Yulia Skripal Is Plainly Under Duress 777


Only the Russians have allowed us to hear the actual voice of Yulia Skripal, in that recorded conversation with her cousin. So the one thing we know for certain is that, at the very first opportunity she had, she called back to her cousin in Russia to let her know what is going on. If you can recall, until the Russians released that phone call, the British authorities were still telling lies that Sergei was in a coma and Yulia herself in a serious condition.

We do not know how Yulia got to make the call. Having myself been admitted unconscious to hospital on several occasions, each time when I came to I found my mobile phone in my bedside cabinet. Yulia’s mobile phone plainly had been removed from her and not returned. Nor had she been given an official one – she specifically told her cousin that she could not call her back on that phone as she had it temporarily. The British government could have given her one to keep on which she could be called back, had they wished to help her.

The most probable explanation is that Yulia persuaded somebody else in the hospital to lend her a phone, without British officials realising. That would explain why the first instinct of the British state and its lackey media was to doubt the authenticity of the call. It would explain why she was able to contradict the official narrative on their health, and why she couldn’t get a return call. It would, more importantly, explain why her family has not been able to hear her voice since. Nor has anybody else.

It strikes me as inherently improbable that, when Yulia called her cousin as her first act the very moment she was able, she would now issue a formal statement through Scotland Yard forbidding her cousin to be in touch or visit. I simply do not believe this British Police statement:

“I was discharged from Salisbury District Hospital on the 9th April 2018. I was treated there with obvious clinical expertise and with such kindness, that I have found I missed the staff immediately.
“I have left my father in their care, and he is still seriously ill. I too am still suffering with the effects of the nerve agent used against us.
“I find myself in a totally different life than the ordinary one I left just over a month ago, and I am seeking to come to terms with my prospects, whilst also recovering from this attack on me.
“I have specially trained officers available to me, who are helping to take care of me and to explain the investigative processes that are being undertaken. I have access to friends and family, and I have been made aware of my specific contacts at the Russian Embassy who have kindly offered me their assistance in any way they can. At the moment I do not wish to avail myself of their services, but, if I change my mind I know how to contact them.
“Most importantly, I am safe and feeling better as time goes by, but I am not yet strong enough to give a full interview to the media, as I one day hope to do. Until that time, I want to stress that no one speaks for me, or for my father, but ourselves. I thank my cousin Viktoria for her concern for us, but ask that she does not visit me or try to contact me for the time being. Her opinions and assertions are not mine and they are not my father’s.
“For the moment I do not wish to speak to the press or the media, and ask for their understanding and patience whilst I try to come to terms with my current situation.”

There is also the very serious question of the language it is written in. Yulia Skripal lived part of her childhood in the UK and speaks good English. But the above statement is in a particular type of formal, official English of a high level which only comes from a certain kind of native speaker.

“At the moment I do not wish to avail myself of their services” – wrote no native Russian speaker, ever.

Nor are the rhythms or idioms such as would in any way indicate a translation from Russian. Take “I thank my cousin Viktoria for her concern for us, but ask that she does not visit me or try to contact me for the time being. Her opinions and assertions are not mine and they are not my father’s.” Not only is this incredibly cold given her first impulse was to phone her cousin, the language is just wrong. It is not the English Yulia would write and it is awkward to translate into Russian, thus not a natural translation from it.

To put it plainly, as someone who has much experience of it, the English of the statement is precisely the English of an official in the UK security services and precisely not the English of somebody like Yulia Skripal or of a natural translation from Russian.

Yulia is, of course, in protective custody “for her own safety”. At the very best, she is being psychologically force-fed the story about the evil Russian government attempting to poison her with the doorknob, and she is being kept totally isolated from any influence that may reinforce any doubts she feels as to that story. There are much worse alternatives involving threat or the safety of her father. But even at the most benevolent reading of the British authorities’ actions, Yulia Skripal is being kept incommunicado, and under duress.


777 thoughts on “Yulia Skripal Is Plainly Under Duress

1 3 4 5 6 7 9
  • Folky McFolkface

    Plainly under duress?

    So please explain if the UK Govt Script is correct how should she announce her snubbing of the Russian state?

    This is a bit of a Moon Landing Scenario where someone who doesn’t believe in certain events cannot be convinced regardless of what evidence is presented. So what would convince you of the UK’s version of the events? The Russians standing up and confessing? Just to clarify, the Russian Ambassador denied the Molotov-Rippentrop pact a few weeks ago so they are unlikely to admit any part in this.

      • Folky McFolkface

        You mean a video of a media interview? Are you saying that any such video couldn’t be faked, or made under duress?
        Her statement does imply that she will speak to the media in due course “For the moment I do not wish to speak to the press or the media, and ask for their understanding and patience whilst I try to come to terms with my current situation.”
        Presumably when she is interviewed, probably on video you will be content then and trust the UK state forever more?
        You might want to watch the OPCW findings at midday on a news channel of your choice, be aware however that RT are unlikely to show this footage live.

          • Folky McFolkface

            Suspicion eh? No answer then?
            I’ve been posting for several months thanks.
            So Gordon, what would convince you of the UKs version of events?

          • Bayard

            That reads to me thus:
            FMcF: So what would convince you of the UK’s version of the events?
            OB: a video
            FMcF: I wouldn’t believe that, it could be faked.
            So, FMcF, just what would convince you of the UK’s version of the events?

