Just Who’s Pulling the Strings? 1205


March 4 2018 Sergei and Yulia Skripal are attacked with a nerve agent in Salisbury

March 6 2018 Boris Johnson blames Russia and calls Russia “a malign force”

March 7 2018 Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman of Saudi Arabia arrives in London for an official visit

March 13 2018 Valeri Gerasimov, Russian Chief of General Staff, states that Russia has intelligence a fake chemical attack is planned against civilians in Syria as a pretext for US bombing of Damascus, and that Russia will respond militarily.

March 19 2018 Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman of Saudi Arabia arrives in Washington for an official visit

April 8 2018 Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman of Saudi Arabia arrives in Paris for an official visit

April 8 2018 Saudi funded jihadist groups Jaysh al Islam and Tahrir al-Sham and UK funded jihadist “rescue group” The White Helmets claim a chemical weapons attack occurred in their enclave of Douma the previous day – just before its agreed handover to the Syrian army – and blame the Syrian government.

April 11 2018 Saudi Arabia pledges support for attack on Syria

April 14 2018 US/UK/French attack on Syria begins.

I have always denied the UK’s claim that only Russia had a motive to attack the Skripals. To denigrate Russia internationally by a false flag attack pinning the blame on Russia, always seemed to me more likely than for the Russians to do that to themselves. And from the start I pointed to the conflict in Syria as a likely motive. That puts Saudi Arabia (and its client jihadists), Saudi Arabia’s close ally Israel, the UK and the USA all in the frame in having a powerful motive in inculcating anti-Russian sentiment prior to planned conflict with Russia in Syria. Any of them could have attacked the Skripals.

Today, Theresa May is claiming -astonishingly – that the UK attack on Syria is “to deter chemical weapons attacks in Syria and the UK”. I don’t think the motive for a Skripal false flag could be more starkly demonstrated.

We do not yet know how many children and other civilians have died so far in what the media always pretend are magically “pinpoint” attacks on Syria. Denying the “collateral damage” is part of the neo-con playbook. The danger is that they will not stop but continue to push, testing how far they can go in weakening Syrian government forces to promote their jihadist allies on the ground, before they spark a real Russian reaction. That way madness lies.

It is also worth noting that the most ardent supporters of this military action, outside Saudi Arabia and Israel, are the Blairites in the UK and the Clinton Democrats in the USA. The self-described “centrists” are actually the unhinged extremists in today’s politics.

This attack on Syria is, beyond doubt, a huge success for the machinations of Mohammed Bin Salman. Please do read my post of 8 March which sets out the background to his agenda, and I believe is essential to why we find our nations in military action again today. Despite the fact the vast majority of the people do not want this.


Allowed HTML - you can use: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

1,205 thoughts on “Just Who’s Pulling the Strings?

1 4 5 6 7 8 11
  • Gary

    Just want to thank you for publishing this and other articles. Without you, and a few others, we would have no information on which to base our opinion. Investigative journalism is dead. In fact basic skills such as ‘fact checking’ seem to have died as well.

    Are you what we used to describe, if based in Soviet Russia back in the day, a ‘dissident’?

    We have more access to knowledge now than ever, yet so much of it is simply press releases from HMG rather than reportage. We need the dissidents and the rebellious to question what we are handed, and make us realise not all is as it seems…

    • Jo Dominich

      Gary you are oh so right. One thing I have learned about being on this blog is that there are some very knowledgeable people here who are brilliant at interrogating the Internet and giving us links to international sites and reports that do not follow press releases from HMG. Long live this site!

  • Madeira

    Well now I guess we know why they chose to use the following phrase:

    ““Novichok-class nerve agent or closely related agent”

    • TJ

      It’s not closely related at all, it’s not even a toxic chemical agent, it is an incapacitating agent, the government committed perjury in it’s submission to the Court.

      • Madeira

        If it is only incapacitating, and it seems you are right about this, I would say that the possibility that at least one of the Skripals was a willing and knowing participant in this “affair” has increased enormously.

      • ToivoS

        bz is an extreme hallucigen that has a large effective range before lethality, but it is deadly. But this story is getting really weird — there is no way any chemist would confuse bz with an organophosphate triester.

  • Charles

    Parliament has been usurped.

    Where now? Another very serious crime has been committed by the United Kingdom on yet another sovereign nation but there is no accountability.

    The warmongers are laughing at the public, the people who pay their wages and pensions. They hold Democracy, the Rule of Law and the Truth in Contempt.

    The UN and ICC have made redundant, The OPCW impotent.

