Skripals – The Mystery Deepens 3063


The time that “Boshirov and Petrov” were allegedly in Salisbury carrying out the attack is all entirely within the period the Skripals were universally reported to have left their home with their mobile phones switched off.

A key hole in the British government’s account of the Salisbury poisonings has been plugged – the lack of any actual suspects. And it has been plugged in a way that appears broadly convincing – these two men do appear to have traveled to Salisbury at the right time to have been involved.

But what has not been established is the men’s identity and that they are agents of the Russian state, or just what they did in Salisbury. If they are Russian agents, they are remarkably amateur assassins. Meanwhile the new evidence throws the previously reported timelines into confusion – and demolishes the theories put out by “experts” as to why the Novichok dose was not fatal.

This BBC report gives a very useful timeline summary of events.

At 09.15 on Sunday 4 March the Skripals’ car was seen on CCTV driving through three different locations in Salisbury. Both Skripals had switched off their mobile phones and they remained off for over four hours, which has baffled geo-location.

There is no CCTV footage that indicates the Skripals returning to their home. It has therefore always been assumed that they last touched the door handle around 9am.

But the Metropolitan Police state that Boshirov and Petrov did not arrive in Salisbury until 11.48 on the day of the poisoning. That means that they could not have applied a nerve agent to the Skripals’ doorknob before noon at the earliest. But there has never been any indication that the Skripals returned to their home after noon on Sunday 4 March. If they did so, they and/or their car somehow avoided all CCTV cameras. Remember they were caught by three CCTV cameras on leaving, and Borishov and Petrov were caught frequently on CCTV on arriving.

The Skripals were next seen on CCTV at 13.30, driving down Devizes road. After that their movements were clearly witnessed or recorded until their admission to hospital.

So even if the Skripals made an “invisible” trip home before being seen on Devizes Road, that means the very latest they could have touched the doorknob is 13.15. The longest possible gap between the novichok being placed on the doorknob and the Skripals touching it would have been one hour and 15 minutes. Do you recall all those “experts” leaping in to tell us that the “ten times deadlier than VX” nerve agent was not fatal because it had degraded overnight on the doorknob? Well that cannot be true. The time between application and contact was between a minute and (at most) just over an hour on this new timeline.

In general it is worth observing that the Skripals, and poor Dawn Sturgess and Charlie Rowley, all managed to achieve almost complete CCTV invisibility in their widespread movements around Salisbury at the key times, while in contrast “Petrov and Boshirov” managed to be frequently caught in high quality all the time during their brief visit.

This is especially remarkable in the case of the Skripals’ location around noon on 4 March. The government can only maintain that they returned home at this time, as they insist they got the nerve agent from the doorknob. But why was their car so frequently caught on CCTV leaving, but not at all returning? It appears very much more probable that they came into contact with the nerve agent somewhere else, while they were out.

“Boshirov and Petrov” plainly are of interest in this case. But only Theresa May stated they were Russian agents: the police did not, and stated that they expected those were not their real identities. We do not know who Boshirov and Petrov were. It appears very likely their appearance was to do with the Skripals on that day. But they may have been meeting them, outside the home. The evidence points to that, rather than doorknobs. Such a meeting might explain why the Skripals had turned off their mobile phones to attempt to avoid surveillance.

It is also telling the police have pressed no charges against them in the case of Dawn Sturgess, which would be manslaughter at least if the government version is true.

If “Boshirov and Petrov” are secret agents, their incompetence is astounding. They used public transport rather than a vehicle and left the clearest possible CCTV footprint. They failed in their assassination attempt. They left traces of novichok everywhere and could well have poisoned themselves, and left the “murder weapon” lying around to be found. Their timings in Salisbury were extremely tight – and British Sunday rail service dependent.

There are other possibilities of who “Boshirov and Petrov” really are, of which Ukrainian is the obvious one. One thing I discovered when British Ambassador to Uzbekistan was that there had been a large Ukrainian ethnic group of scientists working at the Soviet chemical weapon testing facility there at Nukus. There are many other possibilities.

Yesterday’s revelations certainly add to the amount we know about the Skripal event. But they raise as many new questions as they give answers.


3,063 thoughts on “Skripals – The Mystery Deepens

1 10 11 12 13 14 19
  • Alyson

    Whodunnit? I dunno. Times of Israel said it looked like one of theirs. This was a day or 2 after the event, when May had all the evidence that it was the Ruskies wot dunnit

  • Republicofscotland

    As sabre rattling from the Great Satan and Russia took place at the Med shores of Syria. The major question must be is why is the US allowed to have two military bases in Syria, where it trains anti-Assad terrorists?

    The US is illegally occuping Syrian territory, and using it as staging posts to create conflict within the country. The US wouldn’t tolerate such actions on US soil, so would Assad, and his invited allies into the country be well within their rights to strike these hostile bases, and would such actions stand up under legal scrutiny?

    • MJ

      Indeed. Syria is a sovereign country and its government is under a duty to protect it. Syria is not some lawless wasteland where any old Tom, Dick and Harry can turn up to live out their Mad Max fantasies.

      • Republicofscotland

        But they are living them out, Israel has the Golan, and the Great Satan, has bases in Syria, without consent. Turkey to, infringes on Syria’s northern border.

        • MJ

          Yes they are but it is unlawful and Syria has every right to drive them out, with the assistance of anyone it cares to invite.

          • Paul Greenwood

            Syria has a Treaty of Friendship & Cooperation with Syria since 1980. USSR was first to support Syria after independence from France in 1946. It is hard to see why this relationship is any inferior to a NATO Agreement with any of its members.

    • Tony_0pmoc

      Republicofscotland,

      The problem with that is some of The Americans in control really are insane , and though they are nominally Christian, they actually do believe the bits of the Old Testament they want to believe, and they actually want to bring on Armageddon, so they can get Raptured straight to heaven, with 72 virgin mary’s. It’s all very well thinking these people should be in straight jackets, but the reality is, that the are running the show. The Russians have been extremely patient, and tolerant but this thing could escalate out of control, very quickly indeed. If a load of cruise missiles from an American battleship, kill a lot of Russians, it is highly likely they will shoot back and sink the battleship. This will seriously annoy the Americans, and Dr. Strangelove is now back in control, with his finger on the nuclear trigger.

      Tony

      • Paul Barbara

        @ Tony_0pmoc September 9, 2018 at 15:19
        I doubt very much he could press the button. The military even had Nixon covered in case he misused the ‘Nuclear Football’, and though Nixon was an evil jerk, he was a damn smarter than Trump.
        But their are those in the military who probably would and could use it (Dr. Strangelove Syndrome).

        • Rip van Wribkle

          Of course Trump’s an idiot. He made himself a multi billionaire and then became the President of the United States whilst having no mainstream media support via TV or newspapers. Oh, and very little, of any, outside funding.

          Unlike Hillary who had a ‘98% chance of winning the election and spent $2 billion in the process of undertaking a losing campaign.

          Trump sure is a dumbo isn’t he.

    • Paul Greenwood

      “legal scrutiny” has no meaning whatsoever when US weapons are deployed. there is no “legal basis” for murdering people in their own country by drone. There is no “legal basis” for extraordinary rendition and torture in black prison sites.

      The US like Israel can do as it feels and chooses and to an extent the UK – because they have airplanes with stand-off rockets and can kill from a great height. Since 1942 UK and US have been able to destroy cities from the air with relative impunity and Israel has that same advantage.

      Assad has simply to regain his territory and utilise air defence systems to destroy the incoming rockets from Israel/USA/UK/France and if he still has them – bargain with the SAS men he captured in ISIS strongholds

      • Republicofscotland

        Yet the Great Satan and its obedient minions would be quick to cite International laws, if Assad broke them. It would genuinely appear that those US terrorist training camps are there to stay, just as the Israeli’s illegally occupy the Golan.

        • SA

          The May eventually be forced our. They were in Iraq in 2011 and I think will be asked to leave again soon. I think the Kurds sooner or later will find that their reliance on US is no longer an asset and the local Arab militias are getting a bit restless already. But the US is known for bluster.

          • Alyson

            The Kurds have been ill treated by all sides. They worked closely with local Iraqi commanders to drive out ISIS. After succeeding, their partner battalions were replaced by a different occupying Iraqi force…. In Northern Syria they try and sustain their way of life. The women’s battalions fight alongside the men’s to keep out oppressors who would destroy their autonomy, and force them into one or another oppressive form of Islam. Their communal agricultural organisation and their defence of their homes and gardens baffles their neighbours who do not respect their difference, and their success in caring for their communities. Carne Ross describes their ethos of social responsibility as anarchy, because it is autonomous, equal, and caring, like the communes in Spain were more than half a century ago

      • Alyson

        Because Chelsea… Bill ‘shoots blanks’ as he said in his defence in a paternity suit. Hillary’s former partner in the Law firm she worked for is Jewish, and looks like Chelsea. Turkey baster or fling, it shouldn’t matter. She is Bill and Hillary’s daughter, but perhaps they have been pressured and maybe compromised

  • Clark

    These brackets represent the public’s impression […]

    Now, what can be forced into it?

    Novichok > […]
    Chlorine > […]
    Russia > […]
    Assad > […]
    Prohibited chemical weapons > […]

    BUT: Chlorine is NOT prohibited as a chemical weapon, therefore the Neocon US/UK/France/Gulf monarchy/Israeli alliance will NOT get UN approval for any serious attack upon Syria. This is a relief to the Neocon alliance since Russia is well armed.

    Objective: after the inevitable Neocon defeat in Syria (their first since 9/11), the UN can be depicted as “weak”, international law as a “hindrance” to “humanitarian intervention”, and Russia as “evil”.

    This is not about Syria, because the Neocon objectives have already been arrested there. It’s about manufacturing as much public consent as possible for future aggression.

    • Dave Lawton

      Clark
      September 9, 2018 at 14:37
      Chlorine gas cylinders are used extensively in the middle east for domestic drinking and sanitation purposes one hit on a cylinder with a bomb and you could get false claims of a gas attack.

      • Clark

        Dave, yes, I know. I think various parties have been using gas. Seymour Hersh presented a case that the Ghouta sarin attack was a proxy group backed by Turkey, and Craig cited a Washington intelligence community source that only the Israeli Mossad attributed that attack to the Syrian government:

        https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2013/08/the-troodos-conundrum/

        Beyond that, there have been various reports of chlorine. I expect these are a mixture of false alarms and deliberate over-dramatisation by the White Helmets etc., incidental releases as you point out, false-flag provocations by proxies, and actual uses of chlorine by Syrian government forces.

