Russia compared the British government to Inspector LeStrade, a "hapless" investigator from Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes stories, as it denied responsibility for the poisoning of Sergei Skripal.
The bizarre comments were made by Vasily Nebenzya, the Russian permanent representative to the UN, who also suggested the UK or others could have tried to kill Mr Skripal in act of "black PR" designed to "tarnish Russia".
He also suggested that the British public were "not well educated" and being "influenced" by their government.
In a lengthy address to the UN Security Council Mr Nebenzya said: "Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, the British classic, famed in his country and very popular in Russia, has a hapless character, Inspector LeStrade from Scotland Yard.
"He doesn't have the methods of deduction, he is not particularly smart. His role is to be the background for the extraordinary deductive powers of Sherlock Holmes.
Russian Ambassador to the United Nations Vassily Nebenzia looks at a mobile device during an urgent meeting called by Britain to the United Nations Security Council
Russian Ambassador to the United Nations Vassily Nebenzia looks at a mobile device during an urgent meeting called by Britain to the United Nations Security Council CREDIT: REUTERS/SHANNON STAPLETON
"LeStrade latches on to something that is on the surface of a crime and is in a hurry to prove banal conclusions only to be overturned by Sherlock Holmes, who always finds what is behind the crime and what is the motive for it.
"I'm not saying people working at Scotland Yard today are not professional, God guard me from that, but I do think we could all benefit from having a Sherlock Holmes with us today."
He added: "The collective Inspector LeStrades today are high level members of the UK government who are coming up with egregious, superficial and unsupported accusations which have far reaching consequences."
Mr Nebenzya went on: "Is this incident something that benefits Russia on the eve of presidential elections and the world football championships? I can think of a number of countries who would benefit a great deal from this incident and blaming Russia for it."
He said Mr Skripal had no longer been any threat to Russia.
"But he is a perfect victim which could justify any unthinkable lie, any kind of dirt or black PR tarnishing Russia," he said.
"We are witnessing that the authorities of the UK are constantly trying to tarnish Russia, stooping to any low.
He said: "A hysterical atmosphere is being created by London and they are being completely non-transparent in this. They are trying to influence the public which is very easy to influence and not well educated."
Mr Nebenzya accused the UK of "using the language of the 19th Century and colonialism".
He added: "The ultimatum from London is something we can't pay attention to and we consider it null and void. We have nothing to fear, we have nothing to hide.
"We do not speak the language of ultimatums. We will not allow anyone to speak to us in that language, but we are polite."
On Mrs May's letter he said it contained "completely irresponsible statements," adding: "It's difficult for me even to comment using diplomatic vocabulary. It contains threats to a sovereign nation. Russia had nothing to do with this incident."
- Russia warns relations with Britain are more dangerous than during Cold War
The Russian double agent poisoned along with his daughter in Salisbury, England last weekend is linked to former British Spy Christopher Steele, reports The Telegraph.
Col Sergei Skripal - who is currently in intensive care after he and his daughter Yulia were poisoned with a suspected nerve agent - was recruited by MI6 while working at the British embassy in Estonia, according to Russian intelligence services.
When Russia discovered that Skripal had allegedly been paid $100,000 by MI6 to expose undercover Russian intelligence agents in 2006 - the same year Russian double-agent Alexander Litvinenko was poisoned, he was sentenced to 13 years in prison. In 2010, however, Skripal was one of four prisoners released by Moscow in exchange for 10 US spies - after which he moved to the UK and befriended an employee of Christopher Steele.
The Telegraph understands that Col Skripal moved to Salisbury in 2010 in a spy swap and became close to a security consultant employed by Christopher Steele, who compiled the Trump dossier. -Telegraph
A recently deleted LinkedIn account revealed that the British security consultant is based in Salisbury, and his employer is Orbis Business Intelligence - Steele's firm. Steele notoriously assembled a series of memos containing anti-Trump opposition research to Fusion GPS, the first seventeen of which were compiled into the unverified "Trump-Russia" dossier which the FBI relied on to obtain a spy warrant against a Trump campaign associate.
21 people were hospitalized last week when Yulia Skripal reportedly opened a "gift from friends" as they ate in a restaurant. UK counterterrorism police and domestic security agency MI5 are investigating why the Russian double-agent was targeted seven years after his release from a Russian penal colony. Of note, Skripal's son, Alexander, died last year at the age of 43.
Was Skripal still working as a double agent?
If, as The Telegraph posits, Skripal assisted Steele in compiling the dossier - which notably relies on senior Russian officials, despite Steele never having traveled to Moscow - according to testimony by Glenn Simpson of Fusion GPS, it could explain the motive behind the assassination attempt in Salisbury town centre.
Valery Morozov, a former construction magnate who fled Russia after revealing corruption, claimed last night that Col Skripal, 66, was still working, and remained in regular contact with military intelligence officers at the Russian embassy. That would raise the possibility that he was still feeding intelligence to people in this country.
Mr Morozov said that, as a result, he had decided to steer clear of Col Skripal for his own safety. He told Channel 4 News: “If you have a military intelligence officer working in the Russian diplomatic service, living after retirement in the UK, working in cyber-security and every month going to the embassy to meet military intelligence officers – for me, being a political refugee, it is either a certain danger or, frankly speaking, I thought that this contact might not be very good for me because it can bring some questions from British officials.” -Telegraph
Authorities are trying to piece together the movements of both Sergei and Yulia Skripal, who lives in Moscow but was due for a visit - believed to mark the birthday of Skripal's deceased son.
Skripal had reportedly asked his housekeeper to clean his daughter's room on Monday, Feb. 26 in advance of her visit. Her travel plan may have activated the assassination attempt.
Security services now suspect that when Miss Skripal flew out of Moscow, her departure triggered a “red flag” with a hit squad that was being dispatched to assassinate Col Skripal. It is thought that Miss Skripal was being targeted along with her father in a clear message that “traitors” are not tolerated by the Kremlin.
It is not clear when Miss Skripal landed in the UK, but sources suggest the Russian team sent to kill her father was probably a day behind her. -Telegraph
While Russian media has warned "traitors" after Skripal's poisoning, British lawmakers have suggested Moscow will have committed a "brazen act of war" against Britain if Russia is found to be behind the attack.
British intelligence suspect that the attempted assassination would have been made earlier, but weather conditions from a massive snowstorm dubbed the "Beast from the East" delayed the hit squad.
The snow may have deterred father and daughter from venturing out, while it also would have put in doubt the assassination squad’s likely escape from the UK. With flights cancelled and delayed at Heathrow, they risked arrest if they were stuck in the UK.
By Sunday afternoon – and with Miss Skripal on the brink of returning to Moscow – the assassination squad had little room for manoeuvre and were forced into action in broad daylight in the middle of a busy shopping precinct. -Telegraph
“It now looks as though they got desperate by Sunday afternoon and decided to strike,” reported a confidential source. _________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 18335 Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
Posted: Fri Mar 16, 2018 9:09 pm Post subject:
Ambassadors generally beat about the bush.
But this is not beating about the bush.
Whitehall_Bin_Men wrote:
The Russian Ambassador to the UK is giving an interview now to RT's Anastasia Churkina about the chemical-poisoning of a former Russian spy allegations being made by PM Theresa May and the British government against Russia and President Putin.
The Main Points:
It is obvious the charges by the UK against Russia about this "poisoning" incident are false, and expose a deeper strategy of deceit to obtain political objectives. the British government is refusing to answer any questions, provide any material, invite international scientific inspections, and have tried to emotionally hyperventilate this fake story into a nightmare reality. Why? The Globalist UK-EU-US-SOROS types are desperate to ignite a war in order to hide in its flames. The "psychological operation" seems to be attempting to achieve the following objectives:
1) the political-career stabilization of the establishment Prime Minister Theresa May, who has been slipping into madness and oblivion since BREXIT;
2) the demonization of Russia as an easy enemy that distracts the public away from the slow destruction of civil liberties and rights and freedoms by the rising police state;
3) the cultivation and preparation of the public mind to be receptive to increased domination and control by the government;
4) the expansion of the "chemical weapon" narrative as a potential threat against "New York", as claimed by US UN Rep Nikki Haley, as well as other UK-US-NATO members;
5) the potential "suspension" of the BREXIT and European Union break-up using this incident as a "call to reverse course and re-integrate the European Union with Britain and France as a matter of "continental security against Russia";
6) the manipulation of American President Donald Trump to buy in and partner in the lie, and participate in the political war as a pre-text for the military one brewing;
7) justify increased military movement of weapons into Ukraine, Syria, and Yemen to try and counter Russia-Iran's success in the Syrian war against Wahhabi-Saudi-Israeli terrorists pushing ISIS/AL NUSRA to try and destabilize Syrian President Bashar Assad;
8) The blow back will be a separation of the thinking people from the mindless idiots in society, and an increase in social distrust and hostility towards the politicians and media and government institutions fomenting instability and the destruction of personal civil liberty through manufactured national hysteria. Essentially they've cried wolf far too many times to be given any respect by intelligent, honest citizens.
Joined: 13 Sep 2006 Posts: 2568 Location: One breath from Glory
Posted: Fri Mar 16, 2018 10:33 pm Post subject:
rumours circulating in some media that the nerve agent was in the daughters suitcase......planted of course !!!
now we have a story of it possibly being planted in the air vents or on door handles of Skripals car
and a story of a car being taken away from a military establishment because it might have parked next to SKripals in Sainsbury.
he fake news mongers being busy _________________ JO911B.
"for we wrestle not against flesh and blood but against principalities, against powers, against rulers of the darkness of this world, against wicked spirits in high places " Eph.6 v 12
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3l9Gk38pvGc _________________ JO911B.
"for we wrestle not against flesh and blood but against principalities, against powers, against rulers of the darkness of this world, against wicked spirits in high places " Eph.6 v 12
LONDON (Reuters) - The military-grade nerve toxin that poisoned former Russian agent Sergei Skripal was planted in his daughter’s suitcase before she left Moscow, The Telegraph newspaper reported, citing unidentified sources.
FILE PHOTO: Police officers stand behind a cordon placed around a payment machine covered by a tent in a supermarket car park near to where former Russian intelligence agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia were found poisoned in Salisbury, Britain, March 13, 2018. REUTERS/Henry Nicholls
SPONSORED
Skripal, 66, and his daughter Yulia, 33, were found slumped unconscious on a bench outside a shopping center in the genteel southern English city of Salisbury on March 4. They have been in a critical condition in hospital ever since.
Yulia Skripal flew to London from Russia on March 3, according to counter-terrorism police.
British investigators are working on the theory that the toxin was impregnated in an item of clothing or cosmetics or in a gift that was opened in Skripal’s house in Salisbury, the Telegraph said, citing the unidentified sources.
Britain has said the toxin, which also poisoned a British police officer who attended the scene, was Novichok, a lethal nerve agent first developed by the Soviet military.
After the first known offensive use of such a weapon on European soil since World War Two, Britain has pinned the blame on Moscow and given 23 Russians who it said were spies working under diplomatic cover at the London embassy a week to leave.
Britain, the United States, Germany and France jointly called on Russia on Thursday to explain how the toxin came to be used on British soil. Russia has denied any involvement and has accused London of whipping up anti-Russian hysteria.
Reporting by Guy Faulconbridge; Editing by Andrew Heavens
Our Standards:The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles. _________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 18335 Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
Posted: Sat Mar 17, 2018 9:19 pm Post subject:
by email wrote:
THIS IS A NATIONAL APPEAL TO ALL WORLD LEADERS AND NEWS OUTLETS (EXCLUDING THE BBC)
This has the same odour about it as Saddam’s non-existent weapons of mass destruction – a total lie and a hoax.
Evil bitch “Prime Minister” Theresa May doesn’t give a * about the people of Salisbury or anybody else – all she cares about is her place in the luxury nuclear bunker while the rest of us roast.
Dr Julia Spivack BSc(Hons), DO, MSCC, MICO, Dip Hom, MSc(Ayur), BSc(Hons)(Hom)
Natural Medicine Physician
www.juliaspivack.co.uk
Who's behind this policy to escalate tensions with Russia
Chatham House. The Royal Institute for International Affairs in St James, just off Piccadilly. Cecil Rhodes' biggest corporate funded foreign policy think tank in Britain...
Quote:
The Skripal Attack Is a Test for the UK
12 March 2018
Moscow wants to see if the government will be able to muster a strong response to assassination attempts on British soil.
John Lough
Associate Fellow, Russia and Eurasia Programme
James Sherr
Associate Fellow, Russia and Eurasia Programme
https://www.chathamhouse.org/expert/comment/skripal-attack-test-uk
There can be little doubt that the Russian government is behind the attempted assassination of double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter. While there were the typical official denials, the Russian state has ways of communicating its innocence to foreign governments. In this case, it has not done so.
The use of a nerve agent fits a pattern established by the murder of Alexander Litvinenko with polonium in 2006. This was not a McMafia-style operation commissioned by ‘rogue elements’. If they were to blame, Moscow would be even more alarmed than London. Since the chaos of the 1990s, Putin has restored the state’s traditional prerogatives in foreign covert operations, as well as the president’s prerogatives within it. This was graphically demonstrated in Crimea in early 2014 with the deployment of ‘little green men’.
But what could be the motive? The Russians think strategically and will have planned this operation carefully in terms of both its execution and impact. What it says to Russians living in the UK or those thinking of leaving the country is: disloyalty is always punishable, you will never be free of us and you will never be safe, wherever you live. Singling out the reclusive 66-year old Skripal, eight years after he came to the UK and had run out of secrets to tell, simply underlines the point: you do not have to be an arch enemy of the Putin system to be in potential danger, and your family may also be a target.