    I hope Putin does launch his missiles, this is no longer a world fit for decent people.

  • Gary

    Probably a coincidence…have retuned FOUR TIMES and I am still unable to get RT on Freeview, although I CAN get their website. I was eager to get their take on the bombings in Syria.

    Maybe my aerial has somehow moved from it’s position, although RT seems to be the only missing channel so far. It DOES make me wonder if RT’s days are numbered though. I can’t see them being able to operate for long in this climate.

    NB I recognise, of course, they are ‘state funded’ and fulfil the same role as BBC do for us here. But I have always felt that watching the coverage of the same event on both channels makes for an interesting ‘compare and contrast’

  • Blissex

    An opinion piece by Lord Adonis in “The Guardian” says that the bombing were too little too late and we need protection against russian attacks against England and against an invasion of Europe by Russia:

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/apr/14/theresa-may-essential-argument-for-syria-strikes-nonsensical
    «Time and time again Putin has shown his contempt not only for international law (witness Crimea and Salisbury) and chemical weapons conventions (witness Syria and Salisbury), but also western power and pretensions – witness his dismemberment of Ukraine. The case that could be made for May is that we in Britain have recently been attacked by the Russians and are threatened by Putin at large.»
    «It is a vital British and European interest to demonstrate to Putin that Trump is on our side, not his. Our security and defence services are rightly concerned that Putin may not understand this and might thereby seriously miscalculate, perhaps by invading the vulnerable Baltic states in a widening of his Ukrainian enterprise and quest for nationalistic glory.»

    The argument here seems to be that Russia has stockpiles of WMDs that have already been used (“contempt … for … chemical weapons conventions (witness Syria and Salisbury)“) and therefore Vladimir Putin is like but worse than Saddam Hussein and Russia is like but worse than Iraq, and that far from being only 45 minutes away, Putin’s stockpiles of WMDs have already been deployed, because “we in Britain have recently been attacked by the Russians and are threatened by Putin at large”.

      • Blissex

        «welcome the Russians.»

        I would not, as our mafia-like elites are overall somewhat less bad to their own populations than their mafia-like elites.

    • D_Majestic

      In other words, a standard Neocon view delivered in a standardized Neocon newspaper.

    • Jo Dominich

      Blissex, I cannot believe the Guardian are writing this. From where I am standing at least, and from everything I have read, Salisbury is a false flag and false accusation so is Syria. I cannot see any evidence that Putin has tried and is guilty of any of those things. Journalists ought to check their facts, he did not invade Ukraine, the Crimeans voted by a 95% clear mandate to be annexed to the Russian Federation, that is not an invasion that is a democratic vote. Can this journalist provide any proof whatsoever that Russia was guilty for Salisbury or Syria because I can’t. All I can see are government lies, pathetic lies and many changes of stories at that, and Putin and Russia as being the only nation in the world apart from China and Iran who have taken the evidence exactly for what it is. Putin is the only person that has shown admirable restraint, statesmanlike qualities and is the only, repeat, the only party in this who has consistently requested political resolution through the appropriate international and legal channels and through diplomacy – I don’t see anyone else doing this. I cannot see he is out for nationalistic glory – that honour goes to Trump and May – I am so deeply disappointed that the Guardian has stooped so low as to now become a warmongering advocate and another propaganda tool for the UK Government. I don’t see any threats at all from Russia but I do from Trump and May. Our country’s security has now been very seriously compromised by May, Russia is not responsible for that, ,May is. I don’t see Putin having sent a tweet as explosive or anywhere near as inflammatory as Trumps.

  • John Spencer-Davis

    Well, this is an interesting development, isn’t it? Let’s see what the UK media make of this.

    – Sergey Lavrov, Russian Foreign Minister, states that the Swiss laboratory that analysed the substance that harmed the Skripals and Mr Bailey identified it as “3-Quinuclidinyl benzilate”, a toxin with – as far as I can make out – similar properties to a nerve agent.

    – Mr Lavrov states that this substance originated in the US and is known to have been in the possession of the US, the UK and other
    NATO countries. It has not been publicly known to have been synthesised by the former Soviet Union or by Russia.

    These are matters of hard fact, and Mr Lavrov can be publicly demonstrated to be either right or wrong in what he is saying. I wonder how eagerly the Western media and governments will pursue Mr Lavrov’s allegations. J

    • Anthony

      Very interesting indeed. Unfortunately, mainstream journalism seems to be a state-run profession these days, and proudly so.

