemical attack victims first surfaced from rebel sources,
long before U.S. intelligence could have made its own assessment. A 5-page
White House assessment released on April 13th, just days after the alleged attack
asserted that sarin was used at Douma , claiming that "A significant body of information points to the regime using chlorine
in its bombardment of Duma, while some additional information points to the regime also using the nerve agent sarin."
Independent sources warned at the time that
not a single neutral observer was on the ground to confirm that chemical agents launched by the Syrian government had, in fact,
been used, but were ignored. All of the sources reporting the attack were either affiliated with the rebels who occupied the area
or were not physically present in Douma.
Now, finally, three months later, there has been a credible independent report on what was determined about the attack through
chemical analysis of traces recovered in Douma. A preliminary report published last Friday by the Organization for the Prohibition
of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) found no traces of any nerve agent like sarin at the site. The OPCW report
states this clearly : "No organophosphorous nerve agents or their degradation products were detected in the environmental samples
or in the plasma samples taken from alleged casualties."
This means that the Trump Administration claimed to have details relating to an event in a foreign country that it did not know
and could not actually confirm to be true. And it used that as a justification for ordering an airstrike that killed people and destroyed
targets in Syria. Will the White House respond to the OPCW report and apologize, possibly to include reparations for an unjustified
attack on another sovereign nation? Don't hold your breath.
The Salisbury and Douma attacks are illustrative of just what happens when a government is prepared to dissimulate or even lie
to go the extra mile to make a case to justify preemptive action that otherwise might be challenged. Theresa May is, unfortunately,
still in power and so is Donald Trump. In a better world an outraged public would demand that they be thrown out of office and even
possibly subjected to the tender ministrations of the International Criminal Court in The Hague. With power comes accountability,
or at least that should be the rule, but it is a dictum that has for some time been ignored. Even given that, one might hope that
the blunders will not be repeated, but there is not even any assurance that either May or Trump is much given to "lessons learned"
or that a Mike Pence or Boris Johnson would be any better. That is our tragedy.
Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational
foundation that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is
www.councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134
and its email is inform@cnionline.org.
Putin apparently did all that in spite of the fact that he had an election coming up and would be the host of the World
Cup in the summer, an event that would be an absolute top priority to have go smoothly.
[...]
Would the British government actually poison an expendable ex-Russian spy and his daughter to divert attention from a domestic
political problem at home? It's worth considering as the "blame it all on Putin narrative" becomes even less credible.
Mr. Giraldi,
these were my thoughts at first too, but I looked into the case quite extensively over the last several weeks and came to the
conclusion that Putin actually had more of a motive than the British government, et al.
This is my evolution on the Skripals' case:
On Skripal I'm not entirely certain, since I haven't really looked into the case. Also the timing of the incident seems
to be not what Putin would have chosen, in my opinion, since it was too close to the soccer World Cup events/celebrations in
Russia, and Putin usually tries to be conciliatory with the West before big sporting events like that in Russia, e.g. when
he released Khodorkovsky early before the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi, for example.
As I said before, I was agnostic about the Skripal case and tried to keep an open mind about it and not reflexively blame
it on (the) Russians (government), but you providing me with this additional information makes me actually more of a believer
in the official Western narrative now.
Repeated requests by Russia to obtain a sample of the alleged nerve agent for testing were rejected by the British government
in spite of the fact that a military grade nerve agent would have surely killed both the Skripals as well as anyone else within
100 yards.
It was hilarious to watch yesterday evening, as the presidential plane had been underway for two and a half hours, the consternation
on CNN.
As I expected, the vague accusations about Russian meddling in the elections continued this morning, on CNN.
I remember an interview on CNN before the elections, someoen said 'if Trump wins', the two of CNN burst into laughter.
I do hope Trump survives, politically and fysically.
Luckily is it not very ease to murder a president these days.
On top of that, Sept 11 made many all over the world quite suspicious.
I for one never believed that Russia would be so stupid as to try to murder two former spies in such a stupid way, and without
any motive.
MH17 is a similar case.
Assad also is not stupid, he had no interest whatsoever to use poison gas in Syria.
How Arafat died we still do not know, that was done professionally, or maybe not, if I had to kill him I would try to make his
death look natural, a clear cause.
Who had a motive is quite clear.
Until the unhinged May lets Yulia go free–if she's still alive–and go back to Russia and tell her side of the story, nothing will
change.
The so-called Deep State and its willing toady, the corrupt, lying MSM are accomplices in this False Flag and they are the
ones that should be in the dock at the ICC. But since the ICC is part of the Deep State, don't expect this to happen.
This Russian bashing has gotten completely out of hand. And now that Putin has stated that the sleazy Russian thief oligarch
Browder helped launder 400 million to the DNC-Clinton Mob, it's going to get very interesting, if not dangerous for humanity.
They need a BIG distraction to get the sheeple's thought off the truth that there is NOTHING to the Putin-Trump election meddling,
anything might happen, even a repeat of the Israeli masterminded 9/11 False Flag.
Does 'Lucky Larry' own anymore asbestos-laden skyscrapers?
i would love to make a formal complaint about conspiracies because there are people who will and do make trouble for others. it
has taken me a long time to come to that place – but it is no joke as dr. geraldi no doubt knows.
however, one needs the evidence and what has been lacking in all these accusations whether its russia and us elections, chemical
weapons in syria, or supposed poisoning of three people formerly associated with russia, there is suspicion, and there is narrative,
but little in the way of facts. and if any of these accusations were concerning single individual battling mere gossip and innuendo
or other nefarious behaviors, i have learned to discount nothing. look if you can't bring a coupon into a store, wait for coffee
without people launching into fits of fear of life . . . then who knows what triggers people's self defense. it apparently dos
not take much for the supposed superior people to make their inferiors look off kilt. i just take it granted that when i leave
my house, on occasion, i have visitors – as "nutty" as that sounds.
but these cases have multiple researchers and resources to bar on the matter and yet, the evidence is either mere narrative,
contradicted or has a variety of explanations just as reasonable or more reasonable. but what we have is an entire population
engaged in manufacturing not one but several cases in which the president of the us actually engaged in treason based on sketchy
financial dealings with russian banks and financial elites.
and i think this article makes the case that people with power who engage in wielding accusations should be held to the standard
of providing evidence. and while i am a little uncomfortable with our president engaging in open debate with our intel community
from overseas, his objection is well put. the process of evidence collection and by independent objective observers is unreasonable.
yet he found it quite convenient to buy the argument by the same intel agencies for said use in syria. the election is over, but
the war about the election, the level of dislike of the elected , i think it is fair to say has never been so widespread and deep
such that members of the government or government agencies would sign up to press the matter.
and quip reflctions about the damage being done and "it's all in one's head" just are insufficient to address the issues.
frankly, i think the country's not outraged because they are "drama fatigued" last week in attempting to capture a stray kitten
who disappearance has me overly stretched – i never used to like cats – bells rang and doors closed indicating that she had in
fact been enclosed on the patio – around two am or so – only to discover a cute little skunk was the detainee. whose release required
navigating around the house twice because the door locked actually worked. sometimes the evidence doesn't doesn't reveal what
was expected.
as for the kitten, evidence suggests she managed to punch her way through a steel mesh garage vent. now i suspect that someone
recently punched a hole in those mesh barriers, but that is speculation on my part, even likely speculation. however, minus the
proof that is all it is. a mysterious frustrating event.
With the sad demise of the woman of the couple, the continuing make-up story in MSM makes the twist that the nerve agent was found
in a perfume bottle. While of these two non-Russian people (who allegedly were former drug-addicts) one may suspect that they
pick up any strange bottle from the ground and have a sniff at it, this is completely surrealistic in the case of the Skripals.
The difference couldn't be bigger between these two couples. Anyhow, the clue that brings them four together is the vicinity of
Porton Down, where chemical weapons are stored & tested.
If I had to guess at what's been going on in Salisbury I'd wonder if a lunatic/evil employee at Porton Down has smuggled out something
nasty and is amusing himself with it.
The author laments that May and Trump are still in office.
She will last longer than he will. Trump will be out in three months either by impeachment and conviction or by other means. None
of this clandestine stuff like poisoning but by a military coup. I remember the era of 7 Days in May but that was not serious
just a storey teller weaving a good yarn. Today, we have members of Congress and large numbers of the media(probably over 50 percent)
calling for a Armed Forces take over.
The probable stumbling block is how to skip Pense and go directly to Speaker Paul Ryan. Or how to dispense with the chain of succession
entirely and enshrine Hilary or recall Obama until the emergency is over.
Is Mad Dog the man or will McMaster lead the coup? Remember, anyone wearing more than one star made the elite grade during the
Obama regime and some of the one stars had formative years as O-6 and O-5 while Obama ruled supreme.
Quickly, not instantly. If you had an atropine pen handy, you might survive, though it would leave you immobilised and dazed.
If the Skripals were dosed, it would likely have been at or near the bench where they were found. Residue on their clothing might
be weak enough to not kill the constable.
The only thing the Salisbury incidents provide evidence for is that our culture is prone to hysterical outrage over anything
relating to Russia or Putin.
And that's true even if it were rogue elements in the Russian security services.
What I really loved about the coverage of the Skripal "poisoning" were the pictures of the cops wearing hazmat suits to clean
up the park bench. In the same shot birds were hopping around apparently unaffected by the deadly nerve gas. So we're to believe
that this stuff could kill a big cop but not a 2 pound pigeon .
British secret service and its 3 main children – CIA, Mossad, Saudi General Intelligence Agency – are morally capable of committing
any horror imaginable against civilians, even their own.
The Anglo-Zionist Empire is desperate to find the One Ring That Rules Them All.
That's so naïve. When you commit a crime and have witnesses in your custody, you make sure they never talk. "Elementary, Watson",
as Holmes used to say.
That's why we have "journalists" and "historians," mass media and skoolink (yooniversities included), and I find it amazing
that the stories change as fast as the agendas.
Oh "These Kids today" that old refrain again, and it's getting old too, all the emphasis on kids anyway, from concerns about
posterity, to the unending posturing about faux parent related concerns sublimated in one way or another to the other mantra:
" oh the Children" thing that phony liberal types do.
But to the point:
What a pity Western "Intelligence" seems to have never heard the story of The Boy Who Cried 'Wolf'.
When do these little monsters ever get a chance to hear childhood stories nowadays glued to their carry style devices, wearable
devices, soon inserted devices , to hear any of the old wisdom? It now isn't all that likely. It is more the kids teaching
the kids in a modern high tech reality version of Lord of the Flies scenario.
When they are inevitably inducted into the professions as they will, replacing remnants of earlier generations that maybe still
had been somewhat exposed to folk tales and stories, or better TV of earlier times, well, don't be surprised that the rank and
file of the intelligence industry, like elsewhere is unable personally to easily navigate anything, much less possessing inborn
sensibility gained from age old culture and all that. Could it be in the whole Fake News genre too, it seems to indicate
some dialectic flaw in thinking, (a priori as it were.) I feel like it's coming from youngsters lacking any frame of reference/experience
blundering, not being held to account!
The Brat Pack was given free reign and away they go arrogant to a fault
What was folk knowledge is a cumbersome, anachronistic, vestigial relic of another era, sought to be replaced soon, by robots.
None of this clandestine stuff like poisoning but by a military coup. I remember the era of 7 Days in May but that was not
serious just a storey teller weaving a good yarn. Today, we have members of Congress and large numbers of the media(probably
over 50 percent) calling for a Armed Forces take over.
Watching too many old movies now , haven't we? LOL!!
The probable stumbling block is how to skip Pense and go directly to Speaker Paul Ryan. Or how to dispense with the chain
of succession entirely and enshrine Hilary or recall Obama until the emergency is over.
Ok, now you need to be put down or at least committed. LOL
I'm glad Litvinenko Sr. is taken care of in his old age by the Russian state:
BAD CHEMISTRY? Ft. Walter Litvinenko, Father of Alexander Litvinenko
Although he chose to leave Russian of his own will, the authorities were unlikely to welcome him back and his dramatic u-turn
looks like a calculated attempt to smooth the way for his return to the country of his birth.
Clearly relishing Mr Litvinenko senior's propaganda gift in the run-up to a presidential election expected to be won by
Vladimir Putin next month, Russian state TV said the unhappy exile had run out of money and that electricity and gas had been
cut off to his tiny Italian flat for non-payment of bills.
[...]
Alexander Goldfarb, the co-author of a book about the murder and a friend of the late Litvinenko, accused Russian TV of acting
in an irresponsible and inhumane manner, saying the Kremlin's propaganda chiefs had exploited his grief and troubled psychological
condition.
"They used the troubled psychological state of an elderly man for propaganda purposes in order to whitewash Alexander's
killers," he said.
"Walter is going through a really tough time in connection with his wife's death a few months ago and feels lonely. It happens
with old people."
Skripals 'were under Russian surveillance' – BBC Newsnight
Newsnight's Diplomatic and Defence Editor, Mark Urban, reveals that the Skripals 'were under Russian surveillance' and that
he personally had several meetings with Sergei Skripal last year.
I am very embarrassed for the GRU , they are even more incompetent than the French Secret Service combat swimmers who blew
up the that Greenpeace ship. Russia should have sent a Spetsnaz veteran with his trusty entrenching tool to deal with Skripal.
Or maybe one of their Kamikazi exploding dogs.
Maybe Putin did have them killed or poisoned because Russian intelligence had uncovered their plot to explode a dirty
bomb in London which had been set up so as to implicate the Russians. The plotters were foiled and hoist by their own petard.
I tell you a secret. GRU agents, on direct orders from Putin, killed JFK, burnt Giordano Bruno, crucified Christ, and poisoned
Socrates. What's more, they are also responsible for the extinction of the dinosaurs. Didn't you suspect that?
I did not even know those you named had ever been in the GRU, let alone they were British moles.
If you wake up and there is snow all over the ground, that is circumstantial evidence that it snowed in the night. When a Russian
poisons Russians there is not all this Technical Tom sophistry, and motive is important especially when it supports the circumstantial
evidence.
' Theresa May is, unfortunately, still in power and so is Donald Trump. In a better world an outraged public would demand that
they be thrown out of office '
At least in the case of Trump, the problem with rejecting him is, as it always has been, the alternative.
It's literally oppressive that to date, no superior alternative to Trump has emerged. However, like it or not, one hasn't.
Is there a superior alternative to May? If there is, why didn't Brits get rid of that embarrassment? Next to her even John
Major looks like an outstanding statesman.
Every time I think about it, I do find it truly astonishing that we (the USA) launched a missile salvo into Syria based on an
obvious and now proven false flag, and very few people seem to care. This is one of those glaring, "hidden in plain sight"
contradictions to the narrative which tells me that, while the Deep State is finally losing some ground, its liquidation is far,
far from over and all kinds of things are going to fall apart as this thrashing monster slowly sinks beneath the waves.
Yes, interesting that PG has only now brought to a UR article that rather obvious possible connection between Porton Down and
the nearby poisonings.
I don't think it is one of his major areas of attention. Why else would he include with Trump the unfortunate May as someone
he would like to see people rise up against and throw out of office for offences unstated?
Her performance on Skripal right or wrong is hardly worth mentioning when deciding whether and when she has to go. Compared
to Brexit give it a 2 per cent weighting.
My guess is that we haven't heard the last of Ms. Hyphen-Cortez.
"Ocasio-Cortez hedges criticisms of Israel– 'I may not use the right words'
US Politics Philip Weiss on July 15, 2018
Rising Democratic star Alexandria Ocasio-Cortex, soon to go to Congress from NY, all but apologized for using words "massacre"
and "occupation" about Israel, saying she spoke as an "activist," and she is no expert on the Middle East and is willing to "learn
and evolve." '
Her performance has included telling bald-faced lies, lies that are easily exposed as lies too. This is rarely if ever going
to add weight to any personal brand, let alone that of a political leader. She's toast!
"... And those who are crying "fake news" the most often and the most loudly and using that phrase to discredit anything they do not want to rebut with actual information -- those people are the most suspect. Just like those who cry "conspiracy theory" whenever they see a hypothesis that they do not want to have investigated and want to derail. ..."
"... It would not surprise me at all to learn that both of these phrases were cooked up in some corner of Langley to use to get control of the media. ..."
"... Instead of "dissidents" being labeled schizophrenic and sent to psychiatric wards, as in the USSR, they are labeled as conspiracy theorists and purveyors of "fake news" and the effect is about the same, minus the cost of upkeep in a ward. ..."
"Rather than yell at the top of one's lungs "Fake News" when they read a mainstream or
alternative media story, and immediately discount everything, people ought look CRITICALLY at
the facts, consider any bias, read other sources on the issue, and then draw their own
conclusions."
Absolutely. And those who are crying "fake news" the most often and the most loudly and
using that phrase to discredit anything they do not want to rebut with actual information --
those people are the most suspect. Just like those who cry "conspiracy theory" whenever they
see a hypothesis that they do not want to have investigated and want to derail.
It would not
surprise me at all to learn that both of these phrases were cooked up in some corner of
Langley to use to get control of the media.
Instead of "dissidents" being labeled
schizophrenic and sent to psychiatric wards, as in the USSR, they are labeled as conspiracy
theorists and purveyors of "fake news" and the effect is about the same, minus the cost of
upkeep in a ward.
"... In my last post I set out the official Government account of the events in the Skripal Case. Here I examine the credibility of this story. Next week I shall look at alternative explanations. ..."
In my last post I set out the official Government account of the events in the Skripal
Case. Here I examine the credibility of this story. Next week I shall look at alternative
explanations.
Russia has a decade long secret programme of producing and stockpiling novichok nerve
agents. It also has been training agents in secret assassination techniques, and British
intelligence has a copy of the Russian training manual, which includes instruction on painting
nerve agent on doorknobs.
The only backing for this statement by Boris Johnson is alleged "intelligence", and
unfortunately the "intelligence" about Russia's secret novichok programme comes from exactly
the same people who brought you the intelligence about Saddam Hussein's WMD programme, proven
liars. Furthermore, the question arises why Britain has been sitting on this intelligence for a
decade and doing nothing about it, including not telling the OPCW inspectors who certified
Russia's chemical weapons stocks as dismantled.
If Russia really has a professional novichok assassin training programme, why was the
assassination so badly botched? Surely in a decade of development they would have discovered
that the alleged method of gel on doorknob did not work? And where is the training manual which
Boris Johnson claimed to possess? Having told the world – including Russia -the UK has
it, what is stopping the UK from producing it, with marks that could identify the specific copy
erased?
The Russians chose to use this assassination programme to target Sergei Skripal, a double
agent who had been released from jail in Russia some eight years previously.
It seems remarkable that the chosen target of an attempt that would blow the existence of a
secret weapon and end the cover of a decade long programme, should be nobody more prominent
than a middle ranking double agent who the Russians let out of jail years ago. If they wanted
him dead they could have killed him then. Furthermore the attack on him would undermine all
future possible spy swaps. Putin therefore, on this reading, was willing to sacrifice both the
secrecy of the novichok programme and the spy swap card just to attack Sergei Skripal . That
seems highly improbable.
Only the Russians can make novichok and only the Russians had a motive to attack the
Skripals.
The nub of the British government's approach has been the shocking willingness of the
corporate and state media to parrot repeatedly the lie that the nerve agent was Russian made,
even after Porton Down said they could not tell where it was made and the OPCW confirmed that
finding. In fact, while the Soviet Union did develop the "novichok" class of nerve agents, the
programme involved scientists from all over the Soviet Union, especially Ukraine, Armenia and
Georgia, as I myself learnt when I visited the newly decommissioned Nukus testing facility in
Uzbekistan in 2002.
Furthermore, it was the USA who decommissioned the facility and removed equipment back to
the United States. At least two key scientists from the programme moved to the United States.
Formulae for several novichok have been published for over a decade. The USA, UK and Iran have
definitely synthesised a number of novichok formulae and almost certainly others have done so
too. Dozens of states have the ability to produce novichok, as do many sophisticated non-state
actors.
As for motive, the Russian motive might be revenge, but whether that really outweighs the
international opprobrium incurred just ahead of the World Cup, in which so much prestige has
been invested, is unclear.
What is certainly untrue is that only Russia has a motive. The obvious motive is to attempt
to blame and discredit Russia. Those who might wish to do this include Ukraine and Georgia,
with both of which Russia is in territorial dispute, and those states and jihadist groups with
which Russia is in conflict in Syria. The NATO military industrial complex also obviously has a
plain motive for fueling tension with Russia.
There is of course the possibility that Skripal was attacked by a private gangster interest
with which he was in conflict, or that the attack was linked to Skripal's MI6 handler Pablo
Miller' s work on the Orbis/Steele Russiagate dossier on Donald Trump.
Plainly, the British governments statements that only Russia had the means and only Russia
had the motive, are massive lies on both counts.
The Russians had been tapping the phone of Yulia Skripal. They decided to attack Sergei
Skripal while his daughter was visiting from Moscow.
In an effort to shore up the government narrative, at the time of the Amesbury attack the
security services put out through Pablo Miller's long term friend, the BBC's Mark Urban , that
the Russians "may have been" tapping Yulia Skripal's phone, and the claim that this was strong
evidence that the Russians had indeed been behind the attack.
But think this through. If that were true, then the Russians deliberately attacked at a time
when Yulia was in the UK rather than when Sergei was alone. Yet no motive has been adduced for
an attack on Yulia or why they would attack while Yulia was visiting – they could have
painted his doorknob with less fear of discovery anytime he was alone. Furthermore, it is
pretty natural that Russian intelligence would tap the phone of Yulia, and of Sergei if they
could. The family of double agents are normal targets. I have no doubt in the least, from
decades of experience as a British diplomat, that GCHQ have been tapping Yulia's phone. Indeed,
if tapping of phones is seriously put forward as evidence of intent to murder, the British
government must be very murderous indeed.
Their trained assassin(s) painted a novichok on the doorknob of the Skripal house in the
suburbs of Salisbury. Either before or after the attack, they entered a public place in the
centre of Salisbury and left a sealed container of the novichok there.
The incompetence of the assassination beggars belief when compared to British claims of a
long term production and training programme. The Russians built the heart of the International
Space Station. They can kill an old bloke in Salisbury. Why did the Russians not know that the
dose from the door handle was not fatal? Why would trained assassins leave crucial evidence
lying around in a public place in Salisbury? Why would they be conducting any part of the
operation with the novichok in a public area in central Salisbury?
Why did nobody see them painting the doorknob? This must have involved wearing protective
gear, which would look out of place in a Salisbury suburb. With Skripal being resettled by MI6,
and a former intelligence officer himself, it beggars belief that MI6 did not fit, as standard,
some basic security including a security camera on his house.
The Skripals both touched the doorknob and both functioned perfectly normally for at least
five hours, even able to eat and drink heartily. Then they were simultaneously and
instantaneously struck down by the nerve agent, at a spot in the city centre coincidentally
close to where the assassins left a sealed container of the novichok lying around. Even though
the nerve agent was eight times more deadly than Sarin or VX, it did not kill the Skripals
because it had been on the doorknob and affected by rain.
Why did they both touch the outside doorknob in exiting and closing the door? Why did the
novichok act so very slowly, with evidently no feeling of ill health for at least five hours,
and then how did it strike both down absolutely simultaneously, so that neither can call for
help, despite their being different sexes, weights, ages, metabolisms and receiving random
completely uncontrolled doses. The odds of that happening are virtually nil. And why was the
nerve agent ultimately ineffective?
Detective Sergeant Bailey attended the Skripal house and was also poisoned by the doorknob,
but more lightly. None of the other police who attended the house were affected.
Why was the Detective Sergeant affected and nobody else who attended the house, or the scene
where the Skripals were found? Why was Bailey only lightly affected by this extremely deadly
substance, of which a tiny amount can kill?
Four months later, Charlie Rowley and Dawn Sturgess were rooting about in public parks,
possibly looking for cigarette butts, and accidentally came into contact with the sealed
container of a novichok. They were poisoned and Dawn Sturgess subsequently died.
If the nerve agent had survived four months because it was in a sealed container, why has
this sealed container now mysteriously disappeared again? If Rowley and Sturgess had direct
contact straight from the container, why did they not both die quickly? Why had four months
searching of Salisbury and a massive police, security service and military operation not found
this container, if Rowley and Sturgess could?
I am, with a few simple questions, demolishing what is the most ludicrous conspiracy theory
I have ever heard – the Salisbury conspiracy theory being put forward by the British
government and its corporate lackies.
My next post will consider some more plausible explanations of this affair.
In the July 07, 2018 edition of Moon of Alabama, I asked everyone for links and alt-media
websites to go to. The way I did it seemed to be disruptive, given the reactions that I got.
I wanted to apologize for that. I simply wanted to learn more about alt-media websites, not
to troll, but I could have done it in a better way.
Anyway, let's share some alt-media websites that we know of.
Got a host of leftwing websites and rightwing websites and alt-media websites that I don't
think are either leftwing or rightwing, so if you want anymore, just ask me.
Anyway, please, if you've got any alt-media websites you'd like to share, I think that the
Open Thread is the best place to do it. I'm always on the look-out for any alt-media
websites, so if you've got any, please tell me. The reason why I ask is because it's going to
get harder and harder to find these websites, I think. So with that in mind, I'd like to
learn more about what's out there in terms of the alt-media.
You got any alt-media websites to share, please do.
And thanks to anyone that have already shared what they knew in yesterday's thread.
Glad to be here by the way. I've known about Moon of Alabama for some time and I've
decided to drop into the comments. I didn't really keep track of all the links that you guys
posted, but I will now. Thank you.
Exciting new product intro from Max Blumenthal: Maddow's Tears™, a new formula that
produces soothing, cooling moisture in politically convenient circumstances.
"I am at a loss to see what motive the Kremlin might have to commit murders on foreign
soil during the buildup, let alone the enactment, of a sporting event that is of mammoth
chauvinist significance to Russia."
"The most obvious motive for these attacks would surely be from someone out to embarrass
the Russian president, Vladimir Putin – someone from his enemies, rather than from his
friends or employees. But once again we have no clue."
It used to be that the only things one could depend on were "death & taxes." Now of
course we must add to that list the very dependable presence of CIA / State Dept lies
parroted by MSM all over the West. Lies which are endlessly repeated in defiance of all
physical reality and often in direct opposition to actual events in the actual world we live
in.
From the Ukraine coup, to Russia-gate, to the "Assad's gassing his own people" regime
change propaganda, to the totally surreal Alice in Wonderland Skripnal poisoning nonsense in
the U.K, the Western MSM have been as dependable as the rising sun.
They can and do provide
fact-free, evidence-free reporting directly from the bowels of the deep state in support of
the neocolonial West, including unending support for the never ending resort to mass violence
the West relies upon to keep the rest of the planet subjugated -- just as it has for the last
500+ years.
In this article, we have attempted to identify the most censored stories of modern times in
Britain. We have asked the opinions of one of the most famous and celebrated journalists and
documentary film-makers of our time, a high-profile former Mi5 intelligence officer, an
investigative journalist with one of the most well-known climate-change organisations, a
veteran journalist of the Iraq war, an ex-army officer, along with the head of one of the
worlds largest charities working against injustice.
One comment from our eclectic group of experts said; "the UK has the most legally protected
and least accountable intelligence agencies in the western world so even in just that field
competition is fierce, let alone all the other cover-ups."
So true have we found this statement to be that we've had to split this article into two
categories – military and non-military, with a view that we may well categorise
surveillance and privacy on its own another time.
Without further ado – here are the most non-military censored stories in Britain since
the 1980s, in no particular order. Do bear in mind that for those with inquisitive minds, some
of these stories you will have read something about somewhere – but to the majority of
citizens, these stories will read like conspiracy theories.
Consequences of American corporate influence over British welfare reforms
The demolition of the welfare state was first suggested in 1982 by the Conservative Prime
Minister, Margaret Thatcher. Using neoliberal politics, every UK government since 1982 has
covertly worked towards that goal. It is also the political thinking used as justification for
the welfare reforms of the New Labour government, which introduced the use of the Work
Capability Assessment (WCA) for all out-of-work disability benefit claimants. Neoliberal
politics also justified additional austerity measures introduced by the Coalition government
since 2010, and the Conservative government(s) since 2015, which were destined to cause
preventable harm when disregarding the human consequences. Much of this is known and in the
public domain.
However, what is less known is a story the government have tried
very hard to gag . The American healthcare insurance system of disability denial was
adopted, as was the involvement of a US healthcare company to distance the government from the
preventable harm created by its use. The private sector was introduced on a wide scale in many
areas of welfare and social policy as New Labour adopted American social and labour market
policies – and the gravity of its effects cannot be understated.
The result? In one 11 month study 10,600 deaths were attributed to the government disability
denial system of screening, with 2,200 people dying before the ESA assessment was even
completed. Between May 2010 and February 2014, an astonishing total of
40,680 people died within 12 months of going through a government Work Capability
Assessment. The government department responsible has since refused to publish updated
mortality totals.
This political and social scandal has been censored, with the author of
THIS truly damning report in trouble with the government for publishing it.
Climate Change, what a British oil giant knew all along
For decades, tobacco companies buried evidence that smoking was deadly, the same goes for
the fossil fuel industry. As early as 1981, big oil company Shell was aware of the causes and
catastrophic dangers of climate change. In the 1980s it was acknowledging with its own research
that anthropogenic global warming was a fact. Then, as the scientific consensus became more and
more clear, it started introducing doubt and giving weight to a "significant minority" of
"alternative viewpoints" as the full implications for the company's business model became
clear.
By the mid-90s, the company started talking about "distinguished scientists" that cast
aspersions of the seriousness of climate change.
THIS REPORT provides proof of Shell's documentation including emails of what they knew and
what they were hiding from the public domain. One document in 1988 confirms that: "By the time
the global warming becomes detectable it could be too late to take effective countermeasures to
reduce the effects or even stabilise the situation."
It was not until 2007 that scientific research eventually took a grip of the problem and
proved what was known all along. However, as Shell did say – it's probably too late to
take effective countermeasures now anyway. There is still persistent quoting of climate science
deniers by the fossil fuel industries.
Government Surveillance
In 2016, the UK was identified as the most
extreme surveillance state in the Western world. However, legislation really only came
about to legalise its use because of the Edward Snowden revelations in 2013. Prior to that, the
British government had created a secret 360-degree mass surveillance architecture that no-one,
including most members of parliament, knew anything about. And much of it has since been deemed
illegal by the highest courts in both Britain and the European Union.
From operation Optic Nerve which took millions of sexually explicit images of an unknowing
public through their devices to a hacking operation called Gemalto – where GCHQ stole the
keys to a global encryption system with 700 million subscribers. The unaccountable spymasters
of the UK have undertaken breathtaking operations of illegality with absolute impunity.
Some other programmes included; Three Smurfs
– an operation to turn on any mobile device so it could listen to or activate the camera
covertly on mobile phones. XKeyScore was basically a Google search engine for spies to find any
data about anyone. Upstream and Tempora hacked into the worlds main cable highway, intercepting
everything and anything globally with a leaked presentation slide from GCHQ on this programme
expressly stating they were intent on "Mastering the Internet". Royal Concierge identified diplomatic
hotel reservations so GCHQ could organise a surveillance operation against dignitaries either
domestic or foreign, in advance.
In truth, Britain is classed as an endemic surveillance state and right now, we only know
what has been uncovered by whistleblowers. This is why people like Julian Assange, Edward
Snowden and others are nothing less than political prisoners of Western governments. They don't
want you to know what they know about you. They also don't want you to know about them, which
is why the architecture is there in the first place. It is not for catching terrorists because
if it was the courts would not deem these surveillance systems as illegal.
Evidence-Based Medical Studies
Over the last few years, medical professionals have come forward to share a truth that, for
many people, proves difficult to swallow. One such authority is Dr. Richard Horton, the current
editor-in-chief of the Lancet – considered to be one of the most well respected
peer-reviewed medical journals in the world.