        • Ophelia Ball

          no, Folky, to keep it concise

          1. Proof that she is alive, and that it is indeed she
          2. The ability to read her facial expressions, body language and general physical condition
          3. The absence of any apparent downside in doing so; this would not violate her privacy or security, but would build confidence in an otherwise opaque story

          and no, I would not trust the UK state “forever more”, because it is typified not just by rogues such as Blair, but also by cretins such as Johnson and apologists such as the BBC

          Will you be re-appearing in this discussion after the OPCW briefing to eat your hat – on the assumption that RT is allowed to televise it? I have to say, it’s not been all that easy to follow the recent UN Security Council meetings on the BBC, so RT is quite frankly my go-to channel for breaking news stories just now

          • Ophelia Ball

            Folksy, I think you are now straying into the realms of fantasy, and clutching at straws

            How, indeed, could I be confident that the person in the video wasn’t a Martian in a rubber mask? Well, I’m not always entirely taken in by such ruses, and I’m fairly certain that her family in Russia wouldn’t be either

            I am pleased that the OPCW statement will be made public; it would be odd if RT were excluded, surely, because they could hardly run a tampered version of the proceedings, but overall I am willing to keep an open mind until some concrete facts emerge/ You should try it some time

          • Folky McFolkface

            I’m sorry, is it irritating when I steal your thunder and get YOUR excuses in early? Does it undermine your case when it falls apart following Skripals interview(s)?
            I’ll watch this space after she is interviewed and see what smokescreen goes up when your “story” is undone.

          • Ophelia Ball

            Folky, pet, I don’t have ‘a case’. What about that don’t you get?

            I have only two points of interest in this situation:

            1. I don’t know what is going on here, but something clearly is
            2. I’d like more information before forming a rational assessment

            please try to keep up, there’s a poppet

          • Jo Dominich

            Ophelia, RT UK is also my go to channel at the moment – for those who deride it, they should go to it, it is far more balanced and enlightening than people think it is.

        • Dan

          An interview with the guy from Porton Down in front of a large group of journalists, all permitted to ask questions with no subject off limits, and broadcast live (rather than recorded and edited) would be a start…

        • Jack

          Ok Folky lets go over some key points which should cause any reasonable person to question what we are being told.
          1. The British Government spokesperson at the UN told said UN that a weapon of mass destruction had been used on the streets of the UK.
          2. The result of the use of this alleged weapon of mass destruction was that no one was killed and only 3 people were effected in any way.

          Need I go on ?

      • N_

        Yes indeed – she could read the statement out in front of cameras. I can picture now a medic standing behind her “to intervene in case of need” – the kind of bullshit that has been staged in many a British courtroom. They don’t want to get their faces wiped in it as they did before when she got the information out that her dad is not in coma and that neither of them is suffering from anything from which they won’t recover.

        Moon landing my arse. Douma scepticism equivalent to saying the latest school massacre in the US was staged by “crisis” actors, also my arse.

          • Ophelia Ball

            I don’t think you are very well versed in this ‘reasoned argument / rational debate’ kind of thing, Folksy

            in general terms, its not necessary to either put words in people’s mouths which they haven’t said, or to abrasively dismiss every point they make as if your life depends on us

            Reasonable people can sometimes disagree – that doesn’t mean that one of them is necessarily stupid, a liar or pursuing an alternative agenda

            My own take on this is quite simple: I don’t know what is going on here, and I’d like further information in order to form a rational assessment. Please let me know if either of those statements requires further simplification, because I can assure you – neither of them is untrue, neither of them displays any factional allegiance or conspiracy theory, and neither of them are even remotely close to being satisfied by the version of events currently presented by the UK authorities

            You may perhaps be right; Craig, I and everyone else with similar reservations may be complete idiots, but I’m not quite so sure about that; not yet, anyway

    • Xavi

      “This is a bit of a Moon Landing Scenario where someone who doesn’t believe in certain events cannot be convinced regardless of what evidence is presented”

      Why do I suspect that you were blown away by the “evidence” presented for intervening in Iraq and Libya?

    • TomGard

      You know, what a solicitor is? Are there still solicitors in the UK? So why wasn’t Yulia free to name a solicitor from the telephone book who could convey a note to the Russian embassy and / or relatives

      a) If he was allowed to contact personally a person, that looked like Yulia and gave some verbal sign of her identity
      b) if he could speak to her without supervision
      c) if he could exchange written notes with her without interference
      d) if this person certified the statement of Scotland Yard as her’s

      That would still correspond to due legal process in the UK, wouldn’t it?

    • Bayard

      “So what would convince you of the UK’s version of the events?”
      Well a picture of Yulia, taken since the poisoning would help. It could not contradict any of the UK official narrative, but at least we’d know if she was still alive. Better still, have her appear on TV, she doesn’t need to say anything.
      “This is a bit of a Moon Landing Scenario where someone who doesn’t believe in certain events cannot be convinced regardless of what evidence is presented. ”
      All the evidence presented for the Moon landing is credible. Whether it was faked or could have been faked does not alter that. Most of the evidence to support the UK official version of events is not credible, even to someone who does not care one way or the other. Indeed, if I was a supporter of the UK government, I would be exasperated by the issue of such a statement as the one in the post because, regardless of whether it is fake or not, it looks fake.

    • Jo Dominich

      Folky, the Government handling of this has been such a mess you cannot believe a word they put out. It seems to me that Yulia is being detained without access to family, friends or the consulate. Ophelia is right, let’s see her on video. For some two weeks I have come to the view, having regard to all the evidence, that Yulia Skripal has not been in hospital but elsewhere. The air ambulance logs suggest a 20 minute gap in it’s whereabouts. You must never forget Skripal was a double agent. I shouldn’t wonder that the CIA had a big hand in what happened otherwise why would they be on the brink of offering them new identities and relocating to the USA. I am in no doubt whatsoever that Russia had no hand in this at all, the evidence simply isn’t there. Therefore, there is a ‘highly likely’ (Quoting our Govt of course) probable case that Skripal was in someway either involved in some duplicity on behalf of the British Government – i.e. setting up an incident which would create a false flag so allow for what has just happened, a false flag chemical attack in Syria so that the USA/UK and Israel could invade Syria – and then being removed from the public eye and being denied access to their Consulate and friends/or family whilst the story plays out. At the moment, it looks very much as though Yulia is being detained without access to communication tools such as a mobile phone, computer and her family have been denied a Visa to come to the UK. It doesn’t take much intelligence to see that something is seriously wrong h ere. Craig is right, it is not the language any member of the population would have used. Let’s see that video!

