New Labour’s Irrational Adoration of Thatcher 566

When Michael Crick embarrassed Theresa May by quizzing her on her non-existent opposition to apartheid as she visited Mandela’s old cell, the response of New Labour was to defend May by claiming the Tories had opposed apartheid all along. Progress and Labour Friends of Israel rushed immediately to the defence of the person they truly adore, who sits higher still in their Pantheon than Tony Blair and Gordon Brown. They rushed to defend the memory of Margaret Thatcher.

Ex-Labour MP Tom Harris and Blair’s former Political Director John McTernan (who now write for the Tory Spectator and Telegraph) led the suicide charge of the Labour Thatcherites.

The person here quoted with approval is Paul Staines, aka Guido Fawkes, far right blogger who has stated that he never wore a “Hang Nelson Mandela” badge personally, but used to hang out with people who did.

Blair-loving ex-MP Tom Harris went one further by claiming that Jeremy Corbyn’s own anti-apartheid opposition was connected to a “rape-cult”, a stupefying bit of “guilt by association” propaganda.

Here we have Liz Kendall supporter and occasional Guardian columnist Sarah Hayward – possibly the most obscure individual to get themselves a blue tick on Twitter, as though she were worth impersonating – making the absolutely ludicrous claim that when arrested, Corbyn was supporting Thatcher’s anti-apartheid policy.

I could go on, but for a last example here is Blairite house journal the New Statesman, pretending to wrap a scholarly respectability around the Thatcher revisionism. It is worth noting that the Blairites repeatedly call in evidence the claims by another right-wing Blairite and former Ambassador in Pretoria, Lord Renwick (who resigned from the Labour Whip when Blair ceased to be Prime Minister). Renwick wrote an entirely tendentious and self-serving book on his and Thatcher’s “role in ending apartheid”.

The truth is not hard to find. Professor Patrick Salmon, the FCO’s official historian, last year published the monumental volume of official documents “The Challenge of Apartheid”. It details with mounds of evidence Thatcher’s stern resistance to any sanctions against apartheid and, repeatedly, her insistence that the ANC was “a terrorist organisation”. Here is a quote from Salmon’s synthesis of Thatcher’s views from the official history (I can’t give a page number as I received the final draft, as standard FCO practice as I feature in the book, and I quote from the draft):

“Mrs Thatcher was relentlessly hostile to all those who sought to overthrow the apartheid regime by force or undermine it through economic sanctions. The ANC was unacceptable not only because of its association with communism… but above all because of its refusal to renounce the use of violence… which inevitably meant that she regarded it as a terrorist organisation of the same stamp as the PLO or the IRA. Mrs Thatcher adamantly opposed the imposition of further economic sanctions…

South Africa’s role as a bulwark of the West against Soviet expansion was not just a rhetorical ploy but was believed implicitly by Ronald Reagan as well as by Mrs Thatcher.”

I was, to my intense frustration, banned from communicating with the ANC. Professor Salmon details at great length the sharp disagreement between Thatcher and Geoffrey Howe, Malcolm Rifkind and Lynda Chalker over South Africa. There were indeed genuinely anti-apartheid Tories. But Thatcher was not one of them. All of her instincts on this were with the pro-Apartheid right of the party, as Salmon notes explicitly.

In real life, Thatcher was not a dictator. She had to carry her Cabinet with her. Her relationship with Howe in particular was crucial to her political base, as illustrated by the fact that he more than anybody precipitated her ultimate political downfall. It is true that Thatcher did in private meetings tell P W Botha to release Mandela – but that was at Howe’s insistence, not of her own volition.

Thatcher’s 1984 meeting with P W Botha at Chequers is worth noting. There was a massive demonstration against it, on which I took part just before joining the FCO, as did Jeremy Corbyn, Peter Hain and children of both Geoffrey Howe and our then Ambassador to South Africa. At this meeting Thatcher’s briefing provided by the FCO was to call for Mandela’s release. But she did not do so in the official meetings. A minute from her Private Secretary Charles Powell (brother of Blair’s Chief of Staff) claimed that Thatcher had pressed Botha to release Mandela in a private conversation over canapes with no witnesses. It is fair to say the nature of this “pressing”, if it happened, was ever after a subject of some scepticism in the FCO. If anyone knows what the South African records say…

For two years I, among other responsibilities, wrote briefings, speeches and parliamentary answers on South Africa, cleared them through FCO ministers before being sent over to No. 10, where they would get “toned down” by Charles Powell to reflect Thatcher’s views. I cherish my first ever conversation with Powell. I called Number 10 to discuss a draft, and asked;

“Hello, is that Charles Powell?”.
“Actually, it’s Pole”, he replied.
“Oh I am sorry”, I said in genuine innocence, “It’s spelt Powell in my directory”.

I had not yet got used to posh twats.

The truth is very easy to discover, and it is not what the Blairites now claim in their deluded Thatcher worship. Sir Patrick Wright, former Head of the Diplomatic Service, was absolutely correct in observing that Thatcher supported a “Whites-only” state:

It should be noted this comes from Patrick Wright’s diary written at the time, and not a subsequent self-serving account. I can confirm it is absolutely true, from my position as the South Africa (Political) desk officer 1984-6.

What Thatcher favoured was P W Botha’s “Bantustans” or “Homelands policy”, under which an ethnically defined, whites only state possessing all of South Africa’s wealthy cities and ports and the best mineral and agricultural resources, would exist alongside a number of impoverished “independent states” housing different tribes, from which a low paid workforce could commute daily to white areas (or live there temporarily under passes). That was the planned endgame of apartheid, and a number of such “states” were created – South Africa actually declared four “Bantustans” as independent countries. Thatcher hankered after their recognition, particularly Boputhatswana.

The “Homelands policy” is of course identical to the “two state solution” which the neo-cons propose for Palestine, with an apartheid ethnically defined Israel holding all the main resources next to impoverished pockets of Palestinians in an “independent state” commuting in to provide a cheap labour force.

Not only does Patrick Wright affirm in his diaries Thatcher’s support for the “Homelands Policy”, Professor Salmon confirms it too “Mrs Thatcher was talking about a return to pre-1910 South Africa, with a white mini-state partitioned from their neighbouring black states”.

Last year I published more on my recollections of my own role at that period.

As a final rebuke to Thatcher’s New Labour acolytes, I quote Peter Hain:

[Hain] criticised Norman Tebbit, a minister under Margaret Thatcher, and Charles Moore, her biographer, for trying to rewrite history.

“If Nelson Mandela can forgive his oppressors without forgetting their crimes, who am I not to do the same to our opponents in the long decades of the anti-apartheid struggle,” he added.

“But it really does stick in the craw when Lord Tebbit, Charles Moore and others similar tried over recent days to claim that their complicity with apartheid – and that’s what I think it was – somehow brought about its end. Even, to my utter incredulity, when Lord Tebbit told BBC World, in a debate with me, that they had brought about Mandela’s freedom. I know for a fact that Nelson Mandela did not think so.”

But there is a question here of great urgency today. Why do New Labour leap in to deny what Hain called the Tories “craven indulgence of apartheid”, to defend Margaret Thatcher and Theresa May, and to criticise Jeremy Corbyn for his anti-apartheid activity?