What it says to the British government is: we believe you are weak, and we have no respect for you.
In recent years, successive British governments have repeatedly communicated weakness to Russia without any intention of doing so.
First, even before the suspicious ‘suicide’ of dissident oligarch Boris Berezovsky in 2013, the UK authorities had been singularly lacklustre in prosecuting a macabre string of suspect deaths of Russian exiles on British soil. Until 2014, the government resisted a public inquiry into the death of Alexander Litvinenko, signalling that it was disinclined to name and shame Russia for fear of harming attempts to rebuild ties.
Second, Russia viewed the Strategic Defence and Security Review (SDSR) of 2010 as an abdication of Britain’s great power role. The winding down of a fair portion of the UK’s maritime reconnaissance and warfare capability in northern waters was regarded with incredulity. The SDSR’s 2015 successor has repaired much of the damage to UK defence capacities, but this scarcely has registered in Moscow.
Third, David Cameron’s government chose to absent itself from the Russia–Ukraine ‘Minsk process’, leaving the running to Paris and Berlin. Given the UK’s prominent role in securing the rights and assurances that underpinned Ukraine’s independence and territorial integrity (including its signature on the 1994 Budapest Memorandum), London effectively communicated to Moscow that Ukraine had become a lesser priority and that Britain had better things to do. Although the UK’s vigorous defence advisory effort has earned plaudits in Kyiv, Russia no longer considers Britain to be a serious player in Ukraine.
Fourth, there is Brexit, which many of its supporters believe will strengthen Britain’s global influence. Whatever the merits of that claim, the Russians view Brexit as a case of the UK cutting off its nose to spite its face. From the earliest days of the Cold War, the USSR and its Russian successor viewed Britain as Washington’s number one proxy in Europe. From Moscow’s perspective, the UK’s position at the EU top table enhanced US and British influence simultaneously. That advantage has been thrown away.
For these reasons, the Skripal affair is not only a reflection of perceived weakness. It is also a test. If the UK chooses to act toughly, will its allies support it or simply send their best wishes? This latest example of Russian ‘reconnaissance by combat’ puts Britain into a bind.
Fortunately, whatever the allied response, the UK is the repository of a national asset of very high value to Russia: the City of London. For many years, it has effectively allowed key Russian stakeholders to use the services of the City – in particular, the London Stock Exchange, as well as the high-end property market – for purposes legitimate, illegitimate and even illegal.
It is time to transform them from a source of advantage to Russia to a strategic asset for the UK. Doing so will require proper analysis, coordination (including the security services, the Treasury and the Serious Fraud Office) and dedicated resources. Asset freezes, money laundering investigations and selective cancellation of visas for individuals and their families who are either part of the regime or support it will cause real pain in Moscow. Impulsive and symbolic measures will not do the same.
Leon Trotsky once said, ‘You might not be interested in war, but war is interested in you.’ Today’s Russian leadership, political and military, believes it is at war with the West. It is not a war dominated by artillery and tanks, but by finance and social media, with huge opportunities for covert action from disinformation to assassination. As Russia’s Ministry of Defence stated in 2011, to prevail in these new conditions requires ‘destabilizing the society and state, and forcing the state to make decisions in the interests of the opposing party.’ That is the test the UK faces.
How Britain Can Respond to the Skripal Attack
12 March 2018
Nigel Gould-Davies and James Nixey outline the principles that should guide the UK’s actions following the attempted assassination.
Dr Nigel Gould-Davies
Associate Fellow, Russia and Eurasia Programme
Head, Russia and Eurasia Programme
https://www.chathamhouse.org/expert/comment/how-britain-can-respond-sk ripal-attack
If confirmed, the attack on double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter would be the second known Russian state-sponsored murder in the UK, following the murder of Alexander Litvinenko in 2006. Other suspicious cases are now being reopened.
What principles should guide an effective response?
Effective measures are more than symbolic. They impose costs that punish unacceptable actions and deter future ones. The UK’s response to Litvinenko’s death – expelling four diplomats, imposing visa restrictions for officials, and suspending security service liaison – was clearly not sufficient enough to deter the latest attack. Symbols matter, but only if they credibly convey intentions about the consequences of further action.
Measures should be costly in smart ways, targeted at those who bear responsibility for Russian policy or directly benefit from them. Where possible, they should limit disruption to relationships that support other UK goals, such as long-term engagement with ordinary Russians. An appropriately hard line towards the Russian state is emphatically not Russophobic.
Any significant measures will incur, as well as impose, costs. This is inevitable, since they will disrupt existing, mutually-beneficial arrangements. But special pleading should not trump the broader national interest. An effective response is never a free lunch.
What do these principles imply for possible responses to the attempted murder of the Skripals?
Diplomatic sanctions. Expelling known Russian intelligence operatives under diplomatic, or other, cover will reduce Russia’s ability to mount future operations of this kind. But a more general cut in Russian embassy staff, or expulsion of the ambassador, would be merely symbolic, serve no purpose and invite a tit-for-tat response.
World Cup boycott. This is merely symbolic, domestically unpopular and unlikely to be emulated by others. At most, it would be a temporary embarrassment for Russia with no lasting effects. A protocol response is appropriate: palace and senior ministers should not attend key World Cup events. But there is little gain, and no long-term cost, in not sending the England team.
Dealing with fake news outlets. In a report published a year before the Salisbury attack, the House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee noted that ‘the rise of fake news in the UK is a real concern…The UK regulator should continue to take action against examples of outright falsehoods in Russian state-sponsored broadcasting.’
The spread of fake news – especially from RT and Sputnik, and through social media – benefits no one in the UK and has no UK counterpart in Russia. While regulators punish specific infractions, robust action has been inhibited by the belief that the ‘best defence against disinformation is a robust, free, wide, and varied media landscape’. This admirable principle is no longer adequate in meeting the security challenge Russia poses.
Effective financial sanctions. Britain has long been the most important centre for Kremlin-connected oligarchs seeking to legitimate their wealth. This benefits key figures and networks that support, are complicit in or help implement Russian policy.
Western sanctions have not impaired Russia's enjoyment of UK financial and legal services. Last November, oligarch and close Putin confidant Oleg Deripaska listed shares of his company EN+ in London. Most of the capital raised was used to repay a loan to VTB, a Russian state bank subject to Western financial sanctions.
Britain should now apply current financial regulations robustly and effectively. These include newly-strengthened civil asset recovery powers, Unexplained Wealth Orders, money-laundering investigations and ‘know your customer’ rules in banking and property.
What additional steps should the UK take?
The UK government should widen its range of sanctioning powers. One obvious way is to pass a version of the Magnitsky Act. First adopted by the United States, this imposes asset freezes and travel bans on figures complicit in human rights abuses and large-scale corruption. Given the scale of Russian assets in the UK, this would be a potent symbolic and substantive measure.
Britain could also conduct an exercise similar to that mandated by Articles 241–242 of the US Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act, passed overwhelmingly by the US Congress last year. These require the implications of sanctioning key Kremlin-connected figures, and of expanding financial sanctions on Russia, to be set out. Like the Magnitsky Act, it is deeply unwelcome to the Russian authorities and would signal Britain’s resolve to respond further if necessary.
The power of Russian cyber intelligence-gathering and cyber interference to disrupt Western systems have been evident for some time. The recent release of Russian malware to knock out Ukrainian systems affected UK organizations too. Britain should be ready to respond robustly if this recurs.
Britain must coordinate its response closely with NATO and the European Union – the latter in an effective post-Brexit framework. A continent-wide solidarity with no prospect of easing current sanctions, and every prospect of tightening them, is as important as any measure the UK adopts on its own. A future ‘deep and special relationship’ with the EU must, at a minimum, include a common response to a country that (if confirmed) has carried out what is now being treated as a terrorist attack on European soil.
Keys to an effective response
For too long Britain has sought to meet a skilful and growing Russian state threat while servicing the interests of its major beneficiaries. This contradiction is no longer strategically or ethically sustainable. A whole-of-government approach to Russian policy is long overdue, one that would coordinate the many strands of the Russia relationship in a clear and consistent framework.
Britain does not lack options. The key question is whether it has the political will to use them. An effective response should:
Focus on real and lasting effects, not ‘newsy’ symbols or one-off measures;
Combat the use of fake news and elite assets in the UK that sustain Russia’s system and undermine others;
Develop a properly joined-up Russia strategy that is more, not less, than the sum of its parts;
Prioritize a common post-Brexit Russia policy with the EU;
Respond effectively to interests, at home as well as abroad, that seek to maintain the status quo.
Russia will now watch the UK closely for clues to its resolve. A weak response will invite further threats to British security.
_________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
The blow back will be a separation of the thinking people from the mindless idiots in society, and an increase in social distrust and hostility towards the politicians and media and government institutions fomenting instability and the destruction of personal civil liberty through manufactured national hysteria. Essentially they've cried wolf far too many times to be given any respect by truthful citizens.
_________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
Published on 18 Mar 2018Russia-UK relations plunge amid row over the poisoning of a former spy. Award-winning journalist John Pilger joins RT to discuss this issue _________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
_________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
Just posted latest from The Mail tonight. I wonder if her boyfriends mother is blond with a red bag? I couldn't post things earlier, so I sent you text. It appears somebody was driving their car while they were in the restaurant. Unless somebody had forgotten to change the timer on the CCTV
IMG-20180318-WA0001.jpg
Description:
Skripal's car being driven by someone else? Who
Filesize:
145.94 KB
Viewed:
340 Time(s)
_________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
Not far from my home town of Poole, is the historic city of Salisbury where the cathedral there holds an original copy of the Magna Carta 1215. Normally a quiet city that is hardly ever in the news but suddenly it is certainly the centre of attention due to an assassination attempt on a Russian named Sergei Skirpal and his daughter Yulia. They were found seriously ill on a bench in the city and the government has stated they were victims of a nerve agent known as Novichok, which is apparently only manufactured in Russia and this seems to be clear evidence to government that Putin was behind the assassination attempt. I for one most certainly differ on that opinion.
First question I asked myself is why would the Russian state suddenly want Skirpal killed?
Sergei Skirpal was a colonel in the Russian intelligence Service and he was convicted in Russia of being a British spy in 2006, he was sentenced to 18 years in prison. In 2010 a spy swap was organised between Russia and America and Skirpal was one of the four released and he was the only one to be returned to Britain. He has resided in Salisbury for the past eight years, using his own name, so was certainly not trying to hide his identity. Apparently the man who first recruited him in the 1990’s was a MI6 agent named Pablo Miller who coincidently also lives in Salisbury. Surely if the Russians had wanted Skirpal killed for his spying activities then that would have happened whilst he was in a Russian prison for four years. So it makes no sense at all for anyone to say the Russians killed him in revenge for what he was convicted of in the first place.
Quote:
News report of Skirpal’s release in 2010
Though one Russian website dubbed today'stransfer "Russia 10 USA 4", western intelligence sources were claiming tonight that Britain and the US got more out of the spy swap than Russia. They said the four men released by Moscow were more serious individuals than the 10 agents handed over by the US. The four had been in jail and poorly treated.
Britain has a direct interest in Skripal, a former Russian army colonel convicted of passing the identities of Russian agents working undercover in Europe to MI6.
Skripal was sentenced in August 2006 to 13 years in jail for spying for Britain. Russian prosecutors said he had been paid $100,000 by MI6 for the information, which he had been supplying since the 1990s when he was a serving officer.
However, that does not eliminate the fact that the assassination attempt could have been due to something else he has been involved with since coming to live in the UK. It has been said he has remained in constant contact with Pablo Miller in Salisbury and it is rumoured that Pablo Miller was working for Christopher Steele who helped in the creation of an Anti-Trump dossier through Steele’s company Orbis, funded by the Clinton foundation. It is possible that Skirpal was actively involved in the creation of that report due to his own Russian intelligence background.
Then there is Skirpal’s daughter Yulia, who only arrived in the UK from Russia the day before the assassination attempt and she had been working for the US embassy in Russia. It has been reported she is in a relationship with a security agent who works for Putin. The boyfriend’s mother who is also a high ranking security officer in Russia is apparently none to pleased about her son’s relationship with the daughter of a traitor, according to this quoted news article.
The most niggling question to all of this is the use of Novichok and the Government’s insistence it can only be manufactured in Russia. This is simply not true because Novichok was originally designed in the 1970’s and one of the scientists involved in its creation was Dr Vil Mirzayanov, who has lived in America for more than two decades and is living in a $1 million property. He has stated one of the important factors of the design of this particular nerve agent was it was created from normal industrial chemicals, to make it undetectable, so in reality this nerve agent could in fact be made anywhere in the world and as Mirzayanov fled to America to blow the whistle on Novichok, you can be sure he has released details on how to manufacture it so that antidotes could be created. He even published the formula in his book…
Blame it on the Russians...
It would be inconceivable to believe that Porton Down, which is just seven miles outside of Salisbury, did not have their own samples of Novichok to help them create counter agents to it. That is one of the main roles of Porton Down.
I personally find it very hard to believe that Putin was behind this assassination attempt on two Russians in Salisbury, as I fail to see what he would have to gain by it. Especially, considering the anti-Russian propaganda that has been flying around for years now. Even a successful assassination would have caused him far more problems than it was worth. It could have been a rogue Russian attack but even they would have known the repercussions of such actions not only from the West but from Putin as well. Obviously it was never an attack because he was a British spy all those years ago otherwise it would have happened long before now, so it must be related to something he has been involved with since being in the UK and if so it makes it far more probable that he was targeted by the West with a definite intention to blame it on Russia. IMHO.
