Living in Goebbels Land 819

So a tiny independent radio station in Ireland managed to interview Robert Fisk on the ground in Douma, but none of the British mainstream broadcast media today has him on, despite the political fallout from our Syria bombing attacks being the main news story everywhere? Meantime MSM propagandists including Richard Hall (BBC), Dan Hodges (Mail) and Brian Whitaker (Guardian) and many more queue up to denounce Fisk on twitter from their cosy armchairs.

It bears repeating that the information on the alleged gas attacks – which raises great doubt but which Fisk himself does not claim as definitive – is not the most important part of Fisk’s article. The Hell of rule under the jihadists that we in the West are arming, funding, training, “military advising” and giving air support, alongside Saudi Arabia and Israel, is the indisputable and much more important element of Fisk’s report, as is the clear evidence he provides that the White Helmets are part of the jihadist factions.

To return to Scotland, I am sorry I shocked many of those who wish me well with the vehemence of my attack on Ian Blackford and the SNP for accepting MI6′ version of events, together with a renewed expression of my outrage at Nicola Sturgeon for having instantly supported Boris Johnson’s anti-Russian rhetoric over Salisbury without waiting for evidence.

My anger is not synthetic and there is a fundamental point here.

The question is this: whether Scotland wishes to become truly a different kind of state to the UK, or whether it is simply a case of a management buyout of the local NATO franchise. As the UK enters enthusiastically into a new cold war, that question is now a much sharper one.

The UK security services are Scotland’s enemy. The next effort at Independence is not going to look like 2014 – the British Establishment only allowed that because at the outset they did not believe there was a hope in Hell we could win. Now they are rattled. Our next effort at Independence will look much more like Catalonia. All the signs are that the current leadership of the SNP, who are so comfy having little chats with MI6 in their career break from investment banking, or who want to be an inclusive, unionist-friendly “Queen Mum” figure rather than campaign for Independence, do not have the stomach for the fight. What they do have is comfy, very highly paid, billets as a pocket of token opposition and diversity within the United Kingdom.

Nicola buying into the Johnson story of the new cold war is not a small thing. It is huge, momentous, epoch-defining in Scotland. And a fundamental betrayal of her voters.

A Fully Paid Up Member of the British Establishment

In the next street to where I am writing was born the great James Connolly. He wrote:

When it is said that we ought to unite to protect our shores against the ‘foreign enemy’, I confess to be unable to follow that line of reasoning, as I know of no foreign enemy of this country except the British Government

Note the British government are the enemy – not in any way the people of England. Anybody who cannot repeat Connolly’s statement with conviction is only pretending to be part of the Scottish Independence movement, and will falter as soon as Westminster says no.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

819 thoughts on “Living in Goebbels Land

1 4 5 6 7 8
  • Ophelia Ball

    Do we trust the OPCW?

    well, absent evidence to the contrary, and with a lingering ill-taste that the CIA has pretty much every institution based in the West in its pocket, I suppose, “Yes” they are the best hope we have for getting some hard, objective, independent facts. Surely, all the signatories to the CWC must agree with this without reservation?

    Well then

    1. Late in 2017 the OPCW declared that Russia had disposed of all its chemical weapons.
    2. Twice in 2017 the OPCW declared that Syria was not manufacturing or storing chemical weapons at the site bombed last weekend
    3. The OPCW has NOT given any indication that the toxic agent used in the Skripal case was “of a type developed in Russia”, much less that the Russians deployed it in this case
    4. The OPCW is on the ground in Douma as I type this, and any sane observer would therefore surely await their findings before taking steps which breach the UN Charter

    Yes, but, No, but,,, that can’t be true, because,, like, Russians are cheats and liars and anyhow innocent babies and Ukraine! what about Ukraine! and they don’t even write proper English writing and oh shut up!!!!

    Here is live video of Nikki Haley giving evidence in the UN Security Council

    You surely can’t have it both ways: if the OPCW is the Gold Standard of impartiality, you can’t pick and choose. Unless you are Exceptional, in which case all bets are off

      • Clydebuilt

        Ophelia Ball

        On a BBC radio I heard someone claim the OPCW had found 40 instances of Assad’s regime using Chemical Weapons.

        • Ophelia Ball

          I’m sure you misheard that. Surely it was 400? Or 4,000. and all of them yesterday afternoon?

          I just watched a Fox news interview in which both sides of the discussion agreed that Assad was engaged in genocide which directly threatened US security.

          Assad = “Animal” – that’s all you need to know; if the OPCW suggests differently we’ll suppress that.

          • Ophelia Ball

            [ MOD: There is a problem with the spam-filter mechanism at the moment. It is putting everything into pre-mod until either it’s fixed, or we release it manually. Apologies for the delay in making comments visible until this is sorted out. ]

            please could one of the moderators explain why every one of my comments is now subject to review prior to publication: am I “On the naughty step”?

          • Laguerre

            “Assad = “Animal” – that’s all you need to know”

            You do understand that Asad means lion, do you? So Trump’s remark was not inexact.

          • Kempe

            Where did I express support, blind or otherwise, for military action?

            The attitude here towards OPCW is the same as always; full of enthusiasm and support until they issue a report which doesn’t back up what people want to believe then all of a sudden they change from being impartial and reliable to US stooges controlled by the CIA or some such.

          • John Goss

            “The attitude here towards OPCW is the same as always; full of enthusiasm and support until they issue a report which doesn’t back up what people want to believe. . .”

            The OPCW has not issued a report and I have already expressed that we want to see what it has to say. It is only two days ago when you went for the jugular of Robert Fisk trying to blacken this prize-winning journalist’s character rather than address what he said. Before and after the Fisk report many people have reported on this evident false-flag. The UK and US took military action before the OPCW reported.

            “Where did I express support, blind or otherwise, for military action?”

            13 workers at the hospital have confirmed that this was a false-flag.


            Your, as usual, support for western action, is embedded in your opposition to all these honest people.

          • Bill McLean

            Kempe – unfortunately our scepticism is based on the experience of US and UK lies and propaganda – you don’t have to look too far into the past to find them!

          • Kempe

            Sure; and my caution regarding Fisk is similarly based on past experience. So far we only have his word for it.

    • giyane

      Mrs May is so exceptional that she doesn’t have to consult President Trump.
      She is also a determined liar so reverse her statement it comes out like this:

      Q. I wonder whether the Prime Minister can tell us at what point the President instructed her that military action would be taken.

      A:The Prime Minister
      The answer to the hon. Lady’s question isn’t this: I’m not prepared to reveal when Trump decided to attack Syria. I did not take this decision, because I didn’t believe it was the right thing to do and nor was it in our national interest.