  • Xavi

    Anybody willing to engage their brain will have been thinking the same, Craig. But where are the journalists and politicians willing to think logically and question the warmongers? Events of the past few weeks suggest those profession are effectively dead in this country.

      • Niko

        Surely that was his point? The statement purportedly by Yulia herself uses a very similar style to that issued on her behalf’ by the police i.e. probably not the style of a Russian speaker, even if bilingual.

        • Folky McFolkface

          So he took it upon himself to accept what she had to say last week but doesn’t accept the same style this week as the message doesn’t fit his version of events.

          • Bayard

            He didn’t “take it upon himself to accept what she had to say last week” because she didn’t say it and no-one is claiming that she did. It was a statement issued on her behalf by the police, so one would expect it to sound like it was written by the police. What Craig is pointing out is that this latest statement, purportedly issued by her reads exactly the same.

          • Bayard

            OK, fair enough, but what is there in the earlier statement to challenge? She says she’s getting better, she thanks the staff of Salisbury Hospital and she asks for her privacy to be respected. Despite your assertions to the contrary, the whole statement reads much more fluently and is devoid of the sort of stilted officialese of the later one. It is as credible as a, possibly translated, statement from Yulia as the following one is not credible.

  • N_

    A typical piece of cut and paste from a government memo and call myself a journalist crap from the Guardian from 14 minutes ago: “A statement by (Yulia Skripal) issued via Scotland Yard claimed she had refused an offer of consular assistance from the embassy.”

    Well no, actually, it does not claim that, unless you do not know the meaning of the word “refuse”. To “refuse” something means you tell the person offering it to you that you don’t want it.

    The word “via” here is also propaganda, chosen to underline the idea that Yulia Skripal is the principal agent here. “By” would be a more neutral word.

    Why couldn’t she appear before cameras and read the statement out? The answer is that the British authorities are too fucking scared she might go off-message as she did in the phone call to Viktoria. (That’s what I think happened. I don’t go along with the idea that a friendly person smuggled her in a phone.)

    • David Knowles

      or she doesn’t wish to go on camera after spending the last 5 weeks in hospital receiving extensive medical treatments, including a substantial time in a protective coma. This all takes time to recover from.

  • David Knowles

    Or alternatively the British only want her to call people in Russia on one time use burner phones and numbers so as not to give her location away and to make intercept of conversations harder.

    Russia-1 air there own doubts about authenticity of the recording when they first played it, so it wasn’t just western media.

    You are also making assumptions that she called her cousin first, should could have called somebody else who didn’t go to the media about it or Russian intelligence services didn’t intercept and we would never know. She could have called multiple people before calling her cousin. An these calls could have happen before she was given the formal option of entering a witness protection program.

    It also not at all uncommon for police to write statements on behalf of a victim of crime, which explains the formality of her publish statements to the press.

    • N_

      the British only want her to call people in Russia on one time use burner phones and numbers so as not to give her location away and to make intercept of conversations harder.

      In other words she is being kept prisoner.

      Can’t the poshboys defend their own army bases on their own territory? Too scared of a Spetsnaz raid if the coordinates get out?

    • Robyn

      If, as I read somewhere, the FSB (or whoever) instructed Viktoria to record any phone calls coming from a number she didn’t recognise, wouldn’t they have given similar advice/instruction to all other potential phone call recipients? If yes, perhaps transcripts of those calls might have been made available too.

      • Tatyana

        @Robyn
        I admit, Viktoria made record by her own will, it is the first thing that pops up in your head if you’re in Viktoria’s position and receive an international call.
        But I’m sure FSB had some type of conversation with Victoria, they must do this at least to see what type of person she is, is she mentally sound because Viktoria’s acts and statements can influence international relations.

    • Jo Dominich

      David, it is uncommon though, in fact probably unheard of, for Police to make statements on behalf of someone detained without access to external communication and apparently detained by our Security Services. Yulia Skripal has a life in Moscow, she had just bought a flat with her fiance, realised 200,000 dollars from the death of her brother, she had a good job and chose to return to Russia of her own accord having come here with her father in 2010 (read the history). Now, had she an issue with Moscow they could have got rid of her at any time but no, the day after she arrives the alleged attack in Salisbury happens from which time, nobody has had access to her, seen her or her father and it is beginning to look doubtful that she might ever have been in hospital at all. Why, all of a sudden, would she be denied access to friends, family and the consulate – to prevent the truth coming out of course. She is being briefed as is her father. Yes, the UK Government is not just capable of doing these things it IS doing them. Why also, the CIA involvement in offering false identities and relocation to the USA.

  • Pyotr Grozny

    Lobbying suggestion

    As my contribution this morning I have sent a copy of the photo of what looks like a man in a burka to be found here

    http://sonarz.com/still-think-jo-cox-is-dead-watch-this/

    listening when tributes are paid to Jo Cox,

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-o3CJp4jDew

    mentioning Jo Cox’s links to the White Helmets and asking are the White Helmets really what they appear to be.

    I trialled this first on close family and friends and it certainly made them think. I’ve asked everyone to lobby their MP this morning and press for answers. You can be sure Tory MPs will let Teresa May know what constituents think. She can bypass Parliament but not electronic communications in the age of the internet and a blizzard of emails is as good as a crowd outside Parliament.