Of course the EU will be overjoyed about all of this because the last thing they would want is for Britain to have a good close relationship with Russia once we leave the EU and the Remain camp are already using this fall out with Russia as an excuse for keeping us in the European Union. If anyone had the most to gain from this Salisbury assassination attempt, I would say it has to be the EU.
TAGSNerve agentsThe Nerve of agentsDouble-Dealing EU
AltNewsMedia is funded through the goodwill and time of dedicated and talented individuals determined to bring you the truth. Unlike the BBC and other news outlets, we do not have licence fees or huge sponsors so rely on the public to help turn this project into a global news outlet - a news outlet that represents them and they can be part of. Any donation, however small, is welcome and will assist with AltNewsMedia providing you with bigger and better stories. Thanks in advance for your help.
A small monthly amount will help us budget and plan our growth.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZDrdlYZXa_o
John Chase-Bois 341 views
Published on 19 Mar 2018
Craig Murray former diplomat and ambassador talks about the Skripal evidence.
Murray: "Why would Russia 'blow' Novichok program by assassinating an old bloke?"
"If Russia had a decade-long program on Novichok, why would they blow it by assassinating an old retired bloke?" says former British ambassador Craig Murray who reveals that British government pressured scientists over nerve agent origin. _________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 18335 Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
Posted: Tue Mar 20, 2018 9:59 am Post subject:
Predictive programming or what!?!?!
Episode 6
Aired in USA 9th March 2018
Aired in UK: 31st January 2018
General Lázsló shuts down Section 20, forcing Donovan to work in secret. She discovers that Zaryn is in fact Karim Markov, a Russian scientist who allegedly killed his colleagues with Novichok, a nerve agent they invented. The rest of the team arrive at a building to deactivate the signal jammers and alert Donovan, who drives with Jensen to pick them up while the rest engage Magyar Ultra. In the process, Josef and Rosa are killed. After they escape, Donovan is forced to hand Markov over to General Lázsló under Whitehall's orders. However soon after, Lowry ambushes and kills the Hungarian soldiers before kidnapping Markov.
51 "Episode 5" MJ Bassett Jack Lothian 2 March 2018 0.112[6] 28 November 2017 0.569
The team apprehend Lowry's accountant from Rosa's intelligence and then gain access to and freeze her accounts. Corporal Will Jensen (Dunster) finds that Lowry is being bank rolled by Milos Berisovich (Peter Firth), a Belarusian mob boss. Lowry visits her father-in-law in Hamburg for more money, but is forced to return empty handed. Section 20 track Berisovich's meth lab in Turov where Markov is making more Novichok and destroy it, though Berisovich escapes with Markov. Novin goes undercover to Berisovich's mother's funeral to confiscate his ledger. Though they succeed, McAllister and Wyatt are captured by Berisovich's men, and are being held with Lowry, who Berisovich still wants to make a deal with. The rest of the team rescue the men, but in response, Berisovich calls Yuri, his best henchman, to track down and kill Section 20.
52 "Episode 6" Debs Paterson Jack Lothian 9 March 2018 TBA 31 January 2018 0.602
Section 20 track down Maya, a local Muslim woman Lowry radicalised, to a local airport. When she attempts to release the Novichok, Reynolds shoots her. The Novichok is fake however, as Berisovich does not want an attack committed in his country. In the meantime, Yuri finds the team and attempts to kill Reynolds; she shoots him but he escapes. Jensen traces the gas' radiation background and learns that Markov's lab is in Pripyat, Ukraine. By the time Section 20 arrives, Berisovich had already called in the FSB to extract Markov and confiscate the Novichok. Yuri resurfaces to kill McAllister and Wyatt. However they turn the tables and strangle him to death. They then manage to engage the FSB and contain the gas. But in the process Reynolds is exposed. Markov works on an antidote but is killed by the Russians before he can complete. McAllister improvises and saves Reynolds, before Novin blows up the lab. Lowry uses the remainder of the gas to kill Berisovich for trying to betray her. She later gets a call from an acquaintance, who reveals that her husband is still alive.
Why is there a news blackout that #Skripal's MI6 recruiter (or handler) Pablo Miller lives in Salisbury, is friends with Skripal, & now works for Christopher Steele's Orbis Business Intelligence, author of the infamous Trump #FakeDossier?#Marr#Peston#Novichokpic.twitter.com/fV1L6eE5w3
It was reported today that he was close to a consultant who worked for Steele
Ex-Russian agent would have had excellent contacts in intelligence circles
The Russian Embassy have denied claims he visited officials and diplomats
By MARK DUELL and RICHARD SPILLETT FOR MAILONLINE
PUBLISHED: 09:25, 8 March 2018 | UPDATED: 11:35, 8 March 2018
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5476803/Kremlin-double-agent-c lose-Trump-dossier-firm-consultant.html
The Russian double agent attacked with a nerve agent in Salisbury was close to a consultant who worked with the firm of former British spy Christopher Steele, it was reported today.
Sergei Skripal, who is fighting for his life in hospital after the incident on Sunday, is said to have been close to an unnamed intelligence expert who carried out work for independent security firm Orbis Business Intelligence.
Orbis was founded by former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele, who was behind a notorious and controversial dossier on Donald Trump, which claimed Moscow had compromising information on the US President.
Russian double agent Sergei Skripal (left) was close to a consultant who had worked for Orbis Business Intelligence, the firm of former British spy Christopher Steele (right), it was reported
Mr Skripal and the Orbis consultant had become close and were both based in the south of England, the Daily Telegraph reported.
The paper suggested that Skripal's association with Orbis and, indirectly, the Trump dossier could have been a motivation behind the attack on him.
Mounting speculation Russian ambassador could be EXPELLED as...
There are conflicting reports about whether Skripal was retired from the world of espionage.
From his time in Russia's military intelligence apparatus, he would have excellent knowledge of the country's tactics and potential contacts.
Who is ex-British agent Christopher Steele?
Christopher Steele was one of MI6's top Russia experts, having spent a number of years working in Moscow.
During his years in the Russian capital, he had established personal contacts with KGB agents, and operatives of its successor agency the FSB.
Mr Steele quit MI6 in 2009 to set up his own so-called 'spies-for-hire' firm, Orbis Business Intelligence.
It was through this firm that he is understood to have worked on a dossier on President's Trump alleged links to Russia, which included explosive allegations including lurid sex claims and claims the Kremlin had sought to 'cultivate' Mr Trump.
It is likely that during his time working in Russia, Steele would have got to know Skripal, it was claimed this week. It was reported that Mr Steele may be helping police with their investigation.
The Times reported this week that he was still giving lectures on KGB tactics.
And another Russian exile, Valery Morozov, told Channel 4 News last night that Skripal remained in contact with military intelligence officers at the Russian Embassy.
A spokesman for the Russian Embassy said they are not aware of communication between Skripal and staff.
Skripal is a former colonel in Russian military intelligence and was responsible for unmasking dozens of Russian secret agents undercover in Europe.
In 2006, he was sentenced to 13 years in a Russian labour camp after being convicted of passing invaluable Russian secrets to the UK.
In July 2010, he was one of four spies exchanged for ten Russian agents deported from the US in an historic swap involving red-headed 'femme fatale' Anna Chapman.
Since then, he has moved to Salisbury and lived an apparently unremarkable life in Wiltshire cathedral city, joining a £10-a-year Railway Social Club, drinking in local pubs and spending a reported £40-a-week on lottery scratchcards.
Police yesterday revealed he and his daughter Yulia, who was visiting from Moscow, were attacked with a nerve agent on Sunday. Both remain in the critical condition.
Russian exile Valery Morozov told Channel 4 News he met Sergei Skripal several times and claims he was in regular contact with military intelligence officers at the Russian Embassy +7
Russian exile Valery Morozov told Channel 4 News he met Sergei Skripal several times and claims he was in regular contact with military intelligence officers at the Russian Embassy
Poison victim Sergei Skripal 'still working' claims Russian exile
Assistant Commissioner Mark Rowley, the head of counter-terrorism policing, revealed on Wednesday that the incident was being treated as attempted murder and the pair had been 'targeted specifically'.
He declined to specify the nerve agent or how it was administered.
He said: 'Having established that a nerve agent was the cause of the symptoms, leading us to treat this as attempted murder, I can also confirm that we believe the two people who originally became unwell were targeted specifically.
'Our role now of course is to establish who is behind this and why they carried out this act.'
Military personnel wearing protective coveralls work to remove a vehicle as part of the ongoing investigation in connection with the major incident sparked after a man and a woman were apparently poisoned in a nerve agent attack on March 12, 2018, near Middle Winterslow. (Xinhua/AFP)
UNITED NATIONS, March 20 (Xinhua) -- A team of experts from the Hague-based Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) are collecting samples of the poisoning of a former Russian spy in southern England and the chemical used could be determined in three weeks, said Ahmet Uzumcu, the head of the OPCW, on Tuesday.
The samples will be sent to designated labs for analysis, which may take two to three weeks. Once the results were determined, they will be shared with the British government, the director-general told reporters at UN Headquarters in New York.
British authorities have claimed that the nerve agent Novichok was used in the poisoning of Sergei Skripal and his daughter Julia on March 4 in the southern English city of Salisbury. London has demanded Moscow explain why the nerve agent that traces back to Russia should end up in Britain. Moscow has denied any involvement. _________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
Doctors who treated members of the public in the aftermath of the nerve agent attack in Salisbury claim that none of the patients showed symptoms of nerve agent poisoning.
A British doctor who treated members of the public in the aftermath of the nerve agent attack in Salisbury claims that none of the patients showed symptoms of nerve agent poisoning.
Since the March 4th discovery of Russian traitor Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia foaming at the mouth and twitching on a bench in the English city of Salisbury, Britain has been gripped by mounting and alarmist hysteria pointing the finger at Russia and Vladimir Putin.
In highly charged scenes in Parliament on March 15th, Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn was effectively denounced as a traitor himself, for daring to suggest that Britain complies with its international treaty obligations by submitting its evidence for independent verification before starting retaliations, economic, cyber, or otherwise, against the Russian State.
However, despite Theresa May’s stringent tone, the British Government has now climbed down to a far less antagonistic position. Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson confirmed on the Andrew Marr show on March 18th that OPCW inspectors WOULD be entering the country the next morning.
The OPCW has now started its investigation and has 10 days to make its determination and report. As part of this process, Russia will now be given full details of the evidence held.
WHY has this happened? Why the change?
My sources tell me that the sudden change in tone is due to political pressure from the Trump administration. The American President does not trust British Intelligence after they were caught helping former President Barack Obama wiretap his 2016 campaign. Sergei Skripal himself helped with the production of “Ex” MI6 agent Christopher Steele’s discredited “Russia Dossier” – and so Trump smells a rat.
France also appears to be nervous at the recklessness of the British tone and has insisted on UK compliance with its treaty obligations. As Europe’s only other nuclear armed power, if a war did break out between Britain and Russia, and the EU jumped to Britain’s side, France would be certain of obliteration.
Beyond the politics, the actual story on the ground in Salisbury is also fast unravelling.
The UK government had claimed that dozens of people had to be treated in hospital, with 500+ needing to clean all clothes and possessions if they had been in Salisbury town centre on Sunday 4th.
But consultant Stephen Davies has now come forward to say that of all the people sent to hospital, NONE required any medical treatment what-so-ever. There was simply nothing wrong with them! They were ordered to go, so they went, but there was zero medical attention need.
Poisoned policeman, Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey, claimed he gave first aid treatment to the stricken Skripal’s on the bench. This story immediately garnered national sympathy as people considered the image of a policeman rushing to do what he could to help people in trouble, unwittingly being poisoned doing his duty. That is an emotive image that resonates very strongly with people, and reinforced the narrative a serious incident had occurred.
However, once attention was elsewhere this was quietly corrected to now state DS Bailey was poisoned investigating the Skripal’s house.
An actual first responder account was printed in the local Salisbury paper. The Skripal’s were not treated for nerve agent, they were treated for drug overdose, and none of the medics who worked on them had any ill health as a result, at all.
If Salisbury was really so contaminated, why was the Prime Minister herself walking around the very area the Skripal’s were found, wearing her kitten heels, smiling and fist-bumping members of the public? Theresa May was acting, before the commons debate that afternoon, very much like there was some sort of victory…
But the very next morning, for the eyes of the international press, it was back to gas masks in the same area:
Is this really credible?
There is no evidence to contradict the claims that Sergei & Yulia Skripal, and DS Nick Bailey, have been poisoned, maybe with Novichok, although plenty of other poisons could cause the same symptoms. Your News Wire continues to consider them innocent victims, unless hard evidence says otherwise.
But on the other hand, neither is there anything to corroborate the claims, other than the same scant sentences the mainstream media keeps repeating ad nauseam. There is certainly no press coverage from their hospital beds, quite unlike the Litvinenko case 10 years ago.
For the next 10 days, until the OPCW reports on its findings, the UK government will have to cool its heels. Allies are not going to support any further action until then, and measures have stopped at 23 diplomats expelled each by the UK and Russia. Wild talk of asset confiscation, even retaliatory cyber attacks, has been dropped for now. The Russian government remains quite clear that it considers none of the claims credible just on the UK’s say so, and openly charges the UK with a put-on job to damage Russia’s reputation:
There are many questions as to the full range of possible suspects, from Russia, to the UK itself, the EU, the Clinton Cabal silencing Skripal for his work on the dodgy dossier. Indeed, there remains the outside chance that Skripal did this himself!