      The person who made the decision was General Mattis who knew that Assad had chemicals which incriminated the US and many other Western nations in their chemical research department. These chemicals were manufactured in and supplied by the West, not as WMDs, but as part of the heinous process of indoctrinating Muslims by psychological-altering drugs. I respect Mattis’ decision to wipe out the evidence because it would have incriminated not only George Bush, Blair, Cameron and May, but also wiped the smile off the Zionists in Israel who are currently shooting unarmed civilians as if they were pheasants or rabbits.

      The Israelis are quite nasty enough already without rattling their cages with details of Nazi human brainwashing experiments.

      A clever move by Mattis to destroy incriminating evidence. Mrs May is barely able to hold together the logic of a single sentence. She’s most certainly not capable of making the decision to attack Syria by herself.

    • Delores Delaney

      1. Late in 2017 the OPCW declared that Russia had disposed of all its chemical weapons (by dispatching them to their agents across the globe.)
      If you read the OPCW report on their site, they do caveat the statement with – “With the total elimination of Russia’s DECLARED chemical weapons programme, 96.3 per cent of all chemical weapon stockpiles declared by possessor States have been destroyed under OPCW verification.”

      The rest of your post is as inaccurate and subjective as the first line.

  • Abulhaq

    US goes cap in hand to nuclear weaponized NK. We can talk, say the Americans.
    Basshâr al Assad has no nuclear capability. So….An object lesson in the realpolitik of 21 century Earth. Watch and learn Syria and Scotland.

  • certa certi

    ‘false-flag operations’

    Rolls off the keyboard doesn’t it, a euphemism beloved of conspiracy nuts. The proper term is pseudo terrorism, once perpetrated by some western countries but long in disuse, not for ethical reasons but because it’s too easily exposed, backfires and brings reputational and career damage to the good and glorious. Dishounourable exceptions are Russia and some former Soviet republics. I’d prefer a return to the term pseudo terrorism which at least conveys some of the implicit horror. Another example of how the English language is mangled by those who ought to know better.

    • Ophelia Ball

      dirty tricks are often used to gain unfair advantage

      the ploy we are witnessing at present is the Government and mainstream media trying to drag every challenge to its preferred narrative down into the gutter, where they can argue the matter on home turf; it’s a bit like wrestling a pig – the point being that only the pig enjoys it

    • Bayleaf

      Really? Why does a false flag operation always have to be terrorism? It could also be a military operation, for example the attack on the USS Liberty by Israel.

      And, unless you can provide evidence to the contrary, Operation Gladio appears still to be an integral part of NATO. Conspiracy nut territory, my arse. Go tell the European Parliament.

    • Dom

      False flag has been the proper, universally recognised term in the highest military and academic circles .. for as long as anybody can recall (dating back to pirate days on the high seas). Only in your head is it a disreputable, unprofessional term. Stop clutching at any ridiculous straw to try and afford the establishment and the terrorists the moral high ground.

    • giyane

      certa certi

      False-flag is used to describe 2 completely different scenarios, 1/ where all the attackers, spectators and victims are actors/actresses. 2/ where a mailicious state agency recruits and deploys patsies or possibly doubles of patsies to kill or maim real people.

      I prefer Kissinger’s ” covert operations ” because it leaves the mind open to reflect on the absolute evil of the state perpetrators of state terror. That way one can scan all possibilities of true evil until one hits on the exact true evil that has been used.

  • Tony M

    Can I say here a thank you to whoever posted the link to THE KILLING OF WILLIAM BROWDER by ALEX KRAINER, a link to it was posted here some time ago and I’ve been unable to locate it since. It documents the rape of Russia during the 1990s, the last chapters War and Peace, and the Banker’s Revenge is absolutely pertinent and essential reading for anyone trying to comprehend where this is heading, I urge people to rea

  • Sharp Ears

    Ramzy Baroud’s commentary on what is happening in the Labour Party. May must be loving it. There is no opposition to her whilst this wrangling goes on. There is no leadership in fact. Corbyn was sitting behind Gwynne when he was holding forth and he was looked very uncomfortable. BLiar lives within the Labour party.

    Media Cover-up: Shielding Israel is a Matter of Policy
    by Ramzy Baroud / April 17th, 2018

    The term ‘media bias’ does not do justice to the western corporate media’s relationship with Israel and Palestine. The relationship is, indeed, far more profound than mere partiality. It is not ignorance, either. It is a calculated and long-term campaign, aimed at guarding Israel and demonizing Palestinians.
    To disrupt the conversation on Palestine, the Israeli Occupation and the British government’s unconditional support of Israel, British mainstream media has turned the heat on Jeremy Corbyn, the popular leader of the Labor Party.

    Accusations of anti-Semitism has dogged the party since Corbyn’s election in 2015. Yet, Corbyn is not racist; on the contrary, he has stood against racism, for the working class and other disadvantaged groups. His strong pro-Palestine stance, in particular, is threatening to compel a paradigm shift on Palestine and Israel within the revived and energized Labor Party.

    Sadly, Corbyn’s counter strategy is almost entirely absent. Instead of issuing a statement condemning all forms of racism and moving on to deal with the urgent issues at hand, including that of Palestine, he allows his detractors to determine the nature of the discussion, if not the whole discourse. He is now trapped in a perpetual conversation, while the Labor Party is regularly purging its own members for alleged anti-Semitism.

    • bj

      Believe me, exactly what is described here, has been happening in Holland for a long time.

      Former foreign minister Frans Timmermans *) even expressly said, a couple of years back, he holds two standards: one for Israel and one for all remaining countries. I kid you not.

      “Frans Timmermans, a Dutch politician and diplomat serving as the First Vice-President of the European Commission and European Commissioner for Better Regulation, Interinstitutional Relations, the Rule of Law and the Charter of Fundamental Right” (Wikipedia). Also of MH-17 fame.
      [emphasis mine; you’re reading that right, it says ‘Rule of Law’ right there]

  • alasdairB

    Syria & Skripals intertwined in the mind of mad May & faithfully reported by the BBC & MSM acting as the ‘thought police’. It has not been the SNPs ‘finest hour’ at the Westminster debates on Syria. I would have thought Scotland deserves better ; someone of the caliber of Alex Salmond would have utterly destroyed the Government’s tissue of lies & half truths.


  • certa certi

    ‘False flag has been the proper, universally recognised term in the highest military and academic circles .. for as long as anybody can recall’

    No. It hasn’t been. It breeds like easter bunnies on the internet and in the glib media.

    • Bayleaf

      [ MOD: Try to be a little more civil in discourse ]

      You are simply trying to disrupt the thread with your puerile taunts.