    • Paul

      Mr. Lavrov seems like a competent fellow–assume he has evidence that cannot be disappeared, say on a park bench somewhere in Switzerland.

  • Sid

    I’m game, when and where do we storm the ramparts? It’s time to end these criminal western regimes. Walking and strutting around with their ‘moral imperatives’ as grounds for this ILLEGAL attack on a sovereign nation. All based on a SHAM video (watch closely in the footage, the children cry and protest AFTER being showered with cold water from hoses and manhandled). How dare these fools we call leaders claim to be “doing it for the children of Syria” or whatever crap ‘ethical’ reason it is that they are bandying about. YEMEN YEMEN YEMEN. How about the starvation of thousands of children there? Where is the breathless accusations in parliment against the Saudis for the atrocities they inflict on children in Yemen? Crickets.

    • Jo Dominich

      I would like any head of state from a western country to show they have some or any powers of analysis or brains or even courage to get onto this blog and tells why, when the British Public can blatantly see through the lies, manipulations and mass media propaganda to see these two false flags for what they are, the rest of the world leaders obviously don’t have the intelligence to? Also, I would like them to explain why, intent on blaming Syria and Russia for the false flag chemical attack, did they not act on Russian intelligence of a false flag operation sent on 13.30.2018 and they conveniently ignore the fact, the actual fact, that, as confirmed by the OPCW in 2013 and 2017 respectively, that Syria and Russia had destroyed all of their chemical weapons under international supervision. I would like them to explain why these facts are conveniently ignore when they are the actual and evidence truth. Does one Head of State or Head of the UN have the courage to do this.

  • bj

    Citing a report on RT: “The Swiss center sent the results to the OPCW. However, the UN chemical watchdog limited itself only to confirming the formula of the substance used to poison the Skripals in its final report without mentioning anything about the other facts presented in the Swiss document, the Russian foreign minister added. He went on to say that Moscow would ask the OPCW about its decision to not include any other information provided by the Swiss in its report.”

    I don’t quite understand the fragment “However, the [OPCW] limited itself only to confirming the formula of the substance used to poison the Skripals”. Anyone?

    • Kempe

      It’d be good to have some comment from the Swiss laboratory direct; also from the OPCW’s own laboratory in The Netherlands and the other places who got samples to analyse.

      • Murray Johnson

        It’ll have to be the OPCW. I doubt the Swiss Lab would be allowed to publicly comment on OPCW matters.

      • Folky McFolkface


        [Mod: Sock puppet. Don’t comment any further on this thread, please.]

        Comment deleted.

        • IM

          Thanks mod! I found the label of “sock puppet” ambiguous and wasn’t sure to whom it referred.

          May I suggest something along the line of “Poster of this message has been identified as posting using multiple identities contrary to the rules [link]. Consequently, this message is deleted.” instead of “sock puppet” because to be frank, one can pretend to be a mod and label anyone a sock puppet 😉

    • bj

      I do not understand the word “confirming”; the OPCW did its own analysis. Or (conjecture) did the analysis of one of three labs the OPCW approached not concur with the analysis of the other two??

    • Dee

      Originally Lavrov said that the report has confirmation on presence both BZ and Novichok (A-234? don’t remember the exact number sorry), with the Novichok being in such high concentration it excludes its use two weeks ago since it’s too volatile. OPCW report has confirmed the Novichok part and omitted the BZ one all together.

        • Yonatan

          Hoenig’s “Compendium of Chemical Warfare Agents” describes BZ as:

          “BZ is usually disseminated as an aerosol with the primary route of entry into the body through the respiratory system; the secondary route is through the digestive tract. BZ blocks the action of acetylcholine in both the peripheral and central nervous systems. As such, it lessens the degree and extent of the transmission of impulses from one nerve fiber to another through their connecting synaptic junctions. It stimulates the action of noradrenaline (norepinephrine) in the brain, much as do amphetamines and cocaine. Thus, it may induce vivid hallucinations as it sedates the victim. Toxic delirium is very common.”

          This describes the symptoms exhibitied by Sergei Skripal. It has a very high lethal dose to effective dose ratio of about 400:1 which means very small amounts are effective and the victim is unlikely to die unless massive amounts are applied.

          The comment about aerosol dissemination is also very interesting. The CCTV showing the Skripals passing theough the covered arcade between Zizzi’s restaurant and the park bench where they were found showed a blonde woman leaving a shop after they passed and taking the same route as them. The Salisbury police initially declared this woman to be a person of interest, but she seems to have dropped off the radar once the complication of PC Bailey’s poisoning came up and the whole doorknob scenario was created.