        I think the actual Syrian government uses go like this. As Syrian/Russian forces advance, the Neocon alliance’s charming jihadist proxies take cover in civilian residential areas and take many prisoners – pro-government civilians plus any remaining genuine rebels – to use as human shields and propaganda fodder. This is reported locally. The Syrian government informs Russia, which seeds a propaganda cover story that Western agents are organising a false flag gas attack. Syrian forces use chlorine to force the proxies to break cover; possibly the most humane approach under the circumstances short of hand-to-hand combat. Western warmongers shout “gas! Red line crossed!” while Western keyboard warriors shout “gas! False flag!”.

        • Clark

          “Syrian forces use chlorine to force the proxies to break cover; possibly the most humane approach under the circumstances short of hand-to-hand combat”

          The pro-war media use these chlorine attacks to call for Western military intervention. However, they do not present an alternative. Syria/Russia could use conventional bombs etc., but the death toll of non-combatants would be much higher.

          The only alternatives I can see for Syria/Russia are (1) halt their retaking of Syria, as the Neocon side want, and leave large areas of Syria become terrorist wasteland like Libya and much of Iraq, or (2) send troops into buildings occupied by the Neocon’s proxy forces. But in this second option, the proxies would hold a massive advantage; Syria would have to lose many soldiers for each proxy killed or captured. We’ve already seen how siege unfolds; predictably, the civilians starve before the combatants.

          • Paul Barbara

            @ Clark September 9, 2018 at 16:59
            Surely you don’t believe the totally obvious False Flag hoaxes/attacks were carried out by anyone other than the Western proxies and their PR outfit, the White Helmets? Cui bono? A twelve-year old child should be able to see through their evil shenanigans.

          • Deb O'Nair

            The OPCW published a photo from Eastern Ghouta which showed an undamaged chlorine gas cylinder on a bed underneath a massive hole punched through a reinforced concrete ceiling. Even though this was a completely staged setup the OPCW did not rule out that the Syrians had dropped the cylinder, but merely stated the lack of damage tothe cylinder (after forcing it’s way through reinforced concrete) remained unexplained.

        • Paul Barbara

          @ Clark September 9, 2018 at 16:41
          Vanessa Beeley, who has been on the ground in Syria many times, has two versions of how the White Helmets operate.
          One, is when an air raid occurs, they switch the lights off in the tunnels or basements, and someone goes down and pours chlorine on the floor. Ordinary household chorine is very strong, especially in a confined area. They then shout ‘Chemical Attack’, and of course everybody panics. They are then lead to ‘hospitals’ where they are doused with water and filmed.
          The other one, was where she actually was driving passed a large roadside container, which was set alight, and poisonous plastics of some kind were burnt. She slowed down, but was warned to drive on by gun-toting ‘rebels’.
          That was of course also claimed as a ‘CW’ attack. Burning plastic is indeed toxic, and is extremely strong smelling.
          In no way would Assad be so stupid to use any CW’s, knowing full well the consequences.

          • Clark

            The OPCW does NOT classify chlorine as a chemical weapon. The US keeps going on about chlorine, and how they’ll be “forced to respond to chemical weapons”, but somehow never mention that chlorine doesn’t qualify.

          • Clark

            I’m sure what Vanessa Beeley describes does occur. And I’m sure other things occur too. Human behaviour deteriorates in war. Understandably.

          • Paul Barbara

            @ Clark September 9, 2018 at 21:09
            But one thing you can be sure of – Assad would not use CW’s; he knows that the West is just itching to strike Syria again, and he most certainly would not give them a copper-clad invite.
            Russia has challenged the US to name the facilities they plan contain CW’s and which are on their ‘to hit’ list, and to send in the OPCW – and received silence in return.

          • Clark

            “But one thing you can be sure of – Assad would not use CW’s”

            I agree, but as I already said, the OPCW does NOT class chlorine as a chemical weapon.

            You’re not reading it are you? It doesn’t matter how many times I write it. I’ll try twice more, see if I can it get through your internal mental compartmentalisation:

            The OPCW does NOT class chlorine as a chemical weapon.
            The OPCW does NOT class chlorine as a chemical weapon.

        • Paul Barbara

          @ Clark September 9, 2018 at 16:41
          ‘..This is reported locally…’
          Err? These areas are controlled by various branches of head-choppers and fellow-travellers; they will allow such truth to be ‘reported locally’? When even non-conversion to Islam (Daish branch) is often cause enough for death?
          The only truth you’ll get is when these areas are liberated. It’s amazing, that despite all that the Syrian people have suffered, once liberated, a remarkably high number join up with the SAA.

          • Clark

            Someone linked to a report on southfront.org just a few days ago; a report about the rebels/proxies (I don’t profess to tell them apart) taking about a thousand locals prisoner.

          • Paul Barbara

            @ Clark September 9, 2018 at 21:07
            Yes, I know the article you refer to; I read it, and may well have posted it here. But by ‘reported locally’ I took it to mean in the head-chopper’s areas, not southfront.org. Sorry if I misunderstood you.

          • Ngoyo

            “It’s amazing, that despite all that the Syrian people have suffered, once liberated, a remarkably high number join up with the SAA.”

            Not really remarkable. I doubt that the people there are subject to the propaganda and ignorance to which the US and European populations are. They know first hand that their country is under foreign attack and that their army is defending their country. Any patriot anywhere would sign up under those circumstances.

    • laguerre

      “after the inevitable Neocon defeat in Syria (their first since 9/11),”

      Not true. The US lost in Iraq in 2008, by being forced to withdraw entirely, although it took another three years to finalise the withdrawal. But they did, Maliki did pretty well. If it hadn’t been for Da’ish in 2014, there wouldn’t be an American in the country, but Maliki went a bit lulu. I wonder whether we’re not coming up to a sort of repeat. Abbadi is the American candidate, but he lost the election, and the Yanks are insisting he stay in power nevertheless. The Iraqis don’t like this, and this time there are only a few Americans there.

      • Clark

        The US was forced to withdraw, but the Neocons had achieved their objective of regime change, not all the territory is strongly controlled, and the oil is extracted by Neocon companies.

        The Neocons never cared whether the US would be defeated in Iraq:

        ‘Seeing that the Imperialism of the last three decades is clearly condemned as a business policy, in that at enormous expense it has procured a small, bad, unsafe increase of markets, and has jeopardised the entire wealth of the nation in rousing the strong resentment of other nations, we may ask, “How is the British nation induced to embark upon such unsound business?” The only possible answer is that the business interests of the nation as a whole are subordinated to those of certain sectional interests that usurp control of the national resources and use them for their private gain. This is no strange or monstrous charge to bring; it is the commonest disease of all forms of government. The famous words of Sir Thomas More are as true now as when he wrote them: “Everywhere do I perceive a certain conspiracy of rich men seeking their own advantage under the name and pretext of the commonwealth.”’

        https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2007/08/j_a_hobson_impe/

        https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2009/01/the_consequence/

        • laguerre

          “but the Neocons had achieved their objective of regime change,”

          You mean to an Iranian-leaning regime? It’s a bit complicated today, but that’s what I was mentioning above.

          “and the oil is extracted by Neocon companies.”

          Well, no, actually. The Iraqis refused time and time again to vote the oil law Bush wanted, with guaranteed monopoly contracts for US oil companies. I checked the situation today; there is Exxon, but mainly others.

          http://www.iraq-businessnews.com/list-of-international-oil-companies-in-iraq/

          • Clark

            Thanks for that list; I’d only found ExxonMobil. Do you have a list quantifying the extraction per company? And overall, did takings of Neocon interests increase, even temporarily?

            I see your point, but the overthrow intended by the Neocons was completed and a power vacuum was created, which raised more terrorists, and terrorists are always useful. Of course, with their arms industry profits the Neocons win either way, whether the US wins or is defeated. Taxpayers pay for wars, but the private sector profits.

      • Paul Barbara

        @ laguerre September 9, 2018 at 16:52
        ‘… If it hadn’t been for Da’ish in 2014, there wouldn’t be an American in the country, but Maliki went a bit lulu…’
        Cui bono? I wonder who was (and remains) the chief ‘enabler’ of Daish?
        And how two British aircraft, and at least one US helicopter, were shot down delivering arms to IS, if they were ‘fighting them’?.
        And why they are facilitating their going from Iraq and Syria to Afghanistan and Yemen (where the arming continues)?

        • giyane

          @ laguerre September 9, 2018 at 16:52
          ‘… If it hadn’t been for Da’ish in 2014, there wouldn’t be an American in the country, ‘
          Obama made Daesh. Trump destroyed Daesh.
          The neo-cons hate Trump for doing what he promised viz draining the neo-con swamp. As with WW2 we all owe the Russians a vast debt of gratitude for mopping up the infantile colonial greed of USUKIS politicians. May is flip-flopping her tail in the mud while opening and shutting her parched gob.

          I saw a Daesh with a monster beard and tattoos arriving in Sulaimaniyah airport from Birmingham, being hosted by the airport authorities, and waiting for shipping to Obamaland Mosul.

          it wasn’t exactly Disney, more like dystopia, but 100% fantasy created by USUKIS.
          The question is now whether Turkey will be allowed by Russia to profit from their hand in the USUKIS Disneyland dystopia fantasy, and whether the torture-rendition-brainwashed residue of Obamaland now living in Idlib will be treated as indoctrinated victims of Cameron and Obama’s outright madness and aggression, or whether they will be treated as underpaid stage-hands.

          Russia and China presumably think that the fascist style of Islam of the Muslim Brotherhood has merits , because they can do business with fascists. But it’s only a matter of time, without continual indoctrination by USUKIs’s chemical brain-washing, before the jihadists themselves rebel against the fascist control of nutters like Brett Gurk and Erdogan.

          Being holed up in Idlib with a load of other tin-pot fascists isn’t what the late much-detested John McCain promised to his loyal Daesh. They were supposed to get a million dollars each and free passports to the West. You can only fool some of the people , some of the time.

        • Laguerre

          I’d be surprised if the demonstrations in Basra are American-orchestrated. They sound to me nativist, more Muqtada al-Sadr’s lot. The big complaint is corruption. Basra sits next to one of the largest oil-fields in the world (Rumaila), but the people live in a rubbish dump. Where’s the money going, is the thought. I had the so-called pleasure of a week there in May. It really is a dump. The accusations of corruption are also quite correct. Back in 2015, I had a brief involvement in a project where 95% of the budget went in corruption. It has to stop. This is basically a popular revolt.

          • giyane

            And was there 90% corruption under Saddam Hussein? No, 98% of oil revenues were going to the US and UK oil companies leaving Saddam only 2%.