Together with reaction to the quitting the party of Frank Field, an open Thatcher and Enoch Powell reminder, I conclude that the Blairite MPs would prefer to be led by Margaret Thatcher or Theresa May than Jeremy Corbyn. Their psychology is deeply troubling:

I support Scottish Independence, so I am in a different position to voters in England. But, despite the fact large numbers of my friends have joined the Labour Party to support Jeremy Corbyn, I could not vote Labour in most of England. Could I advise somebody to vote for Wes Streeting, John Mann, Jess Phillips, Stephen Kinnock or their ilk? No, under no circumstances.

Labour party members need to bite the bullet on reselection. Being a Labour MP cannot be a sinecure granted for life irrespective of behaviour. The party is plainly dysfunctional, and it is so because the large majority of MPs are totally removed from the views of the membership. There are only two ways to resolve this. Either the MPs will have to leave parliament or the members will have to leave the party. There is no coherent party at present.

The Blairite Labour MPs have painted themselves into a corner by their decision to brand Jeremy Corbyn as personally a racist and an anti-semite. If I was in a party led by a racist and anti-semite, I would leave the party. The idea that they can continue as members of parliament for the party while expressing such views about the leader is a nonsense. But they do not wish to leave, because they would lose their comfy jobs. All of the right wing Labour MPs realise they would never win an election on their own account, without Labour Party support. It would be hilarious if not so serious, that they claim Frank Field can resign the Labour whip but this does not mean leave the party, and that he must still be the Labour Party candidate at the next election!

Their hope is twofold. Firstly, that the charges of anti-semitism against Corbyn will be widely believed and lead to a drastic drop in public support which will force Corbyn out. This is not happening. The public realise that the charges of anti-semitism are false and based on a definition of the word which simply means critic of Israel. Other than the normal polling malaise which follows any split in a party, there is no drastic plunge in support for Labour of the kind which would definitely follow if the public thought the party were led by an anti-semite.

To put it another way, either 40% of the public are anti-semites, or the public do not take these accusations seriously.

The Blairites other hope is that, by the Labour Party adopting the IHRA’s malicious definition of anti-semitism as embracing criticism of Israel, they will manage through legal action to force Jeremy Corbyn’s expulsion from the Labour Party. This attempt to use the British Establishment to circumvent party democracy is extraordinary.

By bringing things to this pitch, the Blairites have made compromise impossible. Either Corbyn and most of the members will have to go, or the Blairite MPs will.

Something must give. That is why I urge everybody who is in the Labour Party to take action today to push for mandatory reselection of MPs. The matter is urgent, and no party can resist the united force of its members for long.


Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received. It will always be free to view and free to copy and reuse articles anywhere. I do not have advertising or sponsorship or backing from any organisation or person. Much less than 1% of readers give financial support so yours will help – select a sum from the dropdown box, from £2 a month. No particular level of output is guaranteed as there is just one of me writing and researching and I am only human!

Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:

Recurring Donations


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.

566 thoughts on “New Labour’s Irrational Adoration of Thatcher

1 2 3 4 5 6
  • certa certi

    ‘I am not silent on South Africa’s “Land Reform”.
    I think it’s not going either far enough or quick enough.’

    How far do you want it to go?

    Some readers may be aware that an ANC list of farms to be expropriated [EWC=expropriation without compensation] was leaked. The first two on the list are being used for hunting safaris not ag. An Australian listed coal miner wanted access and had to take them to court. Speculation is that the ANC plans to hand the farms over to the miners and to China to build a power plant. Not to landless Africans.

    There are better alternatives than ewc. The Western Cape has had success with land reform and Leon Louw’s Libertarians suggest legislating to permit farmers to subdivide and sell smaller parts of their properties, which the law currently forbids.

    • fwl

      Expropriation and the encouragement of rabble rousing tactics whether in respect of land or generally re political systems may have polemic “up yours” satisfying quality, but when you reflect on what tends to result you notice that they either encourage fear backlash and repression, or they open the door not for liberal well intentioned folk to establish a fairer society on moral principles, but they open the door for those who are essentially psychopathic and amoral. You may say the existing elite are quasi psychopathic (or had psychopathic cruel ancestors) but civilization such as we have it requires a degree of empathy, self restraint and reflection. When you open the door to land grabs, basically land looting, then you bring out the worst. Nationalisation is not land looting, but Zimbabwean style antics will benefit no one save for international food conglomerates who can sell into the chaotic state, which has lost productive use if its farmland.

  • Runner77

    In view of Labour’s acceptance of the draft IHRA definition of anti-Se*itism, natural justice seems to demand a complementary definition of anti-Palestinianism. I suggest the following as a tentative draft:

    In the spirit of the Stockholm Declaration that states: “With humanity still scarred by [racism and its physical consequences] the international community shares a solemn responsibility to fight these evils” we suggest the following working definition of anti-Palestinianism:

    “Anti-Palestinianism is a certain perception of Palestinians, which may be expressed as hatred toward them. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of anti-Palestinianism are directed toward Palestinians and/or their property, and toward Palestinian community institutions and religious facilities.”

    The following examples may serve as illustrations:

    Manifestations might include destroying Palestinian land, households, and cultural institutions. Anti-Palestinianism promotes damaging stereotypes of Palestinians as terrorists, and as inferior intellectually, culturally, or morally. Anti-Palestinianism allows and promotes the theft of Palestinian land, water, hydrocarbon resources, and other natural goods, preventing Palestinians from freely developing their country, culture, and freedom of expression. Anti-Palestinianism may be expressed in speech, writing, visual forms, physical brutality, and psychological abuse; and it employs sinister stereotypes and negative character traits.

    Contemporary examples of Anti-Palestinianism in public life, the media, schools, the workplace, and in the religious sphere could, taking into account the overall context, include, but are not limited to:

    • Calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Palestinians in the name of a radical ideology or an extremist view of religion.

    • Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Palestinians individually or collectively.

    • Accusing Palestinians as a people of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing committed by a single Palestinian person or group, or even for acts committed by non-Palestinians.

    • Denying the expulsion of the Palestinian people from their lands since 1948 (the Nakba), and the intentional and illegal theft and destruction of Palestinian resources up to and including the present.

    • Denying the Palestinian people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the historical existence of Palestine is a myth.

    • Applying double standards by denying Palestinians the rights to protect themselves, to trade and travel, and to the education and cultural freedoms expected in any other democratic nation.

    • By defining as terrorism Palestinians attempts to resist oppression and acts of brutality, and to defend themselves and their land from those who attempt to steal it.

    Anti-Palestinian acts are criminal when they are so defined by international law (for example, the building of ‘settlements’ and the expulsion of Palestinians from their own land).

    Criminal acts are Anti-Palestinian when the targets of attacks, whether they are people or property – such as buildings, schools, places of worship and cemeteries – are selected because they are, or are perceived to be, Palestinian or linked to Palestine.

    Anti-Palestinian discrimination is the denial to Palestinians of opportunities or services available to others, and is illegal in many countries.

    • Hatuey

      Yes, good point, runner. You know what’s really disappointing too is the way many ordinary Israelis and Jews refer to Palestinians in everyday life though. There’s a lot of that language along the lines of comparing them to filthy rats, and vermin, as if they are talking about an infestation, and generally implying that Palestinians are sub human, that they don’t care about their own children, etc. It’s really vile stuff.

      When b’tselem handed out video cameras to Palestinians in order for them to record their every day experiences of living in the occupied territories, it was really disgraceful and shocking what came out of that project. In a way it’s the day-to-day low level stuff that angered and shocked me most, more than the high level policies and military stuff.

      I’d urge people reading this to look into that, it was a very effective project. Note that b’tselem is a Jewish organisation that is committed to protecting the rights of Palestinians in the occupied territories. I have nothing but admiration for them and other Israeli groups who oppose the Israeli government’s treatment of Palestinians.