"The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps
half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid
exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for
pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards
darkness."
Across the pond, Dr
Marcia Angell , a physician and longtime Editor-in-Chief of the New England Medical Journal
(NEMJ), which is also considered another one of the most prestigious peer-reviewed medical
journals in the world, makes her view of the subject quite plain:
"It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published
or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no
pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an
editor of the New England Journal of Medicine".
Many newspapers in Britain take the opportunity to indulge in some shameless click baiting
and report completely false stories simply to gain visitor numbers onto their website –
as in this example by the Mail Online HERE
or
HERE.
The Skripal poisoning and Pablo Millar
D-notice's (Defence and Security Media Advisory Notice) are used by the British state to
censor the publication of potentially damaging news stories. They are issued to the mainstream
media to withhold publication of damaging information. One such case was the widespread use of
D-notices regarding the British ex-spy deeply involved in the Skripal/Novichok poisoning case
in Salisbury.
Mainstream journalists, the press and broadcast media were issued with D-notices in respect
of a former British intelligence officer called Pablo Miller. Miller was an associate of
Christopher Steele, first in espionage operations in Russia and more recently in the activities
of Steele's private intelligence firm,
Orbis Business Intelligence .
Steele was responsible for compiling the Trump–Russia dossier, comprising 17 memos
written in 2016 alleging misconduct and conspiracy between Donald Trump's presidential campaign
and the Putin administration. The dossier paid for by the Democratic Party, claimed that Trump
was compromised by evidence of his sexual proclivities (golden shower anyone?) in Russia's
possession. Steele was the subject of an earlier D-notice, which unsuccessfully attempted to
keep his identity as the author of the dossier a secret.
Millar is reported to be Skripal's handler in Salisbury and if Miller and by extension,
Skripal himself were involved in Orbis' work on the highly-suspect Steele-Trump dossier, which
is thought to be the case (for all sorts of reasons – including these D-notices)
alongside representatives of British and possibly US intelligence, then the motivations for the
attempted assassination on the ex-Russian double agent was very wide at best. As it turned out,
blame could not be pinned on Russia's intelligence service, the FSB, no matter how hard the
government tried. This particular part of the Skripal poisoning story remains buried by the
mainstream media.
The City of London – A global crime scene
For over a hundred years the Labour party tried in vain to abolish the City of London and
its accompanying financial corruption. In 1917, Labour's new rising star Herbert Morrison, the
grandfather of Peter Mandelson made a stand and failed, calling it the "devilry of modern
finance." And although attempt after attempt was made throughout the following decades, it was
Margaret Thatcher who succeeded by abolishing its opponent, the Greater London Council in
1986.
Tony Blair went about it another way and offered to reform the City of London in what turned
out to be a gift from God. He effectively gave the vote to corporations which swayed the
balance of democratic power away from residents and workers. It was received by its opponents
as the greatest retrograde step since the peace treaty of 1215, Magna Carta. The City won its
rights through debt financing in 1067, when William the Conqueror acceded to it and ever since
governments have allowed the continuation of its ancient rights above all others.
The consequence? It now stands as money
launderer of the world , the capital of global crime scene with Britain referred to by the
global criminal fraternity to be the most corrupt country in the world.
A 'watchman' sits at the high table of parliament and is its official
lobbyist sitting in the seat of power right next to the Speaker of the House who is
"charged with ensuring that its established rights are safeguarded." The job is to seek out
political dissent that might arise against the City.
The City of London has its own private funding and will 'buy-off' any attempt to erode its
powers – any scrutiny of its financial affairs are put beyond external inspection or
audit. It has it's own police force – and laws. Its dark and shadowy client list
includes; terrorists, drug barons, arms dealers, despots, dictators, shady politicians,
corporations, millionaires and billionaires – most with something to hide. The shocking
Panama Papers, Paradise Papers and Lux Leaks barely scratching the surface
even with their almost unbelievable revelations of criminality.
Keith Bristow Director-General of the UK's National Crime Agency
said in June 2015 that the sheer scale of crime and its subsequent money laundering
operations was "a serious strategic threat to Britain." And whilst much of this activity is
indeed published – the scale of it is not. It is now believed by many investigative
journalists that the City of London is managing "trillions in ill-gotten gains" – not
billions as we have all been told.
State propaganda – manipulating minds, controlling the internet
Reading this you would think this was the stuff of a conspiracy theory – sadly, it's
not. The government, through its spying agent GCHQ developed its own set of software tools to
infiltrate the internet to shape what people see, hear and read, with the ability to rig online
polls and psychologically manipulate people on social media. This was what Glenn Greenwald of
The Intercept confirmed through the Snowden files in 2014. It was not about surveillance
but about manipulating public opinion in ever more Orwellian ways.
These 'tools' now constitute some of the most startling methods of propaganda delivery
systems and internet deception programmes known to mankind. What the Snowden files show are
that the government can change the outcome of online polls (codenamed Underpass), send mass
delivery of emails or SMS messages (Warpath) at will, disrupt video-based websites (Silverlord)
and have tools to permanently disable PC accounts. They can amplify a given message to push a
chosen narrative (GESTATOR), increase traffic to any given website" (GATEWAY) and have the
ability to inflate page views on websites (SLIPSTREAM). They can crash any website (PREDATORS
FACE), reduce page views and distort public responses, spoof any email account and telephone
calls they like. Visitors to WikiLeaks are tracked and monitored as if an inquiring mind is now
against the law.
Don't forget, the government has asked no-one for permission to do any of this and none of
this has been debated in parliament where representative democracy is supposed to be taking
place. There is no protective legislation for the general public and no-one is talking about or
debating these illegal programmes that taxpayers have been given no choice to fund –
costing billions. This is government sponsored fake news and public manipulation programmes on
a monumental scale.
Chris Huhne, a former cabinet minister and member of the national security council until
2012 said – "when it comes to the secret world of GCHQ, the depth of my 'privileged
information' has been dwarfed by the information provided by Edward Snowden to The
Guardian."
The Guardian's offices were then visited by MI5 and the Snowden files were ordered to be
destroyed under threats that if they didn't, it would be closed down – a sign of
British heavy-handedness reminiscent of the East-German Stasi.
Censorship – Spycatcher
'Spycatcher' was a truly candid autobiography of a Senior Intelligence Officer published in
1987. Written by Peter Wright, a former MI5 officer, it was published first in Australia after
being banned by the British government in 1985. Its allegations proved too much for the
authorities to allow it to be in the public domain.
In an interesting twist of irony, the UK government attempted to halt the book's Australian
publication. Malcolm Turnbull, current Prime Minister of Australia, was a lawyer at the time
and represented the publisher that defeated the British government's suppression orders against
Spycatcher in Australia in September 1987, and again on appeal in June 1988. This is the same
man that refuses to assist Julian Assange, an Australian citizen, from his hellhole existence
in the Ecuadorian embassy in London.
The book details plans of the MI6 plot to assassinate Egyptian President Nasser during the
Suez Crisis; of joint MI5-CIA plotting against British Prime Minister Harold Wilson and of
MI5's eavesdropping on high-level Commonwealth conferences. Wright also highlights the methods
and ethics of the spying business.
Newspapers printed in England, attempting proper reportage of Spycatcher's principal
allegations were served gag orders. If they continued, they were tried for contempt of court.
However, the book proved so popular many copies were smuggled into England. In 1987, the Law
Lords again barred reportage of Wright's allegations or sale of books.
The ruling was then overturned, but Wright was barred from receiving royalties from the sale
of the book in the United Kingdom. In November 1991, the European Court of Human Rights ruled
that the British government had breached the European Convention of Human Rights in gagging its
own newspapers. The book has sold more than two million copies. In 1995, Wright died a
millionaire from proceeds of his book.
Censorship – The Internet
To the inquisitive and knowledgeable, censorship of the internet by the British government
is not news. In addition, there have been many reports, especially from independent outlets
complaining about search engines and social media platforms censoring oppositional and
dissenting voices.
Already described earlier in this article is the involvement of the authorities in
strategies to manipulate public opinion and disseminate false narratives in their aims for
control of the internet itself.
A few months ago, the government changed the law to block online content deemed as either
pornographic or of an extremist nature to protect those under 16 years of age. It was
anticipated that approximately 50 websites would be banned altogether. What subsequently
happened was that thousands of websites
disappeared from the internet with no court orders, injunctions, notices or justification.
Even finding out which websites are on that list is a secret.
Over time, like many pieces of legislation that has been abused by the state, websites and
online content that the government of the day does not like will have the perfect tool to
simply press the 'delete' button, pretty much as they have already started doing.
Soon after the Second World War, some of America's richest people began setting up
a
network of thinktanks to promote their interests. These purport to offer dispassionate
opinions on public affairs. But they are more like corporate lobbyists, working on behalf of
those who founded and fund them. These are the organisations now running much of the
Trump administration . These same groups are now running much of Britain. Liam Fox and what
was the Atlantic Bridge and the
Adam Smith Institute are good examples.
They have control of the Conservative party and are largely responsible for years of work
that steered Britain through the EU referendum that ended with Brexit. Tens of £millions
have been spent, mostly undisclosed on making this dream to exploit Britain and its people a
reality. In fact, almost everything in this article is about such organisations. Those hugely
powerful individuals that own search engines and social media platforms along with the banking
industry, the pharmaceutical and medical business, the fossil fuel and arms industries –
they have reached a pinnacle of unprecedented corporate power.
Some of those fully censored stories pushed below the radar by these corporations include;
how over 100,000
EU citizens die every year because of lobbying against workplace carcinogens, how
corporate profits and taxes are hidden, the Tory-Trump plan to
kill food safety with Brexit – to name but a few. And don't forget the corporate
media who are complicit. There are a handful of offshore billionaires that have the ability to
decide what millions should read or see.
The Adam Smith Institute referred to earlier is a good example. It is a mouthpiece for
right-wing extreme neoliberal capitalists. With a turnover of over £130 million and an
operating profit of nearly £17 million, it has received millions of pounds in UK
government funding. That is taxpayers money being used against taxpayers because the ASI does
not believe in the likes of the NHS or civil society in general.
Talking of Dark Money – Brexit and the climate deniers
We recently reported about a
transatlantic network of lobbyists pushing against action on climate change and (latterly)
for Brexit? This group are all based out of one building around the corner from the Palace of
Westminster.
What is much less known is that more recently, these
groups have
lobbied for a Hard Brexit , hoping the UK's withdrawal from the EU will lead to a weakening
of those environmental regulations that hinder future profits. These same groups are also
behind the Tory-DUP pact , currently keeping Theresa May in her job while allowing
hard-line Northern Irish social conservatives to dictate significant parts of the UK's
political agenda, themselves climate change deniers. These are just some of Britain's most
censored stories. There are so many of them that we have had to categorise them, which says
something about how democracy, free speech, civil liberty and human rights are performing in
Britain right now. truepublica.org.uk
"... she's following the lead of the UK's evil intelligence agencies which are waging a psychological and economic war on Russia and Putin just because the oligarchs in the West don't like Putin doing good things for Russia. ..."
On behalf of this side of the pond, I would like to formally apoligize for calling Mr.
Blair, Mr. Bush's poodle. I am also certain that Ms. Skripal, sorry Ms. May, with her fiery
independence, is nobody's poodle either.
Tom , July 5, 2018 at 5:42 am
R U kidding me? Ms. May is a poodle for the UK's intelligence agencies i.e. MI5 and MI6.
The swift movement of her to get on board with the totally discredited blaming of Novichok
and Putin/Russia for the nerve agent attack on the Skripals means she is very evil -- she's
following the lead of the UK's evil intelligence agencies which are waging a psychological
and economic war on Russia and Putin just because the oligarchs in the West don't like Putin
doing good things for Russia.
"... Novichok , the magic Russian military nerve agent jumped on another couple after it stayed low-key for weeks, in order to recover from the humiliation of being unable to kill the Skripals, in spite of being "the most powerful and deadly military agent". ..."
"... I May be wrong regarding this theory, but it is highly unlikely. ..."
The former empire known as Great Britain, was struck again by bad luck:
Novichok , the magic Russian military nerve agent jumped on another couple after it
stayed low-key for weeks, in order to recover from the humiliation of being unable to kill
the Skripals, in spite of being "the most powerful and deadly military agent".
Britain lost the Empire's colonies, its greatness (even if this was built on murder and
theft) , its economic power, and now has lost its mind and its shame .
Britain is currently a pedophile island, full of third world immigrants and given refuge
to all the dictators, criminals, crooks and terrorists in the world. It is laundering money
through its City of London, and this is the only thing keeping that island afloat. It's a
huge latrine with a Crown on top, as I like to describe it.
Now the Russians are randomly "poisoning" ordinary British subjects, because this is what
Brits are. The British government and media immediately knew it was Novichok and the Russians
were behind it. Maybe even Mr. Putin found time to do this.
The Russian team just qualified in the FIFA World Cup quarters ; like Britain did after
beating Columbia. Mr. Putin is practicing on poor Brits. If the Russian team will meet the
Brits in the finals, he may pull a Novichok on them and brazenly win this way, the
finals.
I May be wrong regarding this theory, but it is highly unlikely.
"... Craig Murray pointed out that when actions are discussed or carried out, strategies laid out, Trident is never even mentioned. ..."
"... Britain is a failing Western Democracy just as the US is -- they are getting desperate and trying all kinds of stuff under the general heading of evil Russia. Britain is pathetic when you think about it hollow empty country with no vision or concern for anything but the elites. The entire Western democratic ideal has failed utterly, we live in a multi-polar world now the SCO is far more important than the G7 but May probably doesn't even know what it stands for. Without its association with the US and out of the EU the UK will be about as important as Uruguay or Nauru. ..."
"... I can only conclude the the Ruling Class in GB looks at its own public as completely dimwitted morons, as they apparently believe them willing to swallow this crap. ..."
"... It is just over a week since OPCW was given more powers. Put forward by Britain and backed by the usual coalition of the killing. Pulling another Skripal so soon after that is more than a bit sus. ..."
"... And the unknown substance is now Novichuk. But that 4 day lag, not to worry, 1 day ago the suspects were already identified tying in with the Skripals. The 2 Hitmen with close ties to Russia. ..."
"... Take it from me 90 percent of the British public are dim witted morons that's official from me! No exaggeration! Half just regurgitate what the tv / papers say with out question or thought. The other half have just switched off entirely. Tell them 8,000000 could die in Yemen. There eyes glaze over. ..."
"... Britain was never a democracy. It was masquerading as one in order to placate the unwashed masses. They're definitely in panic mode and whatever they do makes them look insane. ..."
"... I love Guerrero's concept that these stories are prepared more like Novellas... especially the implication that the script for the next episode is written after gauging reaction to the former episode. ..."
"... "I think the take home point is to not live near a chemical weapons lab." Methinks it may be worse than that: just don't live in Britain, these days. Says this sympathetic anglophile. ..."
"... The British can't seem to put the lid back on the vial btw was this the same one used by US Secr of State Colin Powell in 2003 at the UN Security Council before the invasion and occupation of Iraq? The Ayatollahs of Persia be forewarned! ..."
"... After researching everything I could find on Novichok, the only rational and logical conclusion one can draw is the Skripals and this latest couple should be dead. The sad part of this incident and the Skripal affair is how many people actually believe the government's claims. ..."
"... Imagine being Yulia Skripal at this moment. She had a job, a boyfriend, a dog and a home in Russia she may never be able to see again, because the UK government cannot allow her to return home and spill the beans on this sordid affair. If their is any justice in this world, every rational individual should be demanding "FREE Yulia"! ..."
"... I don't think this latest version of the novichok case helps the British case at all as it strongly suggests that there is something else out there killing people than a military grade nerve agent. ..."
"... As for the report in the Daily Telegraph "Salisbury couple are fresh victims of the Novichok attack on Sergei and Yulia Skripal", I suspect that is pure bullshit. ..."
"... I've been wondering how The Swamp's inner circle are feeling about the likelihood that Trump and Putin will get along like a house (of cards) on fire. It looks as though the reptiles are more than just a little bit worried... ..."
"... The capacity of some people to believe these lies is seemingly limitless, otherwise they would not bother. Must be hundreds of people fall ill and require emergency treatment each day. Are the Russians to be suspects in each illness requiring workers to go into home wear Hazmat gear and shut down the neighborhood pending tests? ..."
British Government Peddles Warmed Over Novichok Muck
It seems that Theresa May felt a need to stoke some more
Russia hate :
Just as the World Cup had forced the British media to grudgingly acknowledge the obvious
truth that Russia is an extremely interesting country inhabited, like everywhere else, by
mostly pleasant and attractive people, we have a screaming reprise of the "Salisbury
incident" dominating the British media.
All British media outlets report of a middle-aged British couple, Dawn Sturgess and Charlie
Rowley, who fell seriously ill in Amesbury, a town near Salisbury and near the British chemical
weapon site Proton Down. The couple were transported to the Salisbury hospital. They were first
suspected to have taken drugs but the police now
speaks (vid) of a "potential exposure to an unknown substance" and that they "remain in a
critical condition".
The parallels to the poisoning of the British-Russian spy Sergej Skripal and his daughter
four month ago are obvious. The government alleged they were poisoned by a nerve agent of the
Novichok series. Like back in March the British government will soon name the evildoer of this
new drama.
The most curious issue of the current case is that it happened Saturday morning and that
since a lot of local police action took place. But news of the incident emerged only early
today. None of the pieces I read explains the four day long lack of reporting. The British
government obviously prohibited all news of the case until early today and now prohibits to
explain the censoring.
Why?
A "friend of the couple", who has been together with them, was
interviewed by several outlets:
Here's a link to Newsnow's aggregator for the "major incident". FYI: Newsnow and Wikipedia
are fighting the Copyright Directive of the European Parliament tomorrow (July 5th) - so get
the news while you can...
Sam Hobson said: "His eyes were wide open and red, his pupils were like pinpricks."
Yes, exposition to some toxic agents can make the pupils like pinpricks (and newspapers said
that novichok has this effect), but this contraction is not so easy to note, because the
pupil is not the whole iris and the iris doesn't contract.
"A police spokesman said: "At the moment it is not a police incident it is being led by
the fire and the ambulance. It appears that there are three people who have taken drugs
and had a medical incident. They have all been taken to hospital."
A cordon was put in place as a precaution but police say there is "no danger" to anyone
else in the area.
A spokesman for South Western Ambulance Service later told the Journal that only one
patient had been taken to Salisbury District Hospital.
Might it be useful to think in terms of the structuring of TV-novelas? Are such media content events designed for a similiar/identical purpose? Unlike a literary novel, a soap opera series can be produced without having
an idea as to how artistic unity will be achieved with some universal meaning.
Are serial tear-jerker episodes the product of private storyboard conferences? Their requirements would be much simpler and less demanding than those of art. Each episode ends with the equivalent of a lewd embrace of an illicit couple viewed
by an interested, emotionally involved third-party who happens to come in the door.
(this point-of-view would be that of peeping-tom reflex of a mass-media consumer)
The camera is focusing mostly on skin, and a tear in the eye of the intruder, or
else it is a glare of rage... An advantage to the commercial TV content producers
is that they would be able to gauge reaction before publishing succeeding episodes.
Is it the story of some homeless recreational drug users who were accidently poisoned
by a dose of novichalk that Putin intended for a spy sheltering in the British isles
accidently deposited as spare-change into guitar-case of strung-out subway musician...
Maybe it is the case that cops are trained to look at pupils and can easily determine their
size. I could never do that and I doubt anyone who says so without being trained to do so,
and eve then eyesight and lighting needs to be close to to ideal.
Britain must be desperate or they really believe they are pulling this off. They must be
getting backing from factions in Washington, they must have unspoken permission for this.
Britain doing its humble part in the Russia demonizing to support Trident spending.
Craig Murray pointed out that when actions are discussed or carried out, strategies laid
out, Trident is never even mentioned.
Britain is a failing Western Democracy just as the US is -- they are getting desperate and
trying all kinds of stuff under the general heading of evil Russia. Britain is pathetic when
you think about it hollow empty country with no vision or concern for anything but the
elites. The entire Western democratic ideal has failed utterly, we live in a multi-polar
world now the SCO is far more important than the G7 but May probably doesn't even know what
it stands for. Without its association with the US and out of the EU the UK will be about as
important as Uruguay or Nauru.
So, uhm. How does a door handle on Skripal's front door end up contaminating the area near
the bar. Legit curious to see how they'll spin this to tie it all together now
Now that me being an ex-Junkie is out in the open here, i will provide some possible
explanations:
-Contaiminated Class A drugs: Heroin sold on the street is maximum 10% heroin, and 90%
various more or less toxic filler stuff. That may be strychnin (Which is used as rat poison,
and fits the symptoms well expect for hallucinating, valium or related opiates, paracetamol,
aspirin, or 1000 other chemicals the dealer has lying around.
-"Legal highs": in UK and in EU, those new synthetic drugs that are marketed as legal
substitute for cannabis, XTC, cocaine etc. are quite popular, and they are highly dangerous
because of their synthetic nature, and are known to cause severe health problems up to death.
In prisons also in UK those are popular, because inmates can pass drug tests easily. This
couple seems to have prison and hard drugs experience, and is therefore likely, to have known
or used those substances.
Additionally, being homeless, drug users/addicts, they are likely to have trouble with
police, and are an easy target for manipulation by intelligence operatives.
And why should evil Putin try to kill some UK Junkies?
Even BBC will have a pretty hard time to spin this..
Oh, goody!
Now we can have another round of UK authorities spewing ominous ambiguities, full of
Russia-blaming sound and fury, in the Gorgon PM and her rotten Tory government's ongoing
desperate struggle to keep its depraved nose above water.
I can't wait for UK Village Idiot Laureate Boris Johnson to provide another definitive
briefing.
Meanwhile, hmm... I suspect one of those lost, stolen, strayed, or liquidated Skripal pets
might be the perpetrator here.
I certainly agree that this story is worth reporting as farce . At this stage,
though, I hope people will resist that catnip-like intoxication of sifting through the
allegations and factoids to speculate on what it's "really" all about.
I wish this latest afflicted pair well, though. And just to flout my own suggestion and
engage in hypotheticals-- who knows, maybe next thing we know the UK government will pay top
dollar pound to purchase the crime-scene house!
no one really believes the uk anymore... if this doesn't make them a laughing stock,
nothing will..apparently people like bad re-runs and are happy to watch them.. this is the new 2018
version of coronation street i guess..
Today I was totally surprised. Headline in The Guardian: There is a cloud hanging over this World Cup and Fifa must not ignore it
An otherwise brilliant World Cup has been cheapened by the kind of histrionics witnessed in
England's game with Colombia and they have become a cancer in the game
Imagine: nothing in the article refers to Russia! Additionally "otherwise brilliant World
Cup".
I still stick with the food poisoning hypothesis (that doctor's letter sealed the deal for
me).
Both were near the restaurant the Skripals went right before they showed their symptoms.
They were homeless people. The simplest explanation is that they ate the same poisoned batch
in the garbage of the restaurant; or that the restaurant has an unreliable supplier, which
gave them more than one poisoned batch, or the restaurant simply pushes its luck with spoiled
food which, in seafood case, can result in some kind of toxins liberation (the practice of
recycling expired and sometimes even rotten expensive ingredients is common in sofisticated
restaurants).
In the case of the Skripals, the British government got lucky they were Russians, and
seized the opportunity. I don't see how they're going to use this now, since both victims are
British. Unless they want to declare war.
He described taking Mr Rowley to collect a prescription from Boots in Amesbury and on
to eat lunch at Amesbury Baptist Church fair, before returning to his friend's home in
Muggleton Road.
Boots, the church and the green outside it are among several sides in the town and nearby
Salisbury that have been cordoned off by police.
Mr Hobson said Mr Rowley started falling ill around four hours after Ms Sturgess was taken
to hospital, while they were preparing clothes to take to her. "He felt ill and went for a shower. Then his eyes went bloodshot and like two pin pricks,
he began garbling incoherently and I could tell he was hallucinating.
"He was making weird noises and acting like a zombie. It was a zombie-like state. He
slumped against the wall."
Mr Hobson said he called an ambulance and that when paramedics arrived they initially
believed the illness was drugs-related because of his friend's struggle with
addiction.
There are a plethora of substances that have those effects. Novichock is not one. That
just kills you, straight away. No passing out, no hallucinating, and definitely no park
benches. Done. Finished. Dead.
Even cyanide kills very quickly. Although Jim Jones might not agree. If anybody wanted to
kill anybody else through poisoning, they could do it very easily. Ratex (strychnine), takes
days, weeks to kill. Whoever adds that to their product would be killing their market anyway.
Capitalism hasn't gone full circle yet...
Yhis "poisoning" meme is not funny anymore, nor comical, that has worn off. It is in fact
tragic. It is tragic that the lies are so stupid, thick and unbelievable, that the whole
narrative is so crudely pieced together, that it make Pravda' 1970 articles look like
Voltaire's writings.
I can only conclude the the Ruling Class in GB looks at its own public as completely
dimwitted morons, as they apparently believe them willing to swallow this crap.
It is just over a week since OPCW was given more powers. Put forward by Britain and backed by
the usual coalition of the killing. Pulling another Skripal so soon after that is more than a
bit sus.
First post here - the only blog worth the time and effort to contribute to in my
opinion. Seems to me that as the UK and friends bought the OPCW last week, this incident has been
strategically timed so that the OPCW can investigate the 'poisoning' and apportion blame to
Russia just in time for the WC final, or am I being too cynical?
Thanks b for catching the 4 days lag in timeline.
Early morning, July 4th, British time, it was on the Daily Express as "Breaking News" as
in just happening. And the unknown substance is now Novichuk. But that 4 day lag, not to worry, 1 day ago the suspects were already identified tying in
with the Skripals. The 2 Hitmen with close ties to Russia.
UK Police Allege Two Hitmen 'With Close Ties to Russia' Involved in SkripalsLINK
Britain and its allies continue to blame Moscow for being behind the March 2018 attack on
former Russian intelligence officer Sergei Skripal and his daughter with what UK experts
claim was the A234 nerve agent, although the accusations have not been substantiated.
Russian authorities vehemently reject the allegations as groundless.
The Sun has cited sources in Scotland Yard as saying that "a two-man hit team with close
ties to Russia" orchestrated the alleged poisoning of ex-Russian security agent Sergei
Skripal and his daughter Yulia in the UK earlier this year.
Take it from me 90 percent of the British public are dim witted morons that's official from
me! No exaggeration! Half just regurgitate what the tv / papers say with out question or
thought. The other half have just switched off entirely. Tell them 8,000000 could die in
Yemen. There eyes glaze over.
Britain was never a democracy. It was masquerading as one in order to placate the unwashed
masses. They're definitely in panic mode and whatever they do makes them look insane.
I find it amusing there is no mention on why China is not part of the G7/8. If you believe
the official narrative that China's economy is the second largest in the World, then one
would think China would have a seat at the table. I was half expecting Russia's seat to be
given to China to create a wedge between China and Russia. But we all know why.
James. How I wish nobody believed these fairy tales anymore.
I love Guerrero's concept that these stories are prepared more like Novellas... especially
the implication that the script for the next episode is written after gauging reaction to the
former episode.
One of the witnesses in the BBC article I read reported believing the gas leak story
because electricity to the neighborhood had been cut off. Wonder what that's about?
Did y'all catch "
False Flag Fail: How Syrian Civilians Derailed White Helmet 'Chemical' Stunt in Eastern
Ghouta?"
ah, well...the verdict is in: 'Wiltshire pair poisoned by nerve agent novichok, say police;
Substance deemed responsible for severe illness of Dawn Sturgess and Charlie Rowley'
"Basu added: "I would add that the complex investigation into the attempted murders of Yulia
and Sergei remains ongoing and detectives continue to sift through and assess all the
available evidence and are following every possible lead to identify those responsible, for
what remains a reckless and barbaric criminal act."
"I think the take home point is to not live near a chemical weapons lab." Methinks it may be worse than that: just don't live in Britain, these days. Says this sympathetic anglophile.
UK Nerve Center Porton Down: 'Putin Strikes Again!'
The British can't seem to put the lid back on the vial btw was this the same one used by
US Secr of State
Colin Powell in 2003 at the UN Security Council before the
invasion and occupation of Iraq? The Ayatollahs of Persia be forewarned!
Must have forgotten to scrub the home front door knop of the Skripals or was Yulia's
luggage returned via FedEx? Sloppy work by British Intelligence
Lightning never strikes twice, except near Porton Down. In fact, this second case will
prove the first case was bogus. Were the two KGB agents from the Cold War still around?
After researching everything I could find on Novichok, the only rational and logical
conclusion one can draw is the Skripals and this latest couple should be dead. The sad part
of this incident and the Skripal affair is how many people actually believe the government's
claims.
Imagine being Yulia Skripal at this moment. She had a job, a boyfriend, a dog and a home
in Russia she may never be able to see again, because the UK government cannot allow her to
return home and spill the beans on this sordid affair. If their is any justice in this world,
every rational individual should be demanding "FREE Yulia"!
Oh, but a communist dictatorship can't be in a club with the superior Western Democracies.
Just because they lifted over 700 million people out of poverty who tonight have something to
eat while Western Democracy is starving millions of people deliberately in Yemen, clearly
communists don't understand the free market.
Western Liberal Democracy is an utter and contemptible failure.
That was me - I was being facetious as Putin is not into gangsterism unlike Obama,
Cameron, May, Macron etc.
I don't think this latest version of the novichok case helps the British case at all as it
strongly suggests that there is something else out there killing people than a military grade
nerve agent.
Amesbury is about eight miles from Salisbury and I just can't see how a limited
release of a chemical would create a hot spot several miles away and almost four months
later. A few days later perhaps but not almost four months although I doubt that'd stop some wanker a bellingcat coming up with some dumb theory that's picked up by the MSM.
As for the report in the Daily Telegraph "Salisbury couple are fresh victims of the
Novichok attack on Sergei and Yulia Skripal", I suspect that is pure bullshit.
I've been wondering how The Swamp's inner circle are feeling about the likelihood that Trump
and Putin will get along like a house (of cards) on fire. It looks as though the reptiles are
more than just a little bit worried...
The capacity of some people to believe these lies is seemingly limitless, otherwise they
would not bother.
Must be hundreds of people fall ill and require emergency treatment each day. Are the
Russians to be suspects in each illness requiring workers to go into home wear Hazmat gear
and shut down the neighborhood pending tests?
Ghost ship @ 39
Thanks for owning up to that joke ! Hell in these times a bit of humour is good therapy. So
can I stop digging my bunker now !
On a serious note- whether this latest incident proves to be drug over dose or nerve agent is
pretty secondary to how it's being used to beat the Russians with. What this actually is,is
dog whistle politics. A deliberate attempt again to ferment Hate for Russia in the eyes of
the British public. The only trick they know is hate.
The former empire known as Great Britain, was struck again by bad luck:
Novichok , the magic Russian military nerve agent jumped on another couple after it stayed
low-key for weeks, in order to recover from the humiliation of being unable to kill the
Skripals, in spite of being "the most powerful and deadly military agent".
Britain lost the Empire's colonies, its greatness (even if this was built on murder and
theft) , its economic power, and now has lost its mind and its shame .
Britain is currently a pedophile island, full of third world immigrants and given refuge to
all the dictators, criminals, crooks and terrorists in the world.
It is laundering money through its City of London, and this is the only thing keeping that
island afloat.
It's a huge latrine with a Crown on top, as I like to describe it.
Now the Russians are randomly "poisoning" ordinary British subjects, because this is what
Brits are.
The British government and media immediately knew it was Novichok and the Russians were
behind it.
Maybe even Mr. Putin found time to do this.
The Russian team just qualified in the FIFA World Cup quarters ; like Britain did after
beating Columbia.
Mr. Putin is practicing on poor Brits.
If the Russian team will meet the Brits in the finals, he may pull a Novichok on them and
brazenly win this way, the finals.
I May be wrong regarding this theory, but it is highly unlikely.