      “The term false flag is derived from a naval practice. In times past, a ship might fly a flag other than its own true flag in order to trick its way into an attack or to facilitate an escape.”

  • Paul Barbara

    ‘OPCW-accredited Swiss lab can ‘neither confirm nor deny’ BZ toxin was used in Skripal poisoning’:

    ‘The Swiss state Spiez lab which has studied samples from Salisbury said it can “neither confirm nor deny” the Russian foreign minister’s statement that nerve agent BZ was used in Sergei Skripal’s poisoning.
    Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov made waves on Saturday when he said that Sergei Skripal, a former Russian double agent, and his daughter Yulia, were poisoned with an incapacitating toxin known as 3-Quinuclidinyl benzilate, or simply BZ. While the toxin was never produced in Russia, it was in service in the US, UK and other NATO states.
    The top Russian diplomat was citing the results of the examination conducted by the Spiez lab, designated by the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW). The Swiss chemical laboratory worked with the samples that London handed over to the OPCW, Lavrov said.

    “We cannot have any statement on that,” Andreas Bucher, Spiez Laboratory’s strategy and communications head, told TASS on Monday.

    “We are contractually bound to the OPCW for confidentiality. So, the only institution that could confirm what Mr. Lavrov was saying is the OPCW. We cannot confirm or deny anything,” he added.
    The Swiss state research center is controlled by the country’s Federal Office for Civil Protection and, ultimately, by the defense minister….’

    “We are contractually bound to the OPCW for confidentiality…..”???????
    An issue of a highly possible military clash between Russia and the West, and the Swiss lab hides behind a ‘confidentiality’ clause?
    This issue should be totally transparent – WTF is going on?

    • Jones

      public is constantly told if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear, so presumably if you have something to hide you have much to fear.

    • Laguerre

      I don’t understand your point. The Swiss lab confirms the position quite clearly: it is up to OPCW to respond. Everybody knows Lavrov had a leaked document.

      • Paul Barbara

        @ Laguerre April 18, 2018 at 10:32
        If the OPCW won’t confirm BZ, then the Swiss lab has an overriding duty to break confidentiality agreements for the greater good of world peace.
        If someone in the lab had not done the right thing, and leaked the document, we would almost certainly never have heard about it.
        And why the hell didn’t the OPCW give the full report to Russia, an OPCW member?
        Still, Russia has the leaked document, and if it comes to the crunch they can publish it openly.

      • Laguerre

        Only a suggestion by a prof who was not involved. Not only sounds like a stupid moment to test the competence of the laboratory, but it’s even more unlikely that they would have chosen a substance that could have been in the original sample. They would have chosen something else.

        • Billy Bostickson

          He seems to have been wheeled out by the Brits to discredit the BZ finding, that said he is certainly an expert in this particular field as you will see from his bio.

          When I mentioned the possibility that BZ was in the positive control previously, based on a report by a Swiss Journalist two days ago, I was viciously attacked and told I should have “listened to my GCSE Chemistry Teacher” by a certain “IM” who has since gone very quiet as more comes out on the BZ positive control possibility. I expect he is too embarrassed to show his face now.

      • Emily

        Presumably BZ was also added to the substance that was used on the Russian traitor and his daughter.
        After all it was BZ symptoms they suffered from.
        Coincidence – I think not a chance in Hades.

      • Paul Barbara

        @ Kempe April 18, 2018 at 10:35
        No, it doesn’t look like BZ was used as a positive marker, it looks like this is how Britain is trying to wriggle out of the embarrassing disclosure.
        BZ fits the poisoning case far better than Novichoks. The effects, time delay and survival of the victims is what one would expect from BZ, whereas Novichoks would almost certainly have been fatal.
        And why all the secrecy? Why is a simple case of analysing a chemical compound not perfectly transparent?
        Smell very similar to the MH 17 ‘investigation’, also shrouded in secrecy and totally opaque, with Russia not being allowed to join the investigation, and secrecy clauses so all parties in the investigation (all antagonistic to Russia) had a veto on disclosure of any evidence being disclosed.

        • Kempe

          ” No, it doesn’t look like BZ was used as a positive marker, it looks like this is how Britain is trying to wriggle out of the embarrassing disclosure. ”

          Your evidence for this is what exactly? Apart from not understanding the science and it conflicting with your pre-conceived notions.

          • Michael Tucker

            It’s all very complicated and I’m no scientist. But…

            1) The A-234 was described as very pure, wasn’t it, lacking in impurities. I understand that that is considered unlikely in samples up to three weeks old and exposed, in some cases, to the environment. So, the A-234 looks suspect all by itself. If BZ was added to the samples, it looks as if it was not the only thing.

            2) Lavrov, citing the report of the Swiss lab said:
            “The analysis of the samples uncovered traces of the toxic chemical BZ and its precursors falling into the second category of chemical weapons under the Chemical Weapons Convention,”


            OPCW said:
            “The precursor of BZ that is referred to in the public statements, commonly known as 3Q, was contained in the control sample prepared by the OPCW Lab in accordance with the existing quality control procedures,” the OPCW director general said. “Otherwise it has nothing to do with the samples collected by the OPCW Team in Salisbury. This chemical was reported back to the OPCW by the two designated labs and the findings are duly reflected in the report.”


            Assuming Lavrov is citing correctly from a genuine document, is “BZ and its precursors…” the same as “The precursor of BZ….” or are we talking about BZ on the one hand, and an unspecified number of precursors which might co-exist with BZ on the other hand? Is OPCW excluding BZ as added for control or a precursor of BZ?

            Maybe a chemist or analyst could explain it for me.

          • Michael Tucker

            It could be language or losing something in the translation. Still, for something this important, it still seems a bit weasly.

          • Bayard

            “Your evidence for this is what exactly?”
            Not exactly evidence, but Mr Hay did say that none of the labs would have known that BZ had been added as a control. This cannot be true, they would have been aware of the practice of adding controls, as it’s knowlege available on the internet and also aware of which chemical they were looking for, after HMG told the world it was Novichok. So if they found something that wasn’t Novichok, they would have known it was the control and not gone to the extent of leaking to the Russians. You, HMG and Mr Hay must think the Swiss staff their labs with morons.

      • Bayleaf

        The protocol used for testing such samples will be well established and known to all parties, including the Russians.

        We’ll soon see if they have adhered to the protocol.

    • Delores Delaney

      They would say the same about Novichok and that they can ‘neither confirm nor deny’.
      The statement is exactly what they are legally bound to say and shouldn’t be taken as an affirmation or dismissal.

  • The OneEyedBuddha

    Russia’s Aluminium’s being nicked!

    Russia banned from trading in Aluminium, causing big problem for Rio Tinto, threatens their ability to keep operations going as they get Rusal to refine most of their bauxite into alumia.