          • Laguerre

            “And was there 90% corruption under Saddam Hussein? ” No., they learnt it from the American Occupation in 2003-4. and no, the US oil companies were not in Iraq under Saddam.

          • SA

            Laguerre
            This information comes from Almanar and Mayadin channels in discussions so internal Arab discussions. Difficult to know but they do highlight the rightful complaints and demonstrations by people in Basra of this fact although they also say that the violent riots were orchestrated by the consulate (they say they have evidence). Irrespective a majority coalition including Muqtada al Sadr are asking for the resignation of Abbadi.

    • Borncynical

      @Clark
      How would you define a “serious attack upon Syria”? I take it you wouldn’t classify what happened after the Douma ‘CW’ incident as a ‘serious’ attack, being that it was a ‘shoot from the hip’ response by the US/UK and France WITHOUT UN approval?

      For what it’s worth, my view is that the US is a loose cannon who don’t worry about international laws and procedures before pulling the trigger, supported without question by the UK and France. I can very easily see Syria escalating completely out of control because the US/UK/France nutters see themselves as world policemen and beyond reproach. To quote Samantha Power when promoting her book a while ago “It’s impossible to imagine a world where the US doesn’t take the lead”.

      On the matter of chlorine, and as alluded to by @Clark, my understanding is that in anything other than a fully enclosed space it is relatively harmless (certainly compared to CWs ‘proper’), causing sufficient discomfort to cause temporary distress and disorientation, leaving targeted victims likely to break cover from wherever they are holed up, thereby incapacitating them temporarily and rendering them vulnerable to capture or other offensive manoeuvres. Unfortunately, in the hands of the terrorists, it is a perfect means of killing local people (in locked basements for example) to give the impression of a ‘regime’ chemical attack as, I would suggest, there was evidence of in the post-Douma photographs. The advantage of such a process for the terrorists is, of course, that they can contrive such scenes anywhere and at anytime, take photos and then claim at the appropriate time that they are evidence of a ‘regime’ CW attack. Unfortunately, it is more than likely that children and women …and one or two men for good measure …have already been exploited to this end for the purposes of any forthcoming false flag.

      • Clark

        By “serious attack” I mean a direct attack upon the Syrian government, or an attack upon Syrian air installations such that government becomes incapable of preventing the country from being overrun, or a direct attack upon Russian forces large enough to stop Russia’s support. Basically, anything decisive, which the previous two US missile attacks were not.

        No, the US cares little for international law. But they do care about Russia and China’s nukes, which is why they pay some little lip-service to process at the UN.

        • Borncynical

          Thanks for the clarification – I assumed it had to be something like that. But I do still remain to be convinced that some in the influential US hierarchy might be deterred from their aggressive stance by fear of nuclear attack, particularly as the psychological constitution of a number of individuals is very borderline (both sides of that border!) psychopathic – probably with a sense of immortality thrown in – and as such they would be more than willing to ‘get in first’.

      • Paul Greenwood

        Considering most of the French missiles went awry and they fired more of the StormShadow than UK did it is quite bemusing. Anyway with the new radar systems scanning Akrotiri and with Turkey to be integrated into the Russian air defence system through S-400 acquisition and Iran too through S-300 it should get much more exciting for pilots going to kill civilians on the ground to see their lives in jeopardy. It should be the most dangerous time since Soviet operators using SAMs brought down US pilots over Vietnam

    • Borncynical

      @ Clark

      Apologies. In the first line of para 3 of my comments at 19.53, I should have specified @Clark (16.41) or more politely “your comments at 16.41”. No disrespect intended!

  • Olaf S

    Why does some messages miss reply arrow top right?
    For example this great (convincing) message on the previous page be poster “wild”:

    “Why would “Russian secret services” have links to Russian mobsters or the mobsters themselves?
    “G.R.U.” mentioned throughout is not a secret service organization, but rather military intelligence. As in reconnaissance and analysis. GRU does not even exist since 1992, it is called Main Intelligence Directorate of General Staff (G.U.) and an integral part of a modern Army which hates mobsters of 90s, who robbed the country of wealth and helped to diminish international standing of Russia.

    How members of intelligence directorate of Russian Federation (not USSR) Army can have any links to these types? Money? Officers of Russian Army earn enough. Corruption? At intelligence units? Come on. Skripal made a beef with Soviet GRU, served a prison term and was pardoned and transferred to U.K. What has he got against reformed modern Army? Zilch, I say. “Russian mobsters” is a completely different story. The curious thing about them they haven’t changed since Skripal helped them to buy properties abroad, while at same time reporting them to Spanish police and MI-6.

    Why they “haven’t changed”? Because so called “russian mobsters” itself is an euphemism for EU (Geneve? Spain?), UK and US living former citizens of USSR descent, including ethnic russians, georgians, ukrainians and so on. Putin cleared Russia of them, and they settled abroad. One of indicators of how Putin dealt with them is level of assassinations in Russia itself – high in 90s, negligible now. The “russian” mobsters is the past Skripal lived with, hoping to be protected from hit by UK government.

    Well, he was hit anyway. Right before World Championshiop, in the middle of of Syria intervention.

    I think so called “russian mobsters” have more links with Theresa May’s MI-6 than with Putin’s G.U. (Main Intelligence Directorate of General Staff of Russian Army). Labels are deceiving. Intentionally.”

    • Clark

      “Why does some messages miss reply arrow top right?”

      Comments only “nest” five levels deep; it’s a setting in WordPress.

    • on-mobsters

      Homicide rate in Russia is still quite high
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate#United_States
      There is a reason Russians prefer to live in Britain or Switzerland – you can walk around without security detail though being Russian in itself poses a risk.
      British mobsters have institutionalized their robbery and are called the upper class. Russian mobsters will need a few centuries to achieve this.
      The advantage of not killing off your nobility is that you do not have to feed a new one that is more greedy in catching up.
      It is possible that a Russian in a private capacity sent his hit team, it is possible the Russian state was informed but did not mind, and it is possible that someone else did this.
      But we are in the region of “possible” here, far away from “highly likely”.

      • Dungroanin

        Hit team?

        An assassination using a firearm or another traditional method in a secluded spot is the normal way of carrying out a hit.

        Not in a park in a middle of a town with full cctv coverage using a method that is equally as dangerous to the perpetrator and which failed!

        Cluedo it isn’t.

    • Paul Barbara

      @ Olaf S September 9, 2018 at 15:53
      The way around this setting is simply copy details of the commenter you wish to reply to (as I have done above) then find the first reply button ABOVE the one you wish to answer, put the @ details of the one you wish to comment on, make your comment, and hit ‘send’.

    • Paul Greenwood

      “Why would “Russian secret services” have links to Russian mobsters or the mobsters themselves?

      The same reason CIA stands for “Cocaine Import Agency” and employed Barry Seal (American Made) whose links to Hillary and Bill Tom Cruise thoughtfully left out of the movie.

      Or that OSS and MI6 worked with Lucky Luciano to bring the Sicilian Mafia on board before landing in Sicily 1943

      http://www.thehistoryreader.com/modern-history/lucky-luciano-wwiis-operation-husky/

      Organised Crime in part and parcel of politics – US Politics is riddled with it. Where do you think families like McCain, Kennedy, Pritzker, Bronfman got their money ?

  • nevermind

    Qi Ping to meet Putin to talk about how to make the best Plov, cook it and enjoy an afternoon reminisencing about old times, whether Cing Lun made the best Chinese bowls in 1735, and how best to cooperate to clean a swamp.

    If human rights are gravely broken, innocent children killed in Yemen, a blockade tentatively supported to use hunger as a weapon, are we, being in ACTIVE MILITARY SUPPORT FOR SAUDI ARABIA, not guilty fpr supplying the weapons in this conflict?

    So, would opposing such a trade/manufacturing process not be a legitamite means to uphold what we signed up to.
    In any conceivable way possible, as long as one does not infringe same rights of others.
    Like fundraising to stop it legally, for example.

    • laguerre

      I thought Plov was an Uzbek dish (and google confirms it), but also in other central Asian countries like Xinjiang. Would either Qi Ping or Putin like such a greasy mess of meat and rice (though I personally like it)? The Chinese are supposed to have a million Uighurs in gulags, so Uighur food is a bit no-no at the moment.

        • James

          Nicely done there, Alex. Whether intentionally I don’t know, but pin into bubble for me.
          When laguerre blogs “I thought plov was an Uzbek dish” et seq, s/he really just wants readers to think how clever and worldy s/he is.
          In fact, laguerre simply Googled “plov”, having no clue of its meaning (nothing wrong in that), but then makes what s/he thinks an impressively pithy and insightful comment – in fact based soley on what s/he’d just read on Wiki – pretending s/he has some deep and authentic analysis. S/he cheekily cracks on s/he’d Googled it merely to confirm this worldly wisdom. “I personally like it”: now that’s what I call fake. As with nearly all the comments on here, stylistically it’s standard issue, and sums up much of the comments of these blogs.
          Not “ad hominem”, laguerre, just the truth. What a host of balls.

  • Sandra

    I THINK that there may have been time for Boshirov and Petrov to have had a brief face to face meeting with the Skripals in Salisbury’s town centre on 4 March, between the Skripals’ parking their car at 1.40pm and before their arriving at the Mill pub. (I don’t think the arrival and departure times at the pub have been given, but they went on from there to Zizzi’s, arriving at 2.20 to 2.30pm.)

    Last week, information was made public that Boshirov and Petrov were captured on CCTV in three places along Fisherton Rd, walking away from the town centre a little after 1.00pm. (The first image is the footage from the shop, the second is of them on the left-hand side of the road, crossing a bridge at 1.05pm, (incidentally, opposite a short path leading to the Mill pub.) The third image shows them on the right-hand side of the road at a junction, with the road to their right. If they happened to turn down this road, then it would lead them into the central (open air) and Sainsbury’s car parks. They would then have been a 5-10mins walk away from the station, where they were seen shortly before 2.00pm.

    Incidentally, I don’t think we have been given the time that Borishov and Petrov arrived at Salisbury station on 4 March, but they were caught on CCTV in Wilton Rd a little before midday. As they left their hotel at 8.00am, the trains listed now for a Sunday that they could have caught are the 9.15am or 10.15am, arriving in Salisbury at 10.48am and 11.45am respectively.