      It’s just flabbergasting to see Jews over here going out their way to be offended at comparatively innocuous stuff Corbyn or someone said when Palestinians are literally being starved in their millions, bombed, shot at, forced to watch their kids being arrested and beaten up, deprived of electricity, etc. It’s sickening.

    • nevermind

      Well said runner 77.
      Time to call human righrs criminals to accout.
      settlers who lost crops have started a lawsuit against Hamas for burningSOMEof their crops.

      If Palestinian farmers undertake court cases against the forces of unresyraint Zionism tha has burned and bulldozed thousands of ancient Palestinian olive trees and whole grpves, they would be keeping settlers in court for the next 100 yeats.

      Thanks for the links Brian.

  • Sharp Ears

    The news channels won’t let the a-s smearing go.

    This morning, there was a joint attack by Piers Morgan and Susannah Reid on Ken Livingstone. He was standing in the street. They were in the studio. They constantly heckled and interrupted making wild accusations and asking such questions ‘Do you say that Hitler was a Zionist’. It was scattergun stuff, obviously orchestrated. At the end, they both adopted a pained silence and Reid made a grimace. Vile people.

    The BiBiCee had John Mann and Karen Pollock from the Holocaust Education Trust on. Another O/B but they were given free rein.
    Pollock tweeted ‘On my way to speak to @louiseminchin @BBCBreakfast re #antisemitism #IHRA @HolocaustUK
    59 mins ago ‘ and last night
    ‘Me just now @SkyNews #IHRA #antisemitism.’
    Karen Pollock (@KarenPollock100) · Twitter

    Tabloids too – Look at the Express front page. ‘Police probe Labour hate crime cover up’ in large black type. The Times have chosen a photo of Corbyn that makes him look like a wanted criminal under the headline – ‘Corbyn slapped down by allies over anti semitism’. The Heil leave it off their front page. Online you can see Wallis Simons’ continual attack pieces on Corbyn and Labour.

  • Radar O’Reilly

    The technical press is reporting another outrageous attack on civil society and on the laws of mathematics, aimed squarely at citizens and their rights.

    Australia gov memo from last week asserts under the requirements of national socialism, sorry, national security, that they cannot read the Labour Party & Corbyn’s full communications in real-time; that the un-bribed/un-blackmailed high-court judges, or journo’s secrets are currently fairly safe, and that the gap between what 5eyes is already stealing and what they dream to steal is widening (mostly because of Snowden/Assange’s revelations of previous intel-community chicanery)

    At least everything the buggers (technical term) try to do will be “voluntary” , ‘voluntary’ in the way that US Sprint telco was forced to ‘volunteer’ for the earlier illegal theft of our data? (FISA docket number BR 09-19) or US Qwest Comms International CEO Joseph Nacchio who did NOT volunteer his customers data, and was then imprisoned on ‘unrelated’ tax fraud charges?

    At least the Nigerian/Ukrainian/Russian hacker economy will later boom as all your pension funds are irreversibly stolen in 2023 due to weak backdoored fin-tech crypto bacdoors that will never be reverse engineered, ever?

    Bad/weak crypto: iPhone super secret crypto password used to be “alpine”; Sony PlayStation lost their LV0 keys in 2012; BluRay disc/HDMI crypto was ‘solved’ in the early 2000’s; 2G GSM, Wi-Fi WEP, all these show that “today’s”crypto & encryption is just a delay – all will eventually become plaintext. However the 5eyes(, then all other) government’s have no patience and demand instant access within seconds, they can and do use judicial (slow) targeted RAT attack (remote access/legal cross-border hacking) that always works. So why destroy banking for all when the extremely rare bad-guys will not be affected by weak crypto, they will work around it; unlike the unknowing ordinary users who’s life narratives may be then slightly nudged or deliberately worsened by the omniscient administrators. imagine The Consulting Association, on a 5-nation scale, run by someone trustworthy like Dame Shirley Tesco?

    Face/boot/forever – is getting rather too close for comfort . . . [TCA was subversively fed live intelligence from the matrix of agencies from the 1970’s to 2009, at least one patsy was fined £5K by the ICO]

    • Dennis Revell


      You actually think there are any actual significant pension funds “left”, that haven’t been largely spent on waging mass war and other corrupt misdirections.

      That’s kind of quaint, almost sweet; those Russki hackers are going to be so dissappointed.


  • Dave

    The problem Labour has in rebutting the charge of “anti-Semitism” is no one really cares about it, or more specifically no one really cares about the Palestinians.

    Hence when a powerful Jewish lobby mobilise to make clear that as far as they are concerned support for the Palestinians is “anti-Semitic”, there is a general held view that its not an issue worth dying in the ditch over, because the public are worried about other things and so why alienate a powerful lobby who can potentially help you on other issues, which was always the long standing arrangement, between “Jews and the Left”.

    But conversely as no one’s really bothered about Israel, few will be influenced by the hostile media towards Labour, who ironically will benefit as people can see its all contrived and easily turned by Corbyn’s Christian appeal for peace and justice, always popular, as the polls show.

    In other words as far as the public are concerned its all background noise, but as far as Labour is concerned its a tactic by the Zionists to by-pass the membership and get Corbyn removed through litigation for breaking party rules, aka “anti-Semitism” aka supporting the Palestinians and to resume control of the Party. That’s why getting “the definition” adopted before conference was so important, but the caveat about free speech may have snookered them.

    • laguerre

      “The problem Labour has in rebutting the charge of “anti-Semitism” is no one really cares about it, or more specifically no one really cares about the Palestinians.”

      Classic hasbara. Only ever comes from propagandists for Israel. Most Leftish people care about Palestine. Centre people too, to look at Lib-Dems. It’s the Right who think like Dave, and that’s where the people making the pace on these anti-semitism accusations are located.

      • Ian

        Plenty people cared about black South Africans under apartheid. That is exactly what Israel is trying to combat and suppress, by removing information and coverage of their despicable treatment and living conditions under israeli apartheid.

        • Dave

          They didn’t really care about the blacks, they just hated the whites. Hence why there is no sympathy for white farmers and the murder rate of mostly blacks is ignored.

        • Loony

          I wonder who combats and suppresses information and coverage of the fact that absolutely no-one cares about South Africans of any color in the post apartheid era.

          There are no shortage of people in South Africa right now, right at this moment, who are suffering despicable treatment and living conditions. But absolutely no-one cares.

          This is exactly where the charge of anti Semitism has legs. Do all of those people so exercised about Palestinians actually care about Palestinians – or, if Israel can be dismantled or reigned in will people immediately forget about Palestinians exactly as they have forgotten about South Africans.

          It is the responsibility of the people arguing for Palestinian “justice” to demonstrate exactly how their interest will be maintained in any kind of “post Israel” era. Any failure to provide a comprehensive distinction between their historic concern for black South Africans and their current concern for Palestinians will simply demonstrate that they could not care less about Palestinians but care a great deal (and not in a good way) about Israel and Israeli’s

          • duplicitousdemocracy

            Who are you to decide what catches people’s attention? Through the persistent brutality, the Palestinians have been attempting to highlight Israeli crimes and subsequently managed to raise awareness. Being more publicity savvy constitutes evidence of anti Semitism? It’s a classic hasbara. ‘Don’t look at our crimes when the South Africans are still suffering’. When did we last see SA police lining up with sniper rifles to murder and maim nearly 20,000 protestors? When did SA have a lobby that provides a million pounds to influence public opinion and imply smearing MP’s (the ones that aren’t Labour/Conservative Friends of Israel, of course)?
            The low regard many people have for Israel isn’t because they are Jews, it’s because they are a conscripted army of barbarians that believe they are superior to the Palestinians and treat them accordingly. The treacherous politicians like Ryan, Austin, Berger and others should quit the Labour Party and put their Israel first agenda to the vote.