    But it’s okay, Rusal are sitting on the worlds biggest supply of Aluminium in the LME (which isn’t subject to sanctions as it was produced before the sanctions were introduced on 6th of April)

    as Rusal will be struggling for money as they are banned from trading internationally, think they made be forced to sell it off cheap?

    interesting side play to all of this, I thought it would have effected oil and gas more… (although it’s smashed the Rouble to bits..)

  • Sharp Ears

    May’s Register of Interests in which she declares the donation of assistants from Price Waterhouse Cooper and a Martyn Rose to work on the Shadow Work and Pensions team in 2009. That’s is how this country in run. By global accountancy/management consultancy firms behind the scene.

    £tens and tens of thousands for her ‘leadership’ campaign in 2016, inc £30k from an Abel Halpern He founded Keterm.
    ‘Founded by Abel Halpern, KETERM advises private equity and strategic capital in China, Brazil, Latin America and Central Europe, focusing on the realization of cross-border opportunities. KETERM will, in many cases, work alongside firms and entities providing capital solutions to facilitate such transformations.
    KETERM LTD is an Appointed Representative (AR FRN: 797750) of Enterprise Investment Partners LLP (Enterprise) which is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority (FRN: 604439) in the United Kingdom. ‘
    KETERM LTD is a Limited Company registered in England and Wales. The company registration number is 10994254. The registered address is KETERM LTD, Michelin House, 81 Fulham Road, London SW3

    What does she needs donations for? Rich enough already imho. There is another from Michael Hintze. You will find his name on this site in the Fox Werritty stuff.

    ‘2006, at the time of the Cash for Peerages allegations concerning the Labour Party, Hintze voluntarily revealed he was one of the previously anonymous patrons who had made loans to the Conservative Party. In 2011 his known loans and donations to the party totalled around £4 million. In the five months to September 2011 he donated £31,000, enough to grant him membership of the Conservative Treasurers’ Group, the second highest rung on the party’s donor’s ladder, which allows its members access to senior Conservative figures through a series of lunches, receptions and campaign launches.

    When the Conservative Party were in opposition, Hintze provided the following personal cash donations: £37,500 to George Osborne; £25,000 to David Willetts; £10,000 to the private office of Liam Fox; £1,200 to Theresa May; £7,000 to David Davis; £1,500 to Adam Holloway; £5,000 Boris Johnson. In addition, CQS made non-cash donations of: £25,763 to William Hague; £10,439 to Fox; £1,254 to George Osborne. In May 2008, David Cameron declared a donation from Hintze to the Conservative Party that was used to pay for drinks receptions for Tory MPs and their partners. In March 2008, Hintze paid for a private jet to ferry Cameron and Osborne from Newcastle to Biggin Hill after the Conservative Party conference.’

    What did Mr Hintze get in return?

    In October 2011, it was revealed that Adam Werritty, a close friend and business associate of then Secretary of State for Defence Liam Fox, was provided with a free desk by Hintze at CQS’s London base as part of his £29,000 donation to Fox’s charity The Atlantic Bridge.Hintze also supplied a private jet for Fox and Werritty to fly from the United States to London in May 2011. These disclosures led to the resignation of Liam Fox (who was then Secretary of State for Defence) and the dismissal of Hintze’s then-charity adviser, Oliver Hylton.’

    • giyane

      Hi Sharp Ears
      I don’t think we are allowed to impeach our prime ministers while they are in office. May is certainly unashamed enough to never resign. it was a calculated choice on her part to appoint the next best liar in parliament to the most senior office as back-up for when her lies fall apart.. Tory dogs hunt in packs and are rewarded for killing innocent animals. Have you noticed how Boris’ eyes are getting hooded over like Thatchers? Oppressing the weak has always been a sexual stimulant.

    • duplicitousdemocracy

      Ruth Smeeth is a former employee of BICOM too. Primary critics of Corbyn appear to be largely LF of I associated. How Joan Ryan was not censured for her blatant lie that would have resulted in an innocent Labour Party member being banned by the party, i’ll never know.

      • giyane


        Without the provocation of Sectarian tension by General Petraeus when he was in Iraq, the wound of the 2003 invasion would have healed. Democracy, decision by the majority, was unable to function when sectarian division was being fuelled by false-flag bombs laid by the Americans to ignite civil war. I think USUKIS wanted it to work so that their appointed gewads,/pimps could peacefully extract free oil from the second largest source on the planet.

        In political life, some people have a corporate mindset whereby they want to extract mineral resources efficiently and without fuss. Others have highly adulterous personalities and they instinctively use political power like psychopaths. Clinton, Petraeus, William Hague, Liam Fox, Boris Johnson, Baghdadi alias Shimon Elliot. attacked the basic civilities of human existence.

        Islam allows Christians to practise their religion in peace, if they practise their religion in peace. Islam is highly intolerant of those who break up the peace after it has been established. Mrs May has a choice. She either accepts the pax Russia that has been established in Syria and which President Trump acknowledges, or she breaks it by bombing Damascus. If she bombs, she will start WW3 because China will come the defence of China. Boris Johnson is too arrogant to accept USUKIS defeat and May is too stupid to understand it.

        Everybody in the world understands the risks of leaving these two Tories in government.
        Question is: When is May going for her next country walk? and How can a contraceptive device be inserted over Boris Johnson’s head?

        • John Goss

          Giyane, what you write is largely true. It annoys me that we have so-called Christians like Theresa May (daughter of a clergyman of the C of E). Angela Merkel is also the daughter of a clergyman. One followed the Christian message of peace. One did not. May needs to go.

          • PreProle

            May and Merkel are also both childless – so have no dogs in the game when gambling on their countries futures.

          • giyane


            It doesn’t annoy me that Merkel re-united Germany with an inspiration from Christianity, while Theresa May rebelled against her father’s faith, against the Christian warnings against the pursuit of greed and the oppression of the weak. Children are different from their parents and parents who force their beliefs onto their children invariably damage them psychologically. What we appear to have in the case of Theresa May is elements of the anti-Christ. A psychopathic wish to control people by universal surveillance. A harlequin taste for deceit, play acting compassion and in reality grabbing wealth. Deep arrogance in promoting war, with absolutely no care for the victims of either proxy jihadist violence or direct bombing of Assad.

            To me this means that she rebelled against a moral upbringing. It must be a great disappointment to her dad.

    • Laguerre

      Alikhbaria is a private pro-government TV station. No doubt the guys interviewed here are the ones who Fisk says in his article that he didn’t meet in Douma because they’d gone to Damascus. We’re getting their point of view here, though I don’t suppose they were entirely free to say what they liked.