    • Max_B

      1) Well the pair of guys were captured on CCTV at the Shell Petrol Station on Wilton Road @ 11:58h on 4th March

      https://www.google.com/maps/dir/51.074237,-1.8166669/51.0759571,-1.8136619/@51.0723919,-1.8169337,405a,35y,39.34t/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!4m1!3e1

      http://news.met.police.uk/images/cctv5-equals-image-of-both-suspects-on-wilton-road-salisbury-at-11-58hrs-on-04-march-2018-1408003

      2) We know the Skripal’s left home at just after 13:30 on the 4th March because of this video which has an actual time of 13:33…

      https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5510871/Chilling-CCTV-shows-ex-spy-Sergei-Skripal-driving-Salisbury.html

      Which was taken from this house on India Lane (just round the corner from Skripal)…

      https://www.google.com/maps/dir/51.078512,-1.8142026/51.075962,-1.8136185/@51.0778631,-1.8184017,345a,35y,90h,39.38t/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!4m1!3e0

      3) So it seems just as likely that they met sometime earlier, between 11:58 and 13:05…?

      4) But honestly, I think we’re being shown the bare minimum of information to support the case the government is trying to make to the public. Clearly there is plenty more evidence available. If it supported their case, they would present it, so it most likely doesn’t, which is why it has been withheld.

      • Sandra

        Sorry Max-B, I didn’t see your post there before I posted mine about the Shell garage CCTV. Thanks for the link to the India Lane footage – just another gleaning from the MSM that the Skripals were probably at home until about 1pm, as Sergei’s best friend said in today’s Mail:

        https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6147167/Sergei-Skripal-tailed-eve-Novichok-attack-SECOND-spy-team.html

        I agree that the two parties would have had more time to meet before the Skripals went into the town centre than after they arrived there.
        Still, as you say we are feeding on crumbs.

        • Max_B

          We do know the Skripal’s were at least at home at 13:30h on Sunday, because Sergei’s BMW was recorded on CCTV at 13:33h in India Av., passing the back of No.73 Macklin Road. Although the timestamp on the video is wrong because the clock was out, the 13:33h timing seems spot on, because Sergei’s BMW was recorded approximately 2 minutes later at 13:35 in Devizes Road heading towards the City center.

          If the two guys were meeting somebody, and I do suggest that the smarter and more formal footwear they decided to wear on the 4th in Salisbury, compared to the casual trainers they wore on the 3rd in Salisbury, indicates they wanted to look smarter for some reason. Then we also have to consider that they didn’t feel the need to take a rucksack on the 3rd, but needed a rucksack for carrying something reasonably bulky on the 4th.

          The smarter and more formal choice in footwear, which suggests some requirement to look more presentable, such as for a meeting, appears to have some relationship to the need to use a rucksack to carry something fairly bulky. One might therefore speculate that the contents of the rucksack were an important part of the meeting.

          But we don’t really know if they even met Sergei, or whether they even went to his house. They could have kept on walking up Wilton Road for all we know, perhaps meeting Sergei somewhere else, or perhaps never.

          What we do know is that the cameras in just Devises Road, India Avenue, the Shell Garage on Wilton Road, and Fisherton Street alone, were all capable of recording plenty of footage of cars and people on foot. So the police know far more about everybody’s movements than they are letting on. If this evidence supported their case, they would have released it, so it most likely doesn’t, which is why it has been withheld.

          • Max_B

            Just updating my comments about their new footwear… on their RT interview, the Russian guys claim they went to Oxford Street to buy new shoes after their first visit to Salisbury on Saturday. They say their trainers were so wet after that first visit, that when they got back to London, they both bought new dry footwear.

      • Paul Greenwood

        These tourists certainly loved being photographed even looking in shop windows. My bet is only one of them spoke English.

        I did prefer the old days of Borsalinos and Trenchcoats with collar turned cup and glasses – so much better for facial recognition.

    • Sandra

      Oops! Apologies – Craig has already explained, from Met Police images, that Boshirov and Petrov were pictured in Salisbury station at 11.48am on 4 March and, so, I am now presuming that they arrived on the 11.45am train. By the way, I think the Wilton Rd image, taken just before midday, is from a Shell garage on their side of the road as they go away from the town centre and, looking at the distance, I think they must have been walking quite quickly.

    • laguerre

      The Observer didn’t dare open the article for comments, I see. Cohen has been getting a bit sensitive recently.

    • SA

      This is a not journalism. It sounds like raving’s of a lunatic. Note no attack on the current government and the terrorist supporters that played a big part in the ‘Syrian Revolution ‘ nor their supporters in the Wahhabi state of Saudi Arabia. Of corse Cohen needed to have a snipe at Corbyn as well. We all know what safe haven meant in Libya. I wonder whether Cohen writes much on Yemen and Libya . But these do not have a crucial border with the ODiME.

    • Dungroanin

      The Obssessive Groaniad – now run as a foghorn of the Atlantic Council / SCL / Bell Pottinger thugs.

      ‘Incoherent’ Cohen.
      ‘Ridiculous’ Rawnsley.
      ‘Potty’ Polly.
      ‘Donkey’ D’Ancona
      Etc

      With their running the Syria Campaign PR pieces, the lies of the White Helmets, the fake hospital photos; the failure to cover Israel/ Palestine, Yemen, Libya, the ‘secret’ ‘journalists’ ; the monstering of Corbynites and abject surrender to the Israeli government operating with inpunity in the UK with most politicians and journalists in their or CIA pockets.

      I don’t buy it anymore and only visit it to see the agenda played out – and when allowed, poo poo in the comments. Though as that is made impossible by the miltary unit operating in the moderation team …

      Fuck em – an RSS feed from multiple independent sources easily funded by a few £’s a month – is how their message fails and they look ever more desperate.

      Lol they are pathetic!

  • John McManus

    Where are the dead birds? If a super lethal nerve agent was sprayed around, the area shold have been littered with dead dirds, mice, insects etc. The little ones die first.

    • truthwillout

      You’re forgetting that this Novostick stuff has magical properties and can do (or not do) anything depending on the observer. A bit like a quarks. Our ms media seem happy to perpetuate this myth. One day, someone will write objectively about this whole sorry episode.

  • Isa

    Us jets strike Syria city with banned phosphorous substance . Diabolical imperialists and nobody can or will stop them . It’s sick !

  • Sharp Ears

    This is a war crime.

    BREAKING NEWS
    US jets strike Syrian town with banned white phosphorus bombs – Russian Defense Ministry
    9 Sep 2018 | 17:06 GMT
    US jets strike Syrian town with banned white phosphorus bombs – Russian Defense Ministry
    Two US jets have bombed a town in the Syrian Deir Ez-Zor province with white phosphorus munitions, causing massive fires, Russian military has said.

    https://www.rt.com/news/438008-us-strikes-syria-white-phosphorus/

    Israel did the same on an UNWRA school playground in Gaza.

    • laguerre

      Hajin, southeast of Deir ez-Zor, is the only town in Syria still in the hands of Da’ish. b at Moon of Alabama has been pointing out that there’s been no effort by the US since last December to push Da’ish out (it’s on the American bank of the Euphrates). He attributed this fact to collusion between the US and Da’ish, but it may be that the Sunni Arab militias of the SDF who are dominant in that area (not so much Kurds) are not willing to advance without being “bombed” in.

    • Paul Barbara

      @ Sharp Ears September 9, 2018 at 18:22
      Indeed, and the US used it in Falluja, and tried to wriggle out of it:
      ‘US used white phosphorus in Iraq’: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/4440664.stm
      But, of course, the US, like the UK and a ‘certain ME regime’, are ‘exceptional’, and War Crimes are only for who they say commits them.

    • N_

      Could it have been I__ael that did it this time too?

      Reuters:

      Russia’s military said on Sunday that two U.S. F-15 fighter jets dropped phosphorus bombs over Syria’s Deir al-Zor province on Saturday (…) A Pentagon spokesman denied that U.S. planes dropped phosphorus bombs. ‘At this time, we have not received any reports of any use of white phosphorous,’ said Commander Sean Robertson. ‘None of the military units in the area are even equipped with white phosphorous munitions of any kind.’

      Does the US military admit its fighter jets were in that area on Saturday? I__ael has F-15s too.

    • Dungroanin

      Could be a way of incinerating evidence before retreating. After 8 years there would have been plenty of detritus and DNA and eyewitnesses who couldn’t be evacuated.

  • Sandra

    I don’t know if this has been mentioned already but there is an interesting opinion from Sergei’s best friend, Ross Cassidy, who said that Sergei was ‘spooked’ before the attack. Also, ‘sources close to the investigation said Mr Skripal told detectives they were then followed home to Salisbury’. However, what I think is more interesting is that Mr Cassidy questions the time that Sergei’s front door was contaminated. From today’s Mail:

    “But Mr Cassidy questions the police timeline. It is his understanding that Sergei and Yulia were at home until 1pm. And he said Mr Skripal’s ‘heightened state of awareness’ would have frustrated any attack in broad daylight.
    He said: ‘I spent hours and hours with the Counter Terrorism Command being interviewed and talking about this attack.
    ‘I found their work on this inquiry very thorough and meticulous. Every little detail was talked about and refined over and over again.
    ‘I have the utmost respect for these officers. I find it very difficult to dispute their findings.
    ‘However, I was surprised that they said the Novichok was placed on the Sunday lunchtime. I have always thought it was placed on the Saturday afternoon when we were collecting Yulia from Heathrow, or even Saturday night.
    ‘These guys are professional assassins. It would have been far too brazen for them to have walked down a dead end cul-de-sac in broad daylight on a Sunday lunchtime.
    ‘Sergei’s house faces up the cul-de-sac. He had a converted garage that he used as his office – this gives a full view of the street.
    ‘Almost always, Sergei used to open the door to us before we had chance to knock. Whenever we visited, he’d see us approaching.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6147167/Sergei-Skripal-tailed-eve-Novichok-attack-SECOND-spy-team.html

    Although, the idea that the door was contaminated on the Saturday makes even less sense to me than their being poisoned with novichok hours before they fell, it does validate those who have had difficulty with the given timeline, or the poisoned door scenario.

    • Blunderbuss

      I think we have established with a fair degree of certainty (in earlier pages of this blog) that the Skripals were not poisoned at 1pm on Sunday by Novichok on the door handle. More likely, they were actually poisoned around 4pm in the park by a man and a woman with a red handbag. The poison took effect almost immediately, which is much more likely than the delayed-effect poison posited in the official story.

    • Dungroanin

      “I spent hours and hours with the Counter Terrorism Command being interviewed and talking about this attack. ”

      Then went and talked about it in a newspaper?

      What utter nonsense in a live police inquiry – unless it isn’t…

      Did Yulia bring a message and the Russians send confirmation? That he would be welcomed back for spilling the beans on the dodgy dossier? Was he supposed to take flight instantly but let someone ‘trustworthy’, but not connected to the spooks, know that he needed pet minders?