      • certa certi

        ‘Most Leftish people care about Palestine’

        Not true. Most on the Left couldn’t give a rats about Israel or Palestine. Plenty of more pressing issues closer to home including liberation movements that arouse empathy and don’t use terrorism. Craig offers a rare thread on South Africa and Israel haters take over. Is this really typical of the Brit Left, or just the nature of the blog?

        • Anthony

          Clearly you didnt read the blog it is as much about the clowns who have been helping Israel in trying to remove the leader of their own party.

          • certa certi

            A very small part of it. The thread is mostly about South Africa. But not the comments. Again, is this really typical of the Brit Left, or just the nature of the blog? What on earth has Israel and Palestine got to do with the struggle of Brit workers for jobs and a better world for their kids???

          • certa certi

            May’s visit to SA and African trade agenda are far more important for Brit workers than Izzies and Pallies. Do you lot seriously think voters are interested? Or is it that most readers here just don’t work and not interested in those who do? Is this really what the Brit Left has come to? Say it aint so…

          • Anthony

            Pretty obvious if you’ve given the news a cursory glance in recent montbs. Corbyn is the best hope for ordinary working people in Britain and the Israelis are intent on getting rid off him via their “friends in the Labour party.
            Try and keep up.

          • Anthony

            Corbyn’s Labour won decisively among the working age population in last year’s election. The only age group among whom the Tories won a majority were the over 65s.
            Again, keep up.

          • certa certi

            Over here is Oz we have Scots backpackers working on our boats because they can’t get jobs at home and we can’t get crew. Your scallop wars are more important than Israel and Palllies. What’s Corbyn doing? Where’s the ‘best hope’ ? Brit Labour does’t deserve to win an election. Neither do the Tories. Perhaps you could invite Netanyahu over to govern you for a bit.

          • certa certi

            ‘Israelis are intent on getting rid off him’

            FFS. More conspiracies. Behemoth Israel pulls the strings in the UK. Bibi doesn’t give a toss who leads your parties. But hey any hostility shown towards Brit Jews serves his purpose, he’d love it if they all decamped to Israel.

        • laguerre

          “Most on the Left couldn’t give a rats about Israel or Palestine.”

          Ever the opinion of the Right, whose view of the Left is naturally 100% reliable.

      • Dave

        Hardly “classic hasbara” if you read the whole message. Israel is a threat to world peace, but its not an election issue. It could/should be, but to compete with the MSM anti-Muslim narrative and accusations of “anti-Semitism” you would need to popularise it in a way that cuts through and makes it relevant and that means by making it about immigration.

        I.e. Support Palestine and peace if you oppose mass-immigration, as the migration crisis is due to the on-going conflict in the Middle-East. But as the “Left” wont oppose immigration, it means Palestine and Israel is a non-issue to most voters and the trade unions are conflicted as their members benefit from ‘security’ spending. I think the NEC vote and almost unchanged polling figures illustrates this.

        • laguerre

          Israel/Palestine has a certain place in the public’s opinions, and when it comes to the fore, which is not 100% of the time, that opinion is very largely pro-Palestinian. Indeed, apart from most but not all of the 265,000 Jews, I would say these days very few others, with the exception of a gaggle of fellow-travellers, many of whom have a pecuniary interest, are pro-Israeli. The other stimulus to being pro-Israeli is hating Muslims, but there’s no necessary correlation between the two, to judge from Islamophobic comments.

        • nevermind

          Lets have a lttle more Palestinian immigrants/refugees in this country, a little balance from the usual moneybags that ltter London, victims of the violence that has been crushing, murdering and demoralising them.

          Should there be a Nakhba Rememberance Centre openend in Gaza?
          Would that be something for a crowdfunding initiative? In balance to the current daft/ stupid ‘we were the only ones who suffered persecution show’?

        • Loony

          Interesting to learn that the “migration crisis is due to the ongoing conflict in the Middle East”

          Some people believe that there is no immigration crisis – merely a problem with local racists making a song and dance about immigration. Such people tend to favor ever more immigration – so they manifestly do not believe there to be a crisis. Indeed even describing the present situation as a crisis may mean you run the risk of being labelled a racist.

          In the last census almost 500,000 people described themselves as “Black African” – so that is half a million immigrants who arrived in the UK for reasons not connected to the Middle East.

          Always remember diversity is a great strength. A man named Wayne explains “In the last 10 years since the Congolese and Somali’s came to London they taught us a whole new level of violence…It upped the speed and level of violence for us British born guys. We had to arm up to protect ourselves. It created an upward spiral.”

          • Dave

            The destruction of Libya has contributed to the migrant crisis too and promoting conflict elsewhere is all part of the same ‘business model’ aka neo-con military industrial complex. These conflicts help drive migration to the West, but promoting migration itself has been a feature of Western policy under the Globalists, following their victory in WWII.

            In Britain it became entrenched following the first Race Relations Act which was the Nuremburg Act in reverse. That is whereas Nuremburg disenfranchised a minority the Race Relations Act disenfranchised a majority to prevent discrimination.

            And the same lobby was involved because just as you now get ludicrous wall to wall “anti-Semitism” to describe critics of Israel, you previously got ludicrous wall to wall “racism” to describe critics of immigration. I.e. the MSM coverage is all one sided. But ultimately this censorious approach is rumbled and ignored, hence Brexit.

  • Sharp Ears

    I give up. Have just come home and on the Parliament Channel Ch 232, a Dave Rich, Head of Policy from the Community Security Trust (trustees anonymous via the Charity Commission remember) is giving it large to a HoC Select Committee on the terrible time being given to British Jews and the attacks upon them.

    Women and Equalities
    Subject: Antisemitism
    Laura Marks OBE, Co-chair, Association of Jewish Women’s Organisations,
    Dave Rich, Head of Policy, Community Security Trust,
    Danny Stone, Director, Antisemitism Trust,
    Dr Loretta Trickett, Associate Professor, Nottingham Law School;
    Detective Chief Superintendent Simon Rose and Chief Superintendent Dave Stringer, Metropolitan Police,
    Baljit Ubhey, Director of Prosecution Policy and Inclusion, Crown Prosecution Service (at 10.45am)
    The Wilson Room, Portcullis House
    9.30am (private), 10.00am (public)

    The committee membership include Jess Phillips. LFoI
    Mrs Maria Miller (Chair) Conservative
    Tonia Antoniazzi Labour
    Sarah Champion Labour
    Angela Crawley Scottish National Party
    Philip Davies Conservative
    Vicky Ford Conservative
    Kirstene Hair Conservative
    Eddie Hughes Conservative
    Jess Phillips Labour
    Mr Gavin Shuker Labour (Co-op)
    Tulip Siddiq Labour
    Other FoIs there? I haven’t checked.

    • IrishU

      What exactly is your problem with this? Is it to do Dave Rich, the Community Safety Trust, the lack of transparency concerning the Trustees of the CST or is it the fact that attacks on Jews are being considered by a Parliamentary Select Committee?