  • Dr. Ip

    Regarding language analysis of the Yulia Skripal statement: AntConc, a free software, is available for anyone who wants to do an analysis of the language used in, say, a document released by one of the MI agencies of the government, or by the police, and the statement released on behalf of Yulia Skripal.
    The AntConc software can be found here: http://www.softpedia.com/get/Science-CAD/AntConc.shtml

    Quote from the site:
    The application parses two or more text documents and displays exact or similar words employed in the corpus.
    To conclude, AntConc is a good tool for anyone interested in obtaining word frequency analyses from two or multiple text documents.
    Corpus analysis
    Words frequency analyzer
    Analyze words cluster
    Word Frequency
    N-gram Concordance

    If you like what it does, you might want to visit the site of the developer:
    http://www.laurenceanthony.net/software/antconc/

  • Peter in Private

    I received an email recently from an old friend who used to be an officer in the Metropolitan Police. He described how he’d been robed in the street and his hotel would not return his passport until he’d paid his hotel bill. Then he asked me to send money via Western Union which he would repay later. I knew the email wasn’t from him by the style of the text. The spelling and grammar were fine but the terminology, the lack of structure and the short sentences proved the email was never written by a former officer of the Met. Of course I didn’t send the money and later discovered that his Yahoo account had been hacked.

    Reading Yulia’s statement I see the reverse is true. It reads like it was written by a police office trying to keep his sentences short. For example:

    “I too am still suffering with the effects of the nerve agent used against us.”
    I don’t know Yulia, but I would expect her to simply describe the condition of her health rather than taking the opportunity to support the media war by repeating the allegation that a nerve agent was used against both her and her father.

    “I have specially trained officers available to me”
    Why would she boast about the officers being not just “trained” but “specially trained”? A police officer may say this to emphasis what a good job they are doing of looking after her.

    “At the moment I do not wish to avail myself of their services”. In my 40-year career I’ve worked and/or holidayed in all European countries, including all eastern European countries (except Albania) and I’ve never heard a non-native English speaker say this.

    • Folky McFolkface

      I think the fact that a former Police Officer couldn’t spell “robbed” would arouse suspicions, so much so that I stopped reading…. sorry

    • N_

      Just to add something: the following use of a comma before the word “that” does in fact have a Russian flavour.

      I was treated there with obvious clinical expertise and with such kindness, that I have found I missed the staff immediately.

      Some middle class people like to laugh at the combination of linguistic pretention combined with a lack of education that is often displayed by the police, but I am sure this text went through filters and also if Yulia Skripal was involved in some way that doesn’t mean that her authentic voice is expressing what she would want to say if she were a completely free agent. There are far too many points in this document which completely and irreparably undermine that notion.

      Moreover, I wouldn’t put the tactical use of a “Russian comma” beyond MI5 and MI6’s language boys. But if we really want to get into deep textual analysis it should be noted.

    • Tatyana

      They could simply give her a paper for her to sign up, that is all. Does it count as a statement on Yulia’s behalf via Police?

  • Pyotr Grozny

    Lobbying works !

    At 07.57 I emailed my MP Zac Goldsmith (Con Majority 45)

    Peter Nockolds

    7:57 AM (2 hours ago)

    to Zac

    Zac

    You could save me the trouble of copying our correspondence and digging out the emails of local Lib Dems.

    I suspect I’ve stumbled onto an embarrassing question, can’t think why it should be embarrassing but my rule of thumb is that if a politician finds something embarrassing then they should be embarrassed.

    Peter

    Consulting Parliament – why doesn’t Zac answer

    Zac Goldmith has told me the line he would take if Teresa May consults Parliament about the bombing of Syria but – he took four hours to reply – but a further 20 hours have elapsed since I asked him whether I think she should consult Parliament. I find that very strange. I hope that by circulating this the voters of Richmond upon Thames might get an answer, and even an explanation for the delay in providing an answer.

    23 minutes later he tweeted his position which now appears on the BBC website.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-43733861

    So if you think hard maybe there is something you can do which will make a dfifference

    • Tatyana

      @Pyotr Grozny
      thank you, I wish it helps.
      I’ve learned this night that Trump cannot begin war with a foreign state, it is the reason for impeachment. Girls from USA said ‘He was elected on his policy of non-involvement in foreign wars and bringing troops back home as soon as possible.’
      That’s why I think they need Theresa May to begin.

  • Dave G

    The Guardian says that Yulia Skripal says she doesn’t want to talk to the Russian embassy, but that’s an inaccurate bit of reporting. It’s the oft-politicised UK police who say that she doesn’t want to talk to the embassy. As she’s a Russian citizen and the circumstances in this case are unique, I think the Russian embassy should have the right to hear that from Yulia herself in a non-pressurised situation.

    • N_

      And she has not applied for asylum – that is clear from this text.

      If I were in a spot of trouble in a foreign country and the British consulate wanted to see me and I didn’t want to see them, I would certainly have no problem telling them to their face.

      • Folky McFolkface

        You may wish to review your understanding of the asylum process, she hasn’t applied as she’s been offered it by the UK as she is at risk if she were to return to Russia.

        • IanA

          ‘…as she is at risk if she were to return to Russia.’

          Do you have any evidence to support this assertion?

  • alasdairB

    Having worked closely over a 5 year period alongside the BHC in a then newly independent Commonwealth country I am reasonably au fait with the usage of bland but exact civil service language. Like Craig I am confident the language, phrasing & content of Yulia’s recent press release has been prepared & written for her. Whether or not she had any input or indeed was consulted are questions , which like so many others in this case, for the moment remain unanswered.
    My opinion is that somehow the Skripals were both complicit in this Salisbury incident and we should definitely not overlook Operation Toxic Dagger, its purpose & possible roll in this incident. Full details can be found at “www.gov.uk Exercise Toxic Dagger”

    Moving on to Douma it seems more than likely this will be subject to a collective Cabinet decision & not debated in Parliament for no reason other than May’s hapless government , like Blair , would most probably suffer an ignominious defeat. That is not to say that Corbyn should be clearly demanding an emergency Commons debate on the matter before we become embroiled in another senseless Middle East disaster.

    • N_

      @AladairB –

      Moving on to Douma it seems more than likely this will be subject to a collective Cabinet decision & not debated in Parliament for no reason other than May’s hapless government , like Blair , would most probably suffer an ignominious defeat. That is not to say that Corbyn should be clearly demanding an emergency Commons debate on the matter before we become embroiled in another senseless Middle East disaster.