      Why has he not spoken? Why have they not been freely questioned? Yet the Mail has his ‘besty’?

      Are we supposed to be that thick?

  • Dave

    There is a small item in the Sunday Sun saying Petrov was a Russian gangster jailed for cyber crime!

    • wild

      https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/7210402/russia-hackers-spy-poisoning-novichok/

      “UK police may have helped jail one of the hitmen, over a cyber attack against British bookies 12 years ago.A man named Alexander Petrov was among Russian criminals who threatened to shut down online bookies unless they paid £3million.British detectives traced them and Petrov, then in his 20s, was jailed for eight years by the Russian authorities.It is thought he was recruited by Russia’s military intelligence agency GRU after release.”

      Utter nonsense about “recruiting” a criminal who served 8 years (!) to Russian Army’s Main (!) Intelligence directorate for General Staff (G.U.). One must understand military intelligence everywhere, including reformed Russian Army, consists of career officers, who serve years with spotless record before showing enough potential to join elite, General Staff – informing units.

      Whole propaganda smog about “GRU” (part of KGB, existed before 1992) being Figaro here, Figaro there, Figaro everywhere is utter and complete bullshit. PM shall have more detailed briefings on enemy intelligence before spewing accusations on them.

      • Ort

        True enough.

        But consider that “detailed briefings on enemy intelligence” and for that matter “intelligence” in the general sense of the term, are entirely superfluous if the fast and furious spewing of accusations is the entire point of the exercise.

      • wild

        I forgot to add Sun theory on “Petrov” implies while he is a convicted hacker come a “GRU” agent, he was not used by “GRU” as, well, low-level hacker, which may be understood from a technical standpoint, but … wait a moment… an assassin, sent to Salisbury… wait another moment… with a vial full of chemical weapon! This is B-, nay, Z- movie plot, not the way how things are done in real life.

      • N_

        The GRU was never part of the KGB.
        And the official name GRU changed to GU only in 2010.
        Agreed that that record if true makes him sound more FSB (dunno about SVR) than GRU. The poshboy Brit regime wants to propagandise about Russia’s overseas military capability above all.

      • George Porter

        Also from your Sun link: https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/7210402/russia-hackers-spy-poisoning-novichok/

        Hamish strikes again:

        Security expert Hamish de Bretton Gordon said it was “highly possible” cyber spooks “manipulated” Border Force systems to make the hitmen appear respectable.

        He said: “The Russians are the best in the world at cyber activity so could have put in false information to make this pair look more like legitimate businessmen.

        “They seem to have passed through electronic gates at the same time, which suggests something was done to stop them being flagged up as suspicious and help them get through checks.

        Security services would have known all about Yulia Skripal visiting her dad.

        “So two Russians travelling together like they did at this time would normally have raised alarm bells.

        But they were not even questioned although they were only here a few days.”

        • Borncynical

          George
          Without having read the Sun article but based on your extracts, it strikes me that (the idiot) HdeBG succeeds in raising far more questions about British security than what these two men may or may not have been up to.

  • RobG

    Why bother commenting on all this total nonsense. Your comment is only going to be deleted anyway.

    This is because we are ruled by total psychopaths.

      • RobG

        Clark, I’ve always had the greatest respect for you, and will ask you again to link to any thread/post where I asked for you to be shot?

        We do live in very extreme times, none of which is good for people like me, who just want to live in a half way-sane society.

        Am I the enemy?.

        • Clark

          RobG, people must not be discouraged from thinking and reasoning, even along lines you disagree with. If you’re honest with yourself, you know the implications you were making.

          Oh look; just two comments down; “Trolls, you’re all going to be put on trial for war crimes as well; you do understand that, don’t you?”. That “trial” is what you substituted after your calls for summary execution were criticised. Rob, we’re all the same, the evil lurks in everyone’s soul. The great challenge facing every individual is to recognise that, because until we recognise it we are powerless against it.

          The way most miss it is by seeing the problem only in others; that’s the basis of all conflict. But to see it in one’s self necessarily weakens one’s own confidence. It’s a double-bind, which is why over so many millennia the problem has never been solved. But now our technology has overtaken our self-knowledge, so we have to fix it fast or we’ll wipe each other out.

    • Ort

      There, there, Rob.

      When life’s vicissitudes get us down, there’s nothing like a little passive-aggressive bleating to cheer oneself up!

      Besides, it must be some comfort to know that at least the present comment has escaped the Grim Reaper so far, and inspired replies.

      • RobG

        Fuck off, the lot of you low life scum.

        As I type this the British government (presently headed by prime minister Theresa May) are butchering huge numbers of people in Syria. These are war crimes of large proportions.

        How they can keep getting away with such crimes is, quite frankly, beyond belief.

        But wait, the trolls will come out and ‘explain’ it all to you.

        Trolls, you’re all going to be put on trial for war crimes as well; you do understand that, don’t you?

        • Anon1

          I thought you were dispensing with the trials and moving straight to the executions?

          Anyway, room service needed at room 12, Robbo. Look lively!

        • bj

          You don’t tell people, most of whom are like minded to yourself, to “fuck off”.
          No, not that.

          Get a baseball bat and take to the streets, and get some straight answers from lying bastards that should answer.

          But don’t tell your comrades to eff off.
          Not that.

  • Dave

    Are the “impossible photos” intended to bring down the government? I mean the government has explicitly blamed the Russians for ‘Salisbury’ on the basis of the evidence, but the evidence is so poor how could anyone possibly believe it, which they mostly don’t, even if too fearful to say so.

    This is dangerous territory because if the Prime Minister is lying to Parliament and public, its Iraqi WMDs all over again. Its appears the Labour front bench have fallen in line, to avoid criticising, appease, the deep state, but if Corbyn merely raised questions about the “impossible photos” it would sink the government. Hence the hysterical attacks on Corbyn and anyone who asks the most reasonable questions.

  • Herbie

    I’d like to play poker with this guy:

    “Robert Hannigan, the former head of the British intelligence service GCHQ, tells Four Corners that Russia’s aggression has reached a new, destructive level.”

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DAfkfZIibm8

    Thing is, should our Banking or Power networks etc go offline, we’ve absolutely no way of knowing who did it.

    And, very easy way to control a population.

  • jjc

    I don’t know the purpose of the visit by these two men to the UK and to Salisbury, but the CCTV images do not place these men at the Skripal household and they do not associate them with a perfume bottle or any object that could be associated with a vessel containing a nerve agent. The only evidence that ties these men to the purported assassination attempt is the trace of Novichok allegedly swabbed from what is said to have been their hotel room. This swab was taken a full two months after the events in question. Should this case ever go to court, the prosecution would have a difficult time tying this alleged Novichok trace to these men unless it could be convincingly shown that no one – maids, other guests, etc – accessed this room after the two men checked out. These two men are best described as “persons of interest” rather than “suspects.”

    • Tony_0pmoc

      jjc,

      The problem is quite serious. It is about losing faith in government. Everyone I know, thinks the entire story is complete and utter nonsense, and they all hate all the politicians of all the parties because none of them have the guts to tell the truth

      They don’t like ANY of them.

      That is serious.

      The only thing that is keeping this country together, are the police, the nurses, the fireman, the bus driver, the people who fix your heating etc, and the people who grow, transport and deliver your food, water and energy and keep the sewers running.

      Very little if any of this, involves people working in government or the civil service or the BBC. One of them turned up today in his GCHQ T-Shirt. I asked him, do you wear that when your are interviewing them…and you think I’m joking. I can understand why the standards in both MI5 & MI6 have declined judging from the bloke doing the interviews.
      .
      They could all fck off in some great hole for 2 years, and no one would notice the difference.

      Tony

      • Borncynical

        Tony

        I worked in the Civil Service (London HQ) for 23 years and left about 14 years ago largely because of disillusionment at the serious decline in standards at all levels which was placing insurmountable pressure on us ‘old timers’ who were still there. I agree entirely with your comments. Whether or not anyone is a remainer or a leaver, Brexit has been a disaster because those trying to make something of it at all levels and disciplines are completely incompetent …and the disaster they are creating doesn’t surprise me in the slightest. I find myself these days asking myself whether, if I were still in the Civil Service today, I would have the honesty and integrity to resign as a mark of my shame and disgust at the way May et al (of all parties) behave. I like to think I would.

        • Geoffrey

          Are you saying that those who dont want to “make something ” of Brexit are competent , and thus presumably are thwarting it ?

          • Borncynical

            Geoffrey,

            I think there is that as well. I may have been somewhat unwise in my use of hyperbolic exaggeration in my comments above. I must acknowledge that there are decent both competent and incompetent people trying to make the best of the situation in terms of getting an acceptable constructive deal for the UK. As there are decent people who, whilst against the principle of Brexit, realise it is something we have to accept and aim to make the best of.

            But, yes, alongside the naturally, but well-meaning, ‘incompetents’ I would contend there are rogue elements among the ‘competents’ who will, to put it kindly, not try their hardest to work towards a sound deal for the UK. Maybe I speak from a position of loyalty and experience, but I would go so far as to say that these rogue elements are on the whole unlikely to be within the ranks of the Civil Service itself but amongst those who are advised by Civil Servants and have the ultimate word on what direction to take.

            To give you an insight I was asked many, many years ago to undertake a review of a certain national policy which had serious practical consequences (for geographical reasons) for large parts of the population. The review had been committed to previously and was to take 12 months to undertake and complete, and involved consultation with other Government Departments, Agencies and numerous Non-Governmental Organisations of all interests as well as being open to the public to comment. At the end of the review conclusions based on responses and internal administrative considerations (e.g. the available budget) were to be submitted to Ministers to make the final decision on the appropriate course of action. Early on in the process I was discussing some of the initial incoming consultation responses with my line manager – who was very pally with the junior Minister involved – and on commenting on one or two suggested changes my line manager made a comment to the effect that “well that’s all well and good but, of course, we all know what the outcome of the review is to be, don’t we?” (he just fell short of a ‘nudge, nudge, wink, wink’ gesture) I was shocked. It really put me in an awkward position but, fortunately, I was saved by some other unanticipated policy issues which meant the review was put on hold. If it’s any reassurance, this was the only time in my 23 years service that I encountered such disreputable behaviour and it was from a line manager who was not already held in high esteem by most of his staff for other reasons . The senior manager concerned retired soon after, and I moved on to other things.

      • Michael McNulty

        @Tony. That’s what I also say about the manager-class on big salaries. Let all managers take a week off and watch the country tick over nicely for a week, then let all workers take a week off and watch the country fall apart by the end of the first day.