          Did she follow the Skripals and use a handheld spray unit to spray BZ into the Skripal’s faces? One commentator claimed she was carrying some kind of face mask as she left the shop. The very high lethal/effective ratio would make it a very safe agent to use in this way, especially as the antidote could be on hand in the case of accidental self-poisoning.

        • Gideon Blackmarsh

          My understanding of this, for what it’s worth, would be that BZ was used to produce the symptoms in the Skripals that eyewitnesses reported. The role of the Novichok was to be “found” on Sergei’s door handle and thus frame the Russians (as we would repeatedly be told that this substance could only have been produced in Russia). With both Corbyn and the Russians insisting that the OPCW investigate the events in Salisbury, it was necessary to get a non-lethal dose of Novichok into the Skripal’s bloodstreams for them to find. That would account for the presence of both BZ and Novichok and why the Novichok was the more prominent (being administered more recently) and why the BZ was missed by the other labs.

      • Rubber Duck

        When I was much, much younger, back in the erly 80’s, I remember an old friend – sadly now left us – who told me about an agent called BZ that had been developed. He said it was intended to be deployed to bring about “random behaviour” in the enemy. We used to laugh about the idea of an army behaving randomly, having seen the videos of the British Army acid tests on troops in the sixties. I had no idea back then that this sort of stuff was true. Just seeing those two letters again though… Is the Russian evidence backed up??

    • Madeira

      This is a bit confusing, if Lavrov is correct the “formula” would have been that of 3-Quinuclidinyl benzilate. But the OPCW in its public report said that:

      “The results of analysis by the OPCW designated laboratories of environmental and biomedical samples collected by the OPCW team confirm the findings of the United Kingdom relating to the identity of the toxic chemical that was used in Salisbury”

      Logically, that would mean that the UK identified the “toxic chemical” as 3-Quinuclidinyl benzilate, which would really take us into a deep mess.

  • Blissex

    «March 4 2018 Sergei and Yulia Skripal are attacked with a nerve agent in Salisbury»

    On reflection the timeline by Craig Murray should really being in 2004:

    2004 Sergei Skripal is arrested in Russia for spying and sentenced to 13 years.
    2010 Sergei Skripal after 7 years in russian prison is pardoned and sent to the UK in a spy exchange.

    Because those dates add context: that the russians could have sentenced him to death or “liquidated” him during the 7 years in Russia after he was discovered, or could have killed him at any time during the 7 years he lived in the UK.

    • Hatuey

      Actually there’s a case for beginning the Britain-Syria timeline in the 1920s when Churchill and others were enthusiastically attacking “uncivilised tribes” in the region with planes and arguing for the use of gas (http://www.rudaw.net/english/opinion/02112014) which would “spread a lively terror…”

    • Keith McClary

      13 years seems like a a very light sentence for betraying hundreds of agents. In some countries they would get life or execution.

      I have been looking for comment on this.

      • Blissex

        The only thing I can imagine for such clemency is that at the time all the USSR secrets were being sold by everybody.
        That he got sentenced at all is probably because his sale of secret agent identities was particularly outrageous.

    • Radar O'Reilly

      but John, many many million dollars of ‘best before April 15th 2018’ devices were wasted last night, and now will have to be replaced from the near Trillion Dollar MIC budget. All our reasonable arguments pale into insignificance with a near Trillion Dollar MIC budget. That buys a lot of toys, buys a lot of friends.

      • John Goss

        Yes, and people are homeless, begging on the streets, hospitals are underfunded, apart from special private wards with policemen sat outside them, to keep the Skripals prisoners in this free country of ours. I know Yulia has left hospital but she is still a prisoner.

    • Bayard

      JG, TM should not resign. There’s no way that the Tories would replace her with anyone half so incompetent.

  • Billy Bostickson

    The substance used on Sergei Skripal was an agent called BZ, according to Swiss state Spiez lab, the Russian foreign minister said. The toxin was never produced in Russia, but was in service in the US, UK, and other NATO states. Sergei Skripal, a former Russian double agent, and his daughter Yulia were poisoned with an incapacitating toxin known as 3-Quinuclidinyl benzilate or BZ, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said, citing the results of the examination conducted by a Swiss chemical lab that worked with the samples that London handed over to the Organisation for the Prohibition of the Chemical Weapons (OPCW).

    https://www.rt.com/news/424149-skripal-poisoning-bz-lavrov/

    • John Goss

      That’s an interesting article, especially since Boris Johnson said the that the nerve agent used against Mr and Ms Skripal had been identified as “A-234”.