      Why isn’t it? Or was that a typo?

      This is likely to spread outside the Middle East.

      I don’t share the view that the government would be defeated. There may be a few Labour MPs with backbone but there is talk of SPDing (or is it LFOI-ing?) the Labour party out of the picture, or at least taking a sledgehammer to whatever strength it currently has. A similar job, mutatis mutandis, was accomplished last year in France.

    • bj

      Yes, the point I made earlier; it’s theater on a low budget, i.e. since the Operation Toxic Dagger had been underway, the personnel, the props and stage and costumes were all readily available.

  • Tony_0pmoc

    Duck & Cover, Syria Style, by the White Helmets (not good quality – but this is not an official production). Kids playing happily then playing dead.

    “This video from “rebels’” held area in Syria is one of the reasons why you don’t rush into war based on YouTube videos”

    https://twitter.com/BBassem7/status/983677065844019200

    Personally, I think the missiles will fly, but hit nothing of consequence, and the bathtubs will go back home, but then I am an optomist. There are however, several alternative scenarios. If John Bolton was on The Russian side, I suspect that the bathtubs, would already be at the bottom of the ocean, complete with their missiles. The Americans would find this deeply offensive, and many of us would soon see a massive great flash, for an exceedingly short period of time.

    Ending the human race in a nuclear war, on the basis of lies, and crappy fake videos seems a bit crass, but that is the standard our leaders have no descended to.

    I don’t think the rumour, that the latest Russian electronic countermeasures re defence from missile attack, called Бумеранг is true, though I could be wrong.

    Tony

    • Ophelia Ball

      Tony – maybe I’m just being blithely optimistic, but the longer this goes on, the more I am starting to suggest that Trump may just have blinked first, and this perhaps isn’t going to kick off after all…. well, not yet, anyhow

      I would guesstimate that we are currently aware of slightly less than 10% of what is actually going on behind the scenes just now, and if that ever increases to 20% it will be nothing short of a miracle. It’s futile to speculate, but that’s no basis for denying that there is almost certainly far more to this than meets the eye

  • Jack

    Almost sounds that she speak under influence (sedative drugs or intelligence services) almost a bit brainwashed and in captivity.
    I bet as soon she woke up, mi6 agents start pushing
    “you were poisoned by putin”
    “you were poisoned by putin”
    “you were poisoned by putin”
    “you were poisoned by putin”
    “you were poisoned by putin”

    Poor girl being used by May to bomb Syria..

  • Charles

    I’ve just thought of a scenario where Assad may well have gassed those people.

    He and Putin had been killing lots of people with High Explosive Bombs. That’s war! Shit happens!

    But just at the last moment, when there were only a few more to kill and the war would be over ……… they ran out of High Explosive Bombs.

    The Russians had run out too. So they thought and they thought what should we do and they came up with the idea of getting some bleach and acid and using that instead.

  • Monster

    A little light relief.

    War and Piss

    Pablo Miller: I’m so disappointed in you Chris. Woody and I loved your piss dossier and I said to myself, this is the man for my big project. The plan seemed like a dream. Now it’s a fucking nightmare.. why?

    Christopher Steele: It’s not my fault, mate. Everything was checked out dozens of times but..

    P: But what..? A couple of days into the plan we get some ex-ambassador stirring the shit.

    C: That was just bad luck. He had a book to sell so he comes up with a load of tosh which was a joke, until he started talking to his mates. Then…

    P: So why wasn’t he shut down? Don’t you lot have any computer savvy, or are you too embarrassed to ask the Cheltenham girls for help.

    C: I did. They got half a dozen shills in his comments section, launched an attack, but by then it had got legs.. and er, it spread round internet like.

    P: And what about this fucking hospital stuff.

    C: I had it all sewn up, Christine Blanchard was in place, then Stephen fucking Davis opens his trap. It was sort of, unexpected…I er..

    P: Nothing should be unexpected, you must have learned something from your ballet classes. It’s all about balance isn’t it Chrissy baby. Anyway, Davis is being dealt with. But what about that fucking Motorola salesman at Porton. He’s your man. You get the free phones, and what do we get, a prize fucking moron.

    C: He doesn’t like public speaking, so we did this one-to-one on Sky, but it somehow didn’t come out right.

    P: Nothing seems to be coming out right. We’ve carted off half of Salisbury into quarantine, and people are still asking fucking stupid questions. We got two targets a willing plod and some ketamine. Everything was sorted, but it’s not is it?

    C: Er, no. But the OPCW has come up trumps.

    P: That’s too little too late. And it’s being shut out with our Syria plan.

    C: Well, that’s not going too well for you is it. Talk about pipsqueak ambassadors. Why was Peter fucking Ford allowed to spill his guts on the Beeb.

    P: There’s always glitches in a complex plan. That jock interviewer is being dealt with.

    C: But are you dealing with the Yulia saga. It doesn’t sound like being dealt with to me.

    P: Look, you got the easy bit. I’ve got bodies piling up like its Auschwitz and a fucking war that may never happen. Big C is fucking doing his nut. This has got to be sorted by next Friday. Then we can cancel the local elections and focus on the war.

  • alwaywrite

    i don’t know why craig is still bothering with this hoax, the story has shifted to Syria, as it was always just theatre to help isolate the Russians and make them look no better than the “animal Assad”

    this is obviously part of a gambit to get an international coalition together and strike Syria, strike it hard enough so that Russia and Iran
    ‘ pay’ for their so called victory in fighting and largely destroying the Western backed terrorist proxy army

    id suggest craig puts alot more emphasis on what would happen if things go wrong with this Western gambit and the war in Syria escalates into a nuclear conflict, i say this because what strikes me is how few people think this could happen , and very few understand what the destruction would be

    i think its time to start ‘terrorising’ the public about what real weopons of mass destruction would do, and bring this out fully into the public, because i can’t see many people actually doing so

    • Tony_0pmoc

      alwaywrite,

      The problem is people always relate to their own personal experience, and a relatively short history. There are few British people, still alive, that have experienced bombs dropping in the road where they live, and even fewer Americans.