The woman has the same hairline (off her forehead) and the shape of the man's face looks a
reasonable match.
The CCTV is from a local gym and it was reported, back in March, that the police were only
interested in that part of the CCTV. They must have known who these people were for a long
time, which makes the 4 day delay even more ridiculous.
Can you imagine if they follow this up with another one in Syria? That would be too stupid
but at this point not unfathomable. Seems like they would have tried to make us forget about
Novichok and the lies that were told by May and the MSM about it being something only Russia
could possibly produce. I guess when nobody is held accountable for spreading dangerous
criminal misinformation like that than they just try it again. Even now that there is still
zero evidence and no suspects in the Skirpal incident, none of the countries who expelled
diplomats have apologized and the news hasn't stopped referring to Russia as the only
culprit, so why not give it another go I suppose? Anything to put some smear on the World Cup
maybe, though the details of this story don't seem to make sense yet. As far as Syria, the
NeoCons like Bolton maybe panicking if the rumors that the Syrian government has made some
preliminary deals in regards to lite-reunification and a peace plan with the YPG/SDF. They
may do a "back to back" again and do something drastic in Syria while blaming both on Russia
indirectly..
I've been expecting another Steele dossier. If England make the finals it wouldn't surprise
me if the team get propositioned by some attractive ladies. Of course they will gallantly
resist.
@30 /31 daniel... one can dream, lol... thanks for the videos.. teh vanessa beeley one is
very good.. which brings me to the comment peter mentioned on a previous thread, or maybe
there were a few mentioning it.. the changes to the opcw - to quote the keyphrase from the
usa daily propaganda briefing yesterday "The decision calls on the technical secretariat to
establish arrangements for identifying the perpetrators of chemical weapons attacks in Syria
by using all potentially relevant information..." which essentially means this... all the
money the usa/uk have spent on propaganda to fund the white helmets, syrian civil defense,
'save our syria', chatham house and etc etc - will be accepted as fact, unless proven
otherwise... this will be the grounds for making war on syria with macron, may and trump
being the good poodles for saudi arabia and israel, that they continue to be.. well - that is
what i get from that..
@34 flamingo - thanks for that! just when you think britian can't get any more crazy and
whacked out then it already is - this comes along... a better view on britian at this point
is the whole country has been subject to some form of mind altering drug.. we are witnessing
the byproduct in their msm and political leadership vacuum...
In this episode, we are joined by Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Sy Hersh who exposed
NATO nation war crimes of the military-industrial complex. From Abu Ghraib prison in the
Anglo-American war on Iraq to the Mee Lai Massacre, Sy Hersh has exerted a damning scepticism
of the official line. His new book "Reporter - A Memoir" is out now.
What does Seymour say about 9/11? Anyone, including seymour Hersh and Noam Chomski, isn't
worth a damn if they gloss over 9/11. If he's written a book about Dick Cheney and omitted
his major role in making sure 9/11 was the success it was for the neocons, he's a limited
hangout.
RT should bring Hersh on the show as much as possible. The guy is a legend and he is not
allowed to publish his articles anywhere in the US except in a German newspaper.
Is he sure about tht chemical weapons in Syria? What happened then when it was taken out
of Syria by the Authorities - whose name I have forgotten - and verified by the UN? He should
have a chat with Vanessa Bealey.
Good to see Sy on the rounds again - it's been a while. I guess he was finishing his book.
That point about the Russian sample being what proved to Obama that Nusra probably did the
WMD attack - "Red Line" - and called it off - I bet that had a lot to do with the move to
make Russia "beyond the pale" regarding official OPCW reports. Since then, all the tests have
been done remotely, by Turkey, by the UK, by anyone but Russia. I believe that the balance of
the evidence in the entire Syria aggression suggests that the Syrian government never
conducted any chemical attacks, and that any real attacks that took place were done by the
terrorists.
It should be just common sense - groups which are happy to massacre men, women
and children, keep women as slaves, eat livers, etc would have no moral qualms about using
chemical weapons whatsoever. The Syrian government, on the other hand, has always been in
control of the majority of the population in Syria - even in their worst moments before the
Russians came to help - and so any use of such barbaric methods would risk revolt from the
masses.
No president under such a long conflict could remain in power if he were capable of
such brutal and callous methods - in fact, the evidence shows that they have made every
effort to either arrange the surrender or evacuate the belligerents, while allowing for
civilian escape wherever possible.
The whole "brutal dictator" libel never made any sense
about Assad - he remains popular, mingles with the people, has full support from the
military. He is also a rarity for so-called dictatorships in the Middle East - not a military
man, but a civilian doctor. If there were the slightest doubts about him, the military would
have removed him by now - instead, his government and military appear to have both high
morale and widespread support from the people.
Of course, the facts are never a big concern
for the "regime change" crew - but thankfully, their ability to "create facts on the ground"
has weakened immensely over the 20 years of terror the US rulers began in 2001.
Other patterns on behaviour of British government suggest their nefarious role in Skripal
poisoning scandal
Notable quotes:
"... What else to expect from "Christian colonialists" but hypocrisy and double speak! "Many commit the same crime with a very different result. One bears a cross for his crime; another a crown." ― Juvenal, The Satires ..."
"... Most Christian Colonial wars are fake wars against weak, or weakened, countries for 2 streams of Private Profit using Public Funds. ..."
"... Western looting of Libya netted "someone"(s) more than $1 Trillion in gold and currency reserves alone. Iraq lost historical artifacts of inestimable value. The Friends & Relatives crowd will be perpetually pissed with Putin for ruining Christian Colonialism's plan to loot Damascus. ..."
"... I hate to add another layer of shit on a very deep pile, when it comes to my u k but ! Could the academics here take a look at the time lines concerning the last general election and referendum compared to the 3 terrorist attacks about the same time. That is what kept may in power! Compare to for instances the fake Salisbury incident and east Douma Chem incident. All same patten ! I dug deep but don't let me influence enyone. To add, look at the timing of the grenfail tower fire, re election. I'l just leave this here. ..."
"... Talking about fake wars, bombing functioning ME countries back to the Stone Age and looting them, and "Israel" being a vociferous promoter of the Iraq & Syria Fake Wars, does anyone know how 'lootable' Iran is? ..."
"... Another astonishing thing about all this is the "liberal" media MSM or however you choose to call the corporate establishment press has always gone along with all the coverups. But things have changed and things are changing. ..."
Read Murray's blog entry prior to b's, and it's extremely damning. The May government must be
thrown out and the notables from all post-911 UK governments must be charged with over the
crimes they've committed--including the obstruction of those crimes investigations. This
report also shows we ought to consider Skripal Affair as 100% falsehood as the May government
has less than zero credibility on anything, which is one of the reasons it must be tossed. I
wonder if there're enough Corbynites capable of unseating the "Blue Tories" to bring a new
revitalized People's Labour Party back into power so that justice can be served.
craig murray and b are to be commended for addressing this ongoing issue..
we're back to the issue of accountability and again - nothing has changed..as karlof1 and
worldblee note - this must be addressed and someone must be held accountable for this, or it
will continue.
so - is the uk trying to be like the uae/ksa of the north? maybe they could take up
headchopping as well? i am not sure what country is more backward - uk or usa... in this race
to the bottom, both countries are fully supportive of these regressive regimes in uae/ksa and
fully onside with the war on yemen which they must profit from in order for them to justify
it... for me - justifying murder and mayhem based on profit is a sign of a really sick
culture, but it is fully embraced by many of the so called democratic western countries,
including the one i live in - canada... as far as leadership is concerned - there is a huge
gap and no one is speaking out on any of it in the political spectrum as i know of...
meanwhile we have to thank b and craig murray for shining a light on this as a constant
reminder of just how backward the so called civilized countries are here in 2018..
What else to expect from "Christian colonialists" but hypocrisy and double speak!
"Many commit the same crime with a very different result. One bears a cross for his crime;
another a crown." ― Juvenal, The Satires
There are two aspects of this Christian Colonial (Western) clusterfuck which are particularly
galling for The People in whose name these crimes are committed:
1. Torture was used to extract false confessions.
2. Most Christian Colonial wars are fake wars against weak, or weakened, countries for 2
streams of Private Profit using Public Funds.
----(a) The M-IC makes vast profits from Weapons (win or lose).
----(b) Their wealthy Friends & Relatives get first pick of the spoils of Looting, at a
big discount.
Western looting of Libya netted "someone"(s) more than $1 Trillion in gold and currency
reserves alone. Iraq lost historical artifacts of inestimable value. The Friends &
Relatives crowd will be perpetually pissed with Putin for ruining Christian Colonialism's
plan to loot Damascus.
I hate to add another layer of shit on a very deep pile, when it comes to my u k but !
Could the academics here take a look at the time lines concerning the last general election
and referendum compared to the 3 terrorist attacks about the same time. That is what kept may
in power! Compare to for instances the fake Salisbury incident and east Douma Chem incident.
All same patten ! I dug deep but don't let me influence enyone. To add, look at the timing of
the grenfail tower fire, re election. I'l just leave this here.
Talking about fake wars, bombing functioning ME countries back to the Stone Age and looting
them, and "Israel" being a vociferous promoter of the Iraq & Syria Fake Wars, does anyone
know how 'lootable' Iran is?
Rumors says that Iran has very ancient roots and one imagines it may have artifacts going
back 5000+ years, although I've never heard them talked about.
Another astonishing thing about all this is the "liberal" media MSM or however you choose to
call the corporate establishment press has always gone along with all the coverups. But
things have changed and things are changing.
There is a not quite parallel story to this. The child separations - did you ever hear
from the corp. media about the 5,100+ children separated from their families in 2011 by
Obama. Nor much about how Obama had deported more than Trump at this point in his term.
I try to follow press from several countries and what I notice now is that EVEN MODI is
moving away from the US. The general views is - hay, we want to trade and get along we want
development but we have to deal with this big pain in the ass we have to spend a lot if time
and energy dealing with the US that we could use for development.
Trump is doing the world a favor by bringing all the criminal behavior of the US into the
open, its been there all along.
The liberal press which is hounding Trump over the issue now were silent for a decade when
"liberals" were in power have a Pyrrhic victory, it will come back on them.
If this trade crazy stuff drives Modi to join the B&R the US commercial/corporate
global empire is well and truly over.
Let us appeal to the gods.
SERIOUSLY?!!! - Did Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey have time to visit his home after he was
exposed to the poison but before he exhibited symptoms? Or did someone deliberately pour
bucketfuls of
Novichok into his home?
Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey, who also fell ill after being exposed to Novichok,
receiving £430,000 in compensation for his family home.
Actually I suspect there is nothing wrong with the house. It is Detective Sergeant Nick
Bailey that is too poisonous to be allowed to roam free. He will be given a new identity,
transferred to the USA and released into the custody of some FBI witness protection program. He
must never be allowed to speak to public.
The secret that Nick Bailey must never reveal is that he was poisoned two days after the
Skripals, most likely in the evidence room at the police station by the
£100,000 of cash in the red bag .
The problem the MSMs have is that the World Cup so far has been a success.
Notable quotes:
"... Also just like the Trump bizzo, when his employers dipped out, Steele's unsubstantiated gossip & slander having done nothing useful, Steele leaked his report to the feds. ..."
"... The claims he makes are utterly fantastic ( WARNING the link is to a graun 'long read' and is brimming with tedious & tendentious bulldust) the most laughable being that 'Putin' - always Putin never any of the many thousands of astute bureaucrats who work in the Russian government, stole a bunch of valuable old paintings from the Hermitage and gave them to the blokes on the World Cup venue committee as a bribe. The feds who went through these poor old buggers' lives with a fine tooth comb found nothing to substantiate that libel. ..."
"... The worst thing about these slanders and the harassment of a few old geezers who prefer sport as a mechanism for nations to interact than war, is that these old fellas were all (well just about all) socialists who yeah probably did allow a coupla mill to fall into their wallets, but who were dedicated to their sport remaining egalitarian. They invested billions into developing their sport all over the world especially in Africa, Latin America and the Mid-East where a shortage of venues, kit and professional coaches used to really hold those nations back. ..."
"... The 'clean sweep' of FIFA has opened the door to neolibs who are talking about corporatising the World Cup like the Olympics, then the billions will all go to corporations and their shareholders ..."
"... It is stuff like this about Skirpal's boss Steele, which really opens up the field of suspects on the 'poisoning'. I have no doubt Skirpal would have been the alleged 'proof' for this farrago of tosh. Russia and Qatar got their world cup final, but england and amerika (who were the finalists against Qatar for hosting in 2022) didn't, surely it is the latter two who are more likely to have a grudge against old Sergei. ..."
"... The Western corporate media is a sorry spectacle to behold. The Baltic and the Scandinavian branches are the most pathetic. Combining native stupidity with pig-headed tenacity to hold on to the past. ..."
And another thing - the other day I came a cross an interesting tidbit, I would include a
link if I can remember where I saw it, it may in fact have even been the graun. It goes like
this:
A few years back the FBI raided the FIFA HQ in Switzerland eventually arresting and charging
many FIFA commissioners alleging they were taking backhanders and at the time I, along with
many other sort of assumed that the amerikans shoving their stickbeaks into an organisation
which was none of their damn business was down to an announcement from FIFA president Blatter
that if the Israeli army and police didn't cease harassing the Palestinian team preventing
players from getting to international games by holding the players up at checkpoints, sometimes
for days, FIFA would have no choice but to penalise the Israeli football team who had already
been granted special dispensation by FIFA to play in the Euro conference rather than the ME one
that their geography should have demanded.
Nuttytahoo did his usual 'antisemite' victim whine so it was a reasonable assumption to think
the fed raid the next week was connected.
It may have been the issue which caused the amerikan sheet sniffers to move, but the actual
investigation was caused by something completely different. Two nations competed for the 2018 world cup hosting rights. One was Russia and the second one
was . . .drumroll. . . England! Yep the perfidious poms had put in their bid and one of the tools in their 'kit' was none other
than the old fibber Christopher Steele, who just as with the Trump investigation, did his
'inquiry' by remote control as he is persona non grata in Russia.
Also just like the Trump bizzo, when his employers dipped out, Steele's unsubstantiated gossip
& slander having done nothing useful, Steele leaked his report to the feds.
The claims he makes
are utterly fantastic ( WARNING the link is to a graun 'long read' and is brimming with
tedious & tendentious bulldust) the most laughable being that 'Putin' - always Putin never
any of the many thousands of astute bureaucrats who work in the Russian government, stole a
bunch of valuable old paintings from the Hermitage and gave them to the blokes on the World Cup
venue committee as a bribe. The feds who went through these poor old buggers' lives with a fine
tooth comb found nothing to substantiate that libel.
The other big lie was that while the Russian president was in Qatar finalising the joint gas
pipeline deal he cut another deal of the 'you vote for us we'll vote for you' as world cup host
in 2018 and 2022 respectively. Yeah that sounds just like President Putin tossing Russia's
economic future to the side while he organised a few soccer games - not.
The worst thing about these slanders and the harassment of a few old geezers who prefer
sport as a mechanism for nations to interact than war, is that these old fellas were all (well
just about all) socialists who yeah probably did allow a coupla mill to fall into their
wallets, but who were dedicated to their sport remaining egalitarian. They invested billions
into developing their sport all over the world especially in Africa, Latin America and the
Mid-East where a shortage of venues, kit and professional coaches used to really hold those
nations back.
The 'clean sweep' of FIFA has opened the door to neolibs who are talking about corporatising
the World Cup like the Olympics, then the billions will all go to corporations and their
shareholders.
No one should begrudge these guys the few quid they grabbed, I know puritans hate it but in
a truly tolerant society we should expect that a few otherwise dedicated types will always
'tickle the peter'. I used to get pissed about it in the union movement but the amounts are
usually small compared to turn-over and I'd rather have a dodgy member of the proletariat who
grabs a little in a position of power than a slimy neolib forever manouvering to flog the
entire kit & kaboodle off to a bunch of anonymous 'financiers'.
It is stuff like this about Skirpal's boss Steele, which really opens up the field of
suspects on the 'poisoning'. I have no doubt Skirpal would have been the alleged 'proof' for
this farrago of tosh. Russia and Qatar got their world cup final, but england and amerika (who
were the finalists against Qatar for hosting in 2022) didn't, surely it is the latter two who
are more likely to have a grudge against old Sergei.
The UK hates the idea that the EU that they left would turn to Russia for friendship. Their
propaganda goes along with the USA that shares this apprehension. Now that Trump has
humiliated the EU, the EU is turning toward Russia despite the UK...
The Western corporate media is a sorry spectacle to behold. The Baltic and the Scandinavian
branches are the most pathetic. Combining native stupidity with pig-headed tenacity to hold
on to the past.
Harding is definitely a joke. He is pretty pathetic easily jumping in and trying to milk any
Russian scandal be in Litvinenko, Russiagate, Steele dossier, of Skripals. Any version of events
that he approved can be instantly discarded a lie probably created with MI6 help. So he can serve
as a kind of reliable negative indicator, if you wish.
Applebaum is more dangerous, but still she a typical rabid neocon without any "in depth"
understanding of Russia. the net result of Skripal affair was poisoning Russian-British relation
for decade or so. If this is the price Theresa May wanted to pay to stay in power she should be
prosecuted for abuse of her office.
Notable quotes:
"... The Skripal case: A new Cold War? ..."
"... Applebaum now works at the London School of Economics where she heads, appropriately enough, a program on disinformation and 21st century propaganda. She is a virulent anti-communist and a ferocious warmonger, married to the former foreign minister of Poland. ..."
"... Washington Post ..."
"... editing, contextualising, explanation and redaction ..."
"... Answering a question about the government's use of D-Notices (Defence and Security Media Advisory Notice), Morris tried desperately to excuse press censorship. Contradicting reports that the government had issued two D-notices to prevent the media from identifying British intelligence service personnel Skripal was working with, he said there were "very few that we know about, only one." D notices had "changed" and are now "advisory." ..."
"... One audience member pointed out that since the poisoning had been unsuccessful, Russia might not have been responsible and that the government and media had taken the easy way out by blaming Russia. ..."
"... This was dismissed without a serious answer. The newspaper of what passes for the "liberal left" instead proceeded to solidify its alliance with the most right-wing layers of the US and British political and intelligence establishment by churning out anti-Russian propaganda of a distinctly McCarthyite character. ..."
The Guardian's June 4 event, The Skripal case: A new Cold War? was a
blatant attempt to propagandise against Russia in the interests of British imperialism.
The newspaper gave the platform to Anne Applebaum and Luke Harding along with two of its
journalists, Caroline Bannock and Steve Morris, who had covered the Skripal story.
All have uncritically regurgitated the British government's unsubstantiated, contradictory
and constantly shifting claims that the Russian-British double agent Sergei Skripal and his
daughter Julia were poisoned with a Novichok nerve agent by the Putin regime.
Applebaum now works at the London School of Economics where she heads, appropriately
enough, a program on disinformation and 21st century propaganda. She is a virulent
anti-communist and a ferocious warmonger, married to the former foreign minister of
Poland.
After the Russian annexation of Crimea, she called for "total war" against nuclear-armed
Russia in a column in the Washington Post . Closely connected to the highest echelons
of the US state, she is a member of key foreign policy think tanks and sits on the board of
directors of the CIA-linked National Endowment for Democracy.
Harding, long time foreign correspondent for the Guardian , appears to have very
close links to Britain's security services. He has authored books that can only be described as
hatchet jobs on Julian Assange and Edward Snowden, aimed at discrediting them and facilitating
their persecution by the US authorities, as well as innumerable propaganda pieces against
Russia.
The Guardian itself has a long record of dutifully promoting the anti-Russian
warmongering of both the US and British political establishments. It supported the
Western-backed coup in Ukraine in 2014, using allegations of Russian aggression to press for
punitive sanctions against Moscow, British participation in the US intervention in Syria
against the Russian-backed regime of Bashar al-Assad, most recently following fake news of a
chemical weapons attack on Douma. This is in addition to accepting uncritically the allegations
of Russian interference in the US presidential election in 2016.
To underscore the Guardian's political loyalties, another invitee, although not on
the platform, was Sir David Omand, from whom the Guardian has commissioned several
articles over the years.
Omand is a former senior civil servant and head of the Government Communications
Headquarters (GCHQ), the intelligence and security organisation responsible for spying on
people at home and abroad. He is currently a visiting professor at King's College London and
vice-president of the Royal United Services Institute, the leading military think-tank.
It was GCHQ that in 2013 oversaw the operation to destroy the Guardian's hard
drives and memory cards on two computers containing encrypted files from whistle-blower Edward
Snowden, after the British government threatened to jail editor Alan Rusbridger and close the
newspaper over its reporting of the Snowden revelations. The Guardian accepted this
blatant censorship with only token protest.
The newspaper also has form on news control. It stated in 2010 in an infamous editorial
about WikiLeaks, which had provided secret US diplomatic cables to the Guardian and
four other news outlets, that it had only agreed to publish "a small number of cables" to
control the political fall-out from the details of murder, torture, espionage and
corruption they revealed. It added that the newspaper had exercised extreme discretion in the "
editing, contextualising, explanation and redaction " of the documents. [emphasis
added]
The Guardian is acutely aware of the widespread and entirely healthy scepticism
towards anything the government says on Skripal, in the aftermath of lies such as the existence
of Iraqi "weapons of mass destruction" in furtherance of Britain's warmongering. Indeed, the
week before the June 4 event confirmed the need for the Guardian's services in
propping up the government's campaign of lies.
The newspaper led on the report of the supposed murder of Russian journalist Arkady
Babchenko at his apartment in Kiev as the assassination of yet another Putin critic, only for
Babchenko to show up alive and well the very next day at a press conference about his "murder."
Harding wrote lamenting that the stunt "would allow Russia and other unscrupulous governments
to dismiss real events as fake."
At the event itself, focus was placed for the most part on calls to end Russian money
laundering in London and avoiding wherever possible any direct examination of the Skripal case
in favour of sweeping generalisations.
Applebaum rejected any possibility that the Kremlin was not involved in the Skripals'
attempted assassination. She insisted that, having done a lot of research on how Russian
propaganda works, "this was like watching a replay of MH17," the Malaysian passenger jet shot
down over Eastern Ukraine. In that case, "Russia immediately put out dozens of stories, not
just deny it, but using multiple sources, gave out dozens of stories to pollute media with so
much nutty stuff in order to make people draw back and say believe it is all unknowable. That
is their modus operandi, designed for a Russian audience."
Applebaum never indicated that the same might be said about the British government's line on
the Skripal case!
Harding said that assassination was a traditional Russian method of dealing with opponents
going back to Lenin and Stalin and was resurrected in the 1990s when Putin and ex-KGB people
came to power. Unable to cite any example of Lenin assassinating anyone, he roamed willy-nilly
through history citing various assassinations by Stalin, including that of Trotsky, and various
more contemporary alleged assassinations as "proof" of his argument.
There were, he said, two theories about why Russia had tried to kill Skripal.
The first, which Harding rejected, was that after Skripal was released in a spy exchange, he
broke the rules, remained active and embarked on the old spies' lecture trail. The second,
which he "preferred," is that Skripal was "almost irrelevant": not so much the target but an
instrument to frighten and intimidate anyone thinking of cooperating with the West, especially
talking to the Mueller Inquiry in the US into the alleged Russian attempt to subvert the US
2016 election.
After these baseless ruminations, chairperson Mark Rice Oxley asked former GCHQ chief Omand,
sitting in the audience, for his thoughts. Omand was enthused. "It's a great conversation. I
agree with Luke's idea of implausible deniability. Hence the baroque method assassination. The
point is to intimidate.
"I know the team that did the assessment of the nerve agent, attributing it to a Novichok
agent and the Russian state. It was meticulous, like Sherlock Holmes, eliminating
everything.
"No scientific theory is 100 percent reliable, but this was as close as it gets," he
asserted.
He then admitted that it was entirely unclear how applying Novichok to a door handle would
work!
Omand agreed with Harding that the British government "should go after the money," urging
investigative journalists "to dig," saying it "would hurt the people in power around
Putin."
Omand, responding to a question from the chair as to whether British public opinion would be
in favour of increasing hostility to Russia, revealed the extent of the collaboration between
the Guardian and Prime Minister Theresa May's Conservative government.
He said, "You are doing a good job in that regard. My fear is that if things worsen, it
would be necessary to explain The Kremlin could miscalculate, for example with a cyber-attack.
We could be moving into a dangerous period."
Applebaum interrupted, saying, "We know they could do that."
Some questions from the floor revealed public scepticism towards the government and media's
coverage of the Skripal case.
Answering a question about the government's use of D-Notices (Defence and Security Media
Advisory Notice), Morris tried desperately to excuse press censorship. Contradicting reports
that the government had issued two D-notices to prevent the media from identifying British
intelligence service personnel Skripal was working with, he said there were "very few that we
know about, only one." D notices had "changed" and are now "advisory."
Other members of the audience asked where the Skripals were now, reports about them being
given US passports and relocated to the US under fake names, the government's news management,
whether it was coincidence that Porton Down, the government's chemical and biological military
research institute, was so close to the incident, and that it had recently received additional
funding of £48 million.
One audience member pointed out that since the poisoning had been unsuccessful, Russia
might not have been responsible and that the government and media had taken the easy way out by
blaming Russia.
This was dismissed without a serious answer. The newspaper of what passes for the
"liberal left" instead proceeded to solidify its alliance with the most right-wing layers of
the US and British political and intelligence establishment by churning out anti-Russian
propaganda of a distinctly McCarthyite character.
When the media is controlled by people responsible for false flag operation chances to use investigation to
discredit this false flag operation, no matter how many evidence they have is close to zero
In other word false flag operation is perfect weapon for the "sole superpower" and due to this status entail very little
risks.
Notable quotes:
"... Today's false flag operations are generally carried out by intelligence agencies and non-government actors including terrorist groups, but they are only considered successful if the true attribution of an action remains secret. ..."
"... False flags can be involved in other sorts of activity as well. The past year's two major alleged chemical attacks carried out against Syrian civilians that resulted in President Donald Trump and associates launching 160 cruise missiles are pretty clearly false flag operations carried out by the rebels and terrorist groups that controlled the affected areas at the time. ..."
"... Because the rebels succeeded in convincing much of the world that the Syrian government had carried out the attacks, one might consider their false flag efforts to have been extremely successful. ..."
"... The remedy against false flag operations such as the recent one in Syria is, of course, to avoid taking the bait and instead waiting until a thorough and objective inspection of the evidence has taken place. The United States, Britain and France did not do that, preferring instead to respond to hysterical press reports by "doing something." If the U.N. investigation of the alleged attack turns up nothing, a distinct possibility, it is unlikely that they will apologize for having committed a war crime. ..."
"... The other major false flag that has recently surfaced is the poisoning of Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia in Salisbury England on March 4 th . Russia had no credible motive to carry out the attack and had, in fact, good reasons not to do so. ..."
"... Unfortunately, May proved wrong and the debate ignited over her actions, which included the expulsion of twenty-three Russian diplomats, has done her severe damage. Few now believe that Russia actually carried out the poisoning and there is a growing body of opinion suggesting that it was actually a false flag executed by the British government or even by the CIA. ..."
"... The lesson that should be learned from Syria and Skripal is that if "an incident" looks like it has no obvious motive behind it, there is a high probability that it is a false flag. ..."
False Flag is a concept that goes back centuries. It was considered to be a legitimate ploy
by the Greeks and Romans, where a military force would pretend to be friendly to get close to
an enemy before dropping the pretense and raising its banners to reveal its own affiliation
just before launching an attack. In the sea battles of the eighteenth century among Spain,
France and Britain hoisting an enemy flag instead of one's own to confuse the opponent was
considered to be a legitimate ruse de guerre , but it was only "honorable" if one
reverted to one's own flag before engaging in combat.
Today's false flag operations are generally carried out by intelligence agencies and
non-government actors including terrorist groups, but they are only considered successful if
the true attribution of an action remains secret. There is nothing honorable about them as
their intention is to blame an innocent party for something that it did not do. There has been
a lot of such activity lately and it was interesting to learn by way of a leak that the Central
Intelligence Agency (CIA) has developed a capability to mimic the internet fingerprints of
other foreign intelligence services. That means that when the media is trumpeting news reports
that the Russians or Chinese hacked into U.S. government websites or the sites of major
corporations, it could actually have been the CIA carrying out the intrusion and making it look
like it originated in Moscow or Beijing. Given that capability, there has been considerable
speculation in the alternative media that it was actually the CIA that interfered in the 2016
national elections in the United States.
False flags can be involved in other sorts of activity as well. The past year's two major
alleged chemical attacks carried out against Syrian civilians that resulted in President Donald
Trump and associates launching 160 cruise missiles are pretty clearly false flag operations
carried out by the rebels and terrorist groups that controlled the affected areas at the time.
The most recent reported attack on April 7th might not have occurred at all
according to doctors and other witnesses who were actually in Douma. Because the rebels
succeeded in convincing much of the world that the Syrian government had carried out the
attacks, one might consider their false flag efforts to have been extremely successful.
The remedy against false flag operations such as the recent one in Syria is, of course, to
avoid taking the bait and instead waiting until a thorough and objective inspection of the
evidence has taken place. The United States, Britain and France did not do that, preferring
instead to respond to hysterical press reports by "doing something." If the U.N. investigation
of the alleged attack turns up nothing, a distinct possibility, it is unlikely that they will
apologize for having committed a war crime.
The other major false flag that has recently surfaced is the poisoning of Sergei Skripal and
his daughter Yulia in Salisbury England on March 4th. Russia had no credible
motive to carry out the attack and had, in fact, good reasons not to do so. The allegations
made by British Prime Minister Theresa May about the claimed nerve agent being "very likely"
Russian in origin have been debunked, in part through examination by the U.K.'s own chemical
weapons lab. May, under attack even within her own party, needed a good story and a powerful
enemy to solidify her own hold on power so false flagging something to Russia probably appeared
to be just the ticket as Moscow would hardly be able to deny the "facts" being invented in
London. Unfortunately, May proved wrong and the debate ignited over her actions, which included
the expulsion of twenty-three Russian diplomats, has done her severe damage. Few now believe
that Russia actually carried out the poisoning and there is a growing body of opinion
suggesting that it was actually a false flag executed by the British government or even by the
CIA.
The lesson that should be learned from Syria and Skripal is that if "an incident" looks like
it has no obvious motive behind it, there is a high probability that it is a false flag. A bit
of caution in assigning blame is appropriate given that the alternative would be a precipitate
and likely disproportionate response that could easily escalate into a shooting war.
The real reason for which 'information apocalypse' terrifies the mainstream mediaIn short: because they are rapidly losing the propaganda monopoly by system failure
No matter how hard I tried, I couldn't find a source to inform me about the exact origin
(who and when) of the term 'fake news'. Generally, the term became mainstream during the last
years, and especially after some shocking events for the Western neoliberal establishment, like
Trump's presidency and Brexit.
Very briefly, it appears that the term was suspiciously invented by the neoliberal apparatus
to discredit people who supported such events, through social media and other Internet
platforms completely independent from the mainstream media control. Of course, one can easily
discredit this perception as 'conspiracy theory' or even 'fake news', as well.
While it's true that there has been a lot of hyperbole, misinformation and hard propaganda
circulated inside the cyberspace, it seems that the 'fake news' term was expanded somehow to
include even opinions and positions outside the dominant neoliberal orthodoxy expressed by the
political center in the West.
What's perhaps most interesting in the whole story, is that the term 'fake news' eventually
backfired against the establishment, as it was immediately adopted by the political 'extremes'
outside the neoliberal center, to include the misinformation and the smearing campaigns by the
mainstream media against those who didn't comply with the neoliberal narratives. Mainstream
media propaganda is what brought us numerous wars and plenty of disaster in previous decades,
after all.
numerous wars and plenty of disaster in previous decades, after all.