      Anyway we knew it was a false-flag from the start. I still fear for the life of Yulia Skripal who is being held in a safe house, whose voice, apart from a telephone call to her cousin has not been heard.

    • Andrew H

      Firstly, there is a difference between being pure and not containing impurities. On the one hand something could be 100% nerve agent, but on the other hand something could be 5% nerve agent with other chemicals (water, solvents and other byproducts of manufacture), but no impurities. [An impurity being something unrelated to the chemical compounds like trace amounts of sulphur or iron and other elements, that might be an indicator of the source of the raw ingredients]. My feeling is that the scientists are referring to the later, and I am not sure that means anything beyond that it was manufactured in a lab in small quantities using high quality ingredients rather than on an industrial scale where money would be a greater consideration and lower quality ingredients with many impurities would have been used. Certain manufacturing processes like distillation remove impurities, so I’m not even sure the lack of impurities means anything – if there had been impurities then that might have pointed to origin, but the lack of them means nothing.

    • Andrew H

      In layman’s terms – if you had a glass of beer you could probably figure out where it came from, but turn it into vodka and its probably almost impossible to tell the difference between the Russian and UK made varieties.

  • Rubber Duck

    Going back to the Skripal case, and the gradual release of information by the UK government, the pace of which almost seems dictated by Russian questioning. So many coincidences in the emergence of the narrative.

    The statement from GCHQ refers to evidence of Russian research into the means of delivery – specifically doorhandles. There’s talk about a manual for agents. The UK government seemed to come to it’s conclusions very quickly – yet if we knew about the manual and proposed means of delivery – why did it take so long to establish the door and doorhandle as the focus of the investigation? Over the days following the attack – it was the fish a Zizzi’s, the bench, the car air conditioning etc, etc. Why not just read the manual and check the obvious first??

    • Jo Dominich

      Ah, you know the answer already! Because there is no manual!! So they could not RTFM (Read the f*****g Manual) because it doesn’t exist! Hah!

  • Jo Dominich

    Craig, well said. Today I think, must surely mark the day when democracy truly died in the UK. It is a shameful disgrace to our country, our Government and the mass media in this country that they seem to think breaching international law is o.k. when it suits the USA, UK’s and Israeli interests in the region. Teresa May has effectively, declared total and utter contempt for the rule of law, diplomacy, international relations and international law. Syria is not at war with us or anybody, therefore any military intervention is illegal. She has not sought parliamentary approval for this action and her joke of a foreign secretary has used insulting, accusatory and highly inflammatory language against a Head of State, Putin and Russia without a shred of evidence to support either Salisbury or a chemical attack in Douma by Assad. Both are false flag events. I hope now that Corbyn comes to Parliament on Monday, passionate, angry, dignified and right. The media cannot mount any more vicious and malicious press campaigns against him as I think they’ve got nothing more to say. Also, they would have to run his speech in order to try to undermine him. Theresa May has shown herself to be a warmonger, having the IQ of a newt (sorry newt, you deserve better than that!) and being a total lap dog to Trump and Johnson. I haven’t heard a word of common sense out of her mouth or BoJo’s since Salisbury. I cannot believe they did not wait for the OPCW and UN findings on their visit today to Douma before doing this. Well, I can actually, because they know they will find there never was a gas attack in Douma and Assad and Russia were not responsible, so this pre-emptive strike is to prevent any findings there. Today, I am deeply ashamed of our mass media, the failure of common sense or truth to prevail, the failure of any brave investigative journalists out there to question any of this and our move towards a benevolent Dictatorship or Totalinarianism. A sorry, disgraceful, shameful day for the UK Government and our nation. Bring on Corbyn, the true voice of sanity and reason in Parliament and the only voice of the British public.

    • bj

      Wow. That’s a powerful, ringing dismissal. I think ‘hear hear’ would be redundant, but nevertheless ‘hear hear!’.

      • Jo Dominich

        Thanks BJ. Strangely, I have just had a powerful knocking on my front door. I haven’t answered it. Paranoia might well be setting in!! 🙂

    • MSG

      I wish I could control my thoughts and my vocabulary sufficiently to have been able to express myself like Jo Dominich at 17.17.

    • Gideon Blackmarsh

      One small correction to an otherwise excellent comment: The dictatorship that we are moving towards appears to be anything but benevolent.

  • Jeremy Bate

    CRAIG, may I respectfully ask whether from your experience (or the experience of those whom you trust), that it is reasonably feasible that the UK could have been responsible for Salisbury? Is this a Deep State scenario, done without political authorisation? And without risk of whistle blowing?