      • N_

        The phrase “attack on J__s” is most often used with deliberate and racist deceit in mind. I am thinking of the IHRA “definition” here. The authentic anti-racist response is that a bunch of racist bastards – and all Zionism is racist – have no right to define what is or is not racist. End of discussion.

        Criticising a J__ or even a number of J__s does not make a person anti-J__ish and only a scumbag or idiot says otherwise. If a war cabinet composed only of white people starts a criminal war, or a group of black people carry out a mugging, or a group of J__s create a fascist state with a worldwide support network, I’m f***ed if I can’t criticise them. That doesn’t mean I’m saying all whites start criminal wars, all blacks mug, or all J__s are fascists. There is nothing wrong with criticising or fighting against people of any ethnicity if they deserve it. Anybody who disagrees – or pretends to disagree – is a racist. Some of us are getting fed up of having to make this obvious point. The IHRA are trying to stir up interethnic strife. It is that activity which should be made unlawful.

        Oh and as well as being shite, the IHRA definition reads as though it was written by someone who probably couldn’t manage to get a D grade in GCSE English Language. Being in a mutual support gang doesn’t bestow intellect.

        • IrishU

          I would be grateful if you would explain how attacks on Jews could be considered ‘a deliberate and racist deceit’? Attacks are happening, and have been recorded as crimes by the police, so why shouldn’t British Jews be afforded the opportunity to discuss the attacks and why shouldn’t a Parliamentary Committee consider the reasons behind the increase in such violence?

          I must confess that I do I agree with your conclusion, ‘being in a mutual support gang doesn’t bestow intellect’. Self-awareness is a wonderful quality.

          • Charles Bostock

            Your last sentence was subtle, deadly in its politeness and made me smile. You should contribute more to this forum.

          • Sharp Ears

            You are chiming with Habbabkkuk. I have forgotten how to spell that name. It’s ages since he/she became Charles Bostock.

  • N_

    Theresa May is set to make a special statement in the Commons today after prime minister’s question time. People are saying it may have a Russian theme and that she may identify some of the alleged perpetrators of the chemical incidents in Salisbury and Amesbury.

    If this is it, then from a bird’s eye view it may connect within a short period of time with a falsely-attributed chemical attack in Syria. Russian authorities are again predicting such an attack. Last time they did that, they were right.

    I have been out of circulation for a bit. There are Russian naval movements towards Syria; not sure about US ones, or whether China still has a carrier there.

    • Paul Greenwood

      There are no Russian naval movements towards Syria – they happened ages ago – and in Caspian Sea. They are putting up an air defence screen against the USS Newport News putting into Gibraltar and the USS The Sullivans in the Persian Gulf and the B1B bomber in Qatar

      • N_

        @Paul Greenwood – Can you comment on this article (Reuters): “Russian navy to hold drills off Syria as Idlib offensive looms” (30 Aug 2018). “Russia will begin a major naval exercise in the Mediterranean on Saturday, the Ministry of Defense announced (…) The Russian defense ministry said more than 25 warships and support vessels and around 30 planes, including fighter jets and strategic bombers, would take part in the Mediterranean drills which it said would last from Sept. 1 to Sept. 8.

        This isn’t ages ago or in the Caspian Sea. I’m unclear as to whether you think this report is false, or you were unaware of it, or you’re saying the forces involved were already near Syria, or what.

        • Paul Greenwood

          To me it is ages ago. They also moved a heavy lifer aircraft with transponders switched off probably carrying air defence systems to plug the hole towards Jordan used by USN aircraft from the Gulf.

          To me it is yesterdays news. there are supposedly two diesel subs on patrol in the Med too. The 25 ships include carrier-killers and they are taking part in naval exercises from 1 Sept therefore they set sail quite some time ago.

          US has apparently 70 weapons platforms in theatre capable of delivering 380 cruise missiles which is why Russian ships are there

  • Dungroanin

    Well Craig Murray, you can write the next Skripal article , now that the Russian assassins have been named by the CPS.

    They waited and waited … why?

    • Vivian O'Blivion

      Having a bad news day?
      Need to change the subject?
      Try new improved Novichok! In tests proven to distract 98% of sheeple.
      (Warning; overuse may lead to decline in availability of sheeple)

    • Paul Greenwood

      Since these are fake name how on earth do they know they are “Russian” and not Ukrainian, Chechen, Moldovan, Bulgarian, Uzbek, Tajik, Belarussian, Lithuanian, Latvian, Estonian ?

      • Tom Smythe

        Something about them taking air flights to Moscow. But that hardly indicates nationality especially in a false flag operation to blame Russia. Seems clumsy of perps to time travel so tightly to events knowing so well cctv is everywhere. How convincing is the cctv id in Salisbury? Did it really tie them to Skripals or just to cathedral/stonehence tourism?

        The perfume bottle is very inconvenient … the restaurant bin was not sitting there un-emptied for three months. Return visit, for what purpose?

        I recall the authorities going on about these two back as early as July 15th so they have been sitting on this awaiting some opportunity to exploit it. Originally a gang of four, including a woman. Yes indeed, Article 61 of the Russian constitution does not allow for extradition plus many prior cases of the UK refusing to cooperate with financial crime extradition.

        Suppose these are real names and not aliases? What happens if the two accused demand a UK trial to clear their names? I suppose the answer is refuse them visas, like with Yulia’s relatives.

        • Tom Smythe

          Now police are saying the suspects were traveling on authentic Russian passports but not under their real names. Not clear how authenticity can be determined after the fact and how a passport can be falsified yet still authentic.

          BBC: “Basu noted that traces of Novichok contamination were found in the London hotel room where the two men had stayed. “Tests were carried out in the hotel room where the suspects had stayed. Two swabs showed contamination of Novichok of levels below that which would cause concern for public health,”

          Miraculously, the spill was so small that the two did not die in the room. It is unthinkable that that a nerve agent would be transported in a poorly sealed container, given air pressure cycles in an airplane cabin.

          The UK did seize and swab an aircraft on a return flight back in March. This may have been Yulia’s plane rather than the two thugs pictured; at the time Yulia and a female companion were thought to have brought in the agent, possibly unaware.

          Conveniently, the hotel did not change the sheets, vacuum the carpet, clean the bathrooms for several months and does not need de-contamination now nor were subsequent guests affected.

          Those are exceedingly clear photos of the two. It’s been said we are just seven steps removed from knowing everyone else on the planet so it shouldn’t take but a day or two for acquaintances, schoolmates, co-workers, vKontact, Facebook, family, friends or the individuals themselves to step forward.

          The photos are from the passports or upon entry. There is nothing tying them to Salisbury cctv at this time. So the Uk could simply have picked two Russian secret service travelers at random, fabricated the hotel room swab story knowing it would never be tested in court, with the lack of evidence associating them with either Salisbury or the Skripals passing unnoticed.

          • Tom Smythe

            it seems like there should be a massive trail of evidence between London and Salisbury: contaminated rental cars, contaminated hotel rooms, credit card receipts at restaurants, hotel internet sites, phone calls, phone ping location records, cctv in Market Walk and so on.

            Releasing more information would scarcely prejudice a fair trial since the UK has done that already.

            Swabs from the London hotel, when exactly were these taken? There was no chain of custody on their room, It is all too easy for MI5 etc to come in an hour before and put a bit around, then let the swab people come in.

          • Merkin Scot

            “So the Uk could simply have picked two Russian secret service travelers at random, fabricated the hotel room swab story knowing it would never be tested in court, with the lack of evidence associating them with either Salisbury or the Skripals passing unnoticed”.
            Exactly what appears to have been done.