Now, a
relatively new technology with its origins in the beginning of the previous decade,
seems that it spreads a sort of panic among the mainstream media, often described as
'information apocalypse'.
What is new is the democratisation of
advanced IT, the fact that anyone with a computer can now engage in the weaponisation of
information. 2016 was the year we woke up to the power of fake news, with internet
conspiracy theories and lies used to bolster the case for both Brexit and Donald Trump. We
may, however, look back on it as a kind of phoney war, when photoshopping and video
manipulation were still easily detectable. That window is closing fast. A program developed
at Stanford University allows users to convincingly put words into politicians' mouths.
Celebrities can be inserted into porn videos. Quite soon it will be all but impossible for
ordinary people to tell what's real and what's not. What will the effects of this be? When a public figure claims the racist or sexist audio of
them is simply fake, will we believe them? How will political campaigns work when millions
of voters have the power to engage in dirty tricks? What about health messages on the
dangers of diesel or the safety of vaccines? Will vested interests or conspiracy theorists
attempt to manipulate them? Unable to trust what they see or hear, will people retreat into
lives of non-engagement, ceding the public sphere to the already powerful or the
unscrupulous? The potential for an "information apocalypse" is beginning to be taken seriously. The
problem is we have no idea what a world in which all words and images are suspect will look
like, so it's hard to come up with solutions. Perhaps not very much will change –
perhaps we will develop a sixth sense for bullshit and propaganda, in the same way that it
has become easy to distinguish sales calls from genuine inquiries, and scam emails with
fake bank logos from the real thing. But there's no guarantee we'll be able to defend
ourselves from the onslaught, and society could start to change in unpredictable ways as a
result.
The perspective described here is indeed frightening. Yet, what's really impressive in this
article and in other similar articles by the big media on the Internet, is that there is a type
of information elitism, implying that there is a media priesthood, which has the copyright of
Truth. You can tell that by the fact that the article completely ignores the possibility that
this technology could be used by the mainstream media too, to manipulate the public.
Inside this increasingly artificial reality, is there really anyone today who holds the keys of
the 'ultimate' truth? I don't think so.
So, this bizarre panic around the mainstream media about this new, and indeed frightening
technology, is not coming from their concern that you will be heavily misinformed. It's coming
from the fact that they want the monopoly to misinform you. Because they know that after
decades of lies and propaganda being upgraded to a literally scientific level, their
credibility today has reached a record low.
Celebrities can be inserted into porn videos by anyone. I don't like it. I don't think is
right.
Personalities should be protected and perhaps we need a new legislation code to achieve
that.
But what about the mainstream media pundits who will use this frightening technology to grab
the consent of the masses for another devastating war with millions of dead?
"... The following is the third part of a three-part interview with Professor Piers Robinson, an academic at the University of Sheffield and a member of the Working Group on Syria, Propaganda and Media. Parts one and two appeared on May 24 and May 25. ..."
"... We initially issued two briefing notes on Skripal. That was partly because some of the people in the Working Group who had been looking at chemical/biological events in Syria had relevant knowledge and were aware that what the British government was saying straight off was inaccurate, i.e., the idea that the nerve agent used was Russian and only the Russians could have produced it, etc. ..."
"... I did feel, because at the time the Syrian government was retaking large portions of territory, that the representation of Skripal might be being exploited as part of a broader propaganda drive against Russia (which was providing military support to Syria). ..."
"... If there was going to be an escalation in Syria, beyond the bombing that occurred, that would take us up against the Russians. There was a good possibility that the Skripal event was going to be exploited as part of a broader anti-Russian propaganda drive. ..."
"... when [Foreign Secretary] Boris Johnson pretty much said it was the Russians who must have poisoned the Skripals, that appeared to be a statement of certainty that was not warranted. And, of course, the recent history of Iraq and UK government claims regarding alleged WMD stockpiles was an important reminder that governments can be strongly motivated to distort and manipulate their claims, especially when intelligence is involved. ..."
"... I think the Skripal poisoning might be connected to events in the US. We do know, because Alex Thomson from Channel 4 tweeted on March 12 that the government had put a D-notice restriction on the reporting of [MI6 agent] Pablo Miller. Professor Paul McKeigue (University of Edinburgh) has issued a new briefing talking about this matter. ..."
"... Pablo Miller was Skripal's handler. He was connected to [former MI6 officer] Christopher Steele. He was responsible for the dossier alleging Trump's collusion with Russia. That, as I understand it, was a key part of initiating proceedings and investigations against Trump. It appears that the dossier was linked to the Democratic National Committee in that they apparently commissioned it. ..."
"... If it is the case that Skripal was in any way connected with that, it forms a possibility that there was a motive for someone other than Russia to have carried out the poisoning. ..."
"... More broadly, there is the possibility that the whole Russia-gate narrative is being used for bigger political purposes -- to influence Trump, to try and shore up action in the Middle East, perhaps on some level to distract Western publics from increasing awareness of how we have been involved in wars in the Middle East. ..."
The following is the third part of a three-part interview with Professor Piers Robinson,
an academic at the University of Sheffield and a member of the Working Group on Syria,
Propaganda and Media. Parts one and two appeared on May 24 and
May 25.
Julie Hyland: What is your estimation of the alleged poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal
by Russia, and how do they relate to the war in Syria?
PR: We initially issued two briefing notes on Skripal. That was partly because some of
the people in the Working Group who had been looking at chemical/biological events in Syria had
relevant knowledge and were aware that what the British government was saying straight off was
inaccurate, i.e., the idea that the nerve agent used was Russian and only the Russians could
have produced it, etc.
I did feel, because at the time the Syrian government was retaking large portions of
territory, that the representation of Skripal might be being exploited as part of a broader
propaganda drive against Russia (which was providing military support to Syria).
If there was going to be an escalation in Syria, beyond the bombing that occurred, that
would take us up against the Russians. There was a good possibility that the Skripal event was
going to be exploited as part of a broader anti-Russian propaganda drive.
It's not something you can pinpoint for sure at this stage because you don't have access to
the information. I don't think we will know the full truth of exactly what is happening for
some time. But you can make an informed judgement call.
What we do know is that the claims being made at the time were not tenable. So when
[Foreign Secretary] Boris Johnson pretty much said it was the Russians who must have poisoned
the Skripals, that appeared to be a statement of certainty that was not warranted. And, of
course, the recent history of Iraq and UK government claims regarding alleged WMD stockpiles
was an important reminder that governments can be strongly motivated to distort and manipulate
their claims, especially when intelligence is involved.
I think the Skripal poisoning might be connected to events in the US. We do know, because
Alex Thomson from Channel 4 tweeted on March 12 that the government had put a D-notice
restriction on the reporting of [MI6 agent] Pablo Miller. Professor Paul McKeigue (University
of Edinburgh) has issued
a new briefing talking about this matter.
Pablo Miller was Skripal's handler. He was connected to [former MI6 officer] Christopher
Steele. He was responsible for the dossier alleging Trump's collusion with Russia. That, as I
understand it, was a key part of initiating proceedings and investigations against Trump. It
appears that the dossier was linked to the Democratic National Committee in that they
apparently commissioned it.
If it is the case that Skripal was in any way connected with that, it forms a possibility
that there was a motive for someone other than Russia to have carried out the poisoning.
More broadly, there is the possibility that the whole Russia-gate narrative is being used
for bigger political purposes -- to influence Trump, to try and shore up action in the Middle
East, perhaps on some level to distract Western publics from increasing awareness of how we
have been involved in wars in the Middle East.
In a related area that people don't usually connect, the same psychological warfare methods
being used in the Middle East are being used in the attack on public education to privatize
education globally.
I've had a degree of dialogue with Piers on Facebook .
Despite the fact that he has done some important work here regards state propaganda and
Syria I have found his political positions very much the typical University sociology
professor , where bourgeois ideology and Post modernism runs rampant .
Not immune to running off a line of expletives and ad hominems as if they constitute an
argument, Piers came to the defence of Eva Bartlett and Vanessa Bealey when I had the
audacity to make a distinction between the defence of Syria against US Imperialism and a
defence of Assad per se and Putin
Both engaged in a somewhat lumpen diatribe on the question, despite the fact that I
clearly never once promoted an Imperialist line . The situation was in fact reminiscent of
what in more recent times the WSWS faced in regards Iran , when it seemingly ''had the
audacity'' to support the Iranian working class against its own bourgeois rulers.
The claims the British government made about the Skripal case are nonsensical. It is
entirely possible that the Skipal's were victims of simple
food poisoning or suffered from an
overdose of Fenatnyl . The British government used the case to increase hostility towards
Russia while diverting the public from its failures in the Brexit negotiations. There is
historic
precedence for such false accusations against the Russian state.
The Skripal case is
also related
to the "Dirty Dossier" the "former" British spy Christopher Steele created to defame U.S.
President Donald Trump. Sergej Skripal
may well have written parts of it . A fact which the British government is
trying to hide .
The Skripal's were probably hurt. The British accusations against Russia caused huge damage
in international relations. But the biggest casualty of the case might be the trustworthiness
of the British media.
Where are the deep investigations, the intriguing questions, the door stepping of witnesses
in this case? Why are no serious questions asked about the dubious claims made about the case?
How did the Skripals survive a nerve agent "ten times as deadly as VX"? Why is there no further
digging into the Steele dossier relation?
More
questions need to be asked. Who is the media servicing with its obsequious behavior?
Why?
---
Previous Moon of Alabama posts on the Skripal case:
On March 7, the British issued a D-notice (Defence and Security Media Advisory Notice) to
the British press formally requesting that they refrain from mentioning the name of Sergei
Skripal's former MI6 handler Pablo Miller or making any reference to him in their coverage of
the poisoning case and the police investigation. A week later, a second D-notice was issued
that reiterated the warning of the first D-notice and putting the press on notice not to
publish any information that could lead directly or indirectly to the identification of Pablo
Miller as Sergei Skripal's handler. http://powerbase.info/index.php/DSMA_notice_7_March_2018 http://powerbase.info/index.php/DSMA_notice_14_March_2018
This explains why the British press, usually notorious for harrying people in the
spotlight for interviews and gossipy information, have been noticeably reticent in
approaching the Skripals - assuming of course, that they have access to them.
This would also explain why Julia Skripal was reading a prepared statement in the video
and why her Reuters interview did not seem like a normal interview. She may have had a minder
close by prepared to intervene in case the interviewer posed a question she was not allowed
to answer.
Is anyone able to find out when the Reuters interview took place? If it took place some
time ago, would the time between Julia Skripal's release and the interview have been long
enough for Julia to recover to the extent where she looks well and appears not to be
suffering traumatic after-effects? And why was it only released on May 23?
The most plausible perpetrators of the original poisoning of the Skripals are some element of
the dysfunctional and evil British deep state, which connects to the American deep state,
which too is diabolical and dysfunctional.
The enormous resources, political and media and choreography and stream of lies,
surrounding the Skripal affair make it obvious as a dysfunctional deep state project.
The alternative explanations: 1) that it was Russia, make no sense whatsoever; 2) that it
was food poisoning is far fetched but possible, and might have been taken advantage of, and
the policeman victim then added, to create the 'right' attempted murder mystery ambience.
That is, those who have been 'protecting' and controlling and hiding away and issuing
statements for and 'restoring health to' the Skripals are very likely those who attacked
them.
Father Skripal is a practised devious sort, who would know the ropes. Thet he is not just
expendable, but an endangered loose end for various reasons now, including the Trump-Russia
false flag.
Has Julia Skripal had unimpeded access to her father since their recovery? If so, a wink
wink nod nod private whispered exchange between the two could have transformed the two into a
potential team effort to stay alive by playing their parts.
If she has not been allowed or had available a moment of private exchange with father
Skripal, then she might still know enough to understand that they are both in extreme
danger.
Father Skripal can likely be bought off. That's what he does for as living. But can
Julia?
Starting to believe that the Skripals were going to transport Novichok somehow into Syria so
that it could be used there In a staged event. The problem was that things may have gone
sideways. Makes sense why the Russians issued a warning of a staged attack and how the Brits
are keeping the couple incommunicado. The Russians could have known about the plot
beforehand.
As I commented here before there are many plausible explanations much more probable than any
of variants U.K. gov or media peddled. And this clear statement under duress sounding to
similar British hostages taken by Saddam Hussein in 2003 declaring that they were healthy ate
good food and were personal guests of Saddam and that they were free to leave anytime but
since they enjoyed themselves immensely they would stay for a while and hence do not worry.
Sounds like Julia Skripal. To support this there is not emphasized fact that they both
seem be to held in separate locations so they could not freely communicate much.
What is looks like that in this multiple bottom story something went wrong and some
desperate solutions have been implemented. Because it is clear now that by keeping them alive
that effectively cut off the family access while if dead family would have claimed bodies and
all those lies would have been exposed, or it was all a false flag to redirect Skripal role
in Trump dossier into made up Putin revenge on those who contributed to it.
Here is my take on all that, which may have not entirely happened as planed along the
scenarios I and others including b proposes.
As far as theory how this happened. I see that Skripal was in it, in fact he prepared and
tested appropriate dose for him as his daughter used as pawn to lend credibility and provide
required Putin evil killing innocent narrative which would be absent if he just killed or
hurt rogue agent.
Skipral himself calibrated that false flag dose of BZ or Fenantyl to make sure no
permanent damage would be done to his daughter and then administered it himself to her and
himself in controlled manner in public place so help would be coming immediately while in his
car they could have possibly lie there for hours before being discovered.
In fact place where he lived Salisbury near Porton Downs was perfect for this since there
was no way that doctors would misdiagnose them as military nerve agent victims which wrong
treatment would possibly caused irreversible damage to victims as doctors would be more
aggressive fearing immediate death of patients and also were immune to propaganda of Novichok
crap since they were experts in this medical field as real and present danger, threat of
exposure of Porton Downs employees was always there.
After recovery is was Skripal, trusted by her as her father, himself as part of psych op
presented the narrative as Putin wanted to kill me and did not care that you happened to be
with me at time of attack. I am so sorry, shit lies.
She was brainwashed or threatened some ways offered lucrative financial arrangement in the
west decided to stay and followed MI6 instructions, fearing she could be killed upon meeting
with Russian diplomats or even recruited family members or upon returning to Russia.
I do not think it would be far fetched to concoct such a thing or similar by MI6 as such
stunts were done before like fake deaths or staged attacks but in this case the point was to
fool British unwitting participants that nerve agent attack happenced as later they did later
in Douma in amateurish way but still it worked as pretext to pre planed aggression on Syria
as in case of Skripals pre planed diplomatic retaliation against Russia before any
investigation was really commenced , such a thing only perpetrators of false flag themselves
would do.
If Skripal was not on it why keep them alive witnesses of conspiracy since I could imagine
as a father myself Skripal would,have been furious of MI6 discovering what amounted to attemp
to kill his daughter and blame Putin one he learned that there was no Novichok crap or any
military nerve agent used.
In fact Fenantyl is deadly if inappropriately handled what just few days after Skripal
affair husband and wife overdosed on Fentanty in California and putting in critical condition
their mother in law trying to revive them in the bedroom, children that never enter the room
by looked through the Door who called 911 were also mildly exposed while a police officer who
entered the room end up in hospital himself.
Whole house was immediately quarantined and covered by tent until, special unit arrived
days later and only then police investigator entered premises. WImilar scenario unfolded in
Salisbury.
What interesting that no emergency or medical personnel in hospital in UK as in California
was hurt since they knew well how to deal with Fenantyl epidemic.
We must remember that despite crazy rhetoric we are dealing with risky but rational people
who were not smart enough to concoct something that would go down the throuta of gullible
public much more smoothly.
Starting to believe that the Skripals were going to transport Novichok somehow into Syria
so that it could be used there In a staged event.
Posted by: P Walker | May 24, 2018 9:39:46 AM | 18
At one point I saw a reference (on Sputnik I think, certainly a Russian source) that both
Skripals Sergei and Yulia were under investigation by Russian intelligence for smuggling arms
(I can't remember if there was a reference to chemical weapons but very possibly) into Syria.
It was slightly mind-jarring at the time since it conflicted with the official position that
Russia had (prior to the incident) no interest in Sergei Skripal. Otherwise I've seen nothing
on that, perhaps because of a criminal investigation in progress in Russia.
Regarding the throat scar - I can imagine that was the result of surgery for long-term
artificial respiration during the hospital-induced coma. If so, the alleged statement that
"the clinical treatment was invasive, painful and depressing" was unequivacally originating
from a technical and third-party source and definately not the patient. The doctor could well
have used that phrase in discussions with government officials, who got so used to it they
repeated it in composing an alleged statement for Yulia, but I am quite certain the patient
herself would not describe it in such a way whether in English or Russian, and whether native
English speaking or native foreign speaking. A patient's description would be much more
focussed on the patient's experience (pain, discomfort, probable dryness of the mucosal
membranes and side-effects resulting from that, etc) rather than "invasiveness" which was the
first word in the statement and thereby the most emphasised.
It was always suspicious that Yulia was "discharged" from the hospital - and therefore away
from her father - when her father was allegedly still under treatment. Yulia was alone in a
foreign country, utterly isolated from friends, family and aquaintances, while her father was
still in hospital undergoing "invasive, painful and depressing" treatment after an alleged
state-sponsored assassination attempt - NO WAY! She would not leave her father
voluntarily.
The statement that she does not want to be contacted by her cousin, grandmother, the Russian
government or anyone else is the real killer of the fairy tale, and is the exact opposite of
the compelling reality of such a traumatic episode. Is she supposed to believe her
grandmother and cousin actively conspired in the assassination plot? There is absolutely know
scenario that could explain such a wish.
i more like the "и принятия
всего
происшедшего." part.
('We need time for full revoery and for accepting all that happenned')
i bet it is as unrussian as unrussian can be.
it also is a bit confusing how she sternly repeats "no one should speak for us but
ourselves" then she herself speak for her father.
Another giveaway is "grateful to Russian embassy" -
"признательна
Российскому
посольству".
It is plain wrong. You do not write "russian" with capital letter in Russian.
And if you mean "Russian Embassy" as some kind of name - then bot hwords would be
capital.
It is yet another case of "thinking English" when authoring this Russian letter from Russian
woman to her Russian relatives...
Craig
Murray again shoots massive holes into the hostage video and PR, further using semantics
and discourse analysis to show the UK government at fault in this affair. A jointly written
article by b and Craig would be a great read since their own investigations are very
advanced, seemingly beyond all others. I for one find Craig's "lion cage" metaphor very
convincing.
A conjecture: Teresa had it done to protect Hillary.
1. Why, out of all places in the UK, Skripal would settle down in Salisbury, the location of
UK's CW labs? We're told that is because his handler, Pablo Miller, lived there. Fine, then
the question becomes: why, out of all places in the UK, Pablo Miller was living close to UK's
CW labs?
2. Why was it necessary to drag Yulia into this mess? A claim could be made that the
alleged Russian assassins needed her to track the location where Sergei lived. But this was
not her first visit to him, so alleged Russian assassins could have tracked his whereabouts
long time ago, then waited for the best moment to kill him. Obviously, it would be better to
kill him when he was alone, not with his daughter. Unless alleged Russian assassins, while
she was still in Moscow, secretly poisoned some object that she then brought to her father.
That is the only explanation why alleged Russian assassins would need Yulia. But British
government is not claiming that; instead, they claim that a toxic substance was applied to
the doorknob. Therefore, Yulia's presence was of no use to alleged Russian assassins. Then we
must conclude that her presence was somehow needed by the British or third-party
false-flaggers, or possibly by Sergei in case he was in on the plot. Otherwise, why not wait
till she leaves?
3. The choice of CW to assassinate Skripal, the fact that he lived next to the main CW lab
in UK (and one of the top CW labs in the world), and the fact that he and Yulia were poisoned
at the end of a three-week CW military exercise in Salisbury Plains, taken together, form a
combination that cannot be explained by mere coincidence. There must be a connection here.
Could British intelligence plan all this 8 years ago when they were selecting the location
where Skripal would live? Hell no. Therefore, it must have been the reverse: a decision was
made to kill or "kill" Skripal and pin it on the Russians, then someone decided to use the
fact that he was living close to the CW lab. However, if that's indeed what has happened,
then it was a very flawed plan from the start, since all these coincidences would be readily
apparent to outside observers. The poisoning false flag would work much better if Skripal was
living in some other region of UK, and there was no CW exercise at the time of his poisoning.
Therefore, either the plan was unintentionally dumb (because of incompetence), or it was
intentionally dumb (people did not want to do it but could not reject the order, so they
decided to sabotage it), or the original plan was entirely different, but it didn't work out,
so they quickly improvised something else and failed to make it convincing due to lack of
time.
Looking at the obvious tracheostomy scar left on her throat, Yulia must have lost all ability
to breathe on her on without ventilatory assistance for some time. A tracheostomy is only
performed after all effort to wean a patient off an endotracheal tube placed orally into the
trachea at the time of respiratory failure is attempted. It seems to me this was much more
than "food poisoning", and Yulia was in a deep coma for a prolonged duration.
This whole thing is very bizarre!
The Russian embassy seems curiously unwilling to file a habeus corpus application to produce
the Skripals and enforce their consular rights. I wonder why?
It can be interesting/useful. Translated today's article in Russian newspaper "Komsomolskaya
Pravda":
"KP"* exclusive: Victoria Skripal told that what her sister pronounced not her text in
the videoclip.
Both specialists and average people right away noticed that [Yulia] Skripal was
constrained, and a text which she has been pronounced was obviously written not by herself.
Yulia's sister Viktoria [Skripal] appeared with the same suspicions. Here's what the woman
told in exclusive interview during the "Komsomolskaya Pravda" radio air.
- Have you seen a written appeal?
- I saw only the appeal where she speaks. I'm glad she's alive and healthy. And i'm very
happy she'd like to come back home.
- Maybe you've noticed some strangenesses in this appeal?
- You mean, strangenesses that she's reading a text?
- What makes you think she's reading a text?
- You don't have to be a great specialist [to notice this]. When a person drop his eyes,
then lift up, then drop his eyes again. Do you know what is invasive therapy?
- No.
- Me too don't know. She too doesn't have a medical education. She is a geographer. I am
an accountant. But i don't know what is invasive therapy. And it can't be a persons speaks so
well, without mistakes. She has her favourite word. We all have our own parasite-word, right?
She used it when she called me by telephone: "ну да, ну
да" (Approximate English translation may be "yeah, yeah", or "well, yeah" - ed.).
But here [in this appeal] she suddenly did not use her words. I.e. it's smoothly, in one
breath. And a little bit slowly for her. Because [usually] she's chatter faster, when she's
talking and nervous.
@John Gilberts: A Russian article I've read today says the 1963 Vienna Convention does not
apply since the Skripals are not under investigation by UK authorities. However, their
relatives may go to a UK court to establish the status of the Skripals and request a meeting
with them.
hoped a thread for Yulia's staged appearance would be forthcoming; because of the
vicissitudes of timing, both B.'s observations and the comments have echoed my own reaction:
in brief, this was at best another UK government/spook "tease".
Aside from joining the chorus, however, I find that I am even more skeptical than
previously of the ostensible cumulative "facts" of the case. Yes, there are some established
"knowns", but too much sketchy and dodgy filler material surrounding them.
Yulia's brief presentation was obviously meticulously staged. But nothing that occurred
during the period of the Skripals' disappearance from public view should be presumed real,
actual, and authentic-- including that tracheotomy scar.
Am I saying that "they" would fake the scar? No; hypotheses non fingo. I'm saying that the
appearance of that scar should not prompt the otherwise "reasonable" surmise or assumption
that it "proves" that Yulia actually received a tracheotomy, that her medical condition
warrants it, etc.
I haven't seen any explanation for the circumstances behind Reuters hosting this tidy
little performance. It manifestly is not a case of some intrepid reporter or news
organization penetrating UK security and getting a "scoop".
As with the previous episodes, this "interview" raises more questions than it answers.
Perhaps its perpetrators hope that it will convince complacent, submissive, incurious
dullards that Yulia seems to have recovered nicely, and that there is no real mystery or
scandal about the Skripals having been poisoned by some Russian operative.
From the resistance , May 24, 2018 4:35:41 PM |
52
@Posted by: BM | May 24, 2018 10:55:51 AM | 29
Agree, "invasive" is, most definitively, a very technical term used only in medical field
by insiders to describe an agressive procedure, mostly consisting in introducing big tubes
with/or cameras inside the body to explore or implant drainages or respirator tubes, which
could imply secondary harm as a possibility but cnosidered less harmful than the necessity of
the exploration or procedure fro the helath of the patient, and which due to that are
performed under anesthesics.
No citizen strange to medical profession could anytime use such term, since it is not of
public domain.
I agree also in that it is difficult believe that a young girl having passed through such
"painful and depressing" experience would not have asked for her close relatives to come in
her support, something that, btw, would have been recommended for any doctor or nurse loyal
to their professional obligation with respect of the well being and full recovering of
patients.
She is obviously quite depressed and most probably psychologically incapable of taking right
decissions, or even counterproductive ones for her, as it usually happens under severe
depression.....
IMO, she is held hostage and under menace of something..her statements sounded like
recited by heart without any hint of personal emotion...She could be under psychiatric drugs,
quite possible...
Here is yet another comparison of the two letters.
In Russian, by Russian :)
Arioch , May 24, 2018 5:12:00 PM |
56karlof1 , May 24, 2018 5:12:50 PM |
57
"Wants
to return home" is the big point not being raised according to Russian political
scientist Igor Shatrov:
"It is unlikely that anyone would want to return to a country accused of poisoning her.
Therefore for me, this phrase is the most significant statement that Julia made."
I must concur. But was that part of the script or said independently?
Seems like B is on a roll lately. That's excellent!
However, I can't agree with the hostage claim proposed here and in many other intelligent
places any longer. For me, the Skripals being merely victims of greater powers involved in
foul play, them being somehow held and silenced against their will - that's completely off
the table.
It's hard to come to terms with it, but the Skripals have been in on the whole charade.
Sergey has been from the beginning, probably in an instrumental way even, but to some degree
Yulia must be complicit in the plot, too.
It's the way she behaves in the Reuters video. Her behavior is actually very
straightforward and lighthearted - and coherently so. No gaps there. She sure shows signs of
being a little nervous, but what media amateur wouldn't be in an interview situation. It's
really only minor nervousness given the fact that the Skripals are at the center of so much
international attention and that the Skripal case is a possible casus belli. She is
unmistakably flirting with the camera and clearly enjoying the attention brought to her. You
can't fake that.
The Russians (and the remaining Skripal family) will have to accomodate the fact that the
Skripals are lost to them. They won't be coming back – because they wouldn't want to.
That talk of returning to Russia "one day" is just that – talk, strategically placed
into the statement and aimed at undermining the Russian ambassador's admirable persistence.
Everything else that she says, or most of it, doesn't matter much. You all are perfectly
right in your analysis of who actually wrote Yulia's script I think, but sadly it's way
beside the point.
The Russian side has likely done so already, but if I were a Russian investigator, I'd
have a look at how well in advance of the flight date Yulia's tickets were booked. The date
as such might be of great importance, too. The Skripal ploy would have been given the green
light by the time Yulia got on that plane. It would have been conceived much earlier and I'd
check that against the airing (or finishing of the movie script) of that weird TV series B
mentioned in one of his earlier articles. In all likelihood, Yulia booked a return ticket,
but just for the sake of completeness, I'd check that, too. Also, what kind of health
insurance did she take out for her trip abroad? Was it really the usual, the bare minimum, so
as not to waste any money on it, or something more extensive? And how much luggage did she
take with her, and what items (not just practical stuff, but some cherished things too,
maybe)? Etc. etc.
HERE WE GO AGAIN!
BBC reporting a hoax phone call to Boris Johnson lasting 20 mins from Russian. Brit
government blaming! Russia Kremlin
So in last 2 days they'v dug up the Scripals again,accused Russia of downing a plain with
a missile,reports of new agression against Syria and as a diversion put N.koria back in the
news.
The same old same old!
We will know see,, within hours maybe days a massive attack on Syria/Iran !
They just did the ground work- anti Russia properganda,public distraction.
It's great to see much skepticism here. I see no reason to accept that the alleged event
happened in the first place. Great Britain, the US and Russia are all perfectly well able to
assassinate a couple of civilians if that is their desire.
If these two are alive, I expect they were meant to be alive. If they were meant to be
alive, I see no reason to risk their deaths by deliberately poisoning them (regardless of the
agent used) and then letting them fall into the hands of an emergency room staff - who could
themselves be poisoned or who might accidentally harm (even lethally) the "victims" by
treating them for the wrong agent.
All of the conjecture about Skirpal's ties to the "dodgy dossier" and even that the Clintons
could be the culprits in the dirty deed is based on the belief that the US has two "major"
political parties in serious opposition to one another. I see no evidence of that.
In this particular instance, we have the Clinton Crime family and The Donald - who have
all been good friends for decades. Their daughters both stated during the campaign that
they've been "best friends" since childhood. That could not have been possible with one of
them living under Secret Service watch, even living in the White House - without close ties
between their parents. Further, both Ivanka and Chelsea stated they expect to remain close
friends even after the election.
This is just plain impossible to imagine if the "fire and fury" of the campaign and all
the nasty stuff said during and since were even just exaggerations of real ideological
differences.
I often describe US politics as akin to US football. The Eagles and the Bears both want to
win any given game or championship. The teams get some bonuses for winning. But they are both
playing the same game, and share the proceeds regardless. It used to be that the two "teams"
had different owners (though of the same elite group), but at least since the rise of the
Clinton/DLC, they even share owners, let alone ideologies and "long game" goals.
So I see no reason to believe any of the partisan kabuki theater that oozes out of our
MSM.
The most interesting aspect of the whole Skripal incident was the imposition of D notices on
the media by the UK government. The reasoning was said to be to protect agent Miller but this
was a lie as Miller's association with Skripal was previously well known and bound to come to
the surface. No, the reasons for the D notices were to protect the government's bizarre
narrative of lies and also the likely poisoner which would be our mysterious policeman caught
up in the incident.
I strongly suspect the charade was intimately linked to british special forces captured
unexpectedly in Gouta, Syria whilst assisting the local jihadis in preparing their next false
flag chemical attack which would have brought in a massive western response to try and change
the direction of the conflict. In other words an act of desperation which led to the comical
situation of the authorities having to make the narrative up as they were going along.
It's a fact that allowing the media to swarm all over the place - even if controlled -
would have invariably thrown up scenarios or situations which would have taken control of the
narrative out of the government's hands.
There are a number of reasons to suspect that Sergei Skripal was, and is, being silenced
because of fears of what he might reveal about the Steele dossier. Although he is a minor
character in this affair, there are many facts -- too many for me to go into here -- that
connect him and his alleged MI6 handler Pablo Miller to Christopher Steele and the
dossier.
The entire official story of what happened to Skripal in Salisbury on 4 March is
unbelievable anyway, but the way that he and his daughter Yulia are now being kept
incommunicado looks even more suspicious. The two of them are apparently not even speaking to
their friends and family after being discharged from hospital, even though Yulia phoned her
cousin Viktoria from the hospital in early April.
Add to this the fact that the British authorities are not doing anything to dispel doubts
that the Skripals are acting of their own free will. They have made no effort to allow either
the Russian embassy, or even an independent third party, to speak to either Sergei or
Yulia.
This all suggests that the Skripals are being detained against their will in order to keep
them quiet about something.
J. Decker , May 19, 2018 at 7:25 am
"British authorities have made no effort to allow either the Russian embassy, or even an
independent third party, to speak to either Sergei or Yulia"
Isn't this disallowed in international relations? And why is Russia rolling over rather
than taking the case to the Hague?
Russia may have decided that taking it seriously would be a mistake by giving it too much
attention with all the distortions that would arrive from the MSM. Putin is a Machiavellian
and doesn't rush into things. I predicted weeks ago that we would hear about the miraculous
efforts of British medicine to "rescue" the Skripals. That's what happened. The Skripals are
being silenced rather than allowed to tell their story. Obvious beyond any doubt.