  • Tony_0pmoc

    The Fireworks show last night in Syria cost the UK and the USA taxpayers approximately £116 Million on Missiles alone. Add up all the other costs, and you are talking about a considerable amount of money, that could be put to far better use.

    Yet even Syria, already bombed to hell, could afford the costs, to shoot the vast majority of these missiles down, which killed, nor injured no one, and simply put a few holes in the desert, and destroyed a few buildings, that were no longer in use.

    Who agreed to this. None of you morons consulted us the taxpayers, nor even our elected representatives, if we were happy wasting an enormous amount of money for no effect whatsoever, except make our US and UK Governments look like a complete bunch of imbeciles, well according to The Russians, who unlike you, are probably, largely, telling the truth.

    Can’t you guys do something a little bit more useful instead? You really are a complete and utter very expensive waste of space, contributing nothing useful to anyone.

    “Chief of the Main Operational Directorate of the Russian General Staff Colonel General Sergei Rudskoy holds briefing for mass media”

    http://thesaker.is/chief-of-the-main-operational-directorate-of-the-russian-general-staff-colonel-general-sergei-rudskoy-holds-briefing-for-mass-media/

    Tony

    • Bayard

      Tony, that money had already been spent and we were never going to see it again. So what* if the missiles have been used, the important thing is NOT replacing them. That’s when you start spending money that could better be used elsewhere.
      *only financially, of course.

  • Mikael Kall

    New information from Swiss lab: “The substance used on Sergei Skripal was an agent called BZ, according to Swiss state Spiez lab, the Russian foreign minister said. The toxin was never produced in Russia, but was in service in the US, UK, and other NATO states.
    Sergei Skripal, a former Russian double agent, and his daughter Yulia were poisoned with an incapacitating toxin known as 3-Quinuclidinyl benzilate or BZ, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said, citing the results of the examination conducted by a Swiss chemical lab that worked with the samples that London handed over to the Organisation for the Prohibition of the Chemical Weapons (OPCW).
    “https://www.rt.com/news/424149-skripal-poisoning-bz-lavrov/

  • Harry Law

    Lavrov: Swiss lab says ‘BZ toxin’ used in Salisbury, not produced in Russia, was in US & UK service
    The substance used on Sergei Skripal was an agent called BZ, according to Swiss state Spiez lab, the Russian foreign minister said. The toxin was never produced in Russia, but was in service in the US, UK, and other NATO states.

    Sergei Skripal, a former Russian double agent, and his daughter Yulia were poisoned with an incapacitating toxin known as 3-Quinuclidinyl benzilate or BZ, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said, citing the results of the examination conducted by a Swiss chemical lab that worked with the samples that London handed over to the Organisation for the Prohibition of the Chemical Weapons (OPCW).
    The Swiss center sent the results to the OPCW. However, the UN chemical watchdog limited itself only to confirming the formula of the substance used to poison the Skripals in its final report without mentioning anything about the other facts presented in the Swiss document, the Russian foreign minister added. He went on to say that Moscow would ask the OPCW about its decision to not include any other information provided by the Swiss in its report. https://www.rt.com/news/424149-skripal-poisoning-bz-lavrov/

  • Sebastian

    I don’t know who this display of petulance is for: Presumably the 78% of Suns poll of its readers who didn’t approve of strikes on Syria see it as a ridiculous waste of money. I’m sure somebody by now has calculated just how many A&E medics last nights potlatch was worth. I know it wasn’t a price worth paying it for TM’s chance to strut her stuff on the world stage. In what they are not even pretending was not an extremely carefully choreographed, with the Russians, piece of rather expensive performance art, with no toes stepped on (this time).
    Putin and Lavrov have been shown up as the only adults in the room, to an extraordinarily wide audience. Tis a pity that the room is filled with our crocodilian politicians. Who feel they can advance by standing shoulder to shoulder with the likes of Bolton and Trump, or going out in front and cheerleading.

  • SA

    What is amazing is that nobody seems to be interested in what the Syrian people really want. From the little information we have the majority of the Syrians are behind the SAA and the current government and really do not want the alternative of a Jihadist terrorist rulers.
    May, Trump and Macron are arrogant white supremacists who think that they can force their will by sheer aggression against a country that has not attacked them.