      • Laguerre

        Having watched the video, I think it’s quite solid testimony, richly detailed, though doubtless the UK will say it was made under constraint (much like Yulia Skripal indeed).

        I noted that the women doctors and nurses interviewed were veiled up to the eyes. The TV station wouldn’t have asked for that, being pro-govt. Interesting to speculate why.

  • certa certi

    ‘You are simply trying to disrupt the thread with your puerile taunts’

    I don’t want to disrupt any threads at all. Pseudo Terrorism is the term I first heard when our lecturer, a gentleman of WW2 vintage, discussed with us an alleged proposal by one of the Dulles brothers to detonate a refinery in a certain Asian nation in the 1950s as a pretext to send troops. When mentioned at all, it was just pseudo, itself a euphemism. Euphemisms and war go hand in hand and it’s neither establishment nor puerile to say so.

    • Woke Too Late

      I think that your comment might have been interpreted as denying ‘false flags’. I do think that pseudo, fake or staged terrorism are better terms.

      Both you & Byleaf don’t appear to disagree on what’s important.

    • giyane

      certa certi

      Language changes. The word ” pseudo ” became discredited in the context of Freudian psychology because it became associated with false ideas, such as that personality is created by potty-training. Utter bollocks.
      I was myslf greatly disgusted by being told by a psychologist that my ideas were ” pseudo- intellectual “.
      I later realised that indeed my ideas were not based on knowledge and logic, but on the understanding of the heart. one would have thought it was the job of a psychologist to address the ideas emanating from that department . All else is bollocks in that context.

      It appears that you are out of date. The term ‘pseudo’ has become contentious and divisive. Therefore it has been replaced by another term which places the blame firmly on the perpetrator. I won’t suggest that you want to be able to cast nasturtiums on the victim by your use of the older terminology. You are free to use whatever language you like.

      • Woke Too Late

        Terms are important. I can see that ‘pseudo’ might not be the best word to use but ‘false flag’ is a terrible phrase to use because it is not capable of being understood by those coming across the phrase (unless they are already pre-informed). The majority of those who have come across the term will have done so in the context of 9/11 (which would include me).

        Essentially, ‘false flag’ is jargon for the initiated and doesn’t help convey the message.

  • reel guid

    Theresa May’s 2014 Immigration Act which has caused the Windrush deportations was voted against by only 18 MPs. All 6 SNP MPs voted against. So did Plaid Cymru and Caroline Lucas plus Sarah Teather of the Lib Dems. Hardly any Labour MPs voted against although Corbyn, Abbot and Skinner voted against. There were also dozens of Lib Dem MPs at the time. Few voted against. Cable didn’t oppose it.

    • giyane

      reel guid

      Channel 4 news ran a long piece on this last night. I thought the clip of May apologising was about her attack on Syria. No, it was her policy as long standing Home Secretary, the same racist policy that she has put forward again in Hard Brexit as prime minister. The sheer racism directed by Mrs May against the Polish community has resulted in a total collapse of confidence in this country in Europe.

      Theresa May is a racist and she should be thrown out before her poisonous racism is allowed to strike a second time. She is a disgrace..

      • fred

        Anti-Semites to the left of me, racists to the right and here I am stuck in the middle with you.

        There’s a song in there somewhere.

      • reel guid

        I totally agree Giyane. May is the most right wing Tory leader ever. To the right of Thatcher, Howard and even IDS. Her way of avoiding proper scrutiny is that she doesn’t give the appearance of being very ideologically driven. And the MSM are only to happy to go easy on her.

  • John Goss

    James le Mesurier, the man who should be behind bars but whose White Helmets instead are liberally (millions) funded by the UK and US, is analysed here together with the Oscar-nominated, Nobel Peace Prize-nominated White Helmets. Scott Ritter’s report is two years old but nothing has changed since then. Ritter, former Marine Corps intelligence officer and a former weapons inspector, should know what he is talking about. I don’t doubt however that there may be one or two on here who try to denigrate his name rather than address the issues.

    • Billy Bostickson

      Thanks, this blog is getting complex I must admit with so many links, materials and arguments posted under different sections. I might take a few days off posting (cheers of relief) and try to collate all the arguments, links, evidence. claims since the Skripal incident into one document with lot of bullet points. Wish me luck!

  • Mikael Kall

    “…public pressure may need to be brought on the OPCW itself to immediately release ALL the information it has from ALL the laboratories it has used in the Skripal case. Without such public pressure — and it is certainly not coming from any Western MSM — the OPCW may again do what it did on April 4, when by a vote of 15 to 6, with 17 members abstaining, it rejected Russia’s proposal for “a new, joint investigation” of the Skripal case.”

    OPCW’s headquarters are located at Johan de Wittlaan 32, 2517 JR – The Hague, The Netherlands
    Their phone number: tel: +31 70 416 3300

  • certa certi

    ‘causing big problem for Rio Tinto’

    Rio has options. If the current price can be sustained for the medium term, at least above $2200, which nobody believes, it could help to reopen Rio’s NT Gove refinery. Fraccing has just got the green light and a cheap gas supply would be an extra argument.

    • The OneEyedBuddha

      Well that’s the question, is this being used as a move to cut dependence on Rusal for Alumia refining?

      or a grab for Rusal’s Aluminium stockpile? (or both?)

      if it’s a move to cut out Rusal, then they would need to keep the price up long enough to make it worth while, but take too long (and don’t find an alternative Alumia supplier) then they risk grinding there aluminium production to a halt and call force majeure on their contracts (think they already have on some)

      if its just a stockpile grab, then the sanction would only need to work until Rusal started getting cash flow issues and need to start dumping any assets for cash (unless the Russian state steps in).

      One thing is why did the US throw sanctions on Rusal if they new if would effect Western companies supply chains too? they must have had visibility of this (also Rio weren’t the only company with issues, Liberty House too!)

      interesting to see what plays out here..

    • Laguerre

      This has already been raised. There was a security problem yesterday. I suggest you go elsewhere with your Russophobic scaremongering.

      • Delores Delaney

        I didn’t mention Russia, this is a Syrian Govt issue and has nothing at all to do with the Russian Federation

    • jazza

      the UN do not want to put OPCW staff at risk in what is a terrorist enclave that Syria and Russia (not USA) are still trying to clear – that’s the real reason – seems to have been forgotten?

    • Agent Green

      Fairly obviously it is an active war-zone. There are countless numbers of terrorists and ‘moderate’ rebels running around and in a city environment it is very difficult to guarantee security. They won’t go in until security can be guaranteed – unless we want OPCW members shot dead in the streets or blown up.