      No one has yet experienced a nuclear war. It has never happenned, and they naturally assume, that it never will. It’s the same mindset, that assumes house prices, have always gone up, and always will. They also assume interest rates will always remain very low, and they won’t suddenly become homeless, because a bomb has just landed on it, or interest rates have suddenly gone back up to 15%.

      All these things, except a nuclear war, have happenned in the road where I live.

      A few days ago, I attempted to post a clip from the final scenes of a film made in 1964, about an insane general who triggered a path to nuclear war. My post, not only never appeared, I am almost certain, that it was intercepted, before it got anywhere near Craig Murray’s website. I could try it again, but I don’t like offending these people.

      On another matter, have they upgraded our subs, from running on Windows XP? I seem to recall, there was a nasty virus about since they were last used in anger to destroy Libya. I have no idea why that was done, except to compensate for our low birthrate.

      Tony

      • alwaywrite

        Thanks for that

        I’d suggest trying Raymond Briggs, “when the wind blows” it’ll certainly focus minds when they think granny’s gonna meet with a very nasty end

  • Folky McFolkface

    From what I can see, not one of you would accept any evidence to confirm the UKs version of events under any circumstances, which is amazing from so many supposed open minds. The same minds that clearly do not have a sense of irony which is, well, ironic.
    If she was to appear on camera she would be either under duress or an actress/lookalike/new style prosthetic mask etc…

    We should take a leaf from the Russian’s play book…. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wxo7fPvhqkI

    • Ophelia Ball

      you’re wrong, and I sense your only real interest is in trying to pick an argument

      • Folky McFolkface

        I’m sorry, is it irritating when I steal your thunder and get YOUR excuses in early? Does it undermine your case when it falls apart following Skripals interview(s)?
        I’ll watch this space after she is interviewed and see what smokescreen goes up when your “story” is undone.

        • Ophelia Ball

          yes, that’s the way to do it – just keep repeating the same vapid nonsense, and when the Grown Ups get tired of your banal ranting, that means You’ve Won The Argument and we can all get on with out lives, secure in the knowledge of what a clever little so-and-so you are. I’m impressed, honestly I am. Deeply.

          • Folky McFolkface

            See I knew I could get you to demonstrate a sense of irony. You probably need to work on it a wee bit though, along with your use of “ranting” capitals.

        • alwaywrite

          she won’t be interviewed though as this whole event was probably an elaborate hoax, very possibly created by the intelligence agencies and Mr Skripal, who is a known traitor, and therefore some one with the perfect motive to get involved with such a scheme, which is obviously to smear the russian state and its leader

          id suggest Mr Skripal and daughert will disapear now that their part of the scheme has been fulfilled, which as i suggested early was to isolate the Russians and make them look as bad as the Syrians, who as we’re told are led by an “animal” who “enjoys”
          gasing his own people!

          your been played like a fiddle, and its a tune which will lead to direct conflict with Russia in Syria and possible all out war, I’d suggest you to stop fixating about this, and concentrate on where we’re going

    • Elidor

      The Moon landings have a ridiculously large body of open documentary, photographic and video evidence and free contact with the thousands of people involved. And given that there are plenty of ways you could actually disprove them if false, to claim they didn’t happen can only marks you out as a totally illogical loon.

      Here, we have the equivalent of one piece of paper released by NASA on behalf of the astronauts saying “things are nice here on the Moon”, with no-one ever speaking to the astronauts before the event, or ever seeing them afterwards.

      If that’s what had happened with the Moon landings skepticism would be more than justified.

      Even the most straightforward things aren’t being done here – why isn’t she issuing a statement through an independent solicitor, for starters? Either they’re trying to make it look suspicious for some reason, or there is some reason to be suspicious.

      • Folky McFolkface

        You seem to have taken my post too literally, I believe the moon landing happened.
        Drawing a parallel between this case and people who deny the moon landings is a valid one don’t you think?

        • Elidor

          It is a good comparison, if only to indicate the basic difference in amount of available evidence.

          I believe the Moon landings happened, but not because of a 1-page statement on behalf of the astronauts. Everything about the landings was incredibly open and all the media are available in the public domain. To fake the Moon landings would have been a large-scale conspiracy enterprise involving so many people that it is not remotely conceivable.

          The goings-on around the Skirpals basically involve a couple of former Russian spooks and a few British spooks, so it’s entirely plausible that there’s some funny business going on. The starting position with spooks is to assume that they won’t be telling the truth, unless it happens to suit them.

          Just because some people irrationally disbelieve stuff with mountains of evidence does not mean it’s a good idea to start believing stuff with no evidence. That’s just as irrational.

          I don’t agree with Craig that we can conclude “Yulia Skripal is Plainly Under Duress”, but there is absolutely no evidence that she isn’t, and what little we can actually verify is clearly open to that possibility.

          The authorities are acting dodgily, and should be pressed on that. If she isn’t under duress, then why are they being so shady?

          Everything about this generally stinks of cover-up and bad faith, and if they’re upset that people take it that way, they’ve only got themselves to blame – whether everything is above-board or not.

          The only thing that seems vaguely solid was that there was some nerve agent involved – that’s the only thing that experts have agreed on without lots of careful caveats or weasel wording (and now apparently the OPCW) – but beyond that we really lack any actual solid info.

          • Bayard

            For “nerve agent”, substitute “poison” and that pretty well sums it up. The OPCW have been careful not to confirm in their report that the toxic chemical used was a nerve agent and they should know.

    • Bayard

      What would it take for you to accept that there is anything incredible abut the UK government’s version of events? Not accept that it is not true, but accept that it looks dodgy. Whether or not it looks credible is a totally different value judgement as to whether it is true or not.
      To impute all scepticism generated by a badly presented case as being down to prejudice demonstrates a mind far more closed than what you impute to others who comment on this post.