  • Max_B

    I think it’s funny that the pair of guys wear different shoes for both visits to Salisbury.

    On the first visit on 3rd they both seem to be wearing dark coloured trainers…
    http://news.met.police.uk/images/cctv3-equals-image-of-both-suspects-at-salisbury-train-station-at-16-11hrs-on-03-march-2018-1407993

    But when they return the next day (the 4th), they seem to have chosen footwear which is a bit smarter (you’ll need to download the high resolution image)…
    http://news.met.police.uk/images/cctv5-equals-image-of-both-suspects-on-wilton-road-salisbury-at-11-58hrs-on-04-march-2018-1408003

    I might change into footwear a little more formal and smarter than a pair of trainers, if I was planning on meeting somebody…

    • Tony_0pmoc

      Sharp Ears, I don’t do Twitter, but I can read it. Some of it is actually quite funny, especially when Craig Murray is castigated, by replying to someone with an extremely silly name who is making no sense whatsover. It’s probably Luke of The Guardian, on his third Elon Musk. Tony

  • SIS

    Do not make the error of making your mind up about something based on more false information released by the corrupt government in Westminster.

    The reason the time stamps on the airport photos are the same, is because the images of the supposed suspects were likely created via Photoshop.

    It is no coincidence that after Sergei aged 66, and daughter aged 33, were part of the Psyop, that this Psyop was continued and added too during the World Cup, which was predicted on Craig’s comments section. “Dawn Sturgess, aged 44″ and her pal Crowley find a perfume bottle in a bin, months later”, in pefect timing for the World Cup. You have to be an idiot to believe anything the government is feeding you over this.

    As if two pro hitmen would throw stuff in a bin.

    • Charles Bostock

      Craig has already explained that he does have a family to look after and other revenue raising lines to pursue. He has already also explained that the recurring donations idea cannot be seen as a commitment to post at regular, pre-determined intervals.

      In those circumstances , all we friends of Craig should all show a little forebearance; if anyone finds the current chosen theme “exhausting”, perhaps he/she should take a break, go elsewhere for a while and then return once reinvigorated.

      I wish everyone an excellent week.

  • Stanley

    At the same time as a war looms between Russia and the mentally ill ?U.S. government, the west is stirring the pot to demonize Russia with this fake never-ending poisoning routine.

  • J

    “Fresh off a sitdown with Syrian president Bashar al-Assad, Virginia state senator Richard Black turned up on Arab TV last week making an extraordinary claim about one of the US’ closest allies.

    Mr Black said Britain’s MI6 intelligence service was planning a chemical weapons attack on the Syrian people, which it would then blame on Mr Assad.

    “Around four weeks ago, we knew that British intelligence was working towards a chemical attack in order to blame the Syrian government, to hold Syria responsible,” Mr Black said on Al Mayadeen, an Arab news channel based in Beirut.”

    Continues…

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/syria-chemical-weapons-virginia-senator-richard-black-uk-mi6-assad-russia-a8529681.html

    • Rhys Jaggar

      He forgot to add ‘and while the playbook came from Washington, we are now giving the
      uK the willies unless they reverse that damn Brexit result so Uncle Sam stills rules the EU and UK has been successfully neutered!’

      Why was that do you think?

    • J

      Had a listen to Beleley’s description. Wearying and horrifying just to listen to, can’t imagine being witness to it. Meanwhile George Monbiot paid to drone on irrelevantly for the war machine. Funny old world.

  • Hatuey

    I hear they are illegally bombing Syria again. And that there’s another huge build up of forces in the Eastern Med’, with Russian military, American military, and Boris all out on manoeuvres.

    Despite all of that, I see people are still talking about the Skripals and Salisbury. What oddness. Since everything is connected, I won’t complain.

    The apparent antagonism with Russia, as I see it, is closely connected to two things: 1) Russia’s support for Syria and Iran (i.e. sticking its nose in where it isn’t welcome [The Middle East]), which is well understood and self-explanatory, and 2) the debate on upgrading Trident.

    It’s very difficult to justify spending billions of pounds on upgrading Trident when you are imposing austerity on the poor and further rigging an economy to suit the rich with tax cuts and a light touch approach to everything from energy bills to workers’ rights. Trident is big bucks for those in the industry — bread and butter — and you can bet they’ve been spending millions on lobbying in the last few years.

    So, with public opinion heading south, what do you do? You conjure up the evil bogey man, just like governments do the world over when they want to take money out of poor peoples’ pockets and put in the pockets of rich people. In this respect, then, to a large extent, the supposed friction with Russia is quite theatrical, just as it was during the Cold War… an excuse to fleece taxpayers.

    Russia’s “meddling” in the Middle East is more serious but it’s really a concern for the US, Saudi Arabia, and Israel. In code, Russian meddling threatens to upset the ‘regional balance of power’. For those of you who are not well versed in diplomatic newspeak, the term ‘regional balance of power’ means something like “we run the show and will punch fuck out of anyone that gets in the way”. It’s a technical term.

    There’s been an assumption since 1945, when FDR signed a deal with Saudi Arabia, that the US basically owns the Middle East. Britain itself challenged this idea in 1956 and found out the hard way that, sure enough, the US wasn’t joking about it’s definition of “balance”. Since then Britain has been playing second or third fiddle to America, Israel, and everybody else that knows Britain doesn’t have a pot to piss in.

    And that’s where we are. Britain’s position is actually really humiliating in regards to this fake sabre rattling with Russia. Everybody knows Britain is bankrupt — politically and economically — and is in no position to do a thing (even if you assume the sabre rattling is genuine). Secondly, everybody also knows that the British economy is not only being kept afloat by dark Russian money but that it would have nothing to float in without it. Talk about conflicted.

    • Herbie

      “In this respect, then, to a large extent, the supposed friction with Russia is quite theatrical, just as it was during the Cold War… an excuse to fleece taxpayers.”

      The Cold War was certainly a fraud, and there are those who would like a Cold War II.

      Problem this time is that whilst the Soviets were content enough to play their part in that fraud, the new leadership is not at all happy to continue playing that role.

      Nor are they happy to play the financialised fleecing role that was offered to them. Some of them were, the Liberals, but they’re a minority now.

      • Olaf S

        Guys, you perspective is so weird, it is hard to comment.
        You remind me of the deep thinkers on the flying island in Gullivers Travels, the ones you had to beat with a big stick to bring back to reality. Only that instead of a stick you probably would need to experience your town being turned into radioactive ruins, befor you returned to reality and understood that the cold war was no ”fraude”. The constantly paranoid americans became hysterical, say, when that Russian showed superiority in space technology at a point, the Russians were horrified each time the other guys invented a new type of weapon, mentally anchored in the horrors of WWII as they were (and are). At some points we know that only small pieces of luck stopped the WWIII from happening.
        Well you probably just are writing these things as a form of provocation and for entertainment, so never mind if you wish.

        • Herbie

          Olaf S

          OK. Let’s put it this way. The Cold War was an arrangement between the West and the East at the highest levels.

          That doesn’t mean that the players at lower levels knew it was a fraud. They just played their parts thinking it real.

          The Cold War is now the easiest of these dialectics to grasp.

          A good place to start.

          If you don’t get it you’ll never understand the much more complex dialectics in play today.

          • Doodlebug

            “That doesn’t mean that the players at lower levels knew it was a fraud.”

            Fraud as in the Berlin wall was built from Leggo, Gary Powers was parachuted into the USSR and the Cuban Missile crisis was really a dispute over fishing rights, is that it?

          • Herbie

            No.

            Fraud, as in global elites making arrangements amongst themselves.

            And peeps below acting out their alloted roles.

            If you built that wall with Lego, obviously peeps would know it was a fraud.

            So, the acting and dying and immiseration and so on is quite real to those at lower levels, but to elites it’s a drama, a theatre.

          • Doodlebug

            “Fraud, as in global elites making arrangements amongst themselves.”

            That’s traditionally known as international diplomacy. Your misuse of the word ‘fraud’ is distasteful. I don’t imagine for one moment you were among the junior school children in the playground who looked up to see a Vulcan bomber flying overhead towards goodness knows where and for goodness knows what purpose, then a year or two later being scared shitless by a showing of The War Game at school.

            “And peeps below acting out their allotted roles.” aka getting on with their lives as best they can under prevailing circumstances.

            How dare you, and others like you, seek to re-define the experience of a previous generation in accordance only with what you have read.

          • Herbie

            On the Cold War fraud.

            “That’s traditionally known as international diplomacy.”

            My, aren’t you a one for the euphemisms.

            How dare you suggest that the slaughter and abuse of hundreds of millions of people during WWII and the Cold War can be reduced to such an insipid phrase as international diplomacy.

            It was a fraud, pure and simple.

            A payment by Western elites to Soviet elites of east European peoples, for Stalin’s using his people as Nazi punchbag,

            All planned well in advance.

            Such a fraud indeed, that you seem to know nothing about it.

          • Doodlebug

            “How dare you suggest that the slaughter and abuse of hundreds of millions of people during WWII and the Cold War can be reduced to such an insipid phrase as international diplomacy.”

            I made no such suggestion you contemptuous piece of work. Having falsely labelled the ‘cold war’ as a fraud you now conflate it with WWII to support your blue sky theorizing? (although where your head appears to be lodged I doubt you can even see the sky).

            I was that child during the Cuban Missile crisis, before you were born I expect. There was nothing fraudulent about it. Your library-book-based revisionism is not only inappropriate it is distasteful.

            “A payment by Western elites to Soviet elites of east European peoples, for Stalin’s using his people as Nazi punchbag”

            I won’t assume you know that Hitler and Stalin had a non-aggression pact, which Hitler broke. Russia entered the war in its own defence not on account of some West-East sponsorship deal.

            “Such a fraud indeed, that you seem to know nothing about it”

            I know nothing about last week’s alien invasion either – probably because, like your cold war ‘fraud’, it never happened. But please prove me wrong. Cite some genuine historical evidence for your contention, not your own theoretical drivel.

          • Herbie

            You’re quite the emotional little thing, aren’t you.

            Let’s try and do it in baby steps.

            Firstly

            Tell me this. How did Stalin manage to win out against this ferocious Nazi onslaught?

          • Doodlebug

            Firstly, my disrespectful little juvenile, either put up or shut up. If your only answer to a question is a question then I take it you have nothing further to add of any merit. Either piss in the pot or get off it, i.e. support your tendentious claim that the Cold War was a fraud, with some meaningful evidence to that effect, or STFU.

          • Herbie

            Ahhh. I see.

            You’re of a black/white, right/wrong, kinda mindset.

            But, it don’t quite work that way, I’m afraid.