J. Decker , May 19, 2018 at 7:31 am
Brilliant piece Daniel Lazare. Many thanks! And as well to Consortium News for
broadcasting. I am getting more than I give to you each month in support. You are a a light
to us moths, most others have been put out.
Sam F , May 19, 2018 at 8:42 am
Yes, the isolation of the Skripals strongly suggests UK complicity in the whole
incident.
The lack of transparency requires the presumption of wrongful intent.
Yulia and Sergei Skripal: The father and son whose whereabouts and physical condition are
currently unknown, and whose important story is little-known, massively and scandalously
suppressed and being kept from the awareness of the people of Earth.
Neither U.S. President Donald Trump, U.K. Prime Minister Theresa May nor France President
Emmanuel Macron have offered anything approaching a public statement, by way of explanation
-- over the now "vanished" Yulia and Sergei Skripal.
It is equally important to note and remember that none of these "leaders" have issued
public statements with regard to the Douma, Syria confirmed false flag operation. In
particular, they have not apologized for dangerously and illegally launching over 100
missiles on Syria based on an obvious lie.
***
Question:
Will Donald Trump, Theresa May and Emmanuel Macron rightfully provide their citizens in
America, Britain and France with logical explanations for the massive unresolved
controversies surrounding the Skripal and Douma events?
Answer:
Only if men and women around the Earth join, accumulate sufficient power, and demand
legitimate, honest answers -- making it impossible for them to further obfuscate, deflect
and/or otherwise ignore.
Thanks Rowan @1. Considering all the digital ink spilt at MoA over the Skirpal Affair, I
expected this news to be highlighted.
This Yulia quote struck me:
"I don't want to describe the details, but the clinical treatment was invasive, painful
and depressing... Our recovery has been slow and extremely painful."
Goodness! Considering the US Senate just confirmed a known torturer to run CIA, I must ask
what kind of "treatment" Yulia received. I presume the neck scar is the result of
endotracheal intubation?
And since visual imprints are so important in perception management, I found it
interesting that this young woman, who was last reported in good health sitting on a park
bench, is filmed in her "coming out" video sitting on a bench in a park-like setting. And
she's writing what we must assume is the handwritten note released to the media - on a pad of
paper sitting on the bench next to her! That's a very awkward way to write, especially since
that note is is such legible, neat script.
The BBC article goes on to state:
"Meanwhile, work to decontaminate the Wiltshire city is still under way with the highest
concentration of the Novichok found at the Skripals' front door."
Still decontaminating the town all this time later?
Rowan @ 1, Daniel @ 51: Julia Skripal appeared to be reading or following a prepared script.
For someone who's been in a coma for 20 days, she looked very well indeed and does not appear
to be suffering PTSD.
How would a person in a coma know if the treatment she was receiving was invasive, painful
and depressing?
Novichok is supposed to be an unstable substance that degrades quickly in humid climatic
conditions or in conditions where it comes into contact with water. Is Salisbury being
decontaminated one brick tile, one shrub, one pigeon at a time?
Hmm .. this is what endotracheal intubation looks like but I can't see that a shunt has
been made beneath the throat and between the collar bones. I too was curious about that neck
wound. http://drkashi.science/endotracheal-intubation/
nofollow"
href="https://www.rt.com/uk/427080-skripal-salisbury-nhs-poison/">"Sergei Skripal discharged
from hospital after being poisoned by 'deadly' agent"
The link is to RT, in case anyone missed this report.
It's been a busy "news" week, between significant geopolitical events, the usual US
school massacres, and the bread-and-circuses distraction of a UK Royal Wedding. Perhaps this
is why the above-cited "news" didn't seem to get much attention.
I'll stop enclosing "news" in ironic quotation marks-- the " key on my laptop is
buckling under the strain of overuse. But I used them because every fresh installment of
alleged news about the Skripals simply extends, or exacerbates, the riddle, wrapped in a
mystery, inside an enigma that is l'affaire Skripal.
One reason for the lack of reaction to this latest "development" (those quotes needed
again) is that it is shown through a glass darkly-- the glass being the government controlled
and managed information bubble. Like the earlier "developments", it's eerily
self-contained.
Like many barflies, I have my idiosyncratic axes to grind, soapboxes to climb, bees in
my bonnet, etc. After the mysterious events of 9/11/2001, I coined the term "pernicious
factoids" to describe the bits of manufactured falsehoods and disinformation used to
construct and perpetuate bogus Official Narratives.
For example, not long ago a minor New York Times article about Lee Harvey Oswald's
gravesite began with something like, "When Lee Harvey Oswald shot John F. Kennedy in Dealey
Plaza...". This is a pernicious factoid; they remain embedded like toxic prions in the
collective consciousness, and are regarded as reasonably true, correct, and
meaningful.
Likewise, the other day the Russian ambassador to the UK, Alexander Yakovenko, gave a
routine press conference. As usual, some wretched would-be UK journalist took issue with
Yakovenko's reiterating that the Russians are required by law to interview the Skripals
personally and directly to confirm their status and wishes.
The questioner hectored the ambassador with the point that Yulia Skripal had released
statements through the police indicating that she, at least, did not wish to
meet personally with Russian officials because she was afraid to do so.
Ambassador Yakovenko, also as usual, patiently-- and a bit too diffidently-- explained
that a third-party statement is not the same as first-hand communication. I get it-- he's a
"real" diplomat, not like the whacked-out modern Western berserker-diplomats. So he's not
about to tear this bumptious idiot's head off.
But I wanted to scream. This is the way pernicious factoids work. Everybody in that
room was at least willing to pretend that yeah, OK, Yulia actually did give the
police that statement. Or a statement. Probably. But hmmm, if one really stops and
thinks about it, everything the public has been told about the circumstances of
the, er, events comes from official sources and/or highly-compromised and untrustworthy
mass-media organizations.
So, the ostensibly remarkable development of Sergei Skripal's recovery from a
"military-grade nerve agent" just circles around the disinformation/memory hole. And, since
these virtual "developments" are largely fact-free, the stories usually pad out the minimal
"news" by revisiting and reiterating the same festering gutpile of pernicious factoids we've
been sorting through for months: the supposed doorknob-smearing, the peculiar aspects of the
"poisoning", etc.
End of rant, but only because my " key is overheating and seizing up. ;)
_____________________________________
Bonus Fun Fact: I was curious about the context of Churchill's "riddle" quote, so I
looked it up. According to the "Phrase Finder" website, it was uttered during an October,
1939 radio broadcast: "I cannot forecast to you the action of Russia. It is a riddle,
wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma; but perhaps there is a key. That key is Russian
national interest."
13 - On the Skripals, no reporter I have read on the release of either Skripal has bothered
to wonder why there are no photos of them at all, especially of the normal press availability
on the hospital steps thanking their doctors, no information on their whereabouts, health or
future plans.
"... Now, it is hard to know what to make of all this, other than to point out that he was speaking to fellow security chiefs. Maybe, among themselves, they find it more morale-boosting to demonise an old enemy than to take on adversaries that have emerged more recently, are more complicated and against which they have so far perhaps had less success. ..."
"... the conclusion has to be that Russia is considered a "safe", useful, and almost eternal enemy by the UK's powers-that-be. Some of us may hope for something better, but it seems a long way away. ..."
The UK's obsession with the Russian bogeyman doesn't stack up Mary Dejevsky The head of MI5 has joined the security
establishment's anti-Putin onslaught. But his organization agrees that Moscow is not the greatest threat
Today's
speech by the head of MI5 , Andrew Parker, has been presented as a first – the first time the head of the UK's domestic intelligence
service has delivered a speech abroad, specifically at a conference of security heads in Berlin. But this is the only respect in
which it is a first. It might as accurately be described as the latest in a series of public utterances by UK intelligence chiefs
and top brass, which began last autumn and continued with the
head of GCHQ
addressing a cybersecurity conference in Manchester last month.
"MI5 chief: Kremlin is 'chief protagonist' in campaign to undermine west" Read more
In part, this reflects a deliberate decision by the intelligence services and the government that they should be more open about
what they do, with a view to gaining greater public understanding – and expanding recruitment at a time when they face competition
for tech-savvy graduates from richer and less restrictive employers. But this season of intelligence and military speeches has also
facilitated the communication of an apparently co-ordinated message. As a country, the UK now sees
Russia as its prime adversary.
The poisoning of
Sergei Skripal , the former Russian spy, and his daughter in Salisbury took the UK's official anti-Russia stance to new heights.
And its diplomatic success in persuading so many other countries to
expel Russian diplomats in protest – the biggest ever "collective expulsion of security agents", we were told – seems to have
emboldened London to view itself as the potential leader of an international anti-Russia front, as the Guardian
recently
reported .
The invective produced by Parker today – and heavily sold to the media – was, in its way, extraordinary. In tone, it was quite
different from the cold war register, which was formal and, well, cold. This attack was populist, direct, and far outside the diplomatic
register. Here is just a sample.
The Kremlin was engaging in "deliberate, targeted, malign activity intended to undermine our free, open and democratic societies".
The west had to "shine a light through the fog of lies, half-truths and obfuscation that pours out of their propaganda machine".
Russia, he said caustically, had as one of its "central and entirely admirable aims to build Russian greatness on the world stage".
But it had repeatedly chosen "to pursue that aim through aggressive and pernicious actions by its military and intelligence services".
In so doing, it risked becoming "a more isolated pariah".
So long as the UK refuses consular access to Yulia Skripal, Russia can – with some justification – ask just who has a monopoly
on a fog of lies.'
Now, it is hard to know what to make of all this, other than to point out that he was speaking to fellow security chiefs. Maybe,
among themselves, they find it more morale-boosting to demonise an old enemy than to take on adversaries that have emerged more recently,
are more complicated and against which they have so far perhaps had less success. There is a sense too, for the UK at least, that
relations with Russia have been so bad for so long that magnifying the supposed Russia threat is a cost-free enterprise in diplomatic
terms.
It might also be worth considering whether there are budgetary and Brexit angles. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the
US and the UK, in particular, scaled back their government-backed research on Russia and lost a great deal of expertise, which they
are now trying to rebuild. That means they have to make a case for more taxpayers' money, and scare tactics are one way to do that.
For the UK, there may also be the fear that it will find the European Union less inclined to keep London in the intelligence loop,
and – at a time when the US is looking a far less reliable ally – it might make sense to play up the Russian bogeyman, not least
as Vladimir Putin begins his fourth term in office. Nothing like starting as you intend to go on.
Yet it is still difficult to see the sense in this. Russia has become inured to UK scolding of this kind, and treats it with contempt
– as its social media response to Parker's speech shows. What is more, so long as the UK maintains its silence on the Skripals' fate
and refuses consular access to Yulia Skripal, Russia can – with some justification, I would argue – ask just who has a monopoly on
a "fog of lies".
Nor will the tone necessarily chime well with official views of Russia in Germany and France, which are not necessarily less tough
in practice, but certainly more nuanced, and better informed. The UK seems intent – despite recent legislation about dubious money
in London – in keeping its diplomatic and business relations with Russia in separate boxes. Germany, for one, does not have that
luxury.
The conclusion has to be that Russia is considered a 'safe', useful, and almost eternal enemy by the UK's powers-that-be
The UK's rhetorical onslaught on Russia is even more puzzling when you examine the security services' own priorities. "Is terrorism
the biggest threat facing the UK?" visitors to the MI5 website are asked in
a pop-up called "fact or fiction". Click no, and this is the response: "The biggest threat we currently face comes from international
terrorist groups and individuals inspired by them. Terrorist organisations in Northern Ireland also continue to pose a serious threat."
Now it is true that the threat from terrorism and Islamic State was also broached by Parker in his speech, but this was not the
section spun in advance to the media; it was not the aspect MI5
wanted above all to be noticed. So the conclusion has to be that Russia is considered a "safe", useful, and almost eternal enemy
by the UK's powers-that-be. Some of us may hope for something better, but it seems a long way away.
• Mary Dejevsky is a former foreign correspondent in Moscow
Fake news, trying to create false connections between police psychological issues and a rather dubious UK poisoning false flag.
Via The Guardian
Almost 100 Wiltshire police officers and staff have sought psychological support after the nerve agent attack in Salisbury,
the Guardian can reveal.
Among those who have asked for help were officers who initially responded to the collapse of the former Russian spy Sergei
Skripal and his daughter, Yulia, and those who were at or close to the various investigation sites in subsequent days and weeks.
Some reported feeling disorientated and anxious while others were concerned about the possible long-term health effects on
the public.
While the Skripal poisoning story has faded from much of the mainstream media news cycle, as it was increasingly exposed as a
complete hoax and embarrassment for the May government, the Guardian appears to be trying to resurrect "the Russians did"
Novichok narrative.
It is about time your stupid leader and her clown were put on the stage to explain to all the world why they chose to defame
the integrity of Russia in such an unbelievable set of circumstances that only children under the age of ten would not understand
!! How can any Nation since this demonic happening , ever trust this self - centred Bozo from ever making a sensible judgement
for the future of mankind !
UK has lost it completely and the Guardian has fallen prey to the CIA Mockingbird Operation (infiltration and manipulation
of media). Used to be a good paper under Alan Rushbridger and protection of Snowden, Assange etc. Now it has lost it altogether
with useless editorial board. The woman in charge must have something in common with Nikki Haley: incapable of nuance and irrationally
convinced of her being right (without research lots of claims about Assad, Putin etc.).
"They are liars. And they know that they are liars," the late Egyptian writer and Nobel
laureate Naguib Mahfouz once wrote: "And we know that they are liars. Even so, they keep
lying...."
Notable quotes:
"... of a type developed by Russia ..."
"... The western modus operandi is the same in the Skripal case. The Tories rushed to conclusions and issued a 24-hour ultimatum to the Russian government to prove its innocence, or rather to admit its guilt. How was the so-called novichok delivered to London, did President Vladimir Putin authorise the attack, did Russia lose control of its stockpile? The prime minister and her foreign secretary had in effect declared Russia guilty as charged. No objective police investigation, no due process, no presumption of innocence, no evidence was necessary: it was "sentence first, verdict later", as the Red Queen declared in Alice in Wonderland . ..."
"... The Russian foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, stated for the record that "as soon as the rumors, fed by the British leadership, about the poisoning of Skripal appeared, we immediately requested access to this [toxic] substance so that our experts could analyze it in accordance with the Convention on the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons." After the British ambassador visited the Russian foreign ministry on 13 March to receive the formal Russian reply to the British ultimatum, the foreign ministry in Moscow issued a communiqué: " The [Salisbury] incident appears to be yet another crooked attempt by the UK authorities to discredit Russia. Any threat to take 'punitive' measures against Russia will meet with a response. The British side should be aware of that." The Russian government in fact proposed that the alleged poisoning of the Skripals should be examined by the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) in The Hague, according to procedures to which Britain itself had agreed when the OPCW was established in 1997. ..."
"... In the meantime, President Putin weighed in. "I guess any reasonable person [has] realised," he said, "that this is complete absurd[ity] and nonsense. [How could] anybody in Russia allow themselves such actions on the eve of the [Russian] presidential election and the football World Cup? This is unthinkable." In any police inquiry, investigators look for means, motive and opportunity. On these grounds did the trail of guilt lead to Moscow? ..."
"... The British PowerPoint presentation did not stop with its two main canards. It goes on to refer to "Russian malign activity" including, inter alia ..."
"... bourrage de crâne ..."
"... On 14 April, Minister Lavrov at a meeting in Moscow provided the answer. The substance used to attack the Skripals was laced with a substance know as BZ which incapacitates rather than kills and takes longer to work than an instant acting nerve agent which kills immediately. The United States, Britain and other NATO countries have developed this toxin and put it into service; the Soviet Union never did so. ..."
"... how did the perpetrators obtain the BZ toxin and bring it to Salisbury, did MI5 or MI6 authorise a false flag attack against the Skripals, or was it authorised by the British cabinet or by the prime minister alone? Or did British authorities lose control of their stockpiles? The trail of evidence does not lead to Moscow; it leads to London. ..."
"... A prima facie case can be made that the British government is lying about the Skripal affaire . Suspicion always falls upon those who act deviously, who hide behind clever turns of phrase and procedural and rhetorical smokescreens. British authorities are now saying that they have other top secret evidence, which explains everything, but unfortunately it can't be publicised. Nevertheless, the British government appears to have leaked it to the press. The Times published a story about a covert Russian lab producing nerve agents and it spread like wild fire across the Mainstream Media. The Daily Mirror put out a story about a Russian secret assassins' training manual. These stories are laughable. Is the Tory government that desperate? Is the British "everyman" that gullible? ..."
"... The secret assassin's manual reminds me of the 1924 "Zinoviev Letter", a counterfeit document produced by White Russians in Germany, purporting to demonstrate Soviet interference in British elections and planning for a socialist revolution. It was early days of "fake news". Parliamentary elections were underway in October 1924 and the Tories used the letter to attack the credibility of the Labour party. It was whipping up the red scare, and it worked like a charm. The Tories won a majority government. Soviet authorities claimed that the letter was bogus and they demanded a third party, independent investigation to ascertain the truth, just as the Russian government has done now. In 1924, the Tories refused, and understandably so, since they had a lot to hide. It took seventy-five years to determine that "the letter" was in fact counterfeit. ..."
"... déjà vu. ..."
"... "They are liars. And they know that they are liars," the late Egyptian writer and Nobel laureate Naguib Mahfouz once wrote: "And we know that they are liars. Even so, they keep lying...." ..."
"... The Tories are trying doggedly to maintain control of the narrative. Stakes are high for if it eventuates that the Tories have lied deliberately for political gain, at the risk of destabilising European, indeed world peace and security, the Tory government should be forced to resign and new elections, called. Then, the British electorate can decide whether it wants to be governed by reckless, mendacious Tory politicians who risk to provoke war against the Russian Federation. ..."
On 4 March 2018 it was a foggy day in southern England, and the MI6 Russian spy Sergei
Viktorovich Skripal and his daughter Yulia stepped out for a stroll, stopped at the local pub
in Salisbury, went to lunch at a nearby restaurant, and then took a walk in the park where they
collapsed on a park bench. What had happened to them? Did they suffer from food poisoning? Or
was Sergei Skripal involved in some dark affaire and the object of a hit by persons
unknown, his daughter being an accidental victim?
The police received a call that day at 4:15pm reporting two people in distress. Emergency
services were despatched immediately. The Skripals were rushed to hospital, while the local
police launched an investigation. It began to look like attempted murder, but the police urged
patience, saying it could take months before they might know what had happened and who, if
anyone, was responsible.
The Conservative government decided that it did not need to wait for a police investigation.
"The Russians" had tried to assassinate a former intelligence officer turned informant for MI6.
Skripal went to jail for that, but was released four years later in an exchange of agents with
the United States. Now, "the Russians," so the Tory hypothesis goes, wanted to settle old
scores. Less than 24 hours after the incident in Salisbury, the British foreign secretary,
Boris Johnson, suggested that the Russian government was the prime suspect in what looked like
an attempt gone wrong to assassinate Sergei Skripal.
On 12 March the foreign
secretary summoned the Russian ambassador to inform him that a nerve agent, A-234, had been
used against the Skripals. How did you do it, Johnson wanted to know, or did the Russian
government lose control of its stocks of chemical weapons? He gave the Russian ambassador 24
hours to respond. In point of fact, the Russian government does not possess any stockpiles of
chemical weapons or nerve agents, having destroyed them all as of September 2017.
Later that day, the British prime minister, Theresa May, declared in the House of Commons
that the Skripals, then said to be in a coma, were poisoned with "a military-grade nerve agent
of a type developed by Russia " (italics added) called a 'novichok', a Russian word
having various possible translations into English (beginner, novice, newcomer, etc.). May
claimed that since the Soviet Union was known to have produced this chemical weapon, or nerve
agent (also known as A-234), that it was " highly likely " that the Russian government
was guilty of the attack on the Skripals.
Here is what the prime minister said in the House of Commons: "Either this was a direct act
by the Russian State against our country. Or the Russian government lost control of this
potentially catastrophically damaging nerve agent and allowed it to get into the hands of
others." The hurried British accusations were redolent of those in 2014 alleging Russian
government complicity or direct involvement in the shooting down of Malaysian Airlines MH 17
over the Ukraine. Within hours of the destruction of MH 17, the United States and its
vassals, including Britain, accused Russia of being responsible.
The western modus operandi is the same in the Skripal case. The Tories rushed to
conclusions and issued a 24-hour ultimatum to the Russian government to prove its innocence, or
rather to admit its guilt. How was the so-called novichok delivered to London, did President
Vladimir Putin authorise the attack, did Russia lose control of its stockpile? The prime
minister and her foreign secretary had in effect declared Russia guilty as charged. No
objective police investigation, no due process, no presumption of innocence, no evidence was
necessary: it was "sentence first, verdict later", as the Red Queen declared in Alice in
Wonderland .
On 13 March the Russian embassy informed the Foreign Office that the Russian Federation was
not involved in any way with the Salisbury incident. We will not respond to an ultimatum, came
the reply from Moscow. The eloquent Russian foreign ministry spokesperson, Mariia Zakharova,
characterised the British démarche as a "circus show". Actually, Foreign Office clerks
must have told Boris Johnson that Russia would not respond to such an ultimatum so that it was
a deliberate British attempt to provoke a negative Russian reply.
The Russian foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, stated for the record that "as soon as the
rumors, fed by the British leadership, about the poisoning of Skripal appeared, we immediately
requested access to this [toxic] substance so that our experts could analyze it in accordance
with the Convention on the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons." After the British ambassador
visited the Russian foreign ministry on 13 March to receive the formal Russian reply to the
British ultimatum, the foreign ministry in Moscow issued a communiqué: " The [Salisbury]
incident appears to be yet another crooked attempt by the UK authorities to discredit Russia.
Any threat to take 'punitive' measures against Russia will meet with a response. The British
side should be aware of that." The Russian government in fact proposed that the alleged
poisoning of the Skripals should be examined by the Organisation for the Prohibition of
Chemical Weapons (OPCW) in The Hague, according to procedures to which Britain itself had
agreed when the OPCW was established in 1997.
On 14 March the British government expelled 23 Russian diplomats, and a few days later the
Russian side expelled 23 British diplomats and shuttered the offices of the British Council in
Russia. At the same time, the British appealed to their allies and to the European Union to
show solidarity by expelling Russian diplomats.
Twenty-eight countries did so, though for most it was one or two expulsions, tokenism to
appease the British. Other countries -- for example, Austria, Bulgaria, Greece, Portugal --
refused to join the stampede. Going over the top, the United States expelled sixty
diplomats and closed the Russian consulate in Seattle. The Russians responded in kind with
sixty expulsions and the closure of the US consulate in St. Petersburg. Momentum seemed to be
building toward a major confrontation. The British prime minister even alluded to the
possibility of
military action .
In the meantime, President Putin weighed in. "I guess any reasonable person [has] realised,"
he said, "that this is complete absurd[ity] and nonsense. [How could] anybody in Russia allow
themselves such actions on the eve of the [Russian] presidential election and the football
World Cup? This is unthinkable." In any police inquiry, investigators look for means, motive
and opportunity. On these grounds did the trail of guilt lead to Moscow?
Momentum is sometimes like a balloon, it blows up and then it suddenly bursts. The British
case against Russia began to fall apart almost from the time it was made. In late March the
Russian newspaper Kommersant leaked a
British PowerPoint presentation sent to eighty embassies in Moscow. It asserted, inter
alia , that the British chemical weapons facility at Porton Down had positively identified
the substance, which allegedly poisoned the Skripals, as a Novichok, "developed only by
Russia". Both these statements are false. On 3 April Porton Down stated publicly that it could
not determine the origin of the substance that poisoned the Skripals. It also came out
that the formula for making a so-called novichok was published in a book by a Russian dissident
and chemist, Vil Mirzayanov, who now lives in the United States. You can buy his book
(published in 2008), which includes the formula, on
Amazon.com . In fact, any number of governments or smart chemists or even bright
undergraduate chemistry students with the proper facilities could make this nerve agent.
Amongst those governments having access to the original formula are Britain and the United
States. The Russian embassy in London noted in a published
report that "neither Russia nor the Soviet Union has ever developed an agent named
'Novichok'." The report further stated that "While Soviet scientists did work on new types of
chemical poisons, the word 'Novichok' was introduced in the West in mid-1990s to designate a
series of new chemical agents developed there on the basis of information made available by
Russian expat researchers. The British insistence to use the Russian word 'Novichok' is an
attempt to artificially link the substance to Russia."
The British PowerPoint presentation did not stop with its two main canards. It goes on to
refer to "Russian malign activity" including, inter alia , the "invasion" of Georgia
in 2008, the "destabilisation" of the Ukraine and the shooting down of MH17 in 2014, and
interference in the US elections in 2016. All of these claims are audacious lies ,
easily deconstructed and unpacked. The referenced events are also unrelated to the Salisbury
incident and were raised in an attempt to smear the Russian Federation. In fact, the British
PowerPoint slides represent vulgar propaganda, bourrage de crâne , as
preposterous as any seen during the Cold War.
As Minister Lavrov pointed out, the Skripal case should have gone for resolution to the OPCW
in The Hague. Russia would then be directly involved in the investigation and would have access
to the alleged toxin, and other evidence to try to determine what had happened and who were the
perpetrators. The British government at first refused to go to the OPCW, and then when it did,
refused to authorise the Russian government to have access to the alleged substance, which had
sickened the Skripals. That idea is "perverse", said British authorities. Actually, not at all,
it is the procedure laid out in OPCW statutes, to which Britain itself agreed but has refused
to respect. When the Russian representative at the OPCW proposed a resolution to the executive
council, that it should respect its own statutes, he could not obtain the required vote of
approval. The British were attempting to hijack the OPCW as a
potential tool against the Russian Federation. Thus far, that stratagem has not worked. On 12
April the OPCW released a report stating
that it had "confirm[ed] the findings of the United Kingdom relating to the identity of the
toxic chemical that was used in Salisbury ." The
report said nothing about the origin of the so-called "toxic chemical". The
British accusation against Russia thus remained unsubstantiated.
What I could not understand when I read the OPCW communiqué, is why the Skripals were
still alive. The OPCW says that the toxic chemical used against the Skripals was "of high
purity". Was it a nerve agent? Oddly, the OPCW published report avoids a straight answer. If it
was a nerve agent, being of "high purity," it should have been instant acting and killed the
Skripals almost immediately. Yet both have survived at the time of this writing. Something does
not make sense. Of course, there could be a simple explanation for this puzzling mystery.
On 14 April, Minister Lavrov at a meeting in
Moscow provided the answer. The substance used to attack the Skripals was laced with a
substance know as BZ which incapacitates rather than kills and takes longer to work than an
instant acting nerve agent which kills immediately. The United States, Britain and other NATO
countries have developed this toxin and put it into service; the Soviet Union never did so.
Traces of A-234 were also identified, but according to experts, such a concentration of the
A-234 agent would cause death to anyone affected by it. "Moreover," according to
the Russian embassy in London , "considering its high volatility, the detection of this
substance in its initial state (pure form and high concentration) is extremely suspicious as
the samples have been taken several weeks since the poisoning," Could Britsh authorities have
tampered with the samples? The public OPCW report gives no details, and refers only to a "toxic
chemical". Nor did the report say that the OPCW had submitted specimens of the substance to a
well-known Swiss lab , which
promptly reported back its surprising results. The OPCW authorities thus lied when they said
that the tests "confirmed" the British identify of the "toxic chemical". Unless Porton
Down knew that the substance used against the Skripals was a BZ type toxin, and so informed the
OPCW, or, unless the Tory government lied in claiming publicly that it was a novichok nerve
agent. The British attempted hijacking of the OPCW has compromised its independence, for the
public report issued on 12 April is misleading. Moreover, since the BZ toxin is made by the US,
Britain and other NATO countries, it begs the same questions, which the Tories put to Moscow:
how did the perpetrators obtain the BZ toxin and bring it to Salisbury, did MI5 or MI6
authorise a false
flag attack against the Skripals, or was it authorised by the British cabinet or by the
prime minister alone? Or did British authorities lose control of their stockpiles? The trail of
evidence does not lead to Moscow; it leads to London.
A prima facie case can be made that the British government is lying about the
Skripal affaire . Suspicion always falls upon those who act deviously, who hide behind
clever turns of phrase and procedural and rhetorical smokescreens. British authorities are now
saying that they have other top secret evidence, which explains everything, but unfortunately
it can't be publicised. Nevertheless, the British government appears to have leaked it to the
press. The
Times published a story about a covert Russian lab producing nerve agents and it
spread like wild fire across the Mainstream Media. The
Daily Mirror put out a story about a Russian secret assassins' training manual. These
stories are laughable. Is the Tory government that desperate? Is the British "everyman" that
gullible?
The secret assassin's manual reminds me of the 1924 "Zinoviev Letter", a counterfeit
document produced by White Russians in Germany, purporting to demonstrate Soviet interference
in British elections and planning for a socialist revolution. It was early days of "fake news".
Parliamentary elections were underway in October 1924 and the Tories used the letter to attack
the credibility of the Labour party. It was whipping up the red scare, and it worked like a
charm. The Tories won a majority government. Soviet authorities claimed that the letter was
bogus and they demanded a third party, independent investigation to ascertain the truth, just
as the Russian government has done now. In 1924, the Tories refused, and understandably so,
since they had a lot to hide. It took seventy-five years to determine that "the letter" was in
fact counterfeit.
The Tories are again acting as if they have something to hide. It is déjà
vu. Will it take seventy-five years to get at the truth? Are there any honest British
cops, judges, civil servants ready to reveal the truth?
There is other evidence to suggest that the British narrative on the Salisbury incident is
bogus. The London Metropolitan Police have sought to prevent any outside contact with the
Skripals. They have taken away a recovered Yulia Skripal to an unknown location. They have
until now denied Russian consular authorities access to a Russian citizen in violation of
British approved consular agreements. Is there any chapter of international law, which the
British government now respects? British authorities have denied access to Yulia Skripal's
family in Russia; they have denied a visa to Yulia's cousin, Viktoria, to visit with her. Are
British spooks grooming Yulia, briefing her to stay on the Tory narrative? Is she being
manipulated like some kind of Manchurian Candidate? Have they induced her to betray her country
in exchange for emoluments, a new identity in the United States, a house, a BMW and money? Are
they playing upon her loyalty to her father? Based on a
statement attributed to Yulia by the London Metropolitan Police, it begins
to look that way . Or, is the message, sounding very British and official, quite simply a
fake? The Russian embassy in London suspects that it is. What is certain is that British
authorities are acting as though they have something to hide. Even German politicians,
amongst others, have criticised the British rush to indict Russia. Damage control is underway.
Given all the evidence, can any person with reasonable abilities to think critically believe
anything the Tories are saying about the Salisbury affair?
"They are liars. And they know that they are liars," the late Egyptian writer and Nobel
laureate Naguib Mahfouz once wrote: "And we know that they are liars. Even so, they keep
lying...." Mahfouz was not writing about the British, but all the same, he could have been. Are
not his well-known lines apposite to the present government in London?
The Tories are trying doggedly to maintain control of the narrative. Stakes are high for if
it eventuates that the Tories have lied deliberately for political gain, at the risk of
destabilising European, indeed world peace and security, the Tory government should be forced
to resign and new elections, called. Then, the British electorate can decide whether it wants
to be governed by reckless, mendacious Tory politicians who risk to provoke war against the
Russian Federation.
Where are the Scripals? How are they feeling these days? (68 days and counting), Are they alive ?
Notable quotes:
"... To clarify: Sergei Skripal has been suspected of playing a role in concocting the fake "Steele dossier" that helped launch the Russiagate NARRATIVE. ..."
"... The "dossier" was also used by Comey's FBI to obtain FISA warrants to monitor Trump campaign communications. (The NSA had intercepts all along but Comey's FBI needed a "provenance.") ..."