  • Ruth

    As an ESOL expert I’d absolutely agree the language used doesn’t conform to that of an advanced ESOL student nor even to a well-educated native as formal English is becoming less formal. It is official language.

    • Folky McFolkface

      As an ESOL expert, you probably know better than to capitalise the E in English when referring to language and your last “sentence” isn’t even a sentence…. Next!

  • Ottomanboi

    Reading between the lines it looks certain that Erdoğan’s Turkey will not be offering facilties for any proposed strikes against Syria’s alleged chem.weapon stores. As yet unlocated it seems.
    This will all have to be done from marine vessels in the East Mediterranean.
    Nato is showing signs of cracking up.
    Attacking a sovereign state with which you are not officially at war is aggression.
    Isn’t the UN supposed to be concerned with such matters.
    The Anglosaxons and the Gauls need their hubris clipped.

    • Jo Dominich

      Ottomanboi, you are correct, attacking a sovereign state with which you are not officially at war is aggression, but Nikki Haley stated very clearly the USA will take action with or without UN approval (which is precisely what they did in Iraq and Libya). The other thing that is blatantly ignored in Government narrative is that the OPCW in 2013 and 2017 respectively, confirmed that all Syria and Russia’s chemical weapons had been destroyed under international supervision. So when the Media and politicians talk about ‘hitting Syria’s stockpile of chemical weapons’ you have to ask “Which stockpiles would they be then?”

  • Tony M

    N_
    April 12, 2018 at 10:35

    “Just to add something: the following use of a comma before the word “that” does in fact have a Russian flavour.”

    Talking of superfluous commas you might well recall the earlier postings here by RoS which were, littered, with, the, damned, things!

    • Folky McFolkface

      Tony M,
      Do not criticise punctuation on here, I’llpheelya will have a go at you!

    • Ottomanboi

      As the subject English is taught in schools from the perspective of a child’s supposed innate creativity and not from instruction in the basic hows and whys of syntax etc it is hardly a surprise to find ‘misuse’ of punctuation. Trump is totemic with regard to the current fractured state of English.

  • Colette Annesley

    Worrying statement – purportedly from Yulia Skripal with vocabulary and syntax that does not coalesce with any ordinary person – let alone someone making such a ‘miraculous’ ‘recovery’. Wouldn’t Ms Skripal wish to remain at her father’s bedside? Problematic that they’ve been separated. Question: why are they not in the same ‘medical facility’ as each other? Plus, no mention of the pets…

  • Dan

    Someone should arrange some crowdfunding to finance a poll asking the public whether or not they believe the government’s version of what happened in Salisbury…

  • Tony M

    I’m alarmed by the growing media consensus that parliament must have a say and/or a vote on whether to let loose the dogs of war on the basis of yet another transparently obvious false-flag -with the Tory/DUP fascist majority, and the rabid Blairite Labour back-benchers of the same hue, Hell-No, and thrice No, that is almost a rubber-stamp. I wouldn’t trust ‘the people’ either, given the insane bias and unanimity of the media and the lifetimes conditioning of the masses. Any parliamentary majority would simply be a furtther confirmation as if any more were needed, that this parliament and parliamentary procedures in general are unfit for this or any other purpose.

    • Hatuey

      I guess we can expect another emotional and rousing display by Benn.

      Anyway, I e been reading some of the exchanges on here and I have two observations to make:

      1) there’s an overwhelming sense and assumption that Britain matters. It doesn’t really. Regardless of what Britain decides, the US will do what it wants in regards to Syria. The British choice is to go along with it or not. And world war 3 will not hinge on what Britain does. Britain’s minnow of irrelevance status was formally recognised in 1956 and nothing anyone says on here will alter that.

      2) it’s hard to believe this Yulia Scripal would have access to a phone if the British security service were willed to prevent her making phone calls. I’ll go further, if the British security services were intent on preventing her from making phone calls, there’s no way she would have been able to borrow a phone to make a phone call off any of her visitors or medical staff involved.

      • Bayard

        Hatuey,
        1. Agreed, but we shouldn’t be getting involved in that case and exposing ourselves to possible retaliation.
        2. I think you over-estimate the competence of the security services.

      • Tony_0pmoc

        Hatuey, I disagree. I don’t understand why, but Britain still has enormous influence.

        Re point 1, The Commons voting against war in Syria in 2013, was instrumental in preventing it. If they had voted for, it would have gone ahead. The Americans backed down.

        http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23892783

        “Syria crisis: Cameron loses Commons vote on Syria action”
        “MPs have rejected possible UK military action against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s government to deter the use of chemical weapons.
        David Cameron said he would respect the defeat of a government motion by 285-272, ruling out joining US-led strikes.
        The US said it would “continue to consult” with the UK, “one of our closest allies and friends”.”

        Re point 2 wherever Yulia Scipal was being held (and it may have been Salisbury Hospital), there would be regular access to her, by many different staff, not just nurses and doctors, but all kids of ancilliary staff. Mobile phones and sims, can be bought for less than £10, and can be very small, and untraceable. Numerous people could have secreted them in. The same kind of things happens in High Security jails.

        Tony

        • Hatuey

          What a strange response. There’s nothing in the evidence you provide to support what you are arguing. Quite the contrary.

          The only people who exaggerate the importance of Britain’s role in the world are the British themselves and it’s no surprise that you think the BBC and British government are going to bolster that sort of argument, even if they don’t in this case.

          As for this Yulia case, we can only assume she was highly protected since the story goes that this was an attempt on her life. Security and police would have provided for her safety and thoroughly searched and vetted anyone coming into contact with her.

          Now I’m not saying she didn’t make a phone call, I’m saying if she did then it would need to be sanctioned in some way. Personally, I have no idea if she made a phone call or not and I trust Russia as much as I trust anyone else in this affair.

    • Dan

      The DUP voted against intervention in Syria last time – and I’m not sure that war is covered by the Confidence and Supply arrangement.