The findings of the OPCW will be internationally definitive. But the lack of any additional casualties in Salisbury, indeed, an allegedly toxic nerve agent that hasn’t managed to kill anybody, all suggests that the OPCW’s findings are going to be a lot more subdued than the claims the UK government has made.
If that’s the case, Prime Minister Theresa May is going to have to make an embarrassing climb down and this incident will be forgotten as quickly as possible.
However, if the OPCW find no evidence at all of the presence of “Novichok”, then Theresa May will be out, and the government itself could very likely fall.
The British people will never tolerate being lied to about weapons of mass destruction ever again. Tony Blair, and the lies that led to the Iraq war, broke the spell of blind loyalty to the government’s war drum.
British Doctor: Zero Evidence Of Nerve Agent Attack In Salisbury
Doctors who treated members of the public in the aftermath of the nerve agent attack in Salisbury claim that none of the patients showed symptoms of nerve agent poisoning.
A British doctor who treated members of the public in the aftermath of the nerve agent attack in Salisbury claims that none of the patients showed symptoms of nerve agent poisoning.
Since the March 4th discovery of Russian traitor Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia foaming at the mouth and twitching on a bench in the English city of Salisbury, Britain has been gripped by mounting and alarmist hysteria pointing the finger at Russia and Vladimir Putin.
In highly charged scenes in Parliament on March 15th, Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn was effectively denounced as a traitor himself, for daring to suggest that Britain complies with its international treaty obligations by submitting its evidence for independent verification before starting retaliations, economic, cyber, or otherwise, against the Russian State.
However, despite Theresa May’s stringent tone, the British Government has now climbed down to a far less antagonistic position. Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson confirmed on the Andrew Marr show on March 18th that OPCW inspectors WOULD be entering the country the next morning.
The OPCW has now started its investigation and has 10 days to make its determination and report. As part of this process, Russia will now be given full details of the evidence held.
WHY has this happened? Why the change?
My sources tell me that the sudden change in tone is due to political pressure from the Trump administration. The American President does not trust British Intelligence after they were caught helping former President Barack Obama wiretap his 2016 campaign. Sergei Skripal himself helped with the production of “Ex” MI6 agent Christopher Steele’s discredited “Russia Dossier” – and so Trump smells a rat.
France also appears to be nervous at the recklessness of the British tone and has insisted on UK compliance with its treaty obligations. As Europe’s only other nuclear armed power, if a war did break out between Britain and Russia, and the EU jumped to Britain’s side, France would be certain of obliteration.
Beyond the politics, the actual story on the ground in Salisbury is also fast unravelling.
The UK government had claimed that dozens of people had to be treated in hospital, with 500+ needing to clean all clothes and possessions if they had been in Salisbury town centre on Sunday 4th.
But consultant Stephen Davies has now come forward to say that of all the people sent to hospital, NONE required any medical treatment what-so-ever. There was simply nothing wrong with them! They were ordered to go, so they went, but there was zero medical attention need.
Poisoned policeman, Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey, claimed he gave first aid treatment to the stricken Skripal’s on the bench. This story immediately garnered national sympathy as people considered the image of a policeman rushing to do what he could to help people in trouble, unwittingly being poisoned doing his duty. That is an emotive image that resonates very strongly with people, and reinforced the narrative a serious incident had occurred.
However, once attention was elsewhere this was quietly corrected to now state DS Bailey was poisoned investigating the Skripal’s house.
An actual first responder account was printed in the local Salisbury paper. The Skripal’s were not treated for nerve agent, they were treated for drug overdose, and none of the medics who worked on them had any ill health as a result, at all.
If Salisbury was really so contaminated, why was the Prime Minister herself walking around the very area the Skripal’s were found, wearing her kitten heels, smiling and fist-bumping members of the public? Theresa May was acting, before the commons debate that afternoon, very much like there was some sort of victory…
But the very next morning, for the eyes of the international press, it was back to gas masks in the same area:
Is this really credible?
There is no evidence to contradict the claims that Sergei & Yulia Skripal, and DS Nick Bailey, have been poisoned, maybe with Novichok, although plenty of other poisons could cause the same symptoms. Your News Wire continues to consider them innocent victims, unless hard evidence says otherwise.
But on the other hand, neither is there anything to corroborate the claims, other than the same scant sentences the mainstream media keeps repeating ad nauseam. There is certainly no press coverage from their hospital beds, quite unlike the Litvinenko case 10 years ago.
For the next 10 days, until the OPCW reports on its findings, the UK government will have to cool its heels. Allies are not going to support any further action until then, and measures have stopped at 23 diplomats expelled each by the UK and Russia. Wild talk of asset confiscation, even retaliatory cyber attacks, has been dropped for now. The Russian government remains quite clear that it considers none of the claims credible just on the UK’s say so, and openly charges the UK with a put-on job to damage Russia’s reputation:
There are many questions as to the full range of possible suspects, from Russia, to the UK itself, the EU, the Clinton Cabal silencing Skripal for his work on the dodgy dossier. Indeed, there remains the outside chance that Skripal did this himself!
The findings of the OPCW will be internationally definitive. But the lack of any additional casualties in Salisbury, indeed, an allegedly toxic nerve agent that hasn’t managed to kill anybody, all suggests that the OPCW’s findings are going to be a lot more subdued than the claims the UK government has made.
If that’s the case, Prime Minister Theresa May is going to have to make an embarrassing climb down and this incident will be forgotten as quickly as possible.
However, if the OPCW find no evidence at all of the presence of “Novichok”, then Theresa May will be out, and the government itself could very likely fall.
The British people will never tolerate being lied to about weapons of mass destruction ever again. Tony Blair, and the lies that led to the Iraq war, broke the spell of blind loyalty to the government’s war drum. _________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
Applying the principle of cui bono – who benefits? – to the case of Sergei Skripal might lead investigators away from the Kremlin as the prime suspect and towards Western intelligence agencies, argues James O’Neill.
By James O’Neill
The suspected nerve agent attack upon former Russian intelligence officer Sergei Skripal, which also affected his daughter in the English city of Salisbury last Sunday, has given rise to too much speculation, too much hysteria, and too little analysis or insight. It has provided ammunition for the Russophobic Western media to make accusations that it was another example of Russia in general and Vladimir Putin in particular disposing of a supposed enemy of the Kremlin.
As with the Mueller investigation into the alleged Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election there are accusations with varying degrees of wildness, but little or no actual evidence that would get past first base in any independent court of law.
First, what are the known facts, only some of which have been accurately reported in the western mainstream media? The victim (assuming it was a deliberate attack upon him and his daughter) was formerly a Colonel in the Russian military intelligence service (the GRU). This is the largest of the Russian intelligence agencies and, as with its western equivalents, has a wide variety of functions, of which “spying” is only one.
In the early 1990s Skripal was recruited by an MI6 agent Pablo Miller, whom the British media declined to name. Miller was an MI6 agent in Tallinn, the capital of Estonia. Miller’s main task was recruiting Russians to provide information about their country to the British. An interesting fact, possibly coincidental, was that the MI6 officer under diplomatic cover in Moscow at this time was Christopher Steele. Steele was later to become better known as the principal author of the infamous Trump dossier.
When Steele returned to London, he ran MI6’s Russia desk between the 2006 and 2009. The information that Skripal disclosed would have been given to Steele, first in Moscow and later in London.
Skripal was arrested in 2004. In 2006 he was convicted of treason and sentenced to 18 years imprisonment. In 2010 he was released as part of a prisoner exchange deal with Russian spies in U.S. jails. He went to live in the United Kingdom where he has lived in supposed retirement ever since. Another interesting fact, although again possibly coincidental, is that Salisbury, where Skripal lived, is only about 12 kilometres from Porton Down, the U.K.’s principal research centre for nerve agents.
If the Russians had wanted to kill him, they had ample opportunity to do so during the years when he was imprisoned or the eight years he lived in retirement in Salisbury. If they did wish to kill him, it is not a very credible that they would do so very publicly and by a means that could not be bought off the shelf in the local pharmacy. The handling and the administering of these very dangerous substances require professional expertise. The obvious candidates for the attempted murder are therefore government agencies, but which government is the unanswered question.
This is where the facts become thinner, but the interesting connections of Skripal offer scope for some tentative hypotheses. While living in Salisbury, Skripal became friendly, according to a report in the UK newspaper the Daily Telegraph, with none other than the aforementioned Pablo Miller – whom the Telegraph declined to name but has since been identified on the web.
Miller is now working with a British security consultancy named Orbis Business Intelligence. Again according to the Telegraph, Miller’s association with this company has now been removed from Miller’s LinkedIn profile.
The obvious question again is: why do so now?
Orbis is the same private intelligence agency as that of Christopher Steele. It seems more than a mere coincidence that the same three men who had personal and professional links going back to the 1990s should have a continuing association at the same time as the Steele dossier was being compiled and later as the so-called Russiagate inquiry was imploding. Former FBI Director James Comey described the Steele dossier as “salacious and unverified” in a Senate hearing.
The former British ambassador Craig Murray has suggested on his blog that a motive for the attempted murder of Skripal and his daughter was to further promote the anti-Russian hysteria that inflicts the Western media and the body politic.
That is certainly plausible, and it has certainly been one of the consequences, as the abysmal coverage of the ABC among other outlets makes clear. But an alternative hypothesis presents itself in the light of the above facts, and this hypothesis has not even been mentioned, let alone discussed by our major media.
My admittedly speculative hypothesis (but I would argue, not an unreasonable one) is that Skripal was likely involved in the production of the Steele dossier. He was therefore in a position to offer potentially very damaging information into the circumstances of the Steele dossier. As noted above, that particular narrative has not only spectacularly collapsed, but the revelations reflect very badly on, among others, the U.S. intelligence community, the FBI, the Democratic National Committee, the Obama White House and the Clinton campaign.
In any major criminal enquiry one of the basic questions the investigation asks is: who had the means, the motive and the opportunity? Framed in that light, the Russians come a distant fourth behind the other prime suspects; the U.S. and U.K. intelligence agencies themselves, and those elements of the deep state that sought to prevent Trump winning, and subsequently to undermine his presidency. The primary motive being ascribed to the Russians is revenge for Skripal’s treachery more than a decade ago.
A second major question asked in any criminal investigation is cui bono – who benefits? It is difficult to perceive a credible argument that Russia is a beneficiary of Skripal’s poisoning.
Further support for the hypothesis that this was a false flag operation comes in this statement that British Prime Minister to Theresa May made to the UK Parliament. The statement was frankly absurd and could only have been made when the intention was to further demonize and punish Russia, rather than any attempt to establish the truth and apply ordinary principles of evidence and factual analysis.
May’s argument is thoroughly deconstructed on the Moon of Alabama website, which pointed out that Russia had destroyed all left over stocks from the Soviet Union’s chemical weapon program and does not currently produce chemical weapons. Further, there are any number of governments capable of carrying out the Salisbury attack. “If someone is run-over by a BMW is it ‘highly likely’ that the German government is responsible for it?” the Moon of Alabama asks.
The obfuscations of the British reinforce in the view that Skripal was dangerous to the anti-Trump forces and the authorities therefore sought to have them removed. There is ample precedent for such actions and those familiar with the “suicide” of Dr. David Kelly will recognize the parallels.
The chances of the truth emerging have become vanishingly small at the same time as a serious conflict with Russia becomes correspondingly greater.
James O’Neill is a Barrister at Law and geopolitical analyst. He can be reached at joneill@qldbar.asn.au. _________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
Nerve agent: Who controls the world's most toxic chemicals?
By Prof Alastair Hay
University of Leeds
20 March 2018 UK
International experts are due in the UK, to test samples of the nerve agent used in the attempted murder of a spy and his daughter. How do they keep track of the world's most toxic chemicals?
After collecting samples of the poisons used on Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia, a team from the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) will conduct tests, with results expected to take at least a fortnight.
The UK government says the substance used was Novichok - a group of nerve agents it says is "stockpiled" by Russia, which is "culpable" for the attack. It has dismissed Russia's claim that the poison came from the UK's Porton Down facility.
The work of the OPCW is carried out as part of an international control regime that governs what is, or is not, permissible as far as very toxic chemicals are concerned.
This was established by the 1997 Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC), to which 192 countries are signed up members. Only four countries are outside the CWC - North Korea, Israel, Egypt and South Sudan, which has begun the process of signing. They are still bound by the treaty's provisions, under international law.
The CWC's operational arm, the Hague-based inspectors of the OPCW, have overseen the destruction of nearly 97% of the world's declared stockpiles of chemical weapons .
Countries agree to never manufacture, stockpile or use chemical weapons - nor to assist others to do so. They are also required to declare what stocks of chemical weapons they have and where they could be produced.
Datapic outlining Article 1, Part 1 of the chemical weapons convention
These declarations are used by OPCW inspectors to audit the destruction of chemical weapons and production facilities - a process that should happen within 10 years.
Most countries meet this deadline, but Russia, which inherited the former Soviet Union stocks, and the US did not. The sheer size of their arsenals, the technical challenge of disarmament and costs have caused delays.
What are Novichok nerve agents?
Russian spy: What we know so far
Several months ago, Russia announced it had completed destruction of its nearly 40,000 tonnes of declared agents - the largest stockpile in the world. There is no dispute about this as the process was carried out under the watchful eyes of the OPCW's inspectors.
The US has destroyed some 90% of its declared stocks, with 2021-22 earmarked as the target date for completion. Its challenges have included persuading local communities that the work could be safely carried out in their neighbourhoods.