      • Delores Delaney

        I would guess that the OPCW aren’t equipped to operate in a warzone, looking for ordnance & weapons etc, apparently they have never stepped foot in a war theatre and prefer working in southern England.

  • Tony M

    I don’t think it’s the semantic argument you were being called out on, each to their own, but the assertion that false-flags are not used by any other than Russia and former Soviet republics, which is patently untrue, dishonest and absurd.

    • Bayleaf

      The article proposes the use of a very old batch of A-234 that would have degraded over the years and been insufficiently potent to kill.

      I don’t see how that squares with the “high purity” A-234 found by the OPCW, Its progressive chemical degradation over the years would have introduced many chemical impurities.

      And never forget our courageous doctor who specifically stated that there were no victims of a nerve agent.

    • John Spencer-Davis

      Thanks for this. The information provided by Gareth Porter on Dr Stephen Davies’s statement is worth repeating here. This is the first time I have seen the letter seriously discussed by a scholar. It’s hard to credit that Dr Davies has not come forward (or been pushed forward) with a clarification if he did not say exactly what he meant to say in the letter.

      “An Absence of Nerve Agent Symptoms?

      Also challenging the official British line is a statement by a medical specialist involved in the Salisbury District Hospital’s care for the Skripals revealing that they had not exhibited any symptoms of nerve agent poisoning.

      Stephen Davies, a consultant on emergency medicine for the Salisbury NHS Foundation Trust, which runs the Salisbury District Hospital, wrote a letter published in The Times on March 16 that presented a problem for the official British government position. Davies wrote,“[M]

      ay I clarify that no patients have experienced symptoms of nerve-agent poisoning in Salisbury, and there have only ever been three patients with significant poisoning.” Obviously, Sergei and Yulia Skripal were “patients” in the hospital and were thus included
      in that statement.

      The Times made the unusual decision to cover the Davies letter in a news story, but tellingly failed to quote the crucial statement in the letter that “no patients have experienced symptoms of nerve-agent poisoning in Salisbury” or to report on the significance of the statement.

      To rule out the possibility that Davies intended to say something quite different, this writer requested a confirmation or denial of what Davies had written in his letter from the press officer for the Salisbury NHS Foundation Trust, Patrick Butler. But Butler did not respond for a week and then refused directly to deny, confirm or explain the Davies statement.

      Instead Butler said in an email, “Three people were admitted and treated as inpatients at Salisbury District Hospital for the effects of nerve agent poisoning as Stephen Davies wrote.” When he was reminded that the letter had actually said something quite different, Butler simply repeated the statement he had just sent and then added, “The Trust will not be providing any further information on this matter.”

      Butler did not respond to two separate requests from the writer for assistance in contacting Davies.”


      • Barden Gridge

        That response and then silence from Patrick Butler is one hell of a giveaway.
        So the MSM will steer well clear of that.

        Here’s another little clue:
        Patrick Butler, Head of Communications at Salisbury NHS trust, has not posted any press releases on their website (or if he has,he’s deleted them) since 19th February 2018.

        Current press releases:

        You’d think that would be the place to put reassuring information about the alleged nerve agent attack for the local community.
        You’d think there would be a condemnation of the Russian TV crew that wandered around the hospital at night, looking for the Skripals.
        You’d think that the PM’s visit to the hospital on 15th March 2018 would merit a press relase. I mean, yes, she’s a useless embarrassment, but she’s still the PM.

        You’d think Salisbury hospital would be buzzing with rumours and juicy stories about this case that the tabloids (i.e. the entire MSM these days) would normally kill for. But they’re just not interested.

  • Tony M

    It would seem the well-publicised rescheduled chemical weapons drill that was taking place in Salisbury was not to test prophylactic or defensive measures in the event of their use, but to practice for their actual use against an adversary, offensive use not defensive. The military advantage of BZ over LSD was of course its applicability for aerosol dispersal, over alimentary ingestion of less potent LSD with which the victims would still be ambulatory. I draw attention again to early uncontrolled eye-witnesses who stated that the Skripals were pointing to the sky and flapping their arms, suggesting to me they were trying to indicate that a drone buzzed them as they sat on the park bench. If so all that followed has all been a piece of theatre, whether they’ll be allowed to live so as to tell the tale can only be conjectured, whatever they could be paid to keep quiet can always be topped by a bigger offer to tell all, if they can be found and filthy lucre rather than honour seems to be their primary motivator.

  • Paul Barbara

    ‘…”Concerning the full OPCW report, there is a confidentiality agreement under which the OPCW can publish only those facts and findings which are approved by the United Kingdom as it was a technical report at London’s request. It appears that London has made a mistake of authorizing the report’s distribution among all OPCW members. It is clear that Russia will now look closely into the report’s findings and study it under a magnifying glass,” Anton Utkin, a former UN chemical weapons inspector in Iraq, told Sputnik….’

    So if the samples analysis had not been to Britain’s liking, they could withhold them? Again, just like the MH 17 ‘investigation’.

    ‘…Impossibly a Lethal Agent
    No matter how intriguing the presence of BZ in the samples may seem, experts believe it could not have been used as a lethal agent due to its chemical characteristics….’
    Precisely – the objective was not to kill them, but to carry out the hoax, and blame Russia.

    • John Goss

      And that last statement is why it is imperative that somebody – other than spooks – gets to speak to Yulia Skripal and Sergei Skripal to try and find out what happened to them. Our spooks and government are preventing this and I am sure everybody can guess why.

      • Murray Johnson

        Can it be assumed that Sergei Skripal as a former (or current) MI6 agent would deviate at all from the establishment line on this?
        Couldn’t Russia, as a member state, have asked for a technical report regarding an attack on two of its citizens? Couldn’t they still?

        It’s interesting to watch how the UK operates a ‘closed’ investigation over the Skripal poisoning, waving away any requests for transparency by Russia, yet now Russia & Syria are in a position to manage the investigation into events at Douma (with OPCW help) the UK & US are waving their hands about & making all kinds of wild accusations. It really sucks for them not to be in control of that narrative.

        It does sound as if Douma is still a dangerous place with sporadic gunfire being heard in the vicinity. Of course the Syrian’s first responsibility is to ensure the absolute safety of OPCW staff which will mean protecting them from IEDs, sniper fire & other unexploded ordinance in the area. The consequences of a successful attack on the inspectors would be unthinkable.

      • Bayleaf

        John. Alternatively, what if Yulia and Sergei are complicit actors in a planned subterfuge and will be rolled out to the press when the time is right?

        If they’re just faking it, or have been made an “offer they can’t refuse”, they will confirm Russian involvement before heading off to the USA with a sizeable stash of cash.

        What then?