      That said, this time there are more Blairite rebels who would vote for action just to disagree with Corbyn.

  • Charles

    One thing the UK authorities would have wanted to know was where Sergei and Yulia were after 9:15am on the 4th until 1:00pm.

    They both deliberately immobilised their phones to prevent tracking.

    Given the history they would have been treated as suspects even if the “crime” wasn’t known.

    It can now be presumed that Mi5 now know their whereabouts on the 4th.

    • Dan

      “They both deliberately immobilised their phones to prevent tracking. […]It can now be presumed that Mi5 now know their whereabouts on the 4th.”

      Evidence?

  • Jones

    the consistency in this ongoing saga is that the facts repeatedly differ from what the authorities tell us —- in the one and only phone call between Yulia and Viktoria it was Yulia that phoned Viktoria and in that phone call Yulia said to Viktoria and to quote ”lets talk later” clearly indicating a desire to keep in contact, yet apparently she now coldly tells Viktoria not to contact her. I wonder how many people in her position would voluntarily choose total isolation from family. —- UK is now an authoritarian state driven by mass deception.

    • Salford Lad

      The Skripals are but a side issue in the coming conflagration .They have served their purpose ,had their 5 minutes of fame and now exit the stage.
      We can now connect the dots that brought us to this sorry impasse and possibly a showdown between the worlds two greatest nuclear powers.
      The loss of the POTUS election was a great shock to the Power Centres and disrupted their ongoing hegomonic plans.
      Hillary Clinton and the Obama administration began a plan to undermine Trump and demonise Russia, backed by a suppliant media.
      This worked so well there was little possibility of a peaceful rapprochement with Russia.
      Russia is the only country which is militarily capable of preventing US hegemonic plans, while China is the coming superior economic power.
      Russophobia is now rampant in the West and are seen as the Bad Guys. They are the whipping boys for all manner of things, Brexit and Potus election interference, etc.
      Certainly Russia is a young and imperfect democracy with growing pains, but is not a dictatorship.
      Western democracies have demonstrated their failure by this hasty rush to war without public approval.They are a sham. We are not the Good Guys in this coming conflagration.
      The War Plan was a textbook operation in perception management and manipulating public consent. It worked as follows.
      1. Demonise Jeremy Corbyn as an Anti-semite to undermine him and his anti-war movement,
      2. Rush to war without Parliamentary approval, to prevent the organisation of a viable resistance movement and the exposure of the hoaxes..This lesson learned from the Iraq war.
      3. Fabricate a hoax chemical poisoning in Salisbury , blame it on Russia. Thus preparing the British people for the flimsy hoax of poisoning in Douma by association.
      4. Go to war and end all life on earth,unless someone blinks, or there is a behind doors agreement of a token strike. I know Russia will not blink. History tells us they are prepared to go the whole hog

      In all of this the Media have disgraced themselves and the talking heads and politicians have revealed their utter evil. We now see clearly the real enemies of the people.
      The only journalism now available is the independent blogs,to be filtered as required.
      George Orwell was a prophet with his 1984 novel. Control the media and you control the people, this is changing with the dispersal of news by the Alternative Resistance Media.

  • Sharp Ears

    The latest tweet from the American blond thug:

    ‘Never said when an attack on Syria would take place. Could be very soon or not so soon at all! In any event, the United States, under my Administration, has done a great job of ridding the region of ISIS. Where is our “Thank you America”?’

    • Sharp Ears

      In the original, he had the question mark in the wrong place!

      Donald J. Trump
      @realDonaldTrump
      ·
      12m
      Never said when an attack on Syria would take place. Could be very soon or not so soon at all! In any event, the United States, under my Administration, has done a great job of ridding the region of ISIS. Where is our “Thank you America?”

      Duh Donald.

      • Salford Lad

        The Donald has blinked.
        Donald get his daily update from FoX news and is not frequenting the real world.
        The US created and financed ISIS along with their NATO allies. They did little to defeat them in Syria, but supported them with weapons to overthrow Assad,

  • Iain Orr

    So much of the language of violence, punishment and retribution – and the readiness to jump to judgement by both politicians and the public – recalls the mood captured at the start of WW2 in these lines:

    I and the public know
    What all schoolchildren learn,
    Those to whom evil is done
    Do evil in return.
    W H Auden September 1, 1939 (full text at http://www.poemdujour.com/Sept1.1939.html)

    • Sharp Ears

      Thank you Iain. Our collective memories are short. We do not have poets like Auden now. This is Wilfred Owen’s famous ‘Dulce et Decorum Est’.

      Bent double, like old beggars under sacks,
      Knock-kneed, coughing like hags, we cursed through sludge,
      Till on the haunting flares we turned our backs,
      And towards our distant rest began to trudge.
      Men marched asleep. Many had lost their boots,
      But limped on, blood-shod. All went lame; all blind;
      Drunk with fatigue; deaf even to the hoots
      Of gas-shells dropping softly behind.

      Gas! GAS! Quick, boys!—An ecstasy of fumbling
      Fitting the clumsy helmets just in time,
      But someone still was yelling out and stumbling
      And flound’ring like a man in fire or lime.—
      Dim through the misty panes and thick green light,
      As under a green sea, I saw him drowning.

      In all my dreams before my helpless sight,
      He plunges at me, guttering, choking, drowning.

      If in some smothering dreams, you too could pace
      Behind the wagon that we flung him in,
      And watch the white eyes writhing in his face,
      His hanging face, like a devil’s sick of sin;
      If you could hear, at every jolt, the blood
      Come gargling from the froth-corrupted lungs,
      Obscene as cancer, bitter as the cud
      Of vile, incurable sores on innocent tongues,—
      My friend, you would not tell with such high zest
      To children ardent for some desperate glory,
      The old Lie: Dulce et decorum est
      Pro patria mori.

      He described the hell of war. He died aet 25 in 1918.
      https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poets/wilfred-owen

1 3 4 5 6 7 9

Comments are closed.