But what about other chemicals and the Novichoks in particular?
The Novichoks - those thought to have been used against the Skripals - were never declared to the OPCW, and the chemicals never formed part of any control regime partly because of uncertainty about their chemical structures.
And specific names are crucial, because the CWC allows countries to legally possess a wide range of chemicals if they are identifiable.
Under the convention, countries are allowed stocks of toxic chemicals and their precursors for peaceful purposes including industry, agriculture, research and medicine.
For recognised or potential chemical weapons, and chemicals that may be involved in their manufacture, only limited quantities can be kept.
Signatories are allowed to hold a combined total of one tonne and one facility, usually a laboratory, where these substances can be made.
These stocks can be used to develop protective clothing, gas masks, antidotes and for developing methods to identify chemical weapons.
Auditing of these stocks by the OPCW is down to the milligram level.
For other substances more widely used in industry, but which may be used to make chemical weapons, stocks are closely monitored.
Complete records of the quantities manufactured, sold, used or disposed of must be kept by governments and the information passed to the OPCW every year.
It audits these returns and carries hundreds of inspections of industrial premises globally every year.
You may also be interested in:
Although the Novichoks fall outside these controls, and no country has declared possession to the OPCW, their existence became known in the 1990s.
It is quite likely that some government laboratories made minute quantities.
Their characteristics would have been stored in databases, so that their identity could be confirmed at a later stage if found as an unknown poison in someone's blood.
Whether this has happened in the UK's chemical defence laboratory is not known.
But it is important that the scientists working there were able to identify the Novichok nerve agent used to poison the Skripals as rapidly as they did.
Identifying the agent is vital for the medical treatment the Skripals and Det Sgt Nick Bailey - the police officer injured in the attack - will be receiving.
Correction 20 March 2018: An earlier version of this story stated that there were three countries - North Korea, Israel and Egypt which had not ratified the CWC. It is also the case that South Sudan - which is in the process of signing - has not yet ratified.
About this piece
This analysis piece was commissioned by the BBC from an expert working for an outside organisation .
Alastair Hay is Emeritus Professor of Environmental Toxicology at the University of Leeds . He is a member of the OPCW's advisory board on education and outreach, and joint winner of the 2015 OPCW -The Hague Award for outstanding contributions towards preventing the use of chemical weapons
Edited by Duncan Walker _________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
This post is an attempt to criticize the media’s case against Russia in the most formal way possible. Everything is to be cited and explained carefully based on specific propositions. If I do this correctly, we should see this thread sitting at no greater than 60%, and at least four comments should be calling me a Russian bot. Let’s begin with establishing a simplified version of media’s argument/narrative:
(1) Skripal was certainly poisoned with a “novichok” agent. That is, there is substantial evidence that it was “novichok”. Even its creator said it was definitely Russia!
(2) Russia has a monopoly on “novichok”. Its usage is a smoking gun for Russia’s culpability.
(3) The UK is following international protocol for dealing with a state actor’s usage of chemical weapons.
(4) Russia is at fault for not bothering to respond to the UK’s 24-hour request for explanation.
(5) Russia has a clear motive for poisoning Skripal. More precisely, they have more of a motive than any other state actor. This is an important qualification that we will explore later.
(1) There is no substantial evidence that Skripal was poisoned with novichok.
It is, of course, more difficult to prove a negative than a positive. We cannot prove with complete certainty that the UK government does not have evidence of novichok poisoning, because we do not know what their supposed evidence is. The UK has not presented any evidence, either to Russia or to international channels, that novichok was used. Because of this uncertainty, we must rely on probability and heuristic. Let’s begin our inquiry with simplicity: are there theoretically possible signs of novichok when it is used as a poison? Would we be able to tell, in hypothetically perfect conditions, that it is used when it is used?
The answer, according to top UK scientists, is a flat “no”. According to the textbook literature on Chemical Weapons Toxicology from 2016, aptly named “Chemical Weapons Toxicology”,
No independent confirmation of the structures or the properties of such compounds (novichok] has been published
The author if this chapter (different authors wrote different chapters) is of utmost importance. You could not find somebody with more relevant credentials than him. No, I mean, you really couldn’t. You are going to laugh when you read them. The author who wrote this chapter is Robin M. Black. Robin Black served on the Scientific Advisory Board of OPCW. The OPCW is the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons. It is a crucial organization for proper international conflicts regarding chemical weapons, which we will get to later. In one of the latest OPCW publications about “novichoks”, they state:
The name “Novichok” is used in a publication of a former Soviet scientist who reported investigating a new class of nerve agents suitable for use as binary chemical weapons. The SAB states that it has insufficient information to comment on the existence or properties of “Novichoks”.
Back to Robin M. Black. Guess where else he worked? At the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (DSTL) in the UK, also called Porton Down. Here’s another mention of Robin Black. He has been employed at Porton Down since the 1980’s and is tenured enough to direct other scientists on chemical weapons toxicology.
To spell it out: the UK’s own chemical weapon’s toxiology expert wrote that there is no way currently to detect the use of novichok. Although it is impossible to prove a negative in this situation, this is incredibly strong disconfirming evidence.
As for the last point, that the creator of novichok said it was certainly Russia that was responsible, he added an important clause:
The only other possibility, he said, would be that someone used the formulas in his book to make such a weapon.
This brings us to point 2:
(2) Russia does not have a monopoly on novichok
Although it is apparently impossible to detect novichok, it is not so difficult to make. According to the creator, if somebody “used the formulas in his book”, he would be able to “make such a weapon.” Well, how difficult is it to find this book? Was it published only a handful of times and kept in the arcane laboratories of secretive institutions? Of course not. It’s on * Amazon. And to manufacture “novichok” is simpler than other chemical weapons:
“The Novichok agents are thought to be far more difficult to detect during manufacturing and far easier to manufacture covertly, because they can be made with common chemicals in relatively simple pesticide factories,” the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons says in its Weapons of Mass Casualties and Terrorism Response Handbook.
Russia does not have a monopoly on novichok. Not even close.
(3) The UK is not following international protocol for this conflict over novichok.
Remember what we said about the OPCW? The OPCW is like the UN for chemical weapons (although the UN is also the UN for chemical weapons, of course). There are only four UN states that are not signatories of the OPCW: Egypt, Israel, North Korea and South Sudan. Hence, Russia and the UK are signatories. If the UK believes that Russia used chemical weapons in their borders, what does the OPCW convention tell members to do? And if Russia believes the UK’s accusation is false, what does the OPCW convention tell Russia to do? According to Article IX on Consultations, Cooperation, and Fact-Finding:
Without prejudice to the right of any State Party to request a challenge inspection, 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 10 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.
This is somewhat self-explanatory, but for simplicity’s sake: According to international law the UK is to give Russia 10 days to respond. It is also suggested that they make available the “evidence” they have against Russia. This last one shouldn’t even need to be spelled out in a convention; the right for the accused to see the evidence against them is so fundamental to justice itself that it’s almost damning that the UK thinks they can just flaunt this moral obligation. It has literally been in our justice system for 500 years. It’s not trivial. It’s * important. Russia actually spoke to the OPCW, and notably said the following:
In addition, in this particular case, it would be legitimate for the British side to seek assistance from the OPCW Technical Secretariat in conducting an independent laboratory analysis of the available samples that allegedly show traces of nerve agents in Salisbury.
(4) Russia is thus not at fault for failing to reply to the 24-hour ultimatum. I mean, they actually did reply to the ultimatum by essentially saying “give us the * samples *”(www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-russia-lavrov/moscow-to-london -let-us-examine-nerve-agent-used-in-spy-poisoning-idUSKCN1GP19U), and can you really fault them with this?
(5) Russia’s motive for poisoning Skripal is not as strong as thought. Other nations have greater motive.
This is the most complicated proposition. Let’s go over the history of Skripal. To begin, Russia held him in prison on a sentence of 13 years. If it were absolutely crucial that he be assassinated, they would have done this when they had custody of him. But a sentence of 13 years is hardly a sentence you’d give for someone you want dead. US gives its spies 10 consecutive life sentences in a super-max prison. So if Russia hated this guy so much, why give him such a light sentence, and why give him away in a prisoner swap? The other prisoners who were swapped were not assassinated. And Vil Mirzayanov, the chemist who revealed the existence of novichok and who lives a public life teaching at public universities was not assassinated.
It doesn’t take a genius to realize that the motive to assassinate this 60-year-old just isn’t there. Moreover, it doesn’t take a genius to realize that this is the worst possible time to publicly assassinate somebody. Russia’s image is in tarnishes. Russia really, really wants its latest oil pipeline to be completed unimpeded. They are hosting the World Cup in 3 months. They are still in a conflict in Syria. So why would they go about assassinating a nobody? What is the motivation here?
This is the kind of political move you’d make in the game Civilization 5 when it’s 2am and you’re a little drunk. This isn’t the political move that career politicians make when there is so much on the line.
ITV programme on now lying blatantly about the Salisbury Chemical Attack;
'30 people' treated.
the A&E Consultant at Salisbury Hospital says they treated 3.
They say this was the first use of Chemical Weapons on UK soil. Another lie; Georgi Markov was killed with ricin loaded into an umbrella, Alexsander Litvinenko was murdered with polonium. THEY ARE LYING TO US!.
Russia is almost certainly behind this attack,
but Porton Down has yet to confirm where its from and in ANOTHER lie,
ITV say Novichok was only made in Russia.
Explain the stocks held in Uzbekistan then!.
There is no evidence this attack was even made with Novichok - if it proves to be so, that's one thing, but our Government has an agenda and it doesn't include our welfare. _________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
A famous Sherlock Holmes story contains the following dialog between Holmes and Detective Gregory.
Gregory: “Is there any other point to which you would wish to draw my attention?”
Holmes: “To the curious incident of the dog in the night-time.”
Gregory: “The dog did nothing in the night-time.”
Holmes: “That was the curious incident.”
A confrontation is taking place between two states over the alleged poisoning of a former double agent in Salisbury, UK on March 4th, 2018. A great many claims have been made. Few of those claims have been substantiated by evidence.
Since this incident appears likely to provoke conflict between two nuclear armed powers, it may be of benefit to apply the deductive reasoning of Sherlock Holmes to see what we might learn. It is certain the British people will not object to this use of logic and astute observation as employed by one of the UK’s most famous and revered characters.
The following article contains information culled from public sources. The intent is to engage the Saker’s readers in crowd sourcing the investigation of the poisoning of the Skripals. I have set out what I believe to be “accurate” or “known” facts along with hypotheses or conjecture. The reader is invited to comment and critique, or to add other public information known to them. It is hoped that this crowd sourced investigation may serve to ensure the integrity of the state agencies involved in this affair, and preclude the curious incident of the Skripals being used as a pretext to initiate further global conflict. Let us begin with a chronological summary of events.
Summary of Events
Sergei Skripal is a British citizen. Skripal came to the UK in 2010 as part of a “spy swap” after he had been convicted by Russia of passing information to MI6.
March 4th at 1600 both Skripal and hid daughter were found semi-comatose on a park bench in the Maltings market area of central Salisbury, the police and ambulance services were called, and the couple were removed to Salisbury District Hospital where, as of March 18 2018, they remain in critical condition.
On March 12th Prime Minister May stated “Mr Speaker, on Monday I set out that Mr. Skripal and his daughter were poisoned with a Novichok: a military grade nerve agent developed by Russia.” and “This represents an unlawful use of force by the Russian State against the United Kingdom.”
Any unlawful use of force by one state against another implies an act of war. May issued an ultimatum to Russia provide a full explanation within 24 hours.
March 13th the Russian government issued a diplomatic note to the UK government rejecting any state involvement in the Skripal incident. Russia demanded the UK comply with the terms of the Chemical Weapons Convention to which both Russia and the UK are signatories.
March 14th the UK expelled 23 Russian diplomats and/or intelligence agents, and announced other measures against Russia.
March 15th the UK intelligence agencies claimed the toxic agent had been placed in Yulia Skripal’s luggage prior to her departure from Russia and the contaminated luggage was the mechanism of delivery.
Friday, March 16th, UK foreign secretary Boris Johnson said that it was “overwhelmingly likely” that the poisoning had been ordered directly by Russian president Vladimir Putin.
These events have implications with regard to the conflict in Syria, the NATO build up on the borders of Russia, the Mueller investigation of President Trump, and the allegations against Trump contained in a document created by a former MI6 agent connected to both the creation of the “Steele Dossier,” and to Skripal.
In the next sections the attempt is made to “unpack” some of the extant reporting and attempt to determine the logical validity of that reporting. We start with Scenario #1.
Mode of Toxin Application Scenario #1
The Skripal’s sit on a Salisbury park bench and a mystery couple sidle up and spray the two of them with a nerve agent which immediately incapacitates them. The “mystery couple” then walk away.
Since the UK has an extensive network of CCTV installations there should be video evidence of the “mystery couple.” It should be possible to track this couple as they move through Salisbury both before, and after, the attack. No such video evidence has been produced.
SCENARIO #1 Conjecture 1
It is likely the incident was a team effort. In addition to the “mystery couple” there would have been other team members watching out for interference / observation by innocent members of the public. This surveillance team would follow the Skripal’s and advise the kill team of the appropriate moment to move in and deliver the toxin. No video evidence of such concerted team activity has been produced.
SCENARIO #1 Conjecture 2
The team activity described in Conjecture 1 requires communication between team members. This would likely involve radio transmissions and would result in a spike in radio transmissions. These transmissions may have been recorded. This is especially true if the public cell network was utilized. No evidence of such communications activity has been produced.