        • Robyn

          Bayleaf – it would be plausible that the Skripals are complicit but, if that were the case, wouldn’t they have made sure the pets were looked after?

        • John Goss

          It is a possibility and I rule nothing out. However when Yulia Skripal phoned her cousin Viktoria (Yulia made the phone call) she said that they were both all right and that her father was sleeping whereas at the same time Sky television almost put out an interview with Craig Murray to say he was in a coma and may die. The next day he made a miraculous recovery. If she were complicit she would be unlikely to have said that. But now the spooks are covering their arses by imprisoning her most likely against her wishes. What’s more she and her father are kept separate. God knows what kind of pressure she is under with the indoctrination programme while hinting at a threat to ensure her father does not die of nerve-agent poisoning with a sudden relapse.

          I personally doubt we (the public) will ever see either of them again. Whistleblowers at Porton Down have made available the kind of experiments on humans as well as animals, all of whom are, like the Skripals’ guinea-pigs and cats, incinerated afterwards.

  • reel guid

    The English government is taking the Scottish and Welsh governments to court for their EU continuity bills. These bills being the only way the devolved administrations could protect the devolution settlements from being completely undermined by the English power grab.

    In 2014 Cameron said vote No and Scotland will lead the UK. Vote No to keep Scotland in the EU. Now an English government is not only forcing Scotland out the EU but is trying to have Holyrood legislation designed to protect Scotland’s democracy declared illegal. Some leadership for Scotland.

    The eleventh hour vow made by Cameron, Miliband, Clegg and the unelected Gordon Brown and given the front page in the Daily Record, that Scotland would have devo max if we voted No, was illegal. It was neither on the ballot paper or encoded in law. A duplicitous and worthless promise. The authors never had the slightest intention to make good on it. The introduction of it to the Scottish public just days before the vote in 2014 breached electoral rules. The 2014 referendum was therefore rendered illegitimate. And remains so.

    Now by way of the Vow treachery and its illegitimate result we have the English government’s litigation at Tony Blair’s UK Supreme Court – itself an abrogation of Scots Law and foisted on Scotland – to effectively end devolution in Scotland and Wales. If the English government gets its way on this it would, before long, only be able to govern Scotland and Wales with open coercion. Which would presage the end of democracy in England also.

    • N_

      If you begin your piece with the words “The English government”, many readers will turn the page and you will only be preaching to the converted, which perhaps isn’t your intention. There is no English government.

      • reel guid

        Scotland is being forced out the EU. Scotland never agreed to having no veto on Brexit. Scotland voted 75% for devolution in 1997. Devolution is being undermined by a government which rules the UK by dint of being elected in England. It is the de facto English government. They cannot keep up the fiction of British government when all that is going down.

      • Blissex

        «There is no English government.»

        And here i have a nice bridge to sell, would you be interested in a special price for you?
        There is a tiny scottish, welsh, irish presence in the english government, but population numbers and elite numbers make it clearly an english government (more precisely a southern property owners english government), the more so since T May in 2017 quite clearly campaigned as the leader of the english nationalist party.

        The Conservative party in particular is very narrowly focused, as some of its leaders realize, for example:

        «When Boris Johnson, the slapstick Tory mayor of London, asked the audience if anyone was from Sunderland or Bolton, no one shouted back.»

        • Bayard

          “There is a tiny scottish, welsh, irish presence in the english government,”
          The DUP’s numbers may be “tiny”, but its influence is great for all that.

      • Hatuey

        English Government, British Government, same thing as far as Scotland is concerned.

        Scottish MPs are outnumbered massively to the extent that they might not be there at all.

        Can anyone tell me the last time Scottish MPs were instrumental in passing or blocking a Bill in the Commons?

        Scotland is a neo-colony, essentially managed by Scots on behalf of its owners. The goals, as with direct colonial rule, are wealth extraction, access to markets and resources, and control. It works.


    • Martinned

      As long as Parliamentary Sovereignty exists in the UK, the devolved nations are powerless against any English power grab. Better learn to live with it or get thinking about a more drastic solution.

  • N_

    What IS the government up to with the “Windrush” story?

    The Lebedev Tory Evening Standard is sayingEU citizens plead: Don’t treat our children like Windrush victims“.

    I knew many Poles were racist against black people, and the above seems a lightly veiled way of saying “Don’t treat us as if we were black”.

    The difference of course is that black people who came here from what were then British colonies in the Caribbean are BRITISH, whereas Polish immigrants are NOT.

    • Clydebuilt

      The Government want to push Brexit off the News cycle . . . Windrush has been causing problems For people for 4 years . . . A story sitting on the shelf to be used in times of trouble for May’s shambles.

  • Charles

    Has Russia initiated an international criminal case against the UK?

    “Viktoria also adds that she does not cooperate with Russian special services, and was only interrogated by the Investigative Committee, as “a criminal case has been initiated.””

    As far as the public are aware only Yulia has allegedly indicated she doesn’t want to see anyone but we have heard nothing from Sergei.

    What we have been told;

    Conflicting medical advice regarding what he was poisoned with.

    Sergei is consious and recovering

    He has been denied a consular access request by the UK

    He has been split up from his only remaining immediate family, his daughter.

    His niece has been prevented by the UK from coming to see him.

    Without proof it is reasonable to assume he is being held against his will and therefore a criminal investigation is justified.

    When there is evidence to the contrary you cannot simply take a suspected kidnappers word for it that the suspected victim is free to do what they like.

    It is right and proper a criminal investigation is conducted with urgency

    • Martinned

      it is reasonable to assume he is being held against his will

      That is only reasonable if you’re willing to twist logic to whatever degree it takes to justify Russian actions.

      • Charles

        So lets put some hypothetical twisted logic to the test.

        A 15 year old school child does not turn up to school for a few days

        The school gets in touch with the guardians to inquire about the problem

        The school is told that the child will be no longer attending the school and will be home tutored in future

        The school contact the police and state their concerns

        The police attend the home of the child and are told by the guardians the same as they have told the school

        The police ask to see the child, the guardians refuse.

        What should the police do?

        • Blissex

          «The police ask to see the child, the guardians refuse.
          What should the police do?

          What if the security services are the guardian? The police might well say “yes sir, of course sir everything is all right, sorry for importuning you sir, please don’t report me sir”.
          The story of the seclusion of the Skripals is even stranger because usually the “victims” are paraded in press conferences for Q&A sessions so they can tell their story.
          Anyhow I don’t think that they are being forced to stay away from public contact, it is more in the style of the services to pay them quite well, and Sergei Skripal had already benefited from such payments in his previous career.

      • Bayleaf

        I’m with Martinned on this one. Shock!