      • laguerre

        “Since these are fake name how on earth do they know they are “Russian” and not Ukrainian, Chechen, Moldovan, Bulgarian, Uzbek, Tajik, Belarussian, Lithuanian, Latvian, Estonian ?”

        Or Mossad, who are known to use these techniques. Or from absolutely anywhere.

    • Lisa

      Hurrah! Now, as the culprits are safe in Russia and obviously will not enter the UK any more, it is absolutely safe to let out Sergei and Julia from their “safe house” and allow at least their relatives to visit them.
      No? Why not?

        • Lisa

          Sorry, Paul, I was just trying to be funny / sarcastic. I know nothing else than what was told officially – that the two agents flew to Moscow two days after the incident.

    • pretzelattack

      it’s because boris and natasha were very wiley. look at the amazing feats they performed with the toxin, apparently a genetically engineered poison that ignores cats and parrots and selectively attacks skripals.

  • Sharp Ears

    Timing? A few minutes before PMQs?
    alisbury Novichok poisoning: Two Russian nationals named as suspects
    8 minutes ago
    Image caption Alexander Petrov (left) and Ruslan Boshirov are not thought to be their real names

    Two Russian nationals have been named as suspects in the attempted murder of former Russian spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia.
    There is “sufficient evidence” to charge Alexander Petrov and Ruslan Boshirov over the attack in Salisbury, Scotland Yard and the CPS say.
    They are thought to have been using the names as aliases and are about 40.
    Mr Skripal, 66, and his daughter Yulia, 33, were poisoned with nerve agent Novichok in March.
    Sue Hemming, CPS director of legal services, said there was enough evidence “to provide a realistic prospect of conviction” and that “it is clearly in the public interest to charge Alexander Petrov and Ruslan Boshirov”.
    The offences include conspiracy to murder Sergei Skripal; the attempted murder of Sergei Skripal, Yulia Skripal and Nick Bailey; the use and possession of Novichok contrary to the Chemical Weapons Act; and causing grievous bodily harm with intent to Yulia Skripal and Nick Bailey.
    Ms Hemming said the CPS would not be applying to have the men extradited as Russia does not currently allow the extradition of its nationals.



    • Paul Greenwood

      How does the Daily Telegraph show a picture of a Moscow weapons lab where “Novichok” was made when it was never produced in Russia at all………it was a compound in Uzbekistan and was never put into production ?

      It is so clear that there is going to be a Warm-Up War in Syria to test Russian air defence systems before the main attack on Russia itself

        • Paul Greenwood

          That is not the point…….killing Zarkhachenko was also part of the game. Volker, McCain’s sidekick is CIA.

          UK/USA are currently at war with Russia – France and Germany want to review their options

    • jazza

      not enough evidence to charge Norman Bettison of murder of 98 british 30 years ago so let him off citizens but enough circumstantial evidence and make believe to charge two ‘russians’ but not to extradite them because they ‘know’ russia won’t release them – this is utter boolocks – watch out for the syrian chemical weapons attack …. FFS

  • Paul Greenwood

    “I support Scottish Independence, so I am in a different position to voters in England.”

    you will only get a majority for independence if English voters get their say

  • Vivian O'Blivion

    Two highly trained FSB assassins begin their approach to Salisbury from their East London base of operation (budget hotel) at 08:05, using PUBLIC TRANSPORT! Not exactly early risers. How the fuck did they know that the targets wouldn’t have already left the property by the time they got there? What about operating under cover of darkness? Poundshop assassins.

    • Jack


      “Fsb agents” we dont know that yet, apparenty the police need the public to identify them according to the press conference.
      Intestestingly, UK have NOT put out a warrant to Russia on these persons. Do they want these people for trial or not?

      • Vivian O'Blivion

        I was being sarcastic. According to Google maps, it takes two hours to get from Bow street station to Salisbury station. Then again it being a Sunday maybe the Salisbury assassination express was being operated as a replacement bus service due to engineering works.

    • John A

      Remarkable that the CCTV footage released shows 2 guys standing in a railway station, 2 guys walking along a street, 2 guys going through airport security.
      How about showing CCTV footage of the same 2 guys near the bench where the Skripals were found? Or hanging around outside Zizzi or the pub?

      • Vivian O'Blivion

        Either “Petrov” has visited a hair loss clinic between having his passport photo taken and arriving at Gatwick or he’s taken to affecting a comb over (comb forward).

        • Trowbridge H. Ford

          You forgot the fake photo of the real Yulia who has no scar on her neck which the spooks have tried to pass off with the fake one by cropping her photo as best they can to hide it.

  • Made By Dom

    Perhaps I should wait for Craig’s next post on the Skripals.

    I still maintain Craig’s piece on the term “of a type developed by Russia’ was a great article.
    From the get-go, the problem with this case was there were no cold, hard facts. The Russian expert the media used at the beginning (Mirzayanov?) clearly wasn’t an expert but a guy trying to flog a book. I seem to remember him saying that you’d need a sophisticated Lab in the UK to make a Novichok. You would not be able to travel with the poison.
    So whether you’re Pro-Craig or Pro-The UK Government, it would appear no one seemed to put forward any real evidence.
    To quote Tony Soprano, “What are you gonna do?”

  • Trowbridge H. Ford

    No one interested in Bob Woodward’s one anonymous source journalism which he and Bernstein made up about Al ‘Deep Throat’ Haig, and he has used against Trump in his new book, Fear?

  • mike

    This is the only way the Maybot seems able to function as a leader – delivering scripts in the House of Commons that were written in response to major incidents or events.

    • Sharp Ears

      She’s still at it. Welcomes those who cow tow to and agree with her Russia smear psyop. Corbyn got it in the neck for ‘not showing supporting’ for her statement on Russia. Unbearable. She will have to have a lie down afterwards. Looking and sounding strained.

      Amber got up to have a go at Russia and the naysayers. She has been for a makeover during the hols. All glammed up and now very blond. Another blond, Boris, joined in the vilification of Russia.

      • Michael McNulty

        There can be few things more totalitarian than telling someone what they cannot say then telling them what they must say.

    • Doodlebug

      “And I can now tell the house…..” How it was possible to trace two very specific individuals arriving at Heathrow BS (Before Skripal) to an equally specific London hotel, via their CCTV images recorded on the Underground/Buses/Taxi that took them there (eh?). The very hotel where, despite traces of ‘Novichok’ being present then, there are none now (so don’t bother looking for confirmation of that little porkie either).

      Seldom in my lifetime have I been so infuriated by such blatant misrepresentation. I should like to call it lies but, as TM would no doubt aver, she was reading from a script prepared on the basis of a security brief ergo the words were not really her own.

      Seriously, these people are ‘thicker’ than they must imagine the public to be if they expect this nonsense to pass unquestioned.

  • SA

    The finishing touches are now being applied. Corbyn is neutralised trying to defend himself and can’t afford to question the fairy tale. The Russians are in the dock and waiting a novichok attack now in Idlib and the BBC is cocka hoop.
    Just sit back and relax whilst the sparks fly.

  • Sharp Ears

    Israeli article on IDF giving weapons to ISIS vanishes off web, still available in cache

    Did IDF admit giving weapons to Islamists in Syria? Explosive Israeli news report vanishes

    The deleted report comes on the heels of another major disclosure: On Monday the IDF announced
    that Israel has carried out more than 200 strikes in Syria in the past year and half.

    RT — THE IDF has confirmed that it provided weapons to Islamist rebels in Syria’s Golan Heights, the Jerusalem Post reported. However, the article was removed without explanation hours after being published.