  • labougie

    BZ was mentioned on this blog some weeks ago – anyone remember when/where? The search function on here doesn’t like me. Tks

  • reel guid

    The Grand National had a singer delivering a rendition of God Save the Queen before the race. While the winner’s rostrum was flanked by members of the Household Cavalry and Brigade of Guards in full ceremonial uniform.

    Yet more manifestations of the subtle and not so subtle militarisation and enforced Britishness campaign.

    • Tony_0pmoc

      Madeira, not that I have taken LSD since 1984 (and I wouldn’t reccomend it), but the effects of this toxic chemical, seem similar, but much milder, and safer, such that a dose even 400 times stronger than a dose that could produce a measurable effect with regards to observable physical and mental changes, is highly unlikely to be lethal…

      more or less the equivalent to having a weak lemonade and beer shandy, compared to drinking 2 lites of whisky in one hour, which even that would probably not be lethal to most people – they would simply throw up.

      Are my observations more or less correct, or are The Swiss Taking The Piss?

      Extract from your link

      “Mild to moderate intoxication: “Anticholinergic toxidrome” of elevated body temperature (hyperthermia), dry mouth (xerostomia), dry skin, low urine output, flushing (redness) of skin, dilated pupils (mydriasis), inability to focus on near objects, blurred vision, and rapid heart rate (later a normal or slow heart rate). Other effects include disorientation, altered level of consciousness, misperceptions and difficulty in interpretation (delusions, hallucinations), poor judgment and insight (denial of illness), short attention span, distractibility, impaired short-term memory, slurred speech, involuntary repetition of behaviors (perseveration), loss of coordination (ataxia), variability in behavior (e.g., between quiet and restless states), and muscle weakness.
      Severe intoxication: Dose-dependent decrease in consciousness level (drowsiness through sedation to stupor and coma), hallucinations and combative agitation, serious alterations in heart rhythm (cardiac arrhythmias), and serious alterations in levels of ions in biological fluids (electrolyte disturbances). ”

      Tony

  • berlingooner

    when even the top-rated reader’s comment on the Daily Mail leading article on Trump’s “perfectly executed strike” on Syria is questioning the logic & legitimacy of the move, it does give some hope. Not one of the top 10 comments has anything positive to say about this and neither is there any of the usual Corbyn-bashing despite his condemnation of the attacks. If this is the reaction from Mail readers then the British public really have no stomach for this.
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5615605/Mission-Accomplished-Trump-says-strikes-Syria-not-better-result.html

  • Albert A

    A .long descrition of the action in Damascus was given on BBC by a western freelance journalist named as Danny Mackie in the early morning broadcasts from around the world. Laurence .If in Damascus ,why didn’t he smell o SCOOP as the only western lournalist to examine the site at Douma ?

    • Carmel Townsend

      Probably for the same reason that “journalists” didn’t gather outside the hospital where the Skripals were patients. Not one of them was curious to nab a good story, by talking to nurses, doctors, ancillary staff. Not one. Now if it were waiting outside a hospital while a royal offspring was on the way, we’d have 24-hour rolling “news”coverage.

  • marvellousMRchops

    During the last general election I became so exasperated at the continual bias against Jeremy Corbyn that I refused to watch the MSM coverage and instead followed the election on social media instead. As a result it didn’t come as a total surprise to me that Corbyn had gained so much support – particularly with the young.

    I did stay up to watch shock and awe. Watch the link below to remind yourself why the MSM hate Corbyn so much.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yyw6JdQ-AOI
    Since then the BBC in terms of impartial, investigative journalism has descended into the gutter, with the events in Salisbury and today in Syria.Thanks to Craig’s reporting and many great commentators and insightful links on this blog I have had my eyes well and truly opened.

    So BBC – this is what you should be doing.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rG476h6kFpI
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVQEiaYz9a8

  • Robert

    The OPCW lab’s analysis conveniently confirms that the alleged nerve agent used in Salisbury was the deadly Novichok even though the Skripals are miraculously still alive.

    But RT reports that now a Swiss lab report shows that it cannot possibly be Novichok. It is instead a crystallized substance developed by the US Army in the 1950s and it causes hallucination but not death. Yulia Skripal; told her niece on the phone that she experience a disorientation in Salisbury before passing out. The plot thickens.

        • Mary Paul

          why would Swiss lab give a report commissioned by OPCW to the Russians? Surely it should be highly confidential?!

          • Robert

            “The Swiss center sent the results to the OPCW. However, the UN chemical watchdog limited itself only to confirming the formula of the substance used to poison the Skripals in its final report without mentioning anything about the other facts presented in the Swiss document, the Russian foreign minister added”.