            Interpretation in History is more an evaluation and assessment of evidence than of finding a document saying fraud or not fraud, for example, particularly in these areas. It can happen, but more than often not.

            So a dialogic process is necessary.

            Additionally, I’m not so sure you have the faintest clue about the period other than in terms of emotional responses to a movie or something you saw on telly. That’s usually how Americans get their history, isn’t it. Tom Hanks or something.

            So let’s begin the process.

            It’s a simple enough question, and your answer will indicate whether it’s worth continuing your education in the matter.

            It’s quite important to an understanding of what’s going on in this period.

            How did Stalin manage to win out against this ferocious Nazi onslaught?

            That’s where we’d begin.

            Then, later.

            There’ll be other questions, like, did the US overestimate the threat for example, overplay it, and why they might have done that.

            That’s good enough to get a flavour of what’s going on.

            Then further, we’d probably want to be asking how the Soviets acquired their nukes. What’s the full background to that.

            We’d move on then to look at any interesting relationships between US and Soviet elites, and so on.

            Over to you.

            Get Googling.

          • Doodlebug

            “On the Cold War fraud. It was a fraud, pure and simple. All planned well in advance.”

            I repeat, support your tendentious claim with some meaningful evidence or STFU. (Hint: the cold war was not actually a war “How did Stalin manage to win out against this ferocious Nazi onslaught?” indeed).

            ‘Get Googling’? Go and play with your train set!

          • Herbie

            “(Hint: the cold war was not actually a war “How did Stalin manage to win out against this ferocious Nazi onslaught?” indeed).”

            I see. That bad. You think the Nazis were involved in the Cold War. History channel, eh. No wonder most Americans can’t tell Austria from Australia, and are barely capable of pointing to their own country on a world map.

            As I’ve explained, it’s not a black/white thing. It’s a journey through the evidence. Hence the necessity of the dialogic process. I’d need to take you through it piece by piece, explaining the relevance of the material, talking through it and so on.

            This is an advanced course of study. I really do need to see some indication that you’ll satisfactorily complete.

            I can’t say I’m fully convinced it’s suitable for you at the moment in time.

            If you’re really really interested and determined though, I’m quite happy to talk to Mr Bostock in Beginners to see if he can find room for you on his course.

            There’ll be a lot of reading.

            Anyway. May I take this opportunity to thank you for your interest and wish you every success in your whatever path you choose.

            Good luck.

          • Doodlebug

            “(Hint: the cold war was not actually a war “How did Stalin manage to win out against this ferocious Nazi onslaught?” indeed).”

            “I see. That bad. You think the Nazis were involved in the Cold War.”

            The question was yours, you poseur. You even repeated it!

            Bye.

          • Herbie

            There’s another way of looking at the matter.

            At the moment, the US spends around $700 billion per annum on what they call Defense.

            Could be described as a permanent war economy. The major employers in many of the poorer areas are prisons and weapons manufacturers.

            You can go backwards with this stuff as well. So the last inflection point was the fall of the Soviet Union.

            At that time there was much talk of swords into ploughshares. Under Clinton the budget dropped only by about 3%, I believe.

            Think of what you could do with all that money for infrastructure, material and social.

            Now that their last major enemy had fallen, did they do that.

            No.

            On the contrary, they busied themselves inventing a new enemy to replace the old. That’s PNAC.

            Then 911, and they’re off again.

            The problem with the US is that they need an enemy, and they need others to have enemies as well so that they can recycle all the munitions etc for replacement.

            With the US you’re really looking at unending war.

            A really sick system.

            And there’s no sign they’re deviating from that. Trump certainly isn’t.

            They’ve already withdrawn from most of the agreements which would reduce this expenditure, and Trump is now talking about even bigger and better, more expensive weapons.

            It really is difficult to see how this can be turned around to something more productive.

            And there isn’t much sign they’ve any desire to do so.

            There’s an inevitability about this kind of thing that leads its own way, and it probably ain’t a good destination for most peeps.

            Good for eugenicists, i’d imagine.

          • Herbie

            I’ve spoken to Mr Bostock.

            He wants some samples of your work.

            Happy to help you scrape something together.

        • Hatuey

          If the term Cold War has any meaning it relates to the continuation of exploitative relations and friction between the northern and southern hemispheres. East-West relations had very little to do with it, except in the very rare occasions that Russia appeared to get in the way, and fighting communism served simply as a pretext for intervention in most cases.

          Amongst serious historians that’s considered a given and the phrase ‘Cold War’ is one of many code words they use to discuss and mask the harsh realities of western interference in the second and third world post 1945. God knows you can’t tell the truth.

          It’s always going to be easy to label poor starving peasants who want to escape from western exploitation “communists”. In philosophical terms, it isn’t a great leap.

          • Herbie

            “East-West relations had very little to do with it,”

            It’s precisely that East-West arrangement that enables all the rest you point to.

            Without that things would have been as chaotic as they seem today.

          • Hatuey

            “How would you label the Berliners shot for attempting to cross from East to West?”

            The Soviet Union was undoubtedly a brutal experience for many. If government brutality and violence means Cold War then we should have about 200 cold wars going on right now. Note that the Cold War started well before the Berlin Wall was put in place.

          • Hatuey

            Herbie — “It’s precisely that East-West arrangement that enables all the rest you point to.
            Without that things would have been as chaotic as they seem today.”

            How chaotic things seem is a matter of opinion. But there was no Cold War before 1947 and for several hundred years up until then “the rest” continued without interruption.

            I actually find it amusing that people don’t understand these so obvious things. Did you think after so many hundred years of slavery, imperialism, and exploitation that the West suddenly decided it didn’t need to fleece the second and third world?

            They realised racism and pillaging was bad, became born again Christians and embraced democracy? We all lived happily ever after… Lol.

            Jesus, even the comparatively civilised Belgians had human Zoos with caged Africans on show until 1958.

          • Herbie

            Yup.

            And post-war “democracy” is but a blip in the grand scheme of things.

            Yet many assume it a premise.

          • Hatuey

            Again, the word ‘democracy’ is basically used as a code word. Colonialism after 1945, under American duress, was replaced by neo-colonialism. On the face of it the peasants got to be democracies, free of interference, with representative governments.

            For historical reasons, it suited the US to impose this. They didn’t have colonies and wanted in on the action. Neo-colonialism / democracy opened the door for them.

            Any country that resisted was isolated, refused loans, threatened, attacked, and accused of being part of a communist conspiracy. All very clean and simple, and if they didn’t have the pretext of fighting communism they’d most certainly have come up with an alternative.

            I used to think neo-colonialism was a progressive step in the right direction away from direct colonial rule but it’s hard to argue that with any seriousness. At the end of the day, both systems are geared towards exploitation and that continued (possibly more efficiently) after 1945.

            Scotland today is more or less a neo-colony. There’s a case for saying the treaty of 1707 made it the world’s first.

          • Michael McNulty

            I always considered the US to be the main threat during the Cold War, not the Russians. As a 7 or 8 year old kid in the late ’60s sitting through the news until the kid’s stuff was on, I noticed those planes carpet-bombing South East Asia had ‘United States’ on the side of them, and the star was white not red. And as this kid was just watching and not listening, the BS they spouted to fool the adults never even entered my head. But seeing the danger of the US stayed with me.

        • Moocho

          “Guys, you perspective is so weird, it is hard to comment.” Oh, really? Dude if you believe all the space race nonsense, that they went to the moon etc, please take a look at this NASA image of this, ummm, craft, on the moon, direct from the NASA website. https://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/images/apollo/apollo14/hires/as14-66-09277.jpg It is fraud, there is no doubt. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia “Apollo 14 was the eighth manned mission in the United States Apollo program, and the third to land on the Moon. It was the last of the “H missions,” targeted landings with two-day stays on the Moon with two lunar EVAs, or moonwalks.” I suggest you look at the Apollo 14 Wiki age which, conspicuously, does not link to NASA’s own image of “Apollo 14 on the moon”, because it is quite clearly made from grey paper, gold foil and sellotape. Space is/was about a) mind contol, and b) stealing money from the taxpayer. I won’t expect a response because it so clearly is fraud

          • Borncynical

            Moocho,

            I like the ‘United States’ label on it, just so it’s clear where it came from to anyone else who happens to be on the moon!
            I hadn’t seen this photo before but it really is embarrassing for NASA if they are truly claiming it to be genuine.

          • Moocho

            Embarassing……? It is categorical proof that NASA is a fraudulent organisation, lying to the whole world and stealing vast sums of money from US taxpayers. According to NASA, they have lost the tecnhology which took them to the moon in the first place, hence why they have never gone back. Don’t believe me? Well, watch this excellent clip and allow NASA to tell you this very uncomfortable fact or themselves. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i06kyVwEg5o We’re are all being screwed, lied to on an amost unimaginable scale, and folk woud do themselves a big favour by coming to terms with this obvious reality

          • J

            Inevitable attempt to distract from reasoned critique and reduce it to ridicule.

            I’m fairly sure, from the testimony of experts, friends I’ve known most of my life, one of whom has actually designed missions for NASA, that to pretend to have gone to the moon convincingly, one would have to go there for real in some form. The problem for your argument is manifold, but not least the telemetry data which involved collecting signals returning from the moon. This data was collected around the world at different times in different locations due to the earths rotation relative to the position and rotation of the moon and incorporating the delays introduced by the position and duration of travel of those signals. It would have been as expensive (if not more so) to fake it convincingly, than to actually go there in person. The best possible argument you can make is that probes were sent to the surface of the moon to broadcast fake voice and instrument recordings while corresponding fake photographs and videos were produced to match them. The level of choreography is more difficult than simply going there.

            Whatever your reasons, they are neither honest nor informed and contribute nothing of significance to the discussion, apart from noise. Piss off.

          • Moocho

            Oh, the telemetry data……which has also mysteriously vanished. Ooops. Massive own goal there sunshine. Again, don’t take my word or it, I will allow NASA themselves to explain to you that all the telemetry data as been “lost”. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F0hsMJj9Q-A Suck it up. “It would have been as expensive (if not more so) to fake it convincingly, than to actually go there in person.” This statement is pure, still breathing, bullshit; in fact your entire reposte is just wishy washy assertion and is provably false. Considering you’re so clued up about this and personally know NASA staff, you’re not exactly making a very good case for them…..in fact, your argument does nothing but validate what I am saying even further. Moocho gracias

          • J

            I don’t know any NASA staff. I know a few astrophysicists, one of whom designed a satelite mission for NASA. He’s pretty smart, I prefer to believe his experience over an anonymous arsehole with a youtube video.