"... Like the Hound of the Baskervilles, the absence of questions in the British media speaks volumes. "The truth is the first casualty in a war." ..."
In the meantime, I want to refocus on the Skripal case. There is one outright bizarre thing
which I initially dismissed, but which really is becoming disturbing: the fact that the Brits
are apparently holding Sergei and Iulia Skripal incommunicado. In other words, they have been
kidnapped.
There was this one single telephone call between Iulia Skripal and her sister, Victoria, in
which Iulia said that she was okay (she was clearly trying to reassure Victoria) but it was
clear that she could not speak freely. Furthermore, when Victoria mentioned that she would want
to visit Iulia, the latter reply 'nobody will give you a visa'. After that – full
silence. The Russian consulate has been making countless requests to
have a visit, but all that the Brits have done since is have Scotland
Yard post a letter which was evidently not written by Iulia and which said " I have
access to friends and family, and I have been made aware of my specific contacts at the Russian
Embassy who have kindly offered me their assistance in any way they can. At the moment I do not
wish to avail myself of their services, but, if I change my mind I know how to contact them
". What friends?! What family?! Nonsense!
Her sister tried to contact her many times through various channels, including official
ones, and then in total despair, she posted the following message on Facebook:
" My darling sister, Yulia! You are not communicating with us, and we don't know
anything about you and Sergey Victorivich. I know that I have no right to interfere in your
affairs without asking your permission, but I worry too much. I worry about you and your dad.
I also worry about Nuar. [Nuar is Yulia Skrial's dog, whom she left to stay at a kennel
center, while she was traveling to the UK.] He is now at the dog hotel, and they want to get
paid. We have to decide something what to do with him. I am ready to take him and to take
care of him until you come back home. Besides Nuar, I am concerned about your apartment and
your car. Nothing has been decided about their safety and maintenance. We can help with all
that, but I need your power of attorney in my or my sister Lena's name. If you think that all
of these is important, draw up a power of attorney form in a Russian consulate in any
country. If you won't do that, we will understand and won't interfere in your
affairs.
Vika "
No reply ever came.
I just entered the following query into Google: "
Skripal ". April 10 th has an entry saying that she was released from the
hospital. That is the most recent one I have found. I looked on Wikipedia , the
same thing, there is nothing at all.
I have to admit that when I first heard the Russian complaints I figured that this was no
big deal. I thought " the Brits told the Skripals that Putin tried to poison them, they are
probably afraid, and possibly still sick from whatever it is which made them sick, but the
Brits would never outright kidnap two foreign citizens, and most definitely not in such a
public way ".
I am not so sure anymore.
First, let's get the obvious one out of the way: the fear for the security of the Skripals.
That is utter nonsense. The Brits can organize a meeting between а Russian diplomat in
the UK at a highly protected UK facility, with tanks, SAS Teams on the standby, helicopters in
the air, bombers, etc. That Russian diplomat could speak to them through bullet-proof glass and
a phone. And, since the Russians are all so dangerous, he can be searched for weapons. All
which the Skripals need to do is to tell him/her "thank you, your services are not needed".
Conversation over. But the Brits refuse even that.
But let's say that the Skripals are so totally terrified of the evil Russians, that they
categorically refuse. Even by video-conference. It would be traumatic for them, right?
Okay.
What about a press conference then?
Even more disturbing is that, at least to my knowledge, nobody in the western corporate
media is asking for an interview with them. Snowden can safely speak from Russia and address
even large conferences, but the Skripals can't speak to anybody at all?
But here is the worst part of this: it has been two months already since the Skripals are
held in total secrecy by the UK authorities. Two months, that is 60 days. Ask any specialist on
interrogation or any psychologist what kind of effect 60 days of "specialized treatment" can do
to a person.
I am not dismissing the Russian statements about "kidnapping" anymore. What I see is this:
on substance, the Skripal false flag has crashed and burned, just like MH17 or the Douma
chemical attack, but unlike MH17 or Douma, the Skripals are two witnesses whose testimony has
the potential to result in a gigantic scandal, not just for the May government, but for all
those spineless Europeans who showed "solidarity" with Britain. In other words, the Skripals
will probably never be allowed to speak freely: they must either be killed or totally
brainwashed or disappeared. Any other option would result in a scandal of planetary
magnitude.
I can't pretend like my heart goes out to Sergei Skripal: the man was an officer who gave an
oath and who then betrayed his country to the British (he was a British agent, not a Russian
one as the press writes). Those holding him today are his former bosses. But Iulia? She is
completely innocent and as of April 5 th (when she called her sister Victoria), she
was clearly in good health and with a clear mind. Now she has been disappeared and I don't know
which is worse, the fact that she might never reappear or that she might one day reappear
following months of British "counseling". As for her father, he paid for his betrayal and he
too deserves a better fate than being poisoned, used and then disappeared.
In the big scheme of things (the Zionists war against our entire planet), two individuals
like Sergei and Iulia Skripal might not matter. But I think that the least we can do is to
remember them and their plight.
This also begs the question of what kind of society we live in. I am not shocked by the fact
that the British state would resort to such methods (they have always used them). I am shocked
that in a so-called western "democracy" with freedom, pluralism and "European values" (whatever
that means) the Brits could get away with this.
How about some "solidarity" with the Skripals – you, Europeans?!
As noted on this site some three weeks ago, former British ambassador Craig Murray suggested
some time ago that Sergei and Yulia Skripal were most likely murdered by Western secret
services in order to keep the "Russiagate" fiction (somewhat) alive.
Sergei cannot win – even if he was NOT involved in Russiagate, murdering him creates
flexibility to hang the story on him without contradiction. Yulia is icing on the cake
– "Surely Her Majesty's Government wouldn't murder a pretty girl like Yulia!"
Rather bizarrely, it appears appears that all premises connected with the Skripals are to
be demolished, purely to protect the public, you understand.
To clarify: Sergei Skripal has been suspected of playing a role in concocting the fake
"Steele dossier" that helped launch the Russiagate NARRATIVE.
The "dossier" was also used by Comey's FBI to obtain FISA warrants to monitor Trump
campaign communications. (The NSA had intercepts all along but Comey's FBI needed a
"provenance.")
Whether Skripal was actually involved in inventing the dossier or not, his absence will be
used to milk the narrative afloat a little longer.
Like the Hound of the Baskervilles, the absence of questions in the British media speaks
volumes. "The truth is the first casualty in a war."
Russia should request a third party for instance a well known British public figure as an
intermediary to contact Skripals on behalf of Russia. The UK wil not be able to claim that
such figure will put undue pressure on the Skripals and would be forced to either facilitate
contact or be exposed as actually kidnapping the Skripals.
Potential intermediaries Corbyn, Galloway, UN representative, Tulsi Gabbard. There are
numerous candidates.
In other words, the Skripals will probably never be allowed to speak freely: they must
either be killed or totally brainwashed or disappeared. Any other option would result in a
scandal of planetary magnitude.
That certainly explains why Britain did not kill them with Novichok.
The British are working hard on new super-secret identities for the Scripals. They are so
secret that even the Scripals would not be allowed to know them. Technically, the British
could tell the Scripals their new identities, but then they would have to kill them, in order
to keep them secret.
It is clear that every person including The Saker who write about the Skripals and Russian
affairs do not have the in-depth knowledge of John Helmer the longest serving independent
western journalist in Moscow. In this post by John Helmer dated 23/03/2018
he writes about the British Court of Protection's findings.
Below are two excerpts (in parenthesis his comments) but I implore you to read the whole
article as well as other postings on the potential appointments in Putins new government.
"British High Court Justice David Williams has issued the first court adjudication of
evidence presented by the British Government of what happened to Sergei Skripal and Yulia
Skripal when they succumbed to poisoning in Salisbury on March 4. Following three days of
closed-door hearings this week in London, the judge issued a ruling for publication
yesterday."
"Representing the Skripals, Vikram Sachdeva QC told the judge "that in this case at present
it did not appear practicable or appropriate to seek the views of others who might be
interested in the welfare of Mr Skripal (his mother perhaps) or Ms Skripal (perhaps a
fiancé).
" the Skripals are two witnesses whose testimony has the potential to result in a gigantic
scandal, not just for the May government, but for all those spineless Europeans who showed
"solidarity" with Britain . "
Based on recent history, one can safely bet that there will be no scandal.
The bombing of the Lockerbie plane was an evil crime that took 270 innocent lives, and was
attributed by the official UK/US intelligence centres to the former Libyan government under
late President Gaddafi.
When this government came under NATO attack in 2011, its foreign minister Moussa Koussa
defected and sought refuge in London. He had previously been head of Libyan secret services
for 15 years (!!!), and as such, would have organised and supervised the Lockerbie "terror"
attack.
What did the UK/US governments do with him? Send him to trial at the Hague? Of course not.
He was sent to a safe heaven somewhere in the NATO proxy EAU.
Nobody cares about the victims of false flag attacks, quite the contrary: the less
investigations, the more efficient the false flag.
"... I am reading Taleb's recent book "Skin in the game" which has interesting material about the disconnection between risky behaviors and their consequences in modern USA. He also has a chapter about the mechanics involved in why minority viewpoints in our culture become dominant. It's an interesting read. ..."
"... Finally, the Police partially acknowledged their mistake and accused the Russians of not having been completely fair play. Indeed, these thuriferous bastards of Vlad the Impaler had put poison on the OUTDOOR handle of the front door of the house. It's infinitely subtle of these savages. The Brit Police did not suspect what strong part it had to make, the unexpected thwarting its learned calculations. Presumption, again and again. Nevertheless, the detectives are formal: the Russians did the trick well. The evidence is obvious. In this dramatic case, we are not going to make a comparison between insular and continental logic. The hour is too serious for these trifles. Lots of laughter. ..."
"... It's very difficult in any case to believe that such a notice could have been issued. Can't see why it would be needed. The scripting of the official story on such matters as this seems to be a joint enterprise between the media and the press officers. That's a time-honoured consensus so why would the media need bullying to stay in line? ..."
"... My personal view on all this is that the No. 10 press officers aren't that good at this new-fangled information stuff. They don't seem to have their hearts in it somehow. Time for them to go back to counting paperclips and for information campaigns to be handled by the experts. The BBC have a proven track record in this field and it's time that was officially recognised. ..."
Sir Mark, bless him, has told an MP during a committee meeting, that the armed forces, MI-5, MI-6 and GCHQ do not know who or
indeed what sickened the Skripals, pere et fille , in Salisbury. He doesn't seem to have mentioned the police. So, basically,
pilgrims, Teresa May, the queen's first minister has insistently and incessantly accused the Russians of a crime of which our British
cousins know precious little. In a closely related development, it is now revealed that the Britishers sealed up Skripal's house
after the poisoning event leaving the black Persian shown above and two guinea pigs to die of thirst and hunger within. It would
seem likely that they knew they were doing this since they would have searched the house first. No? Perhaps they thought that the
cat might be a threat as a being of possible Iranian descent. This is impressive stuff. pl
https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2018-05-01/uk-has-not-yet-identified-skripal-poisoning-suspects
These false flag ops are all so shabby in their execution. The lack of thoroughness and imagination on the part of the governments
running them is really disappointing. For example, if I was running an investigation into the Skripal incident, I would have captured
the cat and rodents and run pathology tests on them to see what bio/chem agents might be in their systems. Also, because they
might escape and become a vector of further infection. That seems like it would be SOP. So I'd do it even if I knew the story
was BS to create the appearance of reality. Then, I could always state that the pets should signs of Russian engineered bio/chem
agents. Could even create a video of the pets dying some horrible death due to the agents. That's more better BS.
And yet, this appears to be a lie as well. An earlier piece in the British news claims the pets were taken to Porton Down for
examination and testing soon after the incident. Seems more likely they eliminated evidence and then came up with the cover story
about how the animals were "forgotten about" and locked in the house for a month, implying totally unimportant for the investigation.
http://metro.co.uk/2018/03/...
I hope she and Johnson pay the price for this folly. May it be steep! Very. very steep.
How these two suckered so many nations foolishly into sending diplomats home reflected respect for UK policy toward Russia.
These nations will need to think long and hard about following any such UK lead in future.
This week, the US took down the Russian flag flying over Russian real estate in Seattle. Shameful!
I don't know much about the dynamics of British politics but as a light observer of British news I wonder why Theresa May remains
prime minister? She became prime minister after the historic Brexit vote. Promptly takes the country to an election and botches
it for the Tories. Then bungles the Brexit negotiations. Runs a floundering government. Now comes up with accusations against
the Russians in the Skripal affair with no evidence presented but looking more foolish as her story comes under scrutiny.
I am reading Taleb's recent book "Skin in the game" which has interesting material about the disconnection between risky behaviors
and their consequences in modern USA. He also has a chapter about the mechanics involved in why minority viewpoints in our culture
become dominant. It's an interesting read.
2 cats and 2 guinea pigs were locked up for 9 days in Skipal's house, in the hope of proving that the Russians are guilty.
When the police reopened the house, they found four bodies. the veterinary faculty is positive, both cats died of starvation.
Guinea pigs, some say, began to be worked by hungry cats, accelerating their deaths. Unspeakable bloodshed. In this whole case,
it's THE revolting detail, among many others. Poor beasts.
Finally, the Police partially acknowledged their mistake and accused the Russians of not having been completely fair play.
Indeed, these thuriferous bastards of Vlad the Impaler had put poison on the OUTDOOR handle of the front door of the house. It's
infinitely subtle of these savages. The Brit Police did not suspect what strong part it had to make, the unexpected thwarting
its learned calculations. Presumption, again and again. Nevertheless, the detectives are formal: the Russians did the trick well.
The evidence is obvious. In this dramatic case, we are not going to make a comparison between insular and continental logic. The
hour is too serious for these trifles.
Lots of laughter.
Presumably there are bigger guns in the background if information that would really threaten national security or the lives
of serving officers is in danger of being released. The D-Notice system itself seems to be a more or less voluntary affair -
It's very difficult in any case to believe that such a notice could have been issued. Can't see why it would be needed.
The scripting of the official story on such matters as this seems to be a joint enterprise between the media and the press officers.
That's a time-honoured consensus so why would the media need bullying to stay in line?
My personal view on all this is that the No. 10 press officers aren't that good at this new-fangled information stuff.
They don't seem to have their hearts in it somehow. Time for them to go back to counting paperclips and for information campaigns
to be handled by the experts. The BBC have a proven track record in this field and it's time that was officially recognised.
It would seem that the so-called British prime minister Theresa May, leader of the
Conservative Party [who heads up a minority Tory Government only kept in power through a
confidence and
supply arrangement with the Democratic Unionist Party] has forgotten that there is such a
matter as reality backed up by
solid strong evidence and grounded in
rational fact . It has been a consistent theme of my writings over the last near two years
now that Theresa May is not only a light weight with little leadership talents, but also
unhinged and dangerous. Indeed, Mrs. May has become something of a loose cannon on deck
deluding herself to the truth of the matter that she badly messed up the General Election of
2017 and just about everything else she inherited as prime Minister and her time is long
overdue to Leave 10 Downing Street.
One of the more alarming aspects of the near two-year-old nightmarish May Ministry has been
the near total casual evisceration of consistent truth telling and consistency of position
regarding fundamental political and philosophical questions of judgement and values which goes
to the heart of Leadership. It has not just been the near complete collapse of the UK
Government's negotiating position vis-à-vis Brussels and Michel Barnier. It has not been
the incompetent and disastrous fashion Mrs. May has governed losing one Cabinet minister after
another in rapid succession. It has not just been the lies that Theresa May has poured forth
internally.
It has been the growth under Theresa May and her
Home Office of almost Nazi style black op false flag operations and exercises
- conducted by Mrs. May's personal Gestapo MI5 - as an instrument of government policy in order
to control and manipulate the uneducated masses of the UK and turn the mass of the UK
population into an even more disgusting Peter Bazgallete Endemol style Big Brother
feeding frenzy dump. The distortion of mass public opinion in the UK and the dumbing down
across all sections of society has been deeply disturbing and frustrating to watch, but not the
least bit surprising. In Theresa May's extreme and increasingly desperate quest to hold on to
the title and position of prime Minister, May has become even far more dangerous than I ever
could have imagined. Theresa May is such a shallow empty third rate politician she will say
anything and do anything to hold on to power just for the sake of it to spite her internal Tory
Party enemies such as George Osborne. After less than two years in the job Theresa May has
managed to achieve the unthinkable. She has made Gordon Brown's Premiership look like a model
for stable Government.
May, after botching badly her gift of an early General Election from the powers that be in
Washington DC, has basically conducted the most embarrassing and weak negotiation in modern
political history with the European Union 27. Unable to deliver the massive majority that
elements in DC and Berlin/Brussels were banking on, May has had to resort to increasingly wild,
desperate and highly dangerous tactics to remain in Downing Street, attempting desperately to
shore up and re-invigorate her obviously dying leadership and crumbling administration. Which
brings us to the subject of Russia, a country and people I have tremendous respect and
admiration for and has been treated terribly by the West where I grew up. I am appalled at how
the Russian people have been treated and spoken of and harassed and targeted by the right wing
English Tory Government of Theresa May. Where to begin with? Hillary Clinton's pathetic
whinging and moaning blaming her loss on the Russians? Theresa May's bigoted, xenophobic,
dangerous anti-Russian rhetoric? The EU's expansion and NATO encroachments right up to the
borders of Russia itself in violation of understandings and promises made at the end of the
last Cold War? The 'shock' doctrine capitalism of the West injected without proper thought and
planning post-Gorbachev? Theresa May, let us be blunt, is in the pocket of certain deeply
anti-Russian forces in Washington DC and Brussels. This group of 'foreign policy' and 'national
security' experts and their allies who [seem to be everywhere] hate Russia. For what reason I
think I know and it has all the hallmarks of Nazism.... all over it. It stinks to hell of
Nazism.
Let us be very clear, Russia is not a threat to the UK and has not interfered or attacked UK
vital national interests. Russia is not interested in attacking the UK or UK interests. Russia
is not an enemy of all civilised freedom loving peoples. It is in fact a great guardian of
them. And it has been treated terribly by the West, misunderstood and disrespected beyond
belief. The so-called poisoning of Sergei Skripal was just that, so-called. It never happened.
Sergei Skripal was not poisoned with Novichok. The nerve agent, if one was even used which I
highly doubt, did not come from Russia. The chemical nerve agent is not Russian and did not
come from Russian Labs. The Russian State and Russian Government had nothing to do with it. No
Russian agents, assets, personnel were involved in this most disgusting, appalling, freak show
pathetic English MI5/6 spectacle of Salisbury. One wonders since the English always boast
non-stop about how great their country is and how their intelligence and security services are
the best in the world. In fact they are rubbish. How could Britain's so-called domestic
security service, the all seeing [supposedly], all hearing [supposedly], all knowing
[supposedly] all mighty [supposedly] MI5 allow a chemical nerve agent like Novichok into the UK
and then allow it to be transported to Salisbury and then administered first in Yulia Skripal's
car, then it became the Mill Pub, then it became Zissi Reastaurant, then MI5/6 finally, finally
settled on....the door handle. If this had really occurred like the English State and
Establishment want us to believe and would have us believe then all of Salisbury would be dead
by now if it had really been Novichok. It never happened. The whole Skripal affair was made up
by the wildly anti-Russian CIA/BND controlled Theresa May and her English Nazi style lackeys
whether they be in the English Government, media, local authorities, police or population at
large - and their pay masters in DC and Brussels.
The whole Salisbury/Skripal affair was made up, plotted, stage managed and produced by
British, American and German intelligence services. Everything the UK Government under Theresa
May said about the Salisbury affair was pure lies, scripted and made up as talking points sent
from Washington DC and Brussels. Everything May said, and Boris Johnson, and Amber Rudd and
Philip Hammond with regards to Russia and the Salisbury affair was pure lies. The entire story
the English put forward regarding the Salisbury affair kept changing and there were terrible
inconsistencies. The whole episode from start to finish was a classic English Monty Python
circus act. The Salisbury-Skripal affair was pure English Tory lies. Besides Theresa May who
ran the Home Office when all these terrible things [apparently] were going on, knew all about
it, did not lift a finger to stop it, did not put up a fight or even resign and lead a
rebellion from the backbenches. Theresa May authorised everything she now claims is a terrible
threat to UK National Security. The woman must go. .
The world was told by the British prime Minister the nerve agent used was a military grade
Novichok chemical only from Russia. The creator of Novichok said if exposed to it you either
die a painful slow death or if you do miraculously survive you will be a vegetable the rest of
your life. So how come Yulia Skripal is up and singing and dancing and checking herself out of
the hospital? And what about Sergei Skripal? I've lost track? Is he still in intensive care in
the hospital? Or has he been able to miraculously recover and check himself out? And the police
officer also made a very speedy recovery. The police have still not been able to find any
suspects even though there is a huge and expensive massive police operation under way. The
majority of the English police like MI5 are utterly useless. The Chief Executive of Porton Down
stated that Porton Down was unable to verify that the Novichok chemical agent came from Russia.
The OPCW review was completely flawed and biased against the Russian Government.
Yet Mrs. May seemed to be rather enjoying her pseudo-role as the new found Amazonian
suffragette Wonder Woman FemiNazi, the instrument of the Americans and Germans to take down the
'Evil Empire' of the brilliant and visionary President Vladimir Putin who unlike Theresa May
has got his country back strongly and proudly on its strong feet. I suppose Mrs. May was
desperate for a 'Falklands' style moment to rescue her dying leadership, and for a brief time
it seemed to be working. Mrs. May had successfully wiped off the media agenda any mention of
the crucial and critical final stages of the UK-EU divorce negotiations. There had been a
flurry of right wing press briefing against Jeremy Corbyn in the lead up to the Salisbury
affair just like before the Manchester bombing during the General Election of 2017 which May
called. May and her backers had calculated - that in order to bolster her position, take the
fight to the Russians [which Mrs. Clinton was supposed to have done], weaken Jeremy Corbyn
[which she failed to do fatally last year], change the UK narrative on Brexit and impress May's
supporters - a black op false flag trashing Russia and the Russian people and the great Russian
President on the eve of President Putin's historic fourth election victory and the glorious
World Cup in Moscow - would do the trick nicely for Mrs. May's position. As I have been writing
consistently, if Mrs. May is so desperate and crazy and power mad to hold on to her position
that she is willing to start a war with a vastly superior and vastly stronger country like
Russia, she has completely lost the plot and must go.
After May's appalling power grab at the EU27 Council Summit in March she could not believe
her luck. The EU27 were all lined up behind her as the anti-Russian warrior princess egging her
on to do their bidding in their unofficial war against Russia. This would be the new security
role for Britain in Europe once out of the EU, the anti-Russian Trojan horse leading a robust
and united anti-Russian global coalition in Europe and beyond to effect regime in the Kremlin
on behalf of the EU and their American allies. Unfortunately for Mrs. May the wheels started to
come off this unbelievable, wacky, crazy, ridiculous and extremely dangerous Anti-Russian
foreign policy with another false flag black op in Syria this time. From Salisbury and all the
lies the English told there we jumped to the sands of the Middle East and all the lies that the
Americans have told there along with the British. I could not believe what was going on before
my very eyes.
For a split second it looked like the world was on the brink of an all out war between
American and Russia in the Middle East. Do Mrs. May and her supporters really want to start a
Third World War in the Middle East just so she can pretend to be prime minister for a year or
two more? Douma was carried out by German secret service intelligence, the BND, in conjunction
with the CIA and MI6. Again, this was not the fault of the Russians or Assad Syrian forces, but
rather US backed rebels. However, the consequences of Douma are even more profound
geopolitically than what happens in some provincial English town. Theresa May has succeeded in
driving a wedge between Trump and President Putin and has successfully destroyed any hope of a
rapprochement and detente between Washington DC and Moscow. That is bad for the peace and
security of the international order. Thanks Theresa! The world came very close to a possible
nuclear confrontation between America and Russia, completely unthinkable during the last Cold
War, in the sands of the Middle East only a couple of weeks ago. In this New Cold War, which is
merely a preparation and build up phase to a much bigger confrontation, all the rules of the
old Cold War have changed. I have never felt more ashamed and more embarrassed about being a
British citizen in my life.
The anti-Russian bigotry and racism and xenophobia displayed by the English and their
Government against the Russian people and Russian interests is not something I will ever forget
and has been deeply disturbing, troubling and deeply concerning. I wonder where all this
anti-Russian war mongering is leading? Meanwhile back on the domestic home front after the near
clash between the USA and Russia was avoided, May's Government has been crumbling. May lost a
senior Remain supporter, the Home Secretary Amber Rudd, and has boxed herself into a corner
with her 'good friends' in the DUP who now realise May was just using them for her own ends and
was prepared to drop them quickly once she had achieved what she was ordered to achieve by DC
and Brussels. It will be fascinating to observe who survives this Theresa May Tory English MI5
car crash of Her Majesty's Government. But what I have seen of heard and experienced in England
of the anti-Russian bigotry is something that will remain with me for a lifetime.
"... A McClatchy journalist investigated further and came to the same conclusion as I did. The 'leak' to the New York Times was disinformation. ..."
"... Russia has not pinned the Novichok to Sweden or the Czech Republic. It said, correctly, that several countries produced Novichok. Russia did not blame the UK for the 'nerve gas attack' in Syria. Russia says that there was no gas attack in Douma. ..."
"... The claims of Russian disinformation these authors make to not hold up to scrutiny. Meanwhile there pieces themselves are full of lies, distortions and, yes, disinformation. ..."
"... Wait for an outbreak of hostilities on the Ukraine-Donbass front shortly before the beginning of the World Cup competition which is as internationally important as the Olympic Games -- as they did in 2014 with Maidan and 2016 with the Sochi Winter Olympics drug uproar, the CIA will create chaos that will take the emphasis off any Russian success, since as to them, anything negative regarding Russia is a positive for them. ..."
"... No traces of chemical weapons have been found in Douma. This means that not only the US/UK/French airstrikes were illegal under international law but even their political justification was inherently flawed. Similarly, in the Salisbury affair, no evidence of Russian involvement has been presented, while the two myths on which the British case was built (the Russian origin of the chemical substance used and the existence of proof of Russian responsibility) have been shattered. ..."
"... Given the lack of facts, the Tory leadership seems to be adopting a truly Orwellian logic: that the main proof of Russian responsibility are the Russian denials! It is hard to see how they will be able to sell this to their international partners. Self-respecting countries of G20 would not be willing to risk their reputation. ..."
"... The detail of b's analysis that stands out to me as especially significant and brilliant is his demolition of the Guardian's reuse of the Merkel "quote." ..."
"... Related to the above, consider the nature of the recently christened thought-crime, "whataboutism." The crime may be defined as follows: "Whataboutism" is the attempt to understand a truth asserted by propaganda by way of relation to other truths it has asserted contemporaneous with or prior to this one. It is to ask, "What about this *other* truth? Does this *other* truth affect our understanding of *this* truth? And if so, how does it?" ..."
"... Whataboutism seems to deny that each asserted truth stands on its own, and has no essential relation to any other past, present, or future asserted truth. ..."
"... 1984, anyone? ..."
"... The absurd story that the OPCW says there was a 100gm/100mg who knows which on the door and other sites is just so stupid its painful. ..."
"... Presumably the Skripals touch the cutlery, plates and wine glasses in the restaurant, so why weren't the staff there infected as they must have had to pick up the plates etc after the meal. Even the door to the entrance of the restaurant should be affected as they would have to push it open, thus leaving the chemical for other people to touch. Nope, nothing in this stupid story adds up and the OPCW can't even get the amounts of the chemical right. ..."
"... Biggest problem with the world today is lazy insouciant citizens. ..."
"... One very important point Lavrov made was the anti-Russian group consists of a very small number of nations representing a small fraction of humanity; ..."
"... while they have some economic and military clout, it's possible for the rest of the world's nations to sideline them and get on with the important business of forming a genuine Multipolar World Order, which is what the UN and its Charter envisioned. ..."
"... Anything that may not confirm to the 'truth' as prescribed from above must be overwhelmed with an onslaught of more lies or, if that does not work, be discredited as 'enemy' disinformation. ..."
"... Yes, exactly. The Western hegemony, i.e. the true "Axis of Evil" led by the US, and including the EU and non-Western allies, have invented the Perpetual Big Lie™. ..."
"... Witnesses? They're either confederates, dupes, or terrified by coercion. Evidence and/or technical analysis? All faked! A nominally reliable party, e.g. the president of the Czech Republic, makes statements that undermine the Big Lie Nexus? Again-- he's either been bought off or frightened into making such inconvenient claims. Or he's just a mischievous liar. ..."
"... And, as I seemingly never get tired of pointing out, the Perpetual Big Lie™ strategy arose, and succeeds, because the "natural enemies" of authoritarian government overreach have been coerced or co-opted to a fare-thee-well. So mass-media venues, and even supposedly independent technical and scientific organizations, are part of the Perpetual Big Lie™ apparatus. ..."
"... Putting Kudrin -- an opponent of de-dollarization and an upholder of the Washington Consensus -- in charge of Russia's international outreach would be equal to putting Bill Clinton in charge of a girls' school. ..."
"... In the Guardian I only read the comments, never the article. Here, I read both. That is the difference between propaganda and good reporting. ..."
The Grauniad is slipping deeper into the disinformation business:
Revealed: UK's push to strengthen anti-Russia alliance is the headline of a page one piece
which reveals exactly nothing. There is no secret lifted and no one was discomforted by a
questioning journalist.
Like other such pieces it uses disinformation to accuse Russia of spreading such.
The main 'revelation' is stenographed from a British government official. Some quotes from
the usual anti-Russian propagandists were added. Dubious or false 'western' government claims
are held up as truth. That Russia does not endorse them is proof for Russian mischievousness
and its 'disinformation'.
The opener:
The UK will use a series of international summits this year to call for a comprehensive
strategy to combat Russian disinformation and urge a rethink over traditional diplomatic
dialogue with Moscow, following the Kremlin's aggressive campaign of denials over the use of
chemical weapons in the UK and Syria.
...
"The foreign secretary regards Russia's response to Douma and Salisbury as a turning point
and thinks there is international support to do more," a Whitehall official said. "The areas
the UK are most likely to pursue are countering Russian disinformation and finding a
mechanism to enforce accountability for the use of chemical weapons."
There is a mechanism to enforce accountability for the use of chemical weapons. It is the
Chemical Weapon Convention and the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW).
It was the British government which at first
rejected the use of these instruments during the Skripal incident:
Early involvement of the OPCW, as demanded by Russia, was resisted by the British
government. Only on March 14, ten days after the incident happened and two days after Prime
Minister Theresa may had made accusations against Russia, did the British government invite
the OPCW. Only on March 19, 15 days after the incident happen did the OPCW technical team
arrive and took blood samples.
Now back to the Guardian disinformation:
In making its case to foreign ministries, the UK is arguing that Russian denials over
Salisbury and Douma reveal a state uninterested in cooperating to reach a common
understanding of the truth , but instead using both episodes to try systematically to divide
western electorates and sow doubt.
A 'common understanding of the truth' is an interesting term. What is the truth? Whatever
the British government claims? It accused Russia of the Skripal incident a mere eight days
after it happened. Now, two month later, it admits that it
does not know who poisoned the Skripals:
Police and intelligence agencies have failed so far to identify the individual or
individuals who carried out the nerve agent attack in Salisbury, the UK's national security
adviser has disclosed.
Do the Brits know where the alleged Novichok poison came from? Unless they produced it
themselves they likely have no idea. The Czech Republic just admitted that it
made small doses of a Novichok nerve agent for testing purposes. Others did too.
Back to the Guardian :
British politicians are not alone in claiming Russia's record of mendacity is not a personal
trait of Putin's, but a government-wide strategy that makes traditional diplomacy
ineffective.
Angela Merkel, the German chancellor, famously came off one lengthy phone call with Putin
– she had more than 40 in a year – to say he lived in a different world.