SCENARIO #1 Conjecture 3
Most nation states employ counter-intelligence agents whose principle purpose is the identification and monitoring of foreign intelligence agents. The UK government has expelled 23 alleged Russian agents. This confirms the UK has such knowledge. Known foreign agents operating within the host nation are typically kept under close observation. A team of foreign agents operating against the Skripals would have been detected. No evidence of active foreign agent involvement in the Skripal incident has been produced.
SCENARIO #1 Conclusion
There was no team of foreign agents present in the UK and operating against the Skripals.
Mode of Toxin Application Scenario #2
The toxin was hidden in Yulia Skripal’s luggage and she unwittingly introduced the toxic agent into the Salisbury home of her father. This new allegation obviates the need for an operations team on the ground in Salisbury and provides a convenient means to explain the absence of evidence outlined in Scenario #1.
SCENARIO #2 Conjecture 1
Yulia Skripal’s luggage was not found adjacent to the park bench on which the incapacitated couple were discovered. If the luggage was the delivery mechanism for the toxic agent, and if the Skripal’s did not carry the luggage with them on the day of the attack, then the luggage must have remained in the Skripal residence.
SCENARIO #2 Conjecture 2
If the toxic agent emanated from the luggage then it must have permeated the household in such a way as to be ingested/inhaled by the victims. If the house was not ventilated, this toxic atmosphere would have persisted over time.
SCENARIO #2 Conjecture 3
If conjecture 2 is correct then any other person entering the victim’s household would also have been subject to attack by the same incapacitating agent. There is evidence to support this conjecture. Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey drove from the park bench location where the incapacitated victims were found to the Skripal household, appears to have entered the residence, and became sufficiently ill he then took himself to hospital. He is still under treatment as of March 18th 2018.
SCENARIO #2 Conjecture 4
The following is a time-line of events of Sunday, March 4, 2018. The only firm fact is the time of the victim’s being discovered on a park bench in downtown Salisbury. The other events of March 4th have been culled from public reporting on the incident. The time estimates are my own conjecture based on a Google maps examination of the relative distance between the locations. The greatest uncertainty attaches to the travel time from the Skripal residence to the London Road Cemetery. Readers may have additional detail. If so please provide this detail in a comment.
0915 Skripal’s maroon BMW seen in vicinity of London Road Cemetery
The Skripals are known to have visited the cemetery which
contains the graves of Skripal’s wife and son.
1330 Skripal car seen driving down Devizes Road, towards Salisbury town centre
10 minute travel time from residence to the Maltings shopping district
1340 Arrive Sainsbury parking lot. Walk to Bishops Mill Pub
1415 ESTIMATE depart pub for 5 min walk to Zizzi restaurant
1420 Arrive Zizzi pizza restaurant
Skripal angry with demonstrated loss of emotional control.
1535 Depart Zizzi pizza restaurant
1547 CCTV capture of the Skripals on foot in the Maltings walk area
1600 Found on park bench in the Maltings walk area
Comatose, frothing at mouth, contracted pupils, vacant stare, convulsions
1615 Police summoned
1630 Police and ambulance response. Victims removed to hospital.
Time Budget Estimates
First Trip of March 4
Depart residence for London Road Cemetery and return
Estimated 15 minute travel time from residence to cemetery
Estimated 45 minutes viewing graves in cemetery
Estimated 15 minute travel time to return to residence
Estimated 0900 departure of residence for cemetery
0915 Skripal car observed in vicinity of cemetery
Estimated 1000 departure from cemetery
Estimated 1015 arrival back at residence
Estimated 30 minutes total car travel time
It is likely Yulia would have unpacked items from her luggage prior to going to sleep on the night of March 3 to 4. If the toxin was concealed in her luggage then it would likely have been released at the time of unpacking on the evening of March 3. The total residence exposure is therefore estimated to be in excess of 12 hours (midnight to 0900 on March 4) plus 3 hours in the residence (1015 to 1315) on return from the cemetery and before leaving for lunch in central Salisbury.
Second trip of March 4
Depart residence for the Maltings shopping district in Salisbury
1330 left house
10 minutes travel time in car
1340 arrive Sainsbury parking lot
1600 discovered on bench incapacitated 2 hrs 30 min after departing residence for the second time.
Salisbury Police Detective Bailey is reported to have been one of the first responders to the scene in the Maltings park bench area
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/03/10/poisoned-police-officer-no t-hero-just-job/
Time Estimates for Bailey Exposure
1630 Bailey arrives on scene at Maltings park bench
1700 Bailey conducts initial investigation. Locates Skripal ID
1710 Bailey arrives Skripal residence and enters using key found on victim
???? Bailey becomes ill and drives himself to hospital
Time Budget
Estimated 30 minutes spent adjacent to victims
Estimated 10 minutes car travel to Skripal household
Bailey becomes ill after an unknown number of minutes in the Skripal residence
Bailey’s period of residence exposure is considerably less than the estimated 12 plus hours of residence exposure by the Skripals.
If the residence is the site of toxic exposure for both the Skripals and Detective Bailey why the differential response time to the toxic agent?
A number of assumptions are made. The first is that at the time of the first police response to the Maltings park bench area, Detective Bailey had no awareness of a toxic agent being present. He knows only that two people have been found incapacitated on a park bench with one of them having been sick and vomited.
It is assumed he searches both victims for identification and, once the ambulance has removed the victims to hospital, Detective Bailey then proceeds to the Skripal residence. When he arrives and gets no answer at the door, he enters using a key obtained from the victim and commences to search the interior.
At this point very little is known about the incident. Detective Bailey may assume the incapacitation is due to a recreational drug overdose. He would likely search through the house and its contents seeking confirmation for this assumption. If he did find evidence of recreational drugs he would then advise the Hospital medical team of the possible cause of the Skripals incapacitation.
It is not known how long Bailey was in the house before he became ill. If we reconsider SCENARIO #2 Conjecture 1 it becomes clear that the residents of the household would have been exposed to the toxic residence atmosphere for considerably longer than Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey. The Skripal’s had an estimated minimum 8 to 12 hours of residence exposure to the toxin but they only became incapacitated an estimated 2 hours and 45 minutes after departing the residence a second time for a total duration of 10 to 14 hours.
The evidence suggests Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey was overcome in a much shorter period of time. If the household environment was so toxic that Bailey was overcome within an hour or less, how is it the Skripals showed no effects after an exposure time in excess of 12 hours?
Conclusions:
Scenario #1 the organized team attack may be discounted as no evidence has surfaced with respect to the activities of such a team.
Scenario #3 “From Russia with Luggage” may be discounted as it is awkward to explain the differential response to a household environment made toxic by bad luggage.
It is much more likely “From Russia with Luggage” has been concocted to explain the lack of evidence supporting the presence of a surveillance and kill team operating in Salisbury on March 4th 2018.
Such concoction supports the allegation that state agencies are acting in a deliberate way to create a new “dodgy dossier.”
There are a lot of issues around the case of Sergei and Yulia Skripal which, at the time of writing, are very unclear and rather odd. There may well be good and innocent explanations for some or even all of them. Then again there may not. This is why it is crucial for questions to be asked where, as yet, there are either no answers or deeply unsatisfactory ones.
Some people will assume that this is conspiracy theory territory. It is not that, for the simple reason that I have no credible theory — conspiracy or otherwise — to explain all the details of the incident in Salisbury from start to finish, and I am not attempting to forward one. I have no idea who was behind this incident, and I continue to keep an open mind to a good many possible explanations.
However, there are a number of oddities in the official narrative, which do demand answers and clarifications. You don’t have to be a conspiracy theorist or a defender of the Russian state to see this. You just need a healthy scepticism, “of a type developed by all inquiring minds!”
Below are 30 of the most important questions regarding the case and the British Government’s response, which are currently either wholly unanswered, or which require clarification.
1. Why have there been no updates on the condition of Sergei and Yulia Skripal in the public domain since the first week of the investigation?
2. Are they still alive?
3. If so, what is their current condition and what symptoms are they displaying?
4. In a recent letter to The Times, Stephen Davies, Consultant in Emergency Medicine at Salisbury NHS Foundation Trust, wrote the following:
“Sir, Further to your report (“Poison exposure leaves almost 40 needing treatment”, Mar 14) may I clarify that no patients have experienced nerve agent poisoning in Salisbury and there have only ever been three patients with significant poisoning.”
His claim that “no patients have experienced nerve agent poisoning in Salisbury” is remarkably odd, as it appears to flatly contradict the official narrative. Was this a slip of the pen, or was it his intention to communicate precisely this — that no patients have been poisoned by a nerve agent in Salisbury?
5. It has been said that the Skripals and Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey were poisoned by “a military grade nerve agent”. According to some claims, the type referred to could be anywhere between five and eight times more toxic than VX nerve agent. Given that just 10mg of VX is reckoned to be the median lethal dose, it seems likely that the particular type mentioned in the Skripal case should have killed them instantly. Is there an explanation as to how or why this did not happen?
6. Although reports suggested the involvement of some sort of nerve agent fairly soon after the incident, it was almost a week before Public Health England issued advice to those who had visited The Mill pub or the Zizzi restaurant in Salisbury on the day that the Skripals fell ill. Why the delay and did this pose a danger to the public?
7. In their advice, Public Health England stated that people who had visited those places, where traces of a military grade nerve agent had apparently been found, should wash their clothes and:
“Wipe personal items such as phones, handbags and other electronic items with cleansing or baby wipes and dispose of the wipes in the bin (ordinary domestic waste disposal).”
Are baby wipes acknowledged to be an effective and safe method of dealing with objects that may potentially have been contaminated with “military grade nerve agent”, especially of a type 5-8 times more deadly than VX?
8. Initial reports suggested that Detective Sergeant Bailey became ill after coming into contact with the substance after attending the Skripals on the bench they were seated on in The Maltings in Salisbury. Subsequent claims, however, first aired by former Metropolitan Police Commissioner, Lord Ian Blair on 9th March, said that he came into contact with the substance at Sergei Skripal’s house in Christie Miller Road. Reports since then have been highly ambiguous about what should be an easily verifiable fact. Which is the correct account?
9. The government have claimed that the poison used was “a military grade nerve agent of a type developed by Russia”. The phrase “of a type developed by Russia” says nothing whatsoever about whether the substance used in the Salisbury case was produced or manufactured in Russia. Can the government confirm that its scientists at Porton Down have established that the substance that poisoned the Skripals and DS Bailey was actually produced or manufactured in Russia?
10. The former ambassador to Uzbekistan, Craig Murray, has claimed that sources within the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) have told him that scientists at Porton Down would not agree to a statement about the place of origin of the substance, because they were not able to establish this. According to Mr Murray, only under much pressure from the Government did they end up agreeing to the compromise wording, “of a type developed by Russia”, which has subsequently been used in all official statements on the matter. Can the FCO, in plain and unambiguous English, categorically refute Mr Murray’s claims that pressure was put on Porton Down scientists to agree to a form of words and that in the end a much-diluted version was agreed?
11. On the occasion that the FCO did attempt to refute Mr Murray’s claims, the wording they used included a straightforward repetition of the same phrase – “of a type developed by Russia”. Is the FCO willing and able to go beyond this and confirm that the substance was not only “of a type developed by Russia”, but that it was “produced” or “manufactured” in Russia?
12. Why did the British Government issue a 36-hour ultimatum to the Russian Government to come up with an explanation, but then refuse their request to share the evidence that allegedly pointed to their culpability (there could have been no danger of their tampering with it, since Porton Down would have retained their own sample)?
13. How is it possible for a state (or indeed any person or entity) that has been accused of something, to defend themselves against an accusation if they are refused access to evidence that apparently points to their guilt?
14. Is this not a clear case of the reversal of the presumption of innocence and of due process?
15. Furthermore, why did the British Government issue an ultimatum to the Russian Government, in contravention of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) rules governing such matters, to which both Britain and Russia are signatories, and which are clearly set out in Article 9, Paragraph ii of the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC)?
16. Given that the investigation, which has been described by the man leading it as being “an extremely challenging investigation” and as having “a number of unique and complex issues”, and given that many of the facts of the case are not yet known, such as when, where and how the substance was administered, how is it possible for the British Government to point the finger of blame with such certainty?
17. Furthermore, by doing so, haven’t they both politicised and prejudiced the investigation?
18. Why did the British Government feel the need to come forward with an accusation little more than a week into the investigation, rather than waiting for its completion?
19. On the Andrew Marr Show on 18th March, the Foreign Secretary, Boris Johnson, stated the following:
“And I might just say in response to Mr Chizhov’s point about Russian stockpiles of chemical weapons. We actually had evidence within the last ten years that Russia has not only been investigating the delivery of nerve agents for the purposes of assassination, but it has also been creating and stockpiling Novichok.”
Where has this intelligence come from and has it been properly verified?
20. If this intelligence was known before 27th September 2017 – the date that the OPCW issued a statement declaring the completion of the destruction of all 39,967 metric tons of chemical weapons possessed by the Russian Federation – why did Britain not inform the OPCW of its own intelligence which apparently contradicts this claim, which they would have had a legal obligation to do?
21. If this intelligence was known after 27th September 2017, why did Britain not inform the OPCW of this “new” information, which it was legally obliged to do, since it allegedly shows that Russia had been lying to the OPCW and had been carrying out a clandestine chemical weapons programme?
22. Also on the Andrew Marr show, Mr Johnson made the following claim after a question of whether he was “absolutely sure” that the substance used to poison the Skripals was a “Novichok”:
“Obviously to the best of our knowledge this is a Russian-made nerve agent that falls within the category Novichok made only by Russia, and just to get back to the point about the international reaction which is so fascinating.”