    The report, ‘IDF confirms: Israel provided light-weapons to Syrian rebels,’ claimed that the Israeli military acknowledged for the first time that it had provided money, weapons and ammunition to militants operating near the border with Israel.

    The article was removed shortly after being published, but a version of the article can still be read using Google cache. The IDF told RT that it would not comment on the story, and the Jerusalem Post has not responded to an inquiry asking why the article was pulled.

    The lethal aid was apparently part of Operation Good Neighbor which, until now, was billed as a humanitarian aid program. Launched in 2016 by the Israeli military, the operation purportedly provided large quantities of food, clothing, fuel and medical supplies to those living in the Syrian Golan. The operation was shuttered in July, after the Syrian Army retook the area.

    However, it has long been suspected that Israel was also furnishing weapons to Islamist groups operating in the contested border region, in the hope of creating a “buffer zone” against Hezbollah and Iranian forces operating in southern Syria. Damascus has previously claimed that weapons captured from Islamist groups in the Golan had Hebrew inscriptions.

    The Wall Street Journal reported last year that Israel was “regularly supplying” Syrian rebels with cash to “help pay salaries and buy ammunition and weapons.” The Israeli military declined to confirm the report’s claims, noting only that Israel was committed to “providing humanitarian aid to the Syrians living in the area.”

    One of at least seven groups believed to have received weapons from Israel, Fursan al-Joulan, or ‘Knights of Golan,’ reportedly participated in the Israeli-led operation to evacuate hundreds of members of the controversial White Helmets group out of Syria. The group is also believed to have received upwards of $5,000 per month from Israel.

    The deleted report comes on the heels of another major disclosure: On Monday the IDF announced that Israel has carried out more than 200 strikes in Syria in the past year and half.

    The Israeli military usually declines to comment on missile strikes attributed to Israel, although Tel Aviv has repeatedly claimed that it has the right to attack Hezbollah and Iranian military targets inside Syria. Damascus has repeatedly claimed that Israel uses Hezbollah as a pretext to attack Syrian military formations and installations, accusing Tel Aviv of “directly supporting ISIS and other terror organizations.”

    h/t TLN

  • ZigZag Wanderer

    Why on earth have these images been held back for several weeks and released an hour before the first PMQ of the new session ? Down here in Salisbury we continue to be told ‘ not to touch anything ‘ as we are still at risk of nerve agent poisoning and potential death.
    For some reason the Government appear not to be concerned about the substantial risk to the public. I wonder why ?

    Yesterday msm published that Charlie Rowley was unable to tell police where he found the perfume bottle as he was unable to remember …… today we are told he found it in a charity bin .

  • Sharp Ears

    Chagos Islands. Yesterday in the HoC. FCO Topical Questions.

    Henry Smith (Crawley) (Con)
    T9. I congratulate my right hon. Friend on his appointment as Foreign Secretary two months ago. I would be grateful if he committed to reviewing the resettlement of the Chagos islands, the British Indian Ocean Territory, by the native islanders. [906741]

    Sir Alan Duncan
    As my hon. Friend appreciates we do have a long-standing policy on this issue and we do not recognise the sovereignty claim of the Republic of Mauritius over Chagos archipelago. We very much regret that Mauritius is taking its case to the International Court of Justice. That case started yesterday, so it would be more appropriate for us to wait until the outcome of any judgment, which should conclude this week.

    Earlier, Hunt had paid tribute to McCain.

    and before that, Burt had replied to questions about Israel/Palestine. Theresa Villiers and Stephen Crabb are CFoIs btw.

    • Trowbridge H. Ford

      Hunt made no mention of McCain’s killing and wounding hundreds of fellow comrades from friendly fire during the Vietnam War.

      • Sharp Ears

        I know Mr Ford. He is obsequious and follows on from six years of wrecking OUR NHS.

        Did you see the pair together when Hunt was getting his orders from Washington?

        His Daddy was an admiral dontchaknow and CiC Fleet 1985-7. Who were we killing then? And lots of those ambassadorial chocolates were brought home from his Ferrero board meetings I expect.

        As commander of HMS Ark Royal and having pranged it earlier on (when a Soviet destroyer cut across it – of course it did!) he became ‘Director-General Naval Manpower and Training from 1981 to 1983, and as a vice-admiral was Flag Officer, Scotland and Northern Ireland (1983–85) . That was at the time of Thatcher’s war on Argentina (1982) but there is no mention of that in this Torygraph obit.

          • Clive p

            I knew Nick Hunt well in MoD. He spent most of his time trying to seduce one of the members of my staff!

          • Charles Bostock

            Clive p

            Did you ever write that when the guy was still alive and might have sued you?

          • Dennis Revell


            This is for CHARLES BOSTOCK; you say to Clive P:

            “Did you ever write that when the guy was still alive and might have sued you?”

            – Good point. We all know how Clive Ponting, aka ‘Clive P’ was yer average run of the mill humdrum civil servant, a complete “yes man” who shied away from all controversy and danger to his career; more concerned about his eventual pension and benefits than doing the right thing, and at the time certainly shying away from anything that could possibly place him in legal jeopardy and land him in jail; all of which of course is why he’s a nobody that no one had ever heard of until he ‘popped up’ her. <– NOT.

            Actually you're a fucking idiot.

            On a totally unrelated matter, did they EVER find the log book of the Conqueror?!?


        • IrishU

          Interested in the meaning behind, ‘ commander of HMS Ark Royal and having pranged it earlier on (when a Soviet destroyer cut across it – of course it did!)…’ Are you insinuating that HMS Ark Royal didn’t have an encounter with a Soviet destroyer on 9 November 1970 or that the Soviet destroyer did not cut across the bow of HMS Ark Royal?

      • Dennis Revell


        So, you mean that McCain actually did SOME good in Vietnam – the ‘friendly’ fire thing? – I didn’t know that.

        Pity the rest of his life was a War-Mongering waste. Glad he’s dead – should have come long heretobefore?!? – preferably in his cradle.


  • SA

    Interestingly when you right click on the images and ask Google to look for this photo, you get ‘man’ or action man, but no websites with these photos. Is that because this information has yet to be released to the wider world?

  • Jack

    Watch out for disnformation, facts is spread with lies.
    For example first the police didnt know who these people were, then an hour later Theresa May claim 100% they are from russian military intelligence, no proof is provided.

    I dont know what UK seeks to do here, they havent requested Russia to extradite them. Is it just another smear/propaganda case we see?

  • Jack

    “New Labour’s Irrational Adoration of Thatcher ”

    Its the same with weird liberal/left wings’ throughout europe and US in the support for John McCain.
    Something is really rotten in the so called Left of today.

  • Sean Lamb

    There were always only two possibilities for the Skripal story – either the British intelligence did it – perhaps with some use of proxies, or the Russian government did it

    If British intelligence did it, they can spray traces of Novichok where-ever they please – provided they aren’t as careless as Nick “Butterfingers” Bailey – so it is no surprise traces are found in hotel room.

    I expect there is a lot of flexibility of when the CCTV images in Salisbury was actually taken – and as they don’t seemed to have stayed in Salisbury itself in early March. All you need is someone who arrived in London in early March and visited Salisbury sometime in the next month and caught on CCTV.

    I am not seeing a date for when they flew out release yet, so possibly they have may have stayed some weeks or so.

    The British government is going to throw everything at trying to uphold this, because if this collapses then so does the Alexander Litvinenko case as the evidence was essentially the same – detecting traces of Novicho/Polonium as proof of culpability.