No, Merkel never said that. An Obama administration flunky planted that
in the New York Times :
Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany told Mr. Obama by telephone on Sunday that after speaking
with Mr. Putin she was not sure he was in touch with reality, people briefed on the call
said. "In another world," she said.
When that claim was made in March 2014 we were immediately suspicious
of it:
This does not sound like typically Merkel but rather strange for her. I doubt that she said
that the way the "people briefed on the call" told it to the Times stenographer. It is rather
an attempt to discredit Merkel and to make it more difficult for her to find a solution with
Russia outside of U.S. control.
A day later the German government
denied (ger) that Merkel ever said such (my translation):
The chancellery is unhappy about the report in the New York Times. Merkel by no means meant
to express that Putin behaved irrational. In fact she told Obama that Putin has a different
perspective about the Crimea [than Obama has].
A McClatchy journalist investigated
further and came to the same conclusion as I did. The 'leak' to the New York Times was
disinformation.
That disinformation, spread by the Obama administration but immediately exposed as false, is
now held up as proof by Patrick Wintour, the Diplomatic editor of the Guardian , that
Russia uses disinformation and that Putin is a naughty man.
The British Defense Minister Gavin Williamson
wants journalists to enter the UK reserve forces to help with the creation of
propaganda:
He said army recruitment should be about "looking to different people who maybe think, as a
journalist: 'What are my skills in terms of how are they relevant to the armed forces?'
Patrick Wintour seems to be a qualified candidate.
Or maybe he should join the NATO for Information Warfare the Atlantic Council wants to
create to further disinform about those damned Russkies:
What we need now is a cross-border defense alliance against disinformation -- call it
Communications NATO. Such an alliance is, in fact, nearly as important as its military
counterpart.
Like the Guardian piece above writer of the NATO propaganda lobby Atlantic Council
makes claims of Russian disinformation that do not hold up to the slightest test:
By pinning the Novichok nerve agent on Sweden or the Czech Republic, or blaming the UK for
the nerve gas attack in Syria, the Kremlin sows confusion among our populations and makes us
lose trust in our institutions.
Russia has not pinned the Novichok to Sweden or the Czech Republic. It said, correctly, that
several countries produced Novichok. Russia did not blame the UK for the 'nerve gas attack' in
Syria. Russia says that there was no gas attack in Douma.
The claims of Russian disinformation these authors make to not hold up to scrutiny.
Meanwhile there pieces themselves are full of lies, distortions and, yes, disinformation.
The bigger aim behind all these activities, demanding a myriad of new organizations to
propagandize against Russia, is to introduce a strict control over information within 'western'
societies.
Anything that may not confirm to the 'truth' as prescribed from above must be overwhelmed
with an onslaught of more lies or, if that does not work, be discredited as 'enemy'
disinformation.
That scheme will be used against anyone who deviates from the ordered norm. You dislike that
pipeline in your backyard? You must be falling for
Russian trolls or maybe you yourself are an agent of a foreign power. Social Security? The
Russians like that. It is a disinformation thing. You better forget about it.
Excellent article, in an ongoing run of great journalism.
I am curious - have you read this? https://ratical.org/ratville/JFK/ST/
It purports to be a book by an American military man intimately familiar with the covert ops
portion of the US government. The internal Kafka-esque dynamics described certainly feel
true.
One of the reasons newspapers are getting worse is the economics. They aren't really viable
anymore. Their future is as some form of government sanctioned oligopoly. Two national papers
-- a "left" and a "right" -- and then a handful of regional papers. All spouting the same
neoliberal, neoconservative chicanery.
Genuine journalist Matt Taibbi warned of this sort of branding of disparate views as enemy a
month ago. He was also correct. Evil and insidious. The enemy of a free society.
Wait for an outbreak of hostilities on the Ukraine-Donbass front shortly before the beginning
of the World Cup competition which is as internationally important as the Olympic Games -- as
they did in 2014 with Maidan and 2016 with the Sochi Winter Olympics drug uproar, the CIA
will create chaos that will take the emphasis off any Russian success, since as to them,
anything negative regarding Russia is a positive for them.
I agree that it's difficult to see how the drive to renew the Cold War is going to be
stopped. I presume that, with the exception of certain NeoCon circles, there isn't a desire
for Hot War. Certainly not in the British sources you quote. Britain wouldn't want Hot War
with Russia. It's all a question of going to the limit for internal consumption. Do a 1984,
in order to keep the population in-line.
thanks b... i can't understand how any intelligent thinking person would read the guardian,
let alone something like the huff post, and etc. etc... why? the propaganda money that pays
for the white helmets, certainly goes to these outlets as well..
the uk have gone completely nuts! i guess it comes with reading the guardian, although, in
fairness, all british media seems very skewed - sky news, bbc, and etc. etc.
it does appear as though Patrick Wintour is on Gavin Williamson's propaganda
bandwagon/payroll already... in reading the comments and articles at craig murrays site, i
have become more familiar with just how crazy things are in the uk.. his latest article
freedom no
more sums it up well... throw the uk msm in the trash can... it is for all intensive
purposes, done..
Meanwhile, OPCW chief Uzumcu seems to have been pranked again, this time by his own staff
(this is how I interpret it):
He claimed that the amount of Novichok found was about 100 g and therefore more than
research laboratories would produce, i.e. this was weaponized Novichok.
Q: What is our reaction to the Guardian article on a "comprehensive strategy" to "deepen
the alliance against Russia" to be pursued by the UK Government at international forums?
A: Judging by the publication, the main current challenge for Whitehall is to preserve
the anti-Russian coalition that the Conservatives tried to build after the Salisbury
incident. This task is challenging indeed. The "fusion doctrine" promoted by the national
security apparatus has led to the Western bloc taking hasty decisions that, as life has
shown, were not based on any facts.
No traces of chemical weapons have been found in Douma. This means that not only the
US/UK/French airstrikes were illegal under international law but even their political
justification was inherently flawed. Similarly, in the Salisbury affair, no evidence of
Russian involvement has been presented, while the two myths on which the British case was
built (the Russian origin of the chemical substance used and the existence of proof of
Russian responsibility) have been shattered.
Given the lack of facts, the Tory leadership seems to be adopting a truly Orwellian
logic: that the main proof of Russian responsibility are the Russian denials! It is hard to
see how they will be able to sell this to their international partners. Self-respecting
countries of G20 would not be willing to risk their reputation.
Hmmm... My reply to c1ue went sideways it seems. Yes, The late Mr. Prouty's book's the real
deal and the website hosting his very rare book is a rare gem itself. Click the JFK at page
top left to be transported to that sites archive of writings about his murder. The very important essay by
Prouty's there too.
The detail of b's analysis that stands out to me as especially significant and brilliant is
his demolition of the Guardian's reuse of the Merkel "quote."
This one detail tells us so much about how propaganda works, and about how it can be
defeated. Successful propaganda both depends upon and seeks to accelerate the erasure of
historical memory. This is because its truths are always changing to suit the immediate needs
of the state. None of its truths can be understood historically. b makes the connection
between the documented but forgotten past "truth" of Merkel's quote and its present
reincarnation in the Guardian, and this is really all he *needs* to do. What b points out is
something quite simple; yet the ability to do this very simple thing is becoming increasingly
rare and its exercise increasingly difficult to achieve. It is for me the virtue that makes
b's analysis uniquely indispensable.
Related to the above, consider the nature of the recently christened thought-crime,
"whataboutism." The crime may be defined as follows: "Whataboutism" is the attempt to
understand a truth asserted by propaganda by way of relation to other truths it has asserted
contemporaneous with or prior to this one. It is to ask, "What about this *other* truth? Does
this *other* truth affect our understanding of *this* truth? And if so, how does it?"
Whataboutism seems to deny that each asserted truth stands on its own, and has no
essential relation to any other past, present, or future asserted truth.
The absurd story that the OPCW says there was a 100gm/100mg who knows which on the door and
other sites is just so stupid its painful. This implies that the Skripals both closed the
door together and then went off on their day spreading the stuff everywhere, yet no one else
was contaminated (apart from the fantasy policeman).
Presumably the Skripals touch the
cutlery, plates and wine glasses in the restaurant, so why weren't the staff there infected
as they must have had to pick up the plates etc after the meal. Even the door to the entrance
of the restaurant should be affected as they would have to push it open, thus leaving the
chemical for other people to touch. Nope, nothing in this stupid story adds up and the OPCW
can't even get the amounts of the chemical right.
The problem is,,, most know it's all BS but find it 'easier' to believe or at most ignore, as
then there is no responsibility to 'do something'. Biggest problem with the world today is
lazy insouciant citizens. (Yes,,, I'm a PCR reader) :))
Did you catch the Lavrov interview I linked to on previous Yemen thread? As you might
imagine, the verbiage used is quite similar. One very important point Lavrov made was the
anti-Russian group consists of a very small number of nations representing a small fraction
of humanity; and that while they have some economic and military clout, it's possible for the
rest of the world's nations to sideline them and get on with the important business of
forming a genuine Multipolar World Order, which is what the UN and its Charter
envisioned.
"I cannot sufficiently express my outrage that Leeds City Council feels it is right to ban
a meeting with very distinguished speakers, because it is questioning the government and
establishment line on Syria. Freedom of speech really is dead."
Anything that may not confirm to the 'truth' as prescribed from above must be overwhelmed
with an onslaught of more lies or, if that does not work, be discredited as 'enemy'
disinformation. _______________________________________
Yes, exactly. The Western hegemony, i.e. the true "Axis of Evil" led by the US, and
including the EU and non-Western allies, have invented the Perpetual Big Lie™.
This isn't a new insight, but it's worth repeating. It struck me anew while I was
listening to a couple of UK "journalists" hectoring OPCW Representative Shulgin, and
directing scurrilous and provocative innuendo disguised as "questions" to Mr. Shulgin and the
Syrian witnesses testifying during his presentation.
It flashed upon me that there is no longer a reasonable expectation that the Perpetual Big
Liars must eventually abandon, much less confess, their heinous mendacity. Just as B points
out, there are no countervailing facts, evidence, rebuttals, theories, or explanations
that can't be countered with further iterations of Big Lies, however offensively incredible
and absurd.
Witnesses? They're either confederates, dupes, or terrified by coercion. Evidence and/or
technical analysis? All faked! A nominally reliable party, e.g. the president of the Czech
Republic, makes statements that undermine the Big Lie Nexus? Again-- he's either been bought
off or frightened into making such inconvenient claims. Or he's just a mischievous liar.
And, as I seemingly never get tired of pointing out, the Perpetual Big Lie™ strategy
arose, and succeeds, because the "natural enemies" of authoritarian government overreach have
been coerced or co-opted to a fare-thee-well. So mass-media venues, and even supposedly
independent technical and scientific organizations, are part of the Perpetual Big Lie™
apparatus.
Even as the Big Liars reach a point of diminishing returns, they respond with more of the
same. I wish I were more confident that this reprehensible practice will eventually fail due
to the excess of malignant hubris; I'm not holding my breath.
Is Putin capitulating? Pro US Alexei Kudrin could join new government to negotiate "end of
sanctions" with the West.
Former finance minister Alexei Kudrin will be brought back to "mend fences with the West"
in order to revive Russia's economy. Kudrin has repeatedly said that unless Russia makes her
political system more democratic and ends its confrontation with Europe and the United
States, she will not be able to achieve economic growth. Russia's fifth-columnists were
exalted: "If Kudrin joined the administration or government, it would indicate that they have
agreed on a certain agenda of change, including in foreign policy, because without change in
foreign policy, reforms are simply impossible in Russia," said Yevgeny Gontmakher . . . who
works with a civil society organization set up by Mr. Kudrin. "It would be a powerful
message, because Kudrin is the only one in the top echelons with whom they will talk in the
west and towards whom there is a certain trust."
Putting Kudrin -- an opponent of de-dollarization and an upholder of the Washington
Consensus -- in charge of Russia's international outreach would be equal to putting Bill
Clinton in charge of a girls' school.
It would mark Putin's de facto collapse as a leader. We
shall know very soon. Either way, if anyone wondered what the approach to Russia would be
from Bolton and Pompeo, we now know: they will play very hard ball with Putin, regardless of
what he does (or doesn't do), and with carefree readiness to risk an eventual snap.
Certainly looks like @ 18 is a fine example of what b is presenting.
A good way to extract one's self from the propaganda is to refuse using whatever meme the
disinformation uses, e.g. that Sergei Skripal was a double agent -- that is not a known, only
a convenient suggestion.
Military intelligence is far better described as military
information needed for some project or mission. Not surreptitious cloak and dagger spying.
This is not to say Sergei Scripal was a British spy for which he was convicted, stripped of
rank and career and exiled through a spy swap. To continue using Sergei Scripal was a double
agent only repeats and verifies the disinformation meme and all the framing that goes with
it. Find some alternative to what MSM produces that does not embed truthiness to their
efforts.
I realize it's from one of the biggest propaganda organs in the world... take this New
York Times report of the OPCW's retraction with a 100 grams -- 100mg? -- of salt:
Kudrin is a neoliberal and as such is an
enemy of humanity and will never again be allowed to hold a position of power within Russia's
government. Let him emigrate to the West like his fellow parasites and teach junk economics
at some likeminded university.
"... Testimony by Sir Mark Sedwill, British Prime Minister Theresa May's National Security Adviser, to the House of Commons Defence Committee on 1st May 2018 has now revealed that all the claims about a breakthrough in the Skripal case – not to mention the claims about "Gordon" aka "Mihails Savickis" – were (as I suspected) nonsense. ..."
"... In other words the investigation is going nowhere and has drawn a complete blank. ..."
"... All this comes hot on the heels of suggestions – which are very likely true – that the wall of silence which has recently descended on the British media's reporting of the Skripal case is the product of a British government D-Notice , ie. of a formal request by the British government to the media to limit their coverage of the Skripal story on grounds of national security. ..."
"... It has also been suggested that despite formal denials the most likely reason for the D-Notice is the desire of the British authorities to conceal a possible connection between Sergey Skripal, his former MI6 controller Pablo Miller, and Christopher Steele, the compiler of the Trump Dossier. ..."
Amidst speculation that British government has imposed reporting restrictions, British authorities admit they have no suspect
in Skripal case
A week ago the British media were full of reports from the usual anonymous sources of a breakthrough in the Skripal case.
Allegedly the British authorities by comparing CCTV pictures from Salisbury and details of travellers to and from Britain had
been to identify the persons who were supposedly responsible for the attack on Sergey and Yulia Skripal. These stories came with
further stories of a Russian James Bond style assassin – "Gordon" aka "Mihails Savickis" – who together with his team had supposedly
carried out the attack. The stories about "Gordon" aka "Mihails Savickis" came with a bizarre identikit picture supposedly of him,
which was too ridiculous to take seriously.
In an
article
I wrote for The Duran on 24th April 2018 I expressed skepticism about these claims
.it looks to me as if despite all the claims to the contrary the police investigation of the Skripal case has made little actual
progress. The British seem to have little more knowledge of who carried out the attack on Sergey and Yulia Skripal and why than
they did when the investigation began. Could it possibly be because they are looking in the wrong place?
Testimony by Sir Mark Sedwill, British Prime Minister Theresa May's National Security Adviser, to the House of Commons Defence
Committee on 1st May 2018 has now revealed that all the claims about a breakthrough in the Skripal case – not to mention the claims
about "Gordon" aka "Mihails Savickis" – were (as I suspected) nonsense.
Here is how Sir Mark Sedwill's testimony is reported by
The Guardian
Police and intelligence agencies have failed so far to
identify the individual or individuals who carried out the nerve agent attack in Salisbury, the UK's national security adviser
has disclosed.
The comments by Sir Mark Sedwill punctured hopes that the police and other security agencies had pinpointed suspects but were
withholding the name or names from the public.
Asked by an MP at a Commons defence committee hearing if he knew the individuals responsible, he replied curtly: "Not yet."
Sedwill, who coordinates the work of the MI6, MI5, the surveillance agency
GCHQ and others, did not elaborate but among problems that have
hampered the agencies is a lack of CCTV coverage in Salisbury compared with London. Known Russian spies based in Britain have
also been investigated and ruled out.
In other words the investigation is going nowhere and has drawn a complete blank.
All this comes hot on the heels of suggestions – which are very likely true – that the wall of silence which has recently
descended on the British media's reporting of the Skripal case is the
product of a British government D-Notice , ie. of a formal
request by the British government to the media to limit their coverage of the Skripal story on grounds of national security.
It has also been suggested that despite formal denials the most likely reason for the D-Notice is the desire of the British
authorities to conceal a possible connection between Sergey Skripal, his former MI6 controller Pablo Miller, and Christopher Steele,
the compiler of the Trump Dossier.
There are even suggestions that Sergey Skripal may have had a hand in producing the Trump Dossier, and that this was the reason
for the attack on him.
Whilst all this may be true, I have to say that Sergey Skripal – identified as a British spy by the Russians in 2004 and isolated
from Russia in the leafy British town of Salisbury since 2010 – seems an unlikely source for the Trump Dossier, largely fictitious
though that strange concoction is.
"... The media may be banned from reporting, but if my casual interactions with the UK populace are representative, the majority are highly sceptical of .gov - May / BJ 'Putin did it' accusations. ..."
"... One has to wonder why Russia is not calling Britain out on this obvious kidnapping. ..."
"... i had read craig murrays post earlier today...why are they covering up the fentanoyl angle? it's obvious! ..."
"... I think the policeman in this farce is key to everything. If the cause of the Skripal poisoning was fentenyal then why did the policeman become ill? ..."
"... Anyway, if it was a weapons grade chemical agent that the policeman was affected by, why was it he was able to leave hospital a few days later in full uniform looking a picture of health? ..."
"... Originally the story was he was somehow contaminated by the Skripals themselves, but as no one else in the contact chain was affected, and this notwithstanding the fact ambulance and medical had serious hand on contact was affected, it became clear that the policeman had to have another source of contamination. ..."
"... Thus; they invented the magic door knob story. Even this silly story is absurd. The police and the goons didn't investigate the door knob (actually, a door handle lever type) theory until 25 days later when rain and numerous people coming and going at the Skripals's would have worn off any contaminate from the door handle. ..."
"... By the way, they are now telling us the stuff on the door handle was a liquid. How do you get a liquid to stick of a shiny door handle? Apart from the silence of the press, the silence from the medical people is a factor also. They have not signed any official secrets act and they can't be issued with a D notice. ..."
"... the policemen appears like an inside prop for this false flag op... that is what it looks like to me.. forget about it, or him having any relevance or validity, if he is as i am suggesting.. ..."
"... It all seems amazing to me, what a strange world of collapsing empire we live in. Really, why don't the Russians demand at the UNSC the right to visit with Russian citizens? Call for a resolution demanding a visit and force them to veto. ..."
"... The US Drug Enforcement Agency claims that different kinds of Fentanyl, including something known as Carfentanil, can be absorbed through the skin or accidentally inhaled and cause death. ..."
"... Although the Skripal "op" was a success, the planned false flag didn't happen due to SAA's quick advance (with Russian help). Instead, a sloppy false flag was done at the very last minute in Douma just before the Jihadis gave up. This wouldn't save Ghouta so it was possibly motivated by the the desire to solidify anti-Russian sentiment created by the Skripal op. ..."
"... If we assume that the Skripals had been poisoned with fentanyl, we then have to explain how a doctor was able to give the Skripals first aid at the scene where they collapsed without being poisoned by fentanyl herself. ..."
"... @Jen16. Is it not possible the 'potency' of fentanyl is overstated in order to 'sell' the anti-dote? Much like the anthrax 'dote' after 911. I mean most dealers I have met aren't exactly stupid, that being said most aren't lab smart either, it would seem to me there would be a whole lot of dead dealers if 'traces' in the wind can kill. Then there is the anomaly of the Dr. and other's as you brought up in 16. Just a thought. FWIW. ..."
"... This charade has not gone well for May. It has raised serious doubts that the UK can ever be an ally of Trump. The Steele dirt dossier was an attack on Trump's family, presidential campaign and cripples his first term with purile Russia hatred. May and the espionage establishment are the enemy of the USA. After 250 years the British finally won the US war of independence and have enslaved the majority of its media outlets. ..."
"... The state exists to enforce the dominance of elites, all the rest is propaganda, misdirection, Obfuscation or terrorism up to and including total war. ..."
"... The young man Jamie Paine who first found the Skripals on the park bench got some liquid on his skin and apparently didn't suffer from it. ..."
"... The Devon Live report is still in its original form. It links to the first Wiltshire Police statement on the case and quotes from it. Curiously the link is dead. The first official police statement on the Skripal case is "currently unavailable". ..."
"... D-Notices are one of those evils that, once initiated, are never undone. It reminds me a bit of the fraudulent, gauzy "AUMF" used by the United States government as if it were a blank check written by God to wage imperialistic wars kinetic actions of aggression against anyone or anything it deems ripe for pillage or destruction-- at its sole pleasure and discretion, and for eternity. ..."
"... As it is, the D-Notices' ostensible "national security" rationale has proven to be mere camouflage for its true purpose: ensuring that malfeasant officials and operatives are "secure" in their depraved work, and are protected from all inquiries that might expose their heinous wrongdoing. Whoops! ..."
"... I do not know if fentanyl was found in OPCW sample, only British made BZ paralyzingly agent. The question is why? I think doctors in Salisbury who are trained with chemical nerve agents due to proximity to Porton Downs lab instantly knew there was no military nerve agent used there, would they also instantly know that it was Fentanyl since they faced epidemic of opioid overdoses. ..."
"... After recovery is was Skripal, trusted by her as her father, himself as part of psych op presented the narrative as Putin wanted to kill me and did not care that you happened to be with me at time of attack. I am so sorry, shit lies. She was brainwashed offered lucrative financial arrangement in the west decided to stay, thinking she could be killed upon returning to Russia. ..."
"... The fentanyl/BZ/Novichok angle seems eerily like the US/ZATO/MSM fallback position on the BUK missile scam for MH17. By insisting MH17 was brought down by SOME BUK, the story line never gets to the Ukie SU25s seen near MH17 on Russian commercial air-traffic tracking radar. ..."
"... The potential existence of Skripal's dead-man's-switch documentation may have extended well beyond the Steele scam, which would explain the urgency of the deed and why the Skripals are being held incommunicado. The search of the Skripal residence was to find that documentation, easy once the UK cordoned it off due to potential "chemical contamination". ..."
"... Why does this operation seem to have the malodorous stench of Berezovsky's spectre lingering in the background. While Berezovsky himself may be dead, it is safe to assume that remnants of his network are still around. If indeed the Skripals were poisoned, it could very well have been orchestrated by a rogue, non-state actor with embarrassing ties to MI6. In some ways it is reminiscent of the bungled Litvinenko operation (which the British gov't also covered up). ..."
"... Both Pablo Miller and Christopher Steele were known to be associated with Berezovsky. Steele, as his Mi6 handler, would probably have intimate knowledge of Berezovsky's connections and may well have used them as 'Russian sourced' material for his infamous Steele dossier. So Skripal, who consulted on the Steele dossier, is tied to both Miller and Steele who in turn are connected to remnants of Berezovsky's network. The 'suiciding' of Berezovsky (unless sanctioned by Mi6) suggests at least one group of players within this network who have their own agenda. ..."
"... It is possible that the Skripal case and the White Helmets Damascus chemical weapons likely false flag was an attempt of parts of the British (French) and US deep state to force Trump to remain in Syria. ..."
"... Skripal's "dead man switch" is pure fantasy. It assumes that a man who had betrayed his country and was merely an "asset" would be trusted with sensitive info. ..."
Thretha May proved to be a very dangerous woman -- a real political mafiosy.
There has been no recent reporting on the Skripal case in which a British-Russian double
agent and his daughter were poisoned in Salisbury, England. There even seem to be attempts to
change the public record of the case.
The British government alleged that the Skripals were poisoned by Novichok, a deadly nerve
agent, and blamed Russia for it. There are stiill many open questions to ask but the British
media, otherwise not afraid of 'door stepping', are curiously uninterested. We already noted
in early April that the British press was throwing
Novi-Fog™ onto the public. It was repeating outrageous and illogical claims from
"security services" but did no genuine reporting on the Skripal case.
Some photo editor made sense of what the "security services" said and introduced an April
5 London Times piece with a picture of a likely source of the alleged Novichok
poison:
Now the former British ambassador Craig Murray quotes Clive Ponting, another former senior
civil servant, who
suspects that the British government issued a D-Notice. Such a notice forbids British
media to report on an issue. Murray also points to a tweet by Channel 4 correspondent Alex
Thomson from
March 12 in which Thomsen mentions a D-Notice specifically related to Mr. Skripal's MI6
handler:
The D-Notice attempt Thomsen mentioned was too late as some media had already reported the
name of the Skripal's MI6 handler. We spelled
it out on March 8.
One Pablo Miller, a British MI6 agent, had
recruited Sergej Skripal. The former MI6 agent in Moscow, Christopher Steele, was also
involved in the case. Skripal was caught by the Russian security services and went to jail.
Pablo Miller, the MI6 recruiter, was also the handler of Sergej Skripal after he was released
by Russia in a spy swap. He reportedly also lives in Salisbury. Both Christopher Steele and
Pablo Miller work for Orbis Business Intelligence which created the "Dirty Dossier" about
Donald Trump.
We early on suspected
a relation between the "Dirty Dossier" and the Skripal affair:
Here are some question:
Did Skripal help Steele to make up the "dossier" about Trump?
Were Skripal's old connections used to contact other people in Russia to ask about
Trump dirt?
Did Skripal threaten to talk about this?
If there is a connection between the dossier and Skripal, which seems very likely to me,
then there are a number of people and organizations with potential motives to kill him.
Lots of shady folks and officials on both sides of the Atlantic were involved in creating
and running the anti-Trump/anti-Russia campaign. There are several investigations and some
very dirty laundry might one day come to light. Removing Skripal while putting the blame on
Russia looks like a convenient way to get rid of a potential witness.
Whistleblower Clive Ponting,
quoted by Murray , now also suspects that the Skripal case was an 'inside' job that
followed from the 'dirty dossier' fakery:
If [Sergej Skripal] was also involved in the 'golden showers' dossier then elements in the
US would have a reason to act as well. The whole incident was an inside job not to kill
him, hence the use of BZ, but to give him a warning and a punishment. The whole thing is
being treated as though the authorities know exactly what went on but have to cover it
up.
...
I meant to add that the policeman who 'just happened' to be around was almost certainly the
special branch 'minder' who was keeping Yulia under surveillance. The media are not allowed
to mention the existence of a D notice.
There is not only a very curious silence in British media about the Skripal case, but
there seem to be active attempts to remove certain material about the case from the
public.
In 2017 investigative journalist Dilyana Gaytandzhiev reported about
massive air transports of weapons to Syrian 'rebels' under diplomatic cover and got fired
over it. On April 26 she made another interesting find :
The Clinical Services Journal piece Gaytandzhiev had found is from March 5 2018,
the day after the Skripal incident in Salisbury. In its original version it read:
Salisbury District Hospital declared a "major incident" on Monday 5 March, after two
patients were exposed to an opioid .
...
It followed an incident hours earlier in which a man and a woman were exposed to the drug
Fentanyl in the city centre. The opioid is 10,000 times stronger than heroin.
One wonders why such a tiny magazine would bother to change an old story after some
journalist tweeted about it.
The CSJ was
not the only outlet which
mentioned Fentanyl. The local Salisbury Journal
reported it on March 5 and the piece is still up:
Police declared a major incident after a man in his 60s and a woman in her 30s were found
unconscious on a bench in the shopping centre on Sunday.
Emergency services at the scene suspected the substance may have been a powerful drug
called fentanyl , but nothing has yet been confirmed.
They were taken to Salisbury District Hospital where they are in a critical condition in
intensive care.
In November 2017 the Salisbury Journal had reported about an
unrelated fenatanyl overdose case . In 2016 Salisbury had
a spike in Fentanyl OD cases. The local emergency services were surely aware of the
symptoms and effects of such a substance.
It is understood that police suspect fentanyl, a synthetic opiate many times stronger than
heroin, may have been involved . A man and a woman are in a critical condition and up to 10
other people are involved.
Officers and paramedics were called to The Maltings shopping centre in Salisbury after the
man and a woman fell ill. The woman, who was unconscious, was airlifted to Salisbury
district hospital at about 4.15pm, while the man was taken by ambulance.
...
It was recently reported that fentanyl has claimed the lives of at least 60 people in the
UK over the last eight months.
The Devon Live report is still in its original form. It links to the first
Wiltshire Police statement on the case and quotes from it. Curiously the link is dead. The
first official police
statement on the Skripal case is "currently unavailable".
The British press is now totally silent on the Skripal case. Craig Murray and another
former senior civil servant suspect that the government gave order to not report on the
issue. They also suspect, as we did early on, that the case is related to the fake "Dirty
Dossier" which the Clinton campaign ordered up to use it against Donald Trump.
It is not understandable why the British government would give a silencing order if, as
the government alleges, Russia caused the incident.
Why is no public investigation by the media allowed? Where is Yulia Skripal and what is
the health status of Sergej Skripal? Why have they been silenced?
---
Previous Moon of Alabama posts on the Skripal case:
The media may be banned from reporting, but if my casual interactions with the UK
populace are representative, the majority are highly sceptical of .gov - May / BJ 'Putin
did it' accusations.
Heard yesterday in the dispatch warehouse of a rural agri suply business I was
collecting suplies from.
One warehousman to another- "Terry, where the hell is Jeff this morning?" reply from
warehousman 2 "Off sick, poisoned by russians his Mrs says, proof is clasified, but he will
be in next week"
thanks b... the additional info is fascinating.. i had read craig murrays post earlier
today...why are they covering up the fentanoyl angle? it's obvious!
b,
on another and important note - something is wrong with your site, with regard to making
posts on the most recent open thread and even on the previous thread to this... some weird
html script is showing up on both, but i was able to post earlier today on the previous
thread...
I think the policeman in this farce is key to everything. If the cause of the Skripal
poisoning was fentenyal then why did the policeman become ill? Surely he wasn't taking this
drug?
Anyway, if it was a weapons grade chemical agent that the policeman was affected by,
why was it he was able to leave hospital a few days later in full uniform looking a picture
of health?
Originally the story was he was somehow contaminated by the Skripals themselves,
but as no one else in the contact chain was affected, and this notwithstanding the fact
ambulance and medical had serious hand on contact was affected, it became clear that the
policeman had to have another source of contamination.
Thus; they invented the magic door
knob story. Even this silly story is absurd. The police and the goons didn't investigate
the door knob (actually, a door handle lever type) theory until 25 days later when rain and
numerous people coming and going at the Skripals's would have worn off any contaminate from
the door handle.
By the way, they are now telling us the stuff on the door handle was a
liquid. How do you get a liquid to stick of a shiny door handle? Apart from the silence of
the press, the silence from the medical people is a factor also. They have not signed any
official secrets act and they can't be issued with a D notice.
@4 john.. the policemen appears like an inside prop for this false flag op... that is what
it looks like to me.. forget about it, or him having any relevance or validity, if he is as i am suggesting..
Regarding my post above, it has to be said that this assumed 'assassin' must be the most
incompetent one in the world. Surely the obvious way to get this fantasy weapons grade
chemical to Skripal would be via a letter posted through the door, say, in the early
evening. This way Skripal would have most likely died in his bed. By the way, it was a cold
day so how did the 'assassin not know that the Skripals wouldn't be wearing gloves? Even
the 'assassin' in this affair just doesn't add up. Questions, question, easily answered by
lies, lies, and more lies
It all seems amazing to me, what a strange world of collapsing empire we live in. Really, why don't the Russians demand at the UNSC the right to visit with Russian
citizens? Call for a resolution demanding a visit and force them to veto.
Thanks for doing your part to keep this false flag story alive.
It is interesting that Russia has not taken a stronger position in public about their
treatment.