          • Robert

            @Mary Paul @ Basil Fawity

            A copy of the report was given to every member of The Chemical Weapons Convention. So no the Russian did not steal or hack a copy. The question you should ask yourselves is this: Why the OPCW neglected to include the evidence of the BZ in its report?

        • _

          Interestingly, it may also make sense of Stephen Davies’s letter to the TImes stating ‘no patients have experienced symptoms of nerve agent poisoning in Salisbury’, since BZ (I’m guessing, not an expert) may be classified as something else – an incapacitating agent?

        • G.Bng

          Would be extremely interesting and even a game-changer if the Swiss Lab info is true but so far Western reporting it always caveat it by “Russia claims…” which at this time is sort of saying, “Here we go, Russia up to its confusion tricks again”.

          Interesting in the info sheet you linked to is where it states, “The onset of incapacitation is dose-dependent. It might occur as early as 1 hour after exposure and continue up to 48 hours (1).” It could explain why it took so long to take effect from door handle to bench but since the second person to touch the handle, if they were not advised by the first to not touch it as it had some sticky gel on it, would receive a much lower dose, and how much washing of hands took place, it would still not explain how both father and daughter came to suffer the effects of the toxin at exactly the same time to the extent that neither was able to call for help.

          • Bayard

            If you look up thread, you will find a plausible explanation of why the whole doorhandle story is a lie. Just think about it: You and a friend are leaving the house, you open the door,using the inside door handle. The you go out, your friend follows you, then you or your friend closes the door, using the outside door handle. Only one person touches the outside door handle, yet both Skripals were affected.

          • Crackerjack

            At the same time. Despite one being a burley old chap and the other being a slip of a girl

            I mean it is quite possible that Mr Skripal closed the door and picked up the poison and plausibly passed it on by holding hands ( perhaps at the graveyard) but that argument is shot down by the fact that they succumbed simultaneously.

            That’s just too much of a coincidence

    • Isabelle

      Further to Mr Lavrov’s quoting from the Spiez lab report that the Skirpal sample contained BZ, the Spiez lab have tweeted tweeted yesterday that they have no doubt the Skirpal substance was a Novichock.

      https://twitter.com/spiezlab?lang=en

      Regarding the origin of the Novichock Stefan Mogl, Head of Chemistry division of Spiez Laboratory and a former OPCW inspector and head of the OPCW Laboratory, gave an interview on 05.04.2018 to Neue Zurcher Zeitung (a Swiss German-language daily newspaper).

      Although Mogl said he was sure that Porton Down had made the correct analysis of the substance (based on his trust in Porton Down) he went on to say that the origin of the substance would not be identifiable. (Google translation follows – original article available in German).

      “Can the exact provenance be determined by checking the substance used?
      Mogl makes it clear that this is not possible at today’s level of knowledge.
      In this respect, the excitement about the statements of the head of Porton Down is missed, who had stated on Tuesday that his institute could not prove that the substance comes from Russia.

      According to Mogl, such a finding had never been expected either: Little is known about the method of production of the Novichok poisons, so that no conclusions can be drawn about the country of origin or even the responsible laboratory.”

      https://translate.google.co.uk/translate?hl=en&sl=de&u=https://www.nzz.ch/international/kein-zweifel-am-nowitschok-resultat-ld.1374775&prev=search

      This is the same Mr Mogl who identified the Syrian government as having used chemical weapons in April 2017 even though he went to Syria and didn’t visit the alleged attack site, because it was too dangerous. He disagreed with Russia that it was necessary to visit the site in order to conduct his investigation. Here’s an interview with him about how he conducted the investigation in to the poison gas attack at Khan Sheikhun in April 2017.

      https://translate.google.co.uk/translate?hl=en&sl=de&u=https://www.nzz.ch/schweiz/auf-der-spur-von-giftgas-in-syrien-ld.1346739&prev=search

      The website of Spiez Laboratory in Switzerland is interesting.

      Spiez are an “Internationally recognised verification laboratory for chemical warfare agents Analysis” and are a “Designated laboratory of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW)”.

      Their PDF on how fast their Response Teams work in the event of a Chemical Weapon attack makes one wonder if the UK has anything similar. The “Chemistry Specialists of their Emergency Response Team” can carry out on-site sampling within minutes of arrival at the scene.

      ” The measuring and sampling team consists of three specialists and is capable of beginning its job in the contaminated area within a few minutes after arrival. ”

      https://www.labor-spiez.ch/en/ein/index.htm

1 4 5 6 7 8 11

Comments are closed.