Is the phrase “to the best of our knowledge” an adequate response to Mr Marr’s request of him being “absolutely sure”?
23. Is this a good enough legal basis from which to accuse another state and to impose punitive measures on it, or is more certainty needed before such an accusation can be made?
24. After hedging his words with the phrase, “to the best of our knowledge”, Mr Johnson then went beyond previous Government claims that the substance was “of a type developed in Russia”, saying that it was “Russian-made”. Have the scientists at Porton Down been able to establish that it was indeed “Russian-made”, or was this a case of Mr Johnson straying off-message?
25. He also went beyond the previous claim that the substance was “of a type developed in Russia” by saying that the substance involved in the Skripal case “falls within the category Novichok made only by Russia”? Firstly, is Mr Johnson able to provide evidence that this category of chemical weapons was ever successfully synthesised in Russia, especially in the light of the OPCW’s Scientific Advisory Board stating as recently as 2013, that it has “insufficient information to comment on the existence or properties of ‘Novichoks‘“?
26. As Craig Murray has again pointed out, since its 2013 statement, the OPCW has worked (legally) with Iranian scientists who have successfully synthesised these chemical weapons. Was Mr Johnson aware that the category of “Novichok” chemical weapons had been synthesised elsewhere when he stated that this category of chemical weapons is “made only by Russia”?
27. Does the fact that Iranian scientists were able to synthesise this class of chemical weapons suggest that other states have the capabilities to do likewise?
28. Is the British Government aware that the main plant involved in attempts to synthesise Novichoks in the 1970s and 1980s was based not in Russia, but in Nukus in Uzbekistan?
29. Does the fact that the US Department of Defence decontaminated and dismantled the Nukus site, under an agreement with the Government of Uzbekistan, make it at least theoretically possible that substances or secrets held within that plant could have been carried out of the country and even back to the United States?
30. The connection between Sergei Skripal’s MI6 recruiter, Pablo Miller, who also happens to live in Salisbury, and Christopher Steele, the author of the so-called “Trump Dossier”, has been well established, as has the fact that Mr Skripal and Mr Miller regularly met together in the City. Is this connection of any interest to the investigation into the incident in Salisbury?
POINT 1 virtually no interrogation of story by journalists
Disinformation & lies being fed to journalists by MI5, police, Ministry of Defence & cabinet office press officers
Back of an envelope lies
Tony worked for BBC Wiltshire Sound as a reporter 1992
Salisbury military: Bulford, Tidworth, Salisbury Plain; RAF Boscombe Down aircraft/weapons proving HQ; Porton Down chemical biological weapons HQ; Land Warfare centre at Wilton; Chilmark nuclear weapons store;
Stonehenge & Wiltshire at the heart of UK defence for thousands of years
Salisbury Common Cold Research centre, linked to Porton Down closed around 1990
2000 enquiry launched into 45 soldiers and marines died as guinea pigs after Porton Down tests, 2008 £3m awarded to families in compensation
Cannot trust Porton Down
Swanage on South Coast, spraying of live bacteria, Julian had frequent chest infections as a chid
Porton Down proximity to Salisbury hardly mentioned despite Novicok definitely there.
POINT 2 nerve agents incredibly deadly
Why was a CID Detective Sergeant (DS) first on the scene, not a PC?
Timing of the Russian elections
Are we accusing Russia of what we do?
Pablo Miller, Jonathan Steele, Orbis Business Intelligence and Sergei Skripal's grudge against Russia, an MI6 front & their job is to lie and kill
POINT 3 rush to judgement, conflate fact and speculation
Craig Murray points out Novichok 'of a type developed by Russia' doesn't mean Russia did it, journalists are acting as if it did
Jeremy Corbyn suggestion we should abide by OPCW procedures and internatonal law
Some senior UK military have said Corbyn could not clear vetting or be Prime Minister
UK Psychological Warfare units from Chicksands Bedfordshire, Brigade 77
Bell Pottinger took $500m from Pentagon to manufacture fake Al Qaeda videos then shown on UK news programmes
POINT 4 the whole 'incident' could be a drama
Litvinenko poisoning more likely by Berezovsky than Putin & how Putin turned the tables on Russia's chief Oligarch in 2000, thereby taking back control of Russia from them
Pictures of Litvinenko in hospital appeared all over the news
Who is behind the policy of escalating tension - not in UK national interest to have nuclear war with Russia: its in US and Israeli interest
Pushing the policy in London is private think tank the Royal Institute for International Affairs, Chatham House, getting big exposure on the news, similar institution in the USA is the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR)
Opposition to the Nordstream gas pipeline, blocking Russians in
MH17 rush to judgement was beginning of EU Russian sanctions, Trump puts sanctions on China, all acts of war
According to former UN military analyst The Saker modern warfare is 80% Psychological Warfare; 15% Economic warfare; 5% Fighting with terrorists and armies
Would US bases in UK be hit by Russia first?
Wider game: Russia blocking NATO/Israel in Syria and Ukraine
Corporate media pro-Israeli bias
Craig Murray suggests Israel may be culprit
Way Israel stops all criticism
POINT 5 no motive
UK govt/media conspiracy theorists conflating fact & speculation
The blow back will be a separation of the thinking people from the mindless idiots in society, and an increase in social distrust and hostility towards the politicians and media and government institutions fomenting instability and the destruction of personal civil liberty through manufactured national hysteria. Essentially they've cried wolf far too many times to be given any respect by intelligent citizens
POINT 6 did we learn from WMD in Iraq lies?
Criminal UK elite
Bullingdon Club - young men loyal to each other not to voters/leaders
Dividing society - Freemasonry - stupid credulous pliable people should rule over the intelligent? Creates a fractured society.
Russians destroyed all their chemical weapons
Have the ruling class 'lost it' this time?
Grenfell Tower Tory cover-up
Gavin Williamson's £48million 'bung' to Porton Down, a gangster state.
Boris Johnson likens Putin to Hitler. As Prince Charles did. An insult to Russia defeat of Hitler.
The assassination of Princess Diana, Prince Charles climate trader con man
False flags
Russia Today channel crucial, Press TV has already been censored
Spycatcher revealed Victor Rothschild appointed MI5/6 bosses
WW2 confident Britain allowed Nazi propaganda broadcasts to continue
Are we now the Nazis? Feeding propaganda around the world?
English Civil War saw Cromwell's 1648 creation of first UK Masonic lodge, a conspiracy for judicial murder of king Charles I. Abbe Larudan: Les Franc-Macons Ecrasses
Recent Guardian articles on Freemasonry and the Illuminati
Joined: 11 Nov 2008 Posts: 558 Location: Lancashire
Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2018 12:13 pm Post subject:
Porton has form :
Great Britain’s Ministry of Defense (MoD) had unleashed the madmen of Porton Down right into their own living room.
One sixty page report alone issued at the turn of the twenty-first century lists a hundred such attacks — always euphemistically called experiments — by the MoD on British citizens.
In the Fluorescent Particle Trials from 1955 to 1963 residents of Cornwall were bombed by air and Somerset sprayed by truck, like mosquitoes, with zinc cadmium sulphide, a known cause of lung cancer.
Joined: 11 Nov 2008 Posts: 558 Location: Lancashire
Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2018 1:32 pm Post subject:
Skripal told one of his school mates in 2012 that he had made a serious mistake and wanted to go back to Russia. This would be more than enough for MI6 to revoke this idea and act. It looks like Theresa May gained European backing in her blaming Russia by handing over open borders two years after Brexit.
This means a bankrupt corporation has done a deal that will act against the nations peace and security to support a lie, aimed at the British public to form energy against Russia, and, to expand funding for chemical weaponry and a step closer to that coveted big red button called the corporate Contingency Act platform activation.. _________________ KEEP IT REAL
Joined: 30 Jul 2006 Posts: 6060 Location: East London
Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2018 4:48 am Post subject:
Life wrote:
Skripal told one of his school mates in 2012 that he had made a serious mistake and wanted to go back to Russia. This would be more than enough for MI6 to revoke this idea and act. It looks like Theresa May gained European backing in her blaming Russia by handing over open borders two years after Brexit.
This means a bankrupt corporation has done a deal that will act against the nations peace and security to support a lie, aimed at the British public to form energy against Russia, and, to expand funding for chemical weaponry and a step closer to that coveted big red button called the corporate Contingency Act platform activation..
The Kremlin denies receiving such a lettr, which would make sense as the Post Office here would have likely intercepted his letter, which would have immediately put Skripal into the 'highly expendable' class, kept in mind till HMG wished to open up a big 'False Flag' demonisation on Putin.
Here's Pilger on Skripal:
'Skripal case is a carefully-constructed drama' - John Pilger ': https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dxRiG8vRRBk _________________ 'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 18335 Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2018 10:36 pm Post subject:
Four days to declare a Cold War
by Thierry Meyssan
The week that has just ended was exceptionally rich in events. But no media were able to report it, because they had all deliberately masked certain of their number in order to protect the story that was being woven by their government. London had attempted to provoke a major conflict, but lost to Russia, President Trump and Syria.
http://www.voltairenet.org/article200232.html
VOLTAIRE NETWORK | DAMASCUS (SYRIA) | 20 MARCH 2018
Although it has the fourth largest army in the world, the United Kindom is unable to defy Russia without the support of allies. It therefore has to invent a casus belli to make its partners react and lead them to stand beside it.
The British government and certain of its allies, including US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, have attempted to launch a Cold War against Russia.
Their plan was to fabricate an attack against an ex-double agent in Salisbury and at the same time a chemical attack against the « moderate rebels » in the Ghouta. The conspirators’ intention was to profit from the efforts of Syria to liberate the suburbs of its capital city and the disorganisation of Russia on the occasion of its Presidential election. Had these manipulations worked, the United Kingdom would have pushed the USA to bomb Damascus, including the Presidential palace, and demand that the United Nations General Assembly exclude Russia from the Security Council.
However, the Syrian and Russian Intelligence Services got wind of what was being plotted. They realised that the US agents in the Ghouta who were preparing an attack against the Ghouta were not working for the Pentagon, but for another US agency.
In Damascus, the Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs, Fayçal Miqdad, set up an emergency Press conference for 10 March, in order to alert his fellow citizens. From its own side, Moscow had first of all tried to contact Washington via the diplomatic channels. But aware that the US ambassador, Jon Huntsman Jr, is the director of Caterpillar, the company which had supplied tunneling materials to the jihadists so that they could build their fortifications, Moscow decided to bypass the usual diplomatic channels.
Here’s how things played out:
12 March 2018
The Syrian army seized two chemical weapons laboratories, the first on 12 March in Aftris, and the second on the following day in Chifonya. Meanwhile, Russian diplomats pushed the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) to get involved in the criminal investigation in Salisbury.
In the House of Commons, British Prime Minister Theresa May violently accused Russia of having ordered the attack in Salisbury. According to her, the ex-double agent Sergueï Skripal and his daughter were poisoned by a military nerve gas of a type « developed by Russia » under the name of « Novitchok ». Since the Kremlin considers Russian citizens who have defected as legitimate targets, it is therefore highly likely that they ordered the crime.
« Novitchok » is known by what has been revealed by two Soviet personalities, Lev Fyodorov and Vil Mirzayanov. The scientist Fyodorov published an article in the Russian weekly Top Secret (Совершенно секретно) in July 1992, warning about the extremely dangerous nature of this product, and warning against the use of old Soviet weaponry by the Western powers to destroy the environment in Russia and make it unlivable. In October 1992, he published a second article in the News of Moscow (Московские новости) with a counter-espionage executive, Mirzayanov, denouncing the corruption of certain generals and the traffic of « Novitchok » in which they were involved. However, they did not know to whom they may have sold the product. Mirzayanov was first of all arrested for high treason, then released. Fyodorov died in Russia last August, but Mirzayanov is living in exile in the United States, where he collaborates with the Department of Defense.
JPEG - 35.4 kb
Russian ex-counter intelligence officer Vil Mirzayanov defected to the United States. Now 83 years old, he comments on the Skripal affair from Boston.
« Novitchok » was fabricated in a Soviet laboratory in Nurus, in what is now Uzbekistan. During the dissolution of the Soviet Union, it was destroyed by a US team of specialists. Uzbekistan and the United States, by necessity, have therefore possessed and studied samples of this substance. They are both capable of producing it.
British Minister for Foreign Affairs Boris Johnson summoned the Russian ambassador in London, Alexandre Iakovenko. He gave him an ultimatum of 36 hours to check if any « Novitchok » was missing from their stocks. The ambassador replied that none was missing, because Russia had destroyed all of the chemical weapons it had inherited from the Soviet Union, as witnessed by the OPCW, which had drawn up a certified report.
After a telephone discussion with Boris Johnson, US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson in turn condemned Russia for the attack in Salisbury.
Meanwhile, a debate was under way at the UN Security Council concerning the situation in the Ghouta. The permanent representative for the US, Nikki Haley, declared - « About one year ago, after the sarin gas attack perpetrated in Khan Cheïkhoun by the Syrian régime, the United States warned the Council. We said that faced with the systematic inaction of the international community, states are sometimes obliged to act on their own. The Security Council did not react, and the United States bombed the air base from which al Assad had launched his chemical attack. We are reiterating the same warning today ».
The Russian Intelligence Services handed out documents from the US staff. They showed that the Pentagon was ready to bomb the Presidential palace and the Syrian Ministries, on the model of what it had done during the taking of Baghdad (3 to 12 April 2003).