    • Tony_0pmoc

      Sean Lamb,

      There are far more than two possibilities.

      One possibility, is that they entire thing was planned in advance as an anti-Russian propaganda exercise by the CIA, and against their better judgement, The Briitish Intelligence Services and Government, were in effect forced to comply with the proviso, that no one is killed and no one is seriously injured.

      The entire thing could have been faked from start to finish purely for propaganda purposes.

      There are several things that led me to this conclusion, the first of which was that the press photographers, and the emergency personnel in hazmat suits, were on the scene, the same Sunday afternoon as it happenned, whilst the story according to that released was that an unidentified couple -an older man and a younger woman, had been ill on a park bench in Salisbury. Over-indulgence in alcohol was not suspected, but an overdose of the psychoactive drug, fentanyl, which has been a prescription drug since the 1960’s, but also used by drug addicts. No one gets even the local press, or the fire brigade out for such an event, yet in less than 12 hours it was world headline news.

      The second thing, that made me think it was a propaganda stunt, was events in Syria at almost exactly the same time, where the propaganda onus, was to again demonise the Russians in the Western public mind.

      The third thing, is that the story changed on an almost daily basis, and most of it was totally ridiculous.

      I still think nothing happenned, but a media show. Some of the partcipants actually blew the whistle, including one of the chief doctors at the hospital, who stated no-one at this hospital has been poisoned by a military nerve agent. It was published in The Times, then the Government issued a D-Notice – which in effect said that if anyone says or publishes the truth, then extremely horrible things are likely to happen to both them and their families.

      Under such circumstances, even I would SHTFU

      I feel really sorry for the people -many professionals in Salisbury who have been dragged into this appalling mess, and are frightened to tell the truth.

      I never thought I would end up in an England that had become the equivalent of [email protected] Germany, but the evidence is staring me in my face.


      • Sean Lamb

        “One possibility, is that they entire thing was planned in advance as an anti-Russian propaganda exercise”

        Just in terms of understanding the evidence – whether CIA or MI6 – I am still of the opinion it was a cock-up. The intention was that the perfume bottle would be found in Yulia’s room and said to have been slipped into her luggage at Moscow. Easy-peasy, case closed.

        That fell apart when Nick Bailey got sick. So the “planning” part would have fallen over at that point. So then the question is how did they get these Russians on CCTV – if they can’t have planned it. While I dare say a lot of Russians visit Salisbury, a 2 hour visit on a short trip on the day the Skripals get attacked – well MI6 would have had to get stupendously luck if it happened by chance.

        So how did the evidence get produced?

      • Alex Westlake

        If this country was the equivalent of the Third Reich then this blog wouldn’t exist and it’s author would be in prison or dead.

        • Dennis Revell

          Nice of you to acknowledge that the continued existence of this blog is the only difference, or at least one of the few of them between “this country” and the 3rd. Reich.

          – I think the point that was being made was about a gradual slide – may be not so gradual at that – towards totalitarianism by another name.

          Apart from their sneaking admiration, the establishment learned a LOT from the NAZIs – NOT to call mercilless bombing of countries “Blitzkrieg”; instead let’s call it something warmer and fuzzier: “Shock & Awe” – conjuring visions of nothing more harmful than a humongous fire-works show – which is all the CNN & BBC watching public ever see of it – and not the resulting NAZI-LIKE carnage below; Not to go in talking about “no quarter to be given” (as Hitler did against the Russians in Barbarossa), but instead talk about “spreading democracy™”, and stopping “brutal dictators” who apparently ALWAYS get their rocks off by wholesale killing of their own people™, their favourite common hobby, so so speak.


    • Martin Kernick

      Reports say that the police found traces of novichok in the hotel room that the two men, charged with the Skripal’s murder, used. That’s interesting because, if the novichock was contained in a perfume bottle they would have had to have opened it or sprayed it in the hotel room for there to be traces. It’s very unlikely that they would have done that, as there would be no point in doing it, and it would be an extraordinarily stupid thing to do for reasons of their own personal safety, and the fact that they would leave evidence. If they did such a thing then it’s very unlikely that they are trained Russian agents.

  • Clive p

    The bottle of ‘novichok’ must have been thrown away on the Sunday in March as the ‘assassins’ left the country that day. How is it still in a bin months later? Does nobody empty them in Salisbury? Also since the bottle was not assembled and still in its box with polythene wrapping it can’t have been used against the Skripals. As usual more questions than answers.

    • Sean Lamb

      If I understand Sky News correctly –

      They arrive in Salisbury at 11:48 and then they leave at 13:50 – presumably after visiting the Skripal front door and after finding a charity bin.

      Britain can only fake the things Russia doesn’t have access to – so arrivals and departures at airports are going to be exact.

      It would seem an odd coincidence to only visit Salisbury and only for 2 hours in a short visit to Britain. My guess if they have identified two people who arrived in Britain in the right time – taken images from CCTV during where-ever they did go – and then photoshopped/video editted them into Salisbury CCTV.

    • Doodlebug

      @Clive p

      “As usual more questions than answers.” That’s putting it mildly. How (and indeed why) are the security services supposed to have tracked two specific individuals from the arrival lounge at Heathrow to a particular hotel in London, before having any reasonable cause to do so, i.e., BS (Before Skripal)?

      As far as CPS assertions are concerned, they have serious ‘form’ when it comes to public announcements concerning the certainty of evidence sufficient to warrant a prosecution. It was the CPS (in the shape of Alison Levitt) that felt there was sufficient evidence five years ago for the case against actor Michael Le Vell to proceed to court, whereupon it took the defence Barrister barely a few minutes to point out that, actually, there was no evidence against the man at all – nada – zilch! On which basis his acquittal was virtually assured.

      But we needn’t worry. We can accuse Russians ’till the cows come home, since they’ll never be extradited in any case.

      When I first heard the PM’s statement earlier today I was incandescent with rage, as the saying goes. There is simply no justification for the degree of deceit being practised over this issue, which ranks alongside the nefarious doings of the late Margaret Thatcher for sheer hubris.

  • Made By Dom

    May said, “…25 detectives examined 11,000 hours of CCTV footage and took 1400 statements.”
    She then said, “We were right to say in March that the Russian State was responsible..”

    No, Theresa you weren’t right because back in March you hadn’t examined 11,000 hours of CCTV footage and taken 1400 statements.
    You were counting white swans…

  • Vivian O'Blivion

    “Petrov” and “Boshirov” were there to be seen and recorded on cctv. Why the very late morning arrival in Salisbury? The targets could have already left the house. The targets could still be in the house and on the alert. Would you walk up someone’s front path in broad daylight and apply nerve agent to a door handle? The neighbors would have been up and about. Much less passing footfall on a Sunday.
    Think “Lee Harvey Oswald” being photographed and recorded in Mexico City (only it wasn’t really LHO). The nerve agent would have been applied in the early hours under cover of darkness by a separate team. The plan is flawed in that it relies on the Skripals not leaving the house before haud it and daud it arrive late morning to pose in front of the cctv cameras.

    • Agent Green

      Plan is made up nonsense is what you were trying to say. A poor effort, even by the standards of the UK Government/intelligence.

      • Vivian O'Blivion

        There to be seen. There to be traveling on Russian passports. There to be using direct flights to and from Moscow. A very poor attempt at a false flag op.. Enough to incriminate Putin in the eyes of the clinically gullible.

1 2 3 4 5 6