The UK folks sure seem to be getting away with killing this story and expect them to be
successful if they can create another bigger wag the dog event.....not a good sign except
as a good sign that the end is closer.
DS Nick Bailey said, via an intermediary, that life will "probably never be the same." What
an odd thing for a police sergeant to say (perhaps his last words).
from the Telegraph:
Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey was discharged from hospital two weeks ago and hasn't been
heard from since, probably a result of the private session Bailey had with the Prime
Minister prior to his release. Bailey wasn't even allowed to make a statement upon his
discharge from hospital. In a statement read by Wiltshire Police Chief Constable Kier
Pritchard on March 22, DS Nick Bailey said he recognises his life will "probably never be
the same" and thanks the public for their "overwhelming" support. . .
here .
The US Drug Enforcement Agency claims that different kinds of Fentanyl, including something
known as Carfentanil, can be absorbed through the skin or accidentally inhaled and cause
death.
(The DEA also reminds its officers to protect their canine companions! My respect for
the DEA has increased 1000 fold.)
Do ex-spies ever get involved in the drug trade? Would accidental exposure to some kind
of Fentanyl explain what happened to the law enforcement officer who was also affected?
Perhaps seafood poisoning is the second most parsimonious explanation.
It doesn't seem unreasonable to initially suspect fentanyl given that fentanyl has killed
many people in UK and elsewhere. Food poisoning was also mooted early on due to Zizzi's
poor health record. But these possibilities smell like distraction from the BZ finding.
AFAIK The best way to "set the scene" for a public spectacle would be an attack with a
fast-acting agent at an opportune time and place. All other "theories" seem to me to be
mis-direction/distraction.
A police officer (DS Bailey) makes a logical choice to deliver the incapacitating agent
as he/she does not arouse suspicion when loitering and accosting the victims. If the
victims fight back, the policeman might be exposed to some of the substance.
Since the British haven't had Yulia appear before even the most loyal media poodles, I
suspect that the Skripals are dead.
I'm not convinced that the MI6 had anything to fear from the Steele dossier. To think
that any US investigator would be allowed to freely interview Skripal, Steele, or other
British "asset" seems a big stretch. And, if tying up loose ends of the Steele dossier was
the motive, it would've been much easier and more effective to have Skripal die quietly (in
bed of a heat attack) than publicly.
So I'm inclined to think that the "operation" was designed to discredit Russia prior to
a planned false flag in Ghouta which was meant to forestall SAA defeat of the takfiri
salafist Jihadis that controlled Ghouta. The confusion and apparent hurried nature of the
"op" (as noted by Jen early on - one of my favorite commentators here) fits with this
theory.
Although the Skripal "op" was a success, the planned false flag didn't happen due to
SAA's quick advance (with Russian help). Instead, a sloppy false flag was done at the very
last minute in Douma just before the Jihadis gave up. This wouldn't save Ghouta so it was
possibly motivated by the the desire to solidify anti-Russian sentiment created by the
Skripal op.
Anyway, that's my best guess as to what really happened. Another clusterfuck in a long
line of clusterfucks.
On April 26th she made an interesting discovery? Really? What about this Russian guy who
nobody bothers to read ? He is a pharmacologist and a knock-out coder and wrote about
Fentanyl on April the 21st.
If we assume that the Skripals had been poisoned with fentanyl, we then have to explain how
a doctor was able to give the Skripals first aid at the scene where they collapsed without
being poisoned by fentanyl herself.
There have been reports from the US about police
officers and emergency first response workers coming into contact with even very minute
amounts of fentanyl and falling unconscious and needing first aid themselves. In one
unusual incident, a police officer had been dealing with several cases, one of which
involved coming in contact with someone who overdosed on fentanyl, and after several hours
he brushed off what looked like dust particles from his uniform with his bare hand. He
collapsed almost straight away and needed hospitalisation. The dust particles turned out to
be fentanyl particles.
The doctor who gave first aid to the Skripals reported no ill effects; she turned
herself in to Salisbury District Hospital after hearing that the couple had been poisoned
by Novichok but she was found to be clear of any poisoning agent.
@Jen16. Is it not possible the 'potency' of fentanyl is overstated in order to 'sell' the
anti-dote? Much like the anthrax 'dote' after 911. I mean most dealers I have met aren't
exactly stupid, that being said most aren't lab smart either, it would seem to me there
would be a whole lot of dead dealers if 'traces' in the wind can kill. Then there is the
anomaly of the Dr. and other's as you brought up in 16. Just a thought. FWIW.
This charade has not gone well for May. It has raised serious doubts that the UK can ever
be an ally of Trump. The Steele dirt dossier was an attack on Trump's family, presidential
campaign and cripples his first term with purile Russia hatred. May and the espionage
establishment are the enemy of the USA. After 250 years the British finally won the US war
of independence and have enslaved the majority of its media outlets.
I would say narrative . Keep it simple. Repeat. Anything that throws doubt or poses
questions is submerged .
Curious that they went to the effort of shutting down the British press and the
scrubbing from search results on skripal and pablo miller. The results for "pablo miller"
in google news UK, US and others throw up almost identical results, even though I recall
seeing his name via google news mentioned early on...
I bet it has nothing to do with the Brussels 'Right to be forgotten!' Directive being
enforced...
But, when I look for him in Quant (under 'All') ...it throws up some interesting links,
but nothing under the 'news'!:
Remember I wrote earlier that I was sure that I had seen Miller's name mentioned on
google news earlier on? Well Quant threw this paywalled Daily Telegraph article from 7th
March (loose the spaces):
Poisoned Russian spy Sergei Skripal was close to consultant https://www. telegraph .co.uk/news/ 2018/03/07/
poisoned-russian-spy-sergei-skripal-close-consultant-linked/
By Robert Mendick, Chief Reporter Hayley Dixon Patrick Sawer, Senior Reporter and Luke
Heighton
A security consultant who has worked for the company that compiled the controversial
dossier on Donald Trump was close to the Russian double agent poisoned last weekend, it has
been claimed.
The consultant, who The Telegraph is declining to identify, lived close to Col
Skripal and is understood to have known him for some time.
Col Skripal, who is in intensive care and fighting for his life after an
assassination attempt on Sunday, was recruited by MI6 when he worked for the British
embassy in Estonia, according to the FSB, the Russian intelligence agency....
#####
It must have somehow slipped through, though probably because the you can't see 'pablo
miller's name in the visible section.
There are some other juicy links from Qwant, including one from the Guardian in 2000
which names Miller:
...which is full of unverifiable claims, including that Putin was almost recruited to
the UK! It always makes me laugh when they bring up the 'apartment bombings were an FSB
false flag to attack Chechnya', but those same people don't even mention Basayev's invasion
of Dagestan on the 7th August 1999 in support of his fellow jihadis who dreamed of a
Caucasian Islamic Emirate in Russia's south, i.e. what was attempted in Syria these last
few years. Keeping Russia weak, something entirely in keeping with US & UK
interests...
I'm pleased to see Antwar.com's stalwart Justin Raimondo's piece come up too.
Its unclear if that happened in all (100%) cases though. Its possible that only in
certain percentage of such cases the rescuers were affected, and in some cases they were
not.
Thus, a full statistic with such cases will have to be provided in order to be able to
make conclusions about this.
The young man Jamie Paine who first found the Skripals on the park bench got some liquid on
his skin and apparently didn't suffer from it. From a March 8 BBC video --
". . .man was frothing from the mouth, I got a little bit on my skin, it wasn't too much, I
just brushed it off." That has never been mentioned in any recent news accounts that I've
seen. We do have other articles mentioning Paine.
Wow! Thanks for picking up and expanding on Murray's blog, b! The planet's populated with
far too many evil English speaking people that must be culled from the herd--and soon!
I did an online search and I don't see frothing at the mouth or jerking motions as a
symptom of fentanyl poisoning. Opiate OD results in dizziness, confusion, sleepiness and
loss of consciousness, low blood pressure, slowed heartbeat and slow breathing, etc.
Also, there is a well-known antidote for fentanyl poisoning: naloxone (aka narcan),
which could've been applied quickly. And, while I'm not an expert, I am not aware of people
being in a coma for weeks due from a fentanyl OD. AFAIK, within days they are dead or
recovered.
Several people have asked why Russia has not raised the issue at the UNSC. I have heard
them raise the issue at the UNSC, (I listened on Ruptly), and so did Lavrov and so did the
Russian ambassador to Britain and so did Maria Zakarova.
The reason no one knows this is because the Mighty Wurlitzer of propaganda is controlled by
the West, not Russia. If they don't report it, people think it didn't happen. But it did.
The Devon Live report is still in its original form. It links to the first Wiltshire
Police statement on the case and quotes from it. Curiously the link is dead. The first
official police statement on the Skripal case is "currently unavailable".
FYI: A copy of the web page has been preserved at the Wayback Machine
@DB. Froth is a good visual indicator, kinda like having a roach clip on your keychain when
u cross a border.
It tells a story......... I doubt the Skirpals got a dose of Gillette.
I am not sure I have seen this angle in the article or comments, fentanyl use would present
the same triage symptoms as BZ. Seems chasing a fentanyl trail gets further from existing
evidence.
D-Notices are one of those evils that, once initiated, are never undone.
It reminds me a bit of the fraudulent, gauzy "AUMF" used by the United States government
as if it were a blank check written by God to wage imperialistic wars kinetic
actions of aggression against anyone or anything it deems ripe for pillage or destruction--
at its sole pleasure and discretion, and for eternity.
But I digress. Just as a matter of logic, it would seem as if the authorities who
created and approved the "D-Notice" procedure presumed that the government would never
become so tyrannical, despotic, and unethical that it would issue such mega-censorship
diktats in bad faith-- i.e., to provide cover for illicit and illegal government
conduct.
As it is, the D-Notices' ostensible "national security" rationale has proven to be mere
camouflage for its true purpose: ensuring that malfeasant officials and operatives are
"secure" in their depraved work, and are protected from all inquiries that might expose
their heinous wrongdoing. Whoops!
______________________________________
That said, I also wonder about Russia's relative official deference, at least publicly,
to the UK authorities' sequestering of the Skripals.
Given the absence of any domestic countervailing force to the British government's
high-handedness-- the UK media consent-manufactories are complicit enough as it is, even
without being gagged by D-Notices-- it would seem that the Russians are the only party able
and willing to "raise a stink" beyond polite formal communications.
Perhaps the comparison is inapt, but compare OPCW representative Aleksandr Shulgin's
recent presentation at the OPCW, and his comments about the faked chemical attack in Syria.
They are directly, forcefully, and appropriately accusatory, and signal that the Russian
government is weary of politely submitting to the UK's abusive and bellicose policies and
conduct.
But there seems to be no corresponding inclination to press the UK authorities over the
reprehensible and unconscionable kidnapping, or worse, of Russian citizens. 'Tis a
puzzlement.
I do not know if fentanyl was found in OPCW sample, only British made BZ paralyzingly
agent.
The question is why? I think doctors in Salisbury who are trained with chemical nerve
agents due to proximity to Porton Downs lab instantly knew there was no military nerve
agent used there, would they also instantly know that it was Fentanyl since they faced
epidemic of opioid overdoses.
As far as theory how this happened. I see that Skripal was in it, in fact he prepared
and tested appropriate dose for him as his daughter used as pawn to lend credibility and
provide required Putin evil killing innocent narrative which would be absent if he just
killed or hurt rogue agent.
Skipral himself calibrated that false flag dose of BZ or Fenantyl to make sure no
permanent damage would be done to his daughter and then administered it himself to her and
himself in controlled manner in public place so help would be coming immediately while in
his car they could have possibly lie there for hours before being discovered.
In fact place where he lived Salisbury near Porton Downs was perfect for this since
there was no way that doctors would misdiagnose them as military nerve agent victims which
wrong treatment would possibly caused irreversible damage to victims as doctors would be
more aggressive fearing immediate death of patients and also were immune to propaganda of
Novichok crap since they were experts in this medical field as real and present danger,
threat of exposure of Porton Downs employees was always there.
After recovery is was Skripal, trusted by her as her father, himself as part of psych op
presented the narrative as Putin wanted to kill me and did not care that you happened to be
with me at time of attack. I am so sorry, shit lies. She was brainwashed offered lucrative financial arrangement in the west decided to stay,
thinking she could be killed upon returning to Russia.
I do not think it would be far fetched to concoct such a thing or similar by MI6 as such
stunts were done before like fake deaths or staged attacks but in this case the point was
to fool British unwitting participants that nerve agent attack happenced as later they did
later in Douma in amateurish way but still it worked as pretext to pre planed aggression on
Syria as in case of Skripals pre planed diplomatic retaliation against Russia before any
investigation was really commenced , such thing only perpetrators of false flag themselves
would do.
If Skripal was not on it why keep them alive as prime witnesses of conspiracy since I
could imagine as a father myself Skripal being furious of MI6 amounted to attemp to kill
his daughter and blame Putin one he learned that there was no Novichok crap or any military
nerve agent used.
In fact Fenantyl is deadly if inappropriately handled what just few days after Skripal
affair husband and wife overdosed on Fentanty in California and putting in critical
condition their mother in law trying to revive them in the bedroom, children that never
enter the room by looked through the Door who called 911 were also mildly exposed while a
police officer who entered the room end up in hospital himself.
Whole house was immediately quarantined and covered by tent until, special unit arrived
days later and only then police investigator entered premises.
What interesting that no emergency or medical personnel in hospital was hurt since they
knew well how to deal with Fenantyl epidemic.
We must remember that despite crazy rhetoric we are dealing with risky but rational
people.
Unless I am mistaken D Notices are issued by the Minister of Defence who, in this instance
is the exceedingly high flying Tory Gavin Williamson. Williamson's previous job was as Tory
Whip -- making sure that there were no rebellions among the MPs at a time when the May
government hangs by a thread and is taking the most extraordinary measures to ensure that
it does not lose a Paliamentary vote.
Williamson's claim to fame, and May's affection, was that he ran the Whip's office as a
blackmail operation-spying on MPs and building dossiers featuring their errors, crimes and
indiscretions. He was very good at this, May, though very unpopular, is spared the fate
that Thatcher suffered-a vote of non confidence by the Tory MPs (the 1922 Committee)-
because Williamson, a thug, has a blackmailer's 'hold' over most of his colleagues.
Using a D Notice in this matter is very unusual- quite how national security would suffer
if the truth were to become widely known is difficult to imagine.
But thanks to the Israeli Embassy's million pound campaign against Corbyn, and a hundred
Fifth Columnists on the Labour benches who prefer May to their party leader, and
Williamson's mafia Parliament isn't working as it ought to.
The fentanyl/BZ/Novichok angle seems eerily like the US/ZATO/MSM fallback position on the
BUK missile scam for MH17. By insisting MH17 was brought down by SOME BUK, the story line
never gets to the Ukie SU25s seen near MH17 on Russian commercial air-traffic tracking
radar.
The pub seafood dish spiked with shellfish toxin is more likely, as it would need to be
ingested with a time-lag after ingestion so mere contact on the bench would not be an
issue. Mossad is too clever to leave anything easily traceable, and will keep injecting
alternative story lines into the British "intel" system and the MSM.
It is obvious this was NOT a UK or even US/CIA/5-Eyes operation. The UK politicians and
intel community had no idea, were caught totally flatfooted, so went to "trusted sources
(Mossad) to find out what to say.
The ONLY way for the UK to manage this massive back-stab by the Rothschild-backed
Israeli Zionists is to just shut down all access to any real info, so some BS stories will
be thrown around to confuse the public and defuse any attempts by real investigators to
piece together the real events.
The fact Skripal was probably involved in the Steele dossier scam may indicate the true
source of the anti-Trump agenda. Why else would Mossad be moved to desperately silence
Skripal, and his daughter on the potential scenario she knew and had come to pick up
Skripal's dead-man's-switch documentation and take it back to Russia for safe-keeping.
Imagine how upset Trumpty Dumbdy would be if he found out the Steele scam was ultimately
set in motion by Nuttyyahoo, or rogue elements in the Israeli gov't/Mossad.
"The first official police statement on the Skripal case is "currently unavailable"."
FYI:
the first report is still available on the Way Back machine Web Archive here, and there are
5 "captures" but only 3 of those show the actual report (through March 2018), starting in
April the text is not available any more....
link
">https://www.wiltshire.police.uk/article/1736/Major-incident-after-two-people-suspected-of-being-exposed-to-unknown-substance-in-Salisbury">link
@33DB. Yes and no depending on where your personal belief fence may be. For myself not
proves...... just seems conspicuously coincidental. Mind you, MSM never played it up to my
knowledge... in either case so..... either way froth no froth all we really know is two
family members from Russia spent time in a London hospital and the UK skreamed Russia did
it way before any reasonable person could be exected to believe it, given the track record,
after that who knows really.
I was curious about the relationship between Trump and the Rothschilds, and why they might
go to such lengths to get Mossad to go 100% rogue and pull off the Skripal attack.
A simple Dog Pile meta-search (Google will probably not give the same results for
obvious reasons) found a story in wide blog circulation from Oct 2016 which said Trump had
recently paid off his debt to the Rothschilds (probably through Goldman Sachs or the like).
The interesting part is the article claims Trump had ALL Rothschilds banned from his Mar a
Lago resort, the reputed quote from the Tweeter in Chief was "I grabbed Jacob (Rothschild)
by the scruff of the neck and kicked him out the back door of Palm Beach of Florida
society". Way to make enemies and influence friends there Donny-boy. The same article
quotes a Trump tweet, "They do not own the world, and they do not have carte blanch to do
whatever they want. If we do not challenge them there will be other issues. We will not be
bullied by them!" http://harddawn.com/trump-banned-rothschilds/
Except for the Trump tweets, the rest of the election-run-up article is full of Trumpty
Dumbdy hopium which has not panned out.
In an Infowars article: "The Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU), a company under the wing
of The Economist, owned by the Rothschild banking family of England, has declared Donald
Trump a "global risk"
Can't see the Economist getting too far off-narrative with the Rothschild cabal, so this
rings true.
So while Infowars and Hard Dawn are not anyone's first choice as sources, they are
quoting Trump himself and a Rothschild media/propaganda organ.
Circle closed, Mossad did it. The UK MI6/5 and politicians didn't know what was
happening until after Israeli/Mossad "trusted sources" gave May and Johnson the script to
feed the MSM .
The potential existence of Skripal's dead-man's-switch documentation may have extended well
beyond the Steele scam, which would explain the urgency of the deed and why the Skripals
are being held incommunicado. The search of the Skripal residence was to find that
documentation, easy once the UK cordoned it off due to potential "chemical contamination".
Just to complicate the matter even more, I have found UK tabloid news reports online dated
7 - 8 March 2018 of a female office worker (who worked in the building next to the Zizzi's
Restaurant franchise in Salisbury) who was taken to Salisbury District Hospital by
paramedics. Links to the reports below:
The reports may not amount to much. The woman could have had a fainting reaction to
something not related to the Skripal poisoning incident.
As of today (29 April 2018) the pizza restaurant remains closed. The uniforms of the
staff who worked there on the Sunday when the Skripals ate at the restaurant were seized
and burned by the authorities.
Apparently traces of a nerve gas agent were said to have been found at the restaurant,
in particular on and around the table where the Skripals ate their lunch (and which has
since been incinerated).
Any word from the owner of the restaurant or workers laid off? Who pays to shut all them
and their families up?
@ A P with the Trump/Rothschild conflict exposure......thanks
If a sane world made the tools of finance public utilities then these social retards
would not have the means to plays these games on the backs of the rest of us.
It is obvious that Yulia Skripal's and her brother's ability to travel freely between
both sides and keep their childhood friends in the secret service community would have cost
their father dearly. He is described as a family man, and could easily be blackmailed with his family.
Fentanyl OD would have very similar symptoms to BZ exposure. There is no doubt in my mind
that the Skripals were exposed to BZ (as confirmed by Swiss lab) and Fentanyl was the
obvious suspect for the medical staff who would not have had full toxicology report by the
time initial report was made.
Seems like UK just started a propaganda campaing against Corbyn sigh, UK Media Claims 'Russian Bots' Tried to Influence Election to Support Corbyn
https://sptnkne.ws/hwDC
51 OPCW says the BZ was in the control samples not the original. All you need to cheat would be one person to switch Novichok and original samples in the
Dutch lab where the samples were split.
A control sample that gives the same exact symptoms as the victims displayed. How
convenient! Of all the millions of organic chemicals they could have chosen for a control
sample........ I'll leave you with that thought.
I'm confused about dropping the Novichok hypothesis.
The explanation of BZ poisoning has been dropped, fine. But what about the presence of
A234? It's not because the initial report mentioned Fentanyl poisoning that this is
correct. Fentanyl is a problem the doctors are familiar with as a 'live' social problem and
it's easy to explain a new case with Fentanyl while in fact it's something else. So it is
possible that afterwards the doctors changed their minds and saw no reason not to comply
with pressure to correct the statement. I don't know if the symptoms the doctors were
presented with were clear enough to exclude confusion.
Gareth Porter has an article about a batch of A234 which has been around since the
nineties, probably in hands of Russian mafia, and which by now has been deteriorated and
would have much less predictable effects when used.
There is a mention of the purity of the traces of A234. There are two interpretations of
that: one is that it is fresh and contains little contaminations. Another is that it has in
fact deteriorated very much but from the proportions of the components it is clear that it
was once a pure product.
I would not exclude the possibility that a very old batch of A234 was used and that the
British were convinced it was from russian origin and intended to take full advantage of
this. It could be that they knew it had russian origin because they had been involved in
acquiring the sample , or it was just a good guess, but the opportunistic use of the
pretext is the same.
Here is some information from Pablo Miller: "Little was known about Miller's life outside
his public clashes with the FSB. He served in the British Army as a member of the Royal
Tank Regiment and the Royal Green Jackets before he joined the Foreign and Commonwealth
Office in 1990. A veterans site for the Royal Tank Regiment shows a 1984 photograph of a
Lt. Pablo Miller patrolling the Green Line in Cyprus, where Miller's LinkedIn profile
indicates he served.
Diplomatic lists show Miller's first foreign posts after joining the FCO were in
Nigeria, first in Abuja and later Lagos beginning in 1992 before he took a job as first
secretary at the British embassy in Estonia in September 1997. He also served as a
counsellor at the British embassy in Warsaw, Poland from 2010 through 2013." (....) In
2000, the FSB identified Miller as the "head of British intelligence in Tallinn," Estonia
and accused him of recruiting an FSB officer later identified as Valery Ojamae." (Source:
Daily Beast)
https://www.thedailybeast.com/pablo-miller-the-mystery-man-who-recruited-putins-poisoned-spy?source=facebook&via=mobile
Why does this operation seem to have the malodorous stench of Berezovsky's spectre
lingering in the background. While Berezovsky himself may be dead, it is safe to assume
that remnants of his network are still around. If indeed the Skripals were poisoned, it
could very well have been orchestrated by a rogue, non-state actor with embarrassing ties
to MI6. In some ways it is reminiscent of the bungled Litvinenko operation (which the
British gov't also covered up).
Both Pablo Miller and Christopher Steele were known to be associated with Berezovsky.
Steele, as his Mi6 handler, would probably have intimate knowledge of Berezovsky's
connections and may well have used them as 'Russian sourced' material for his infamous
Steele dossier. So Skripal, who consulted on the Steele dossier, is tied to both Miller and
Steele who in turn are connected to remnants of Berezovsky's network. The 'suiciding' of
Berezovsky (unless sanctioned by Mi6) suggests at least one group of players within this
network who have their own agenda.
Perhaps you would be considerate enough not to degrade the quality of MOA by posting
'information' sourced from obvious nutjobs such as your sourcing for ' Trump and the
Rothschilds'. To quote a blog, which includes such gems as "FACT CHECK! 69 Million Illegal
Alien Extraterrestrials Voted for Hillary: Mostly True", seems to indicate you are probably
more suited to be commenting over there rather than on MOA.
That idea is probably more plausible than the food poisoning idea: the poison need not
actually have been a nerve gas agent as long as it mimics the symptoms of shellfish
poisoning. The only issue is, who would have put the poison into the food? If the staff had
done it, someone would have noticed because there were no walls or other barriers between
the kitchen and the dining area. One would also expect other diners to have had food
poisoning although it's possible the Skripals were the only diners that day to have eaten
seafood risotto. The second possibility is that someone was with the Skripals while they
were having lunch and managed to pop something into their lunch while they were not
looking.
Of course we would discount other alternatives: that the Skripals were poisoned at The
Mill pub or on the park bench.
V @ 45: Why would we be surprised if Treason'n'Mayhem doesn't flinch if she's been busted
for lying? She's had plenty of practice, another episode of lying is just part of the
regular routine!
Fwiw. DS Nick Bailey. I tend to believe that he was 'sickened,' was not a made-up
character / a real person playing a hoaxy part / and so on.
1 He existed at the Wiltshire Police, enough on the net about him. At one point (2017)
he was stationed very close to the 'park bench' spot. The photo seen everywhere is of an
award ceremony for him for work leading to the arrest of a serial rapist. (2016) Imho his
wife and children exist (no post about that.)
2 How, from where, etc. he arrived at the Skripal collapse park-bench on 4 March (if he
did) is not mentioned in any news article. Expressions used: rushed / speeded / to help --
after coming to the aid of -- first cop on the scene -- after responding to the attack --
as the first response to the attack -- No other info. offered.
Was he on duty? Where was he? How did he arrive? What did he do? How did he get to the
hospital? One article mentions TWO policemen as first responders, as one would expect. Who
was the other one (if 1 = N. B.)? Almost no info about N.B. was given out. At some later
point some articles suggested that he was not poisoned at the scene, or thru contact with
the Skripals, but because he was the first plod to enter the Skripal house. (Imho this last
story was pure speculation / made up, a sort of offshoot of the poisoned knob narrative.
Whatever, if any, poisoning took place, was not at the house, but at the very earliest at
the Zizzi restaurant.)
3 Couldn't find any 'witness' descriptions (e.g. doc who first dealt with Yulia) of the
arrival of the police. Exceedingly strange. Perhaps some exist but I missed them..? One
would expect: When DS Bailey and Plodue rushing to the scene of the deathly murderous
attack realised some nerve agent was suspected a high alert priority emergency order was
immediately called out for a helicopter .. Nothing like that. It is as if all the
'bystander witnesses' simply vanished at some point. I also looked for cell photos of the
park-bench scene and only found ONE possible. Scroll down to pic of Sergei:
4 I found NO news about N.B. beyond the read-out declaration by police, and the
annoucement that he left hosp. on 22 March. The few words available (visit of top plod to
N. B. in hosp and declaration) "very anxious" - "completely surreal" - "life never the same
again" - "find a new normal" seem to fit with..heh.. a lot of stuff incl. BZ, Fentanyl, and
LSD, but not a deadly nerve agent. Heh, not worth much, just a few words. (see Don Bacon as
well.)
All this, imho, signals a clumsy cover-up, gag orders, etc. Which points to unexpected
results, plots gone wrong, clumsy exploitation of events, etc. No way a planned false flag
type conspiracy. (I'm not keen on the links between Skripal and the Steele
dossier.)
@31. ı think the issue we are wondering most about is the abduction of Yulia Skripal.
We know they have addressed the poisoning issue at the UNSC, but wonder about Russia
pressing for the illegal prevention of a Russian citizen accessing her government. There is
zero evidence provided by the British government which suggests Yulia does not want
contact, except the British governments' assertion to that effect. The word of the
abductors is worthless.
your dealing with ............criminals........... who are in charge of top level large
organizations/departments called your government. criminals. the same for terrorists, which
pre-9/11 was just criminals. your dealing with criminals/terrorist who have a hand in their
media to be able to make you think in a hundred directions. which is not necessary.
First. How could UK and US not know about some mossad operation and was caught flat footed?
There responses were quick enough to insinuate that russia did it again in syria not long
after.
Second. How come skripal and his daughter haven't just come out for answers unless they
were in on it? (how they were in, is not really important now, it is obvious, unless i hear
a story about a russian immigrant jumping out of a window, I find her flying to UK was her
one way trip now unless she proves otherwise)
Last. the fact the sample did contain a bit of everything suggests, their intention was to
"hide". remember i said the cctv cameras would have been reviewed by now easily.
the hit on n.korea's brother? there was not really an intention to hide by their
governance.
russia is doing good to ignore such banter, because it is really below the level of even
petty criminals who do things out of necessity as compared to idiots who have power but
still fk it all up. not that putin is not capable of this and probably has so before, but
these actions or inactions speak about someone who is experienced.
On a side note. I viewed US campaign commercials and I saw the words two faced being used
instead of highlighting what they had done or will do....... it has been a nice ride. i
missed the old us but i won't regret her now. =(
"UPDATE: Stupidly I had forgotten this vital confirmation from Channel 4 News (serial
rebel Alex Thomson) of the D Notice in place on mention of Pablo Miller.
(Alex Thomson tweeted on March 12 that a D notice, to protect Skripal's handler,living
nearby, had been imposed in the previous week) https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/
"Back then I did not realise what I now know, that the person being protected was Pablo
Miller, colleague in both MI6 then Orbis Intelligence of Christopher Steele, author of the
fabrications of the Trump/Russia golden shower dossier. That the government's very first
act on the poisoning was to ban all media mention of Pablo Miller makes it extremely
probable that this whole incident is related to the Trump dossier and that Skripal had
worked on it, as I immediately suspected. The most probable cause is that Skripal –
who you should remember had traded the names of Russian agents to Britain for cash –
had worked on the dossier with Miller but was threatening to expose its lies for cash."
A super strong opioid and therefore OD will involve loss, of consciousness, slowed
breathing, pin point pupils and death.
Fentanyl is usually administered via a transdermal patch i.e. across the skin but over an
extended time period, although the junkies I worked with in Sydney had worked out how to
extract the good stuff from the patch in an injectable form. Bang into your arm (or neck if
you're hardcore).
Overdose is EASILY reversed by Narcan /naloxone injected IM. Kicks every opioid molecule
off associated receptors.
I believe an aerosol form was used by Russian special forces in Moscow theatre siege. It
incapacitated terrorists and hostages and unfortunately coused death by positional
asphyxiation to a hundred or so hostages.
I think the idea about Yulia visiting to take Sergei's dead-man-switch back to Russia is
interesting. Reminded me of the report
that they both had turned off their cell phones for four hours between the visit to the
cemetery in the morning and showing up in city center in the early afternoon. Maybe they
went for the documents Sergei had stored in a secret location and had them with them when
they were taken out in the park.
61) actually they do. This here is the OPCW publication on "on-site and off-site
analysis"
They use "scheduled chemicals" for spiking controls which means chemicals that are on
their chemical weapons list.
Spiked samples at OPCW lab would show those control chemicals in a virgin state, and
that's exactly what happened. Problem is, the evidence was exactly the opposite of what
OPCW claimed. Swiss report showed Novichok was in a virgin state and pure form
(definitely lethal to victims, if it was in their blood), that's an evidence IT WAS THE
SPIKE, not BZ.
According to the OPCW lab report the Russians got hold of, it sounded as though remnant
traces of BZ where found plus a A-234 spike (in virgin state). But then medical journal has
Fentanyl.
The Skripals knocked out with Fentanyl, OPOCW blood samples first spiked by MI6 with
A-234 and then spiked by OPCW with a control substance?
Or Skripals knocked out with fast acting Fentanyl, then dosed with BZ, perhaps a day or two
later?
@50 "Family man" Scripal...hmmm...they said that his wife and son are dead (for how
long?)...Then they said that his daughter has been paid 200.000 in to her account as a
money he received from the house sold after his divorce (with second wife that noone even
mentioned or ...his dead wife? I assume one can not divorce his dead wife...) just before
poisoning...
It is possible that the Skripal case and the White Helmets Damascus chemical weapons
likely false flag was an attempt of parts of the British (French) and US deep state to
force Trump to remain in Syria.
It looks like there has been a rift between military and intelligence services.