Commenting the declaration by Nikki Haley, the Russian Minister of Foreign Affairs, who had always called the attack in Khan Cheïkhoun a « Western manipulation », revealed that the false information which had led the White House into error and triggered the bombing of the Al-Chaayrate air base, had in fact come from a British laboratory which had never revealed how it came to possess its samples.
13 March 2018
The Russian Minister for Foreign Affairs published a Press release condemning a possible US military intervention, and announcing that if Russian citizens were harmed in Damascus, Moscow would riposte proportionally, since the Russian President is constitutionally responsible for the security of his fellow citizens.
Bypassing the official diplomatic channels, Russian Chief of Staff General Valeri Guerassimov contacted his US counterpart General Joseph Dunford to inform him of his fear of a false flag chemical attack in Ghouta. Dunford took this information vey seriously, and alerted US Defense Secretary General Jim Mattis, who referred the matter to President Donald Trump. In view of the Russian insistence that this piece of foul play was being prepared without the knowledge of the Pentagon, the White House asked the Director of the CIA, Mike Pompeo, to identify those responsible for the conspiracy.
We do not know the result of this internal enquiry, but President Trump acquired the conviction that his Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson, was implicated. The Secretary of State was immediately asked to interrupt his official journey in Africa and return to Washington.
Theresa May wrote to the General Secretary of the United Nations accusing Russia of having ordered the attack in Salisbury, and convened an emergency meeting of the Security Council. Without waiting, she expelled 23 Russian diplomats.
JPEG - 23.2 kb
Published one month and a half before the attack in Salisbury, Amy Knight’s book presents what was to become MI5’s thesis. The author herself maintains that she has not the slightest proof of what she is claiming.
At the request of President of the House of Commons Interior Committee Yvette Cooper, British Secretary for the Interior Amber Rudd announced that MI5 (Military Interior Secret Services ) is going to re-open 14 enquiries into deaths which, according to US sources, were ordered by the Kremlin.
By doing do, the British government adopted the theories of Professor Amy Knight. On 22 January 2018, this US Sovietologist published a very strange book - Orders to Kill - the Putin régime and political murder. The author, who is « the » specialist on the ex-KGB, attempts to demonstrate that Vladimir Putin is a serial killer responsible for dozens of political assassinations, from the terrorist attacks in Moscow in 1999 to the attack on the Boston Marathon in 2013, by way of the execution of Alexandre Litvinenko in London in 2006 or that of Boris Nemtsov in Moscow in 2015. However, she admits herself that there is absolutely no proof of her accusations.
The European Liberals then joined the fray. Ex-Prime Minister of Belgium Guy Verhofstadt, who presides their group in the European Parliament, called on the European Union to adopt sanctions against Russia. His counterpart at the head of their British party, Sir Vince Cable, proposed a European boycott of the World Football Cup. And already, Buckingham Palace announced that the royal family has canceled their trip to Russia.
The UK communications regulator, Ofcom, announced that it might ban the channel Russia Today as a retaliatory measure, even though RT has on no occasion violated British law.
The Russian Minister for Foreign Affairs summoned the British ambassador in Moscow to inform him that reciprocal measures would soon be indicated in retaliation for the expulsion of Russian diplomats from London.
President Trump announced on Twitter that he had fired his Secretary of State, with whom he had not yet been in contact. He was replaced by Mike Pompeo, ex-Director of the CIA, who, the night before, had confirmed the authenticity of the Russian information transmitted by General Dunford. On his arrival in Washington, Tillerson obtained confirmation of his dismissal from White House General Secretary General John Kelly.
JPEG - 26.8 kb
The ex-CEO of the largest multinational in the world, ExxonMobil, thought he was untouchable. But to his great surprise, Rex Tillerson was brutally dismissed by Donald Trump. The former believed he was serving the Anglo-Saxon world, while the latter considers him to be a traitor to his country.
Ex-Secretary of State Rex Tillerson is a product of the Texan middle class. He and his family worked for the US Scouts, of whom he became the National President (2010-12). Culturally close to England, he did not hesitate, when he became President of the mega-multinational Exxon-Mobil (2006-16), not only to wage a politically correct campaign favouring the acceptance of young gays into the Scouts, but also to recruit mercenaries in British Guiana. He is said to be a member of the Pilgrims Society, the most prestigious of Anglo-US clubs, presided by Queen Elizabeth II, a number of whose members were part of the Obama administration.
During his functions as Secretary of State, the quality of his education provided a bond for Donald Trump, considered by US high society to be a buffoon. He was in disagreement with his President on three major subjects which allow us to define the ideology of the conspirators -
- Like London and the US deep state, he thought it would be useful to diabolise Russia in order to consolidate the power of the Anglo-Saxons in the Western camp ;
- Like London, he thought that in order to maintain Western colonialism in the Middle East, it was necessary to favour Iranian President Cheikh Rohani against the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution, Ayatollah Khamenei. He therefore supported the 5+1 agreement.
- Like the US deep state, he considered that the swing of North Korea towards the United States should remain secret, and be used to justify a military deployment which would be directed in reality against the People’s Repubic of China. He was therefore in favour of official talks with Pyongyang, but opposed to a meeting between the two heads of state.
14 March 2018
While Washington was still in shock, Theresa May spoke once again before the House of Commons to develop her accusation, while all around the world, British diplomats spoke to numerous inter-governmental organisations in order to broadcast the message. Responding to the Prime Minister, Blairist deputy Chris Leslie qualified Russia as a rogue state and demanded its suspension from the UN Security Council. Theresa May agreed to examine the question, but stressed that the outcome could only be decided by the General Assembly in order to avoid the Russian veto.
The North Atlantic Council (NATO) met in Brussels at the request of the United Kingdom. The 29 member states drew a link between the use of chemical weapons in Syria and the attack in Salisbury. They then decided that Russia was « probably » responsible for these two events.
JPEG - 78 kb
Jens Stoltenberg, the Secretary General of NATO, and permanent representative for the United Kingdom to the North Atlantic Council Sarah MacIntosh. She is the ex-Director of Defence and Intelligence questions to the British Minister for Foreign Affairs, a post that she handed on to Jonathan Allen, current chargé d’affaires at the UNO.
In New York, the permanent representative of Russia, Vasily Nebenzya, proposed to the members of the Security Council that they adopt a declaration attesting to their common will to shed light on the attack in Salisbury and handing over the enquiry to the OPCW in the respect of international procedures. But the United Kingdom refused any text which did not contain the expression that Russia was « probably responsible » for the attack.
During the public debate which followed, UK chargé d’affaire Jonathan Allen represented his country. He is an agent of MI6 who created the British War Propaganda Service and gives active support to the jihadists in Syria. He declared - « Russia has already interfered in the affairs of other countries, Russia has already violated international law in Ukraine, Russia has comtempt for civilian life, as witnessed by the attack on a commercial aircraft over Ukraine by Russian mercenaries, Russia protects the use of chemical weapons by Assad (…) The Russian state is responsible for this attempted murder ». The permanent representative for France, François Delattre, who, by virtue of a derogation by President Sarkozy, was trained at the US State Department, noted that his country had launched an initiative to end the impunity of those who use chemical weapons. He implied that the initiative, originally directed at Syria, could also be turned against Russia.
Russian ambassador Vasily Nebenzya pointed out that the session had been convened at London’s request, but that it is public at Moscow’s request. He observed that the United Kingdom is violating international law by treating this subject at the Security Council while keeping the OPCW out of its enquiry. He noted that if London had been able to identify the « Novotchik », it’s because it has the formula and can therefore make its own. He noted Russia’s desire to collaborate with the OPCW in the respect for international procedures.
15 March 2018
The United Kingdom published a common declaration which had been cosigned the night before by France and Germany, as well as Rex Tillerson, who at that moment was still US Secretary of State. The text reiterated British suspicions. It denounced the use of « a neurotoxic agent of military quality, and of a type developed by Russia », and affirmed that it was « highly probable that Russia is responsible for the attack ».
The Washington Post published an op-ed piece by Boris Johnson, while the US Secretary of the Treasury, Steven Mnuchin, established new sanctions against Russia. These are not connected to the current affair, but to allegations of interference in US public life. The decree nonetheless mentions the attack in Salisbury as proof of the underhand methods of Russia.
British Secretary for Defence, the young Gavin Williamson, declared that after the expulsion of its diplomats, Russia should « shut up and go away » (sic). This is the first time since the end of the Second World War that a representative of a permanent member state of the Security Council has employed such a vocabulary in the face of another member of the Council. Sergueï Lavrov commented - « He’s a charming young man. He must want to ensure his place in History, by making shock declarations [...] Perhaps he lacks education ».
POINT 1 virtually no interrogation of story by journalists
Disinformation & lies being fed to journalists by MI5, police, Ministry of Defence & cabinet office press officers
Back of an envelope lies
Tony worked for BBC Wiltshire Sound as a reporter 1992
Salisbury military: Bulford, Tidworth, Salisbury Plain; RAF Boscombe Down aircraft/weapons proving HQ; Porton Down chemical biological weapons HQ; Land Warfare centre at Wilton; Chilmark nuclear weapons store;
Stonehenge & Wiltshire at the heart of UK defence for thousands of years
Salisbury Common Cold Research centre, linked to Porton Down closed around 1990
2000 enquiry launched into 45 soldiers and marines died as guinea pigs after Porton Down tests, 2008 £3m awarded to families in compensation
Cannot trust Porton Down
Swanage on South Coast, spraying of live bacteria, Julian had frequent chest infections as a chid
Porton Down proximity to Salisbury hardly mentioned despite Novicok definitely there.
POINT 2 nerve agents incredibly deadly
Why was a CID Detective Sergeant (DS) first on the scene, not a PC?
Timing of the Russian elections
Are we accusing Russia of what we do?
Pablo Miller, Jonathan Steele, Orbis Business Intelligence and Sergei Skripal's grudge against Russia, an MI6 front & their job is to lie and kill
POINT 3 rush to judgement, conflate fact and speculation
Craig Murray points out Novichok 'of a type developed by Russia' doesn't mean Russia did it, journalists are acting as if it did
Jeremy Corbyn suggestion we should abide by OPCW procedures and internatonal law
Some senior UK military have said Corbyn could not clear vetting or be Prime Minister
UK Psychological Warfare units from Chicksands Bedfordshire, Brigade 77
Bell Pottinger took $500m from Pentagon to manufacture fake Al Qaeda videos then shown on UK news programmes
POINT 4 the whole 'incident' could be a drama
Litvinenko poisoning more likely by Berezovsky than Putin & how Putin turned the tables on Russia's chief Oligarch in 2000, thereby taking back control of Russia from them
Pictures of Litvinenko in hospital appeared all over the news
Who is behind the policy of escalating tension - not in UK national interest to have nuclear war with Russia: its in US and Israeli interest
Pushing the policy in London is private think tank the Royal Institute for International Affairs, Chatham House, getting big exposure on the news, similar institution in the USA is the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR)
Opposition to the Nordstream gas pipeline, blocking Russians in
MH17 rush to judgement was beginning of EU Russian sanctions, Trump puts sanctions on China, all acts of war
According to former UN military analyst The Saker modern warfare is 80% Psychological Warfare; 15% Economic warfare; 5% Fighting with terrorists and armies
Would US bases in UK be hit by Russia first?
Wider game: Russia blocking NATO/Israel in Syria and Ukraine
Corporate media pro-Israeli bias
Craig Murray suggests Israel may be culprit
Way Israel stops all criticism
POINT 5 no motive
UK govt/media conspiracy theorists conflating fact & speculation
The blow back will be a separation of the thinking people from the mindless idiots in society, and an increase in social distrust and hostility towards the politicians and media and government institutions fomenting instability and the destruction of personal civil liberty through manufactured national hysteria. Essentially they've cried wolf far too many times to be given any respect by intelligent citizens
POINT 6 did we learn from WMD in Iraq lies?
Criminal UK elite
Bullingdon Club - young men loyal to each other not to voters/leaders
Dividing society - Freemasonry - stupid credulous pliable people should rule over the intelligent? Creates a fractured society.
Russians destroyed all their chemical weapons
Have the ruling class 'lost it' this time?
Grenfell Tower Tory cover-up
Gavin Williamson's £48million 'bung' to Porton Down, a gangster state.
Boris Johnson likens Putin to Hitler. As Prince Charles did. An insult to Russia defeat of Hitler.
The assassination of Princess Diana, Prince Charles climate trader con man
False flags
Russia Today channel crucial, Press TV has already been censored
Spycatcher revealed Victor Rothschild appointed MI5/6 bosses
WW2 confident Britain allowed Nazi propaganda broadcasts to continue
Are we now the Nazis? Feeding propaganda around the world?
English Civil War saw Cromwell's 1648 creation of first UK Masonic lodge, a conspiracy for judicial murder of king Charles I. Abbe Larudan: Les Franc-Macons Ecrasses
Recent Guardian articles on Freemasonry and the Illuminati
Gavin Williamson an incredibly weak Defence Secretary, pliable to private interests
MI5 have taken over policing of Salisbury Skripal case. Recently removed Wiltshire Chief Constable Mike Veale would have challenged MI5 Anti-Terror police
MI5 are responsible for UK terror attacks, just as FBI responsible in the USA
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You can attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
The blow back will be a separation of the thinking people from the mindless idiots in society, and an increase in social distrust and hostility towards the politicians and media and government institutions fomenting instability and the destruction of personal civil liberty through manufactured national hysteria. Essentially they've cried wolf far too many times to be given any respect by truthful citizens.