        Either Sergei and Yulia are being held against their will or they are not. Either scenario is reasonable. We cannot discount the possibility that they are willing actors in a charade.

        • Charles

          OK can we agree;

          The Skripals May be being detained against their will

          The Skripals May be dead

          The Skripals May have taken part in an international fraud against Russia causing Diplomats to be expelled from the country

          The Skripals May have been extraordinarily rendered to another country

          It is reasonable that If the Skripals have been involved passively or actively as victims or perpetrators in a crime that Russia has a legitimate interest in then Russia should request that a criminal investigation is initiated to eliminate or confirm those reasonable concerns

          • Bayleaf

            Charles – There is already an ongoing “investigation” into the alleged poisoning. Given the statement issued “on behalf of” Yulia by the Metropolitan Police, in which she asked for people to respect her privacy, exactly what breach of the law are the Wiltshire Police supposed to investigate?

  • Tony M

    April 18, 2018 at 12:17

    No, you’re clutching at straws, fred/N_ reel guid’s comment is an excellent summation of the situation, the referendum was invalidated by amongst other things the fraudulent and never honoured ‘vow’, the dishonest breaking of purdah rules by the English government (for that is what it is as Westminster is the English Parliament), and by the media at its most vicious the peoples of Britain have ever seen, especially by the BBC which it’s own staff insiders such as Derek Bateman, have described as in full propaganda mode not seen since their full and witting and criminally culpable part in the war-crimes England committed against the Iraqi people.

  • Sharp Ears

    The whole thing was a scam from the very beginning.

    The NHS is in such a mess from the Tory ‘demoralize – destabilize- dismantle’ plan maybe Salisbury NHS Foundation Trust have gone along with the play acting. Perhaps their £12m debt has been wiped off the balance sheet.

    Wonder how Mr Hunt’s property portfolio is doing? We don’t see or hear from him these days.

    See Mare Pond Properties LTD of which his wife is sole director. He took himself off as as a director. Apologized. So that’s OK then. It is a resigning matter.

    Labour demands parliamentary investigation into Jeremy Hunt’s purchase of luxury flats
    The health secretary should not be allowed to ‘sweep this under the carpet’ say opposition
    13 April 2018

    and before in 2012.

  • Sean Lamb

    Remarks of the Director General of the OPCW

    “The precursor of
    BZ that is referred to in the public statements, commonly known as 3Q, was contained in the
    control sample prepared by the OPCW Lab in accordance with the existing quality control
    procedures. Otherwise it has nothing to do with the samples collected by the OPCW Team in
    Salisbury. This chemical was reported back to the OPCW by the two designated labs and the
    findings are duly reflected in the report.”

    Which is why the Spies lab leaked their report to the Russians. End of story. Science rules!

    • Paul Barbara

      @ Sean Lamb April 18, 2018 at 13:09
      Incredible that the OPCW should thus tamper with samples, particularly in such a sensitive and important case as this.
      Surely they could do all their ‘quality control’ by sending in unimportant specimens for analysis?

      • Sean Lamb

        Lets hope the Russians release the original of the Swiss report now.

        For this type of analysis you have to know the identity of compound you are looking for – at least if it is contained in blood – otherwise it is a needle in a haystack.

        We only have the small section of text Lavrov read on, but it stated a trace of BZ and large quantities of A-234.

        If it was a positive control spike, it would hardly be a trace. But a trace is what you would expect several weeks after a poisoning.

        I wonder if anyone has been testing the samples for the pharmaceutical treatments the Skripals have been receiving?

    • flatulence

      was BZ in one of the smaples, or was BZ AND A-234 in one of the samples? I thought I had read it as both chemicals was found in one of the samples. This would go against what the OPCW is saying because the control would only have BZ in it, not both.

    • bj

      How and on what basis dd they decide to add BZ? What if they original chemical was BZ already by itself, contaminated with some A-234?

    • Bayard

      “The precursor of BZ that is referred to in the public statements, commonly known as 3Q, was contained in the
      control sample prepared by the OPCW Lab in accordance with the existing quality control
      procedures. Otherwise it has nothing to do with the samples collected by the OPCW Team in
      Looks like the Director General of the OPCW thinks the Swiss staff their labs with morons, too. The Swiss would have known it was A234 they were looking for, so they would have also known that the BZ was a control and not made a fuss about it.

  • Scottish Intelligence Service

    The simplest way to spot a PSYOP is usually that the perpetrator is blamed almost instantly in the media. No trial or investigation is needed, as the state has already worked out who the intended target villain is.

    Despite the fact, that the PSYOP story will like have “holes in it” or be ludicrous to anyone with the ability to analyse rationally, the official outlets for the PSYOP narrative will continue to repeat the lies. As there is need for repetition and reinforcement.

    Fear inhibits rational thought, hence the need for sensational headlines. The public are put into fear.

    If you missed this one, it is verging on hilarity from the BBC. No mention of BZ, the “Nerve Agent” lie continues. BBC now quoting “DEFRA” in the scamming. Mi5 / Mi6 must have a direct desk at the BBC. It now makes sense why lots of BBC articles have no journalists named as writers of the BBC articles.

    Here’s some quick quotes from the BBC piece:

    “A “very small amount” of the Novichok nerve agent was used in the attack, with the substance delivered in a “liquid form”, Defra said.” 1

    What a relief, it was not “nerve gas”. Stand down to Defcon 2.

    The “Novichok” lie is continued, the “Nerve Agent” lie is continued in the first sentence of the article also. The army, with their Nuclear Biological and Chemical warfare suits in Salisbury in March, must have overlooked some of the deadly material:

    “It will be cleaned away with caustic agents and hoardings will go up in public places in the next few days for the clean up to begin”

    “The nine sites affected include ambulance stations, Sergei Skripal’s house, and various city centre locations, including Zizzi restaurant and the Mill pub, where the Skripals spent time on the day they fell ill.

    Nearly 200 military personnel will help with the work, which is expected to take a number of months.” 2

    200 people wasted on a scam. What did the army do when they were in Salisbury weeks ago? Have a cup of tea and some pizza at Zizzi? A “number of months” to clear up. It’s a farce. The government did not clean the shit up correctly in the first place? It is such a scam.

    “The Skripals’ poisoning has triggered a diplomatic crisis between Russia and the West, with more than 20 countries expelling Russian envoys in solidarity with the UK.” 3

    “Russian spy: Skripal poison ‘was in liquid form’ (BBC)”

    The last quote sums it up. If the intention of the PSYOP was to continue to inflate the new cold war, and to bomb Syria, then the PSYOP was a success.

    Truth no longer matters to the criminals in Westminster, and their lackeys at the BBC.

    It is indeed like living in “Goebbels Land”.

1 4 5 6 7 8