          • J

            Some questions for you:

            1. Why would NASA keep their copies of magnetic tape with no possible future use once the technology was superseded?

            1.A. Presumably they should have assumed that in the future some anonymous arsehole would deny the moon landings took place.

            1.B. Can you demonstrate that none of the telemetry data exists? Given that some may not exist, doesn’t mean all of NASA’s records are gone.

            1.C NASA were not the only agency involved in receiving signals from the lunar orbiters and landers. Earth revolves once every 24 hours (unless you’re also a flat earther) and not all communication took place via satellites (a documented fact) some even involving earth based radio telescopes. Many other agencies in various parts of the world also took part in the moon landings, have you confirmed that their records no longer exist?

            2. Can you account for the samples of moon rock in museums, collections and laboratories around the world? Is it all faked? Is the science resulting from these samples also faked? is the unique composition of these rocks wholly falsified? Are the scientists who have had access to these rocks lying about having done so?

            3. How do you account for the documentary footage from earth orbit, lunar orbit, lunar landing and lunar surface? How do you account for the visible effects due to lower than earth gravity especially in film footage from the moon, inconsistent with simply slowing down earth based film footage (which does not reproduce all the effects of lower gravity)? These images were standard emulsion film, not so easy to reproduce and alter as digital images today. Can you falsify the images by close analysis of image grain etc, rather than references to sellotape? You have to explain how the images were created. How hundreds of hours of footage were created, footage unequalled in it’s time or since.

            4. Presumably you also assert that space travel does not exist. How do you explain being able to phone people on the other side of the planet without geo-stationary satellites for example? Presumably the Saturn 5 launches were faked, the shuttle mission launches were faked, Hubble was faked including all of the images Hubble has produced, the ISS is faked, satellites visible with the naked eye are somehow faked, the various Mars missions are faked, the Cassini mission was faked, the Juno mission was faked, the various cometary missions were faked, the Viking and Voyager missions were faked, New Horizons was faked, and all the rest.

            Otherwise you need to explain why you believe we can do all of those other things but despite having had human space flight for more than half a century, humans could do nothing more than launch a few tin cans into earth orbit.

            5. You also have to explain why at least some NASA staff did not make known the hoax they were involved in. How were experienced pilots fooled into believing they flew to and walked upon the moon? If involved in the hoax, why maintain that they did so to this day? Other conspirators have spoken out at various times about conspiracies in which they believe they were involved, so why not in this instance? Is this a unique conspiracy?

            In short, although you’re full of shit and you know it, you want others to believe that you’re full of shit in order to equate your moon hoax theories with the personal experience of ambassadors, diplomats and journalists who have departed from mainstream opinion.

            Why would you want to devalue reasonable scepticism of corporate media reporting? Why would you want to try to equate the two as you have clearly intended from you first post?

          • Doodlebug

            Isn’t it. Similarly I imagine the ‘flat earthers’ don’t believe Drake’s circumnavigation since it’s not available to view on Youtube.

          • Moocho

            “1. Why would NASA keep their copies of magnetic tape with no possible future use once the technology was superseded?” you’re asking why NASA should keep accurate records of what is dubbed as mankind’s greatest ever achievement……are you serious?

            “1.A. Presumably they should have assumed that in the future some anonymous arsehole would deny the moon landings took place.” Correct

            “1.B. Can you demonstrate that none of the telemetry data exists? Given that some may not exist, doesn’t mean all of NASA’s records are gone.” My understanding is that all the telemetry data is missing from all missions, but could not swear that is the case. Enlighten me

            “1.C NASA were not the only agency involved in receiving signals from the lunar orbiters and landers. Earth revolves once every 24 hours (unless you’re also a flat earther) and not all communication took place via satellites (a documented fact) some even involving earth based radio telescopes. Many other agencies in various parts of the world also took part in the moon landings, have you confirmed that their records no longer exist?” No, I have not. Regarding flat earth, anything is possible, given the scale on which we are clearly being lied about so many things. I have no idea if we live on a giant spinning ball or a stationary flat plain. This is a good flat earth documentary. The jury is out as far as I’m concerned. The Science of Flat Earth – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jSxsVicp5uM&t=1108s

            “2. Can you account for the samples of moon rock in museums, collections and laboratories around the world? Is it all faked? Is the science resulting from these samples also faked? is the unique composition of these rocks wholly falsified? Are the scientists who have had access to these rocks lying about having done so?” I’m not qualified to answer this and will not pretend to be. I don’t know

            “3. How do you account for the documentary footage from earth orbit, lunar orbit, lunar landing and lunar surface? How do you account for the visible effects due to lower than earth gravity especially in film footage from the moon, inconsistent with simply slowing down earth based film footage (which does not reproduce all the effects of lower gravity)? These images were standard emulsion film, not so easy to reproduce and alter as digital images today. Can you falsify the images by close analysis of image grain etc, rather than references to sellotape? You have to explain how the images were created. How hundreds of hours of footage were created, footage unequalled in it’s time or since.” What footage? links please. There’s tonnes of evidence the moon walks were all fake though, no doubt. Cable wires visible, impossible motions to get back on their feet after falling over etc

            “4. Presumably you also assert that space travel does not exist. How do you explain being able to phone people on the other side of the planet without geo-stationary satellites for example? Presumably the Saturn 5 launches were faked, the shuttle mission launches were faked, Hubble was faked including all of the images Hubble has produced, the ISS is faked, satellites visible with the naked eye are somehow faked, the various Mars missions are faked, the Cassini mission was faked, the Juno mission was faked, the various cometary missions were faked, the Viking and Voyager missions were faked, New Horizons was faked, and all the rest.

            Otherwise you need to explain why you believe we can do all of those other things but despite having had human space flight for more than half a century, humans could do nothing more than launch a few tin cans into earth orbit.” It’s possible that much of what you mention is fake, yes.

            “5. You also have to explain why at least some NASA staff did not make known the hoax they were involved in. How were experienced pilots fooled into believing they flew to and walked upon the moon? If involved in the hoax, why maintain that they did so to this day? Other conspirators have spoken out at various times about conspiracies in which they believe they were involved, so why not in this instance? Is this a unique conspiracy?” All the Astronauts were freemasons, so part of a very powerful and shady secret society. This is very suspicious and thereore it is entirely plausible that they were part of a conspiracy. They were/are pretty horrible people as well, as you can see very clearly from this tape. None would swear on the Bible they went to the moon https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XgeLscTavAk

            “In short, although you’re full of shit and you know it (bit harsh, lol), you want others to believe that you’re full of shit in order to equate your moon hoax theories with the personal experience of ambassadors, diplomats and journalists who have departed from mainstream opinion.

            Why would you want to devalue reasonable scepticism of corporate media reporting? Why would you want to try to equate the two as you have clearly intended from you first post?” I’m just tring to figure out what the fuck is going on in this horrible world we inhabit, our realities, science and existence is clearly being manipulated by extremely dark, evil forces. If you can’t see that, that’s your problem, not mine

          • Moocho

            @ Doodlebug – this is so weak, it’s laughable. No meat at all just some brainwashed baby boomer high on cognitive dissonance. If that’s the best you’ve got, I rest my case. pmsl. Nice images o brainwasing underway early on though

          • Doodlebug

            @Moocho

            “Laughable” It brings a smile to my face too.

            “Pmsl”? I hope you’ve since found time to change your nappy.

          • Moocho

            personal insults and a seriously weak presentation is all you have. genuinely pathetic. please do not delete their insults mods even if they break house rules, I can take it and it highlights just how weak their argument actually is. Both of you resorting to playground level debating techniques. you’ve made my day, thanks.

          • Clark

            Moocho, for a few years I’ve been watching the ISS pass over the area that I live. I’ve watched it become brighter as new modules were added. I’ve seen a Shuttle and the ISS in orbit together, and on another occasion, the ISS and a Progress module. I like to convince unsuspecting folk that I’m an alien by successfully predicting, to the second, Iridium flares in the night sky; “I’m checking my spaceship is still in orbit, it’s about to signal me, watch just there”. I know how to calculate the speed of light from observations of Jupiter’s moons; a 150mm telescope and a clockwork timepiece are quite adequate for this.

            Science doesn’t have to be a spectator sport, where all you can have is an opinion. Get yourself a copy of Ben Goldacre’s Bad Science, and take back control of your mind from the YouTube conspiracy theorists.

          • Moocho

            Ok, but how does this relate to everything that has been said thus far? What has that got to with the fact that NASA explain away the fact they have never returned to the moon by telling us they have destroyed the technology that got them there in the first place? how does this relate to the fact that the Apollo14 landing module is visibly made from grey paper, gold foil and baking trays? there is more, please re-read the thread. if you want to ignore the entire basis of the argument and just focus on the fact that I linked to a flat earth presentation, where i clearly stated i was on the fence, which I think is what you are getting at, please address all the points raised in that video, one at a time.

          • Clark

            Moocho, currently only the largest of the Russian Soyuz launch systems could take a three-person mission to the Moon. The US put their resources into the Shuttle, which was a very poor design from the start, but it did service the ISS a lot.

            The Space Race was about missile technology. The actual story is fascinating. After WWII the superpowers developed nukes, but they had no delivery system. Nukes in silos are susceptible to pre-emptive strike, so they wanted to deploy vehicles that could tour for months. Aircraft and submarines had opposite problems, both a result of the dependencies of internal combustion engines which require both fuel and oxygen. An aircraft can draw upon all the oxygen in the atmosphere, but it has to keep landing to refuel. A sub can carry weeks-worth of diesel, but it keeps having to surface for air. So both the US and the USSR began two projects; nuclear subs and nuclear aircraft. Nuclear subs got developed. Nuclear aircraft were still being developed by the time that the Space Race delivered intercontinental missile capability.

            The nuclear reactor for aircraft was the Molten Salt Reactor or MSR; only three working examples have ever been built, and the last one was shut down in 1971. The nuclear reactor for subs was the familiar Pressurised Water Reactor or PWR. Both were designed by Alvin Weinberg, but he wanted his MSR developed for civilian use. He claimed his PWR design wasn’t safe enough, so the US bureaucrats sacked him; “Alvin, if you’re so concerned about reactor safety, we think it time you left nuclear power”. A great pity, because Fukushima proved him right, three times over.

            But that’s an aside. Space exploration has always been the poor relative of military development, and the US cut the budget after the Moon landings because missiles had a large enough range by then, which is why no one has ever been back to the Moon.

            Take a look at various satellites on-line. You’ll see that the construction of many of them looks a lot like the Lunar Module. Spacecraft look pretty weird because the conditions they need to withstand, and couldn’t possibly withstand, are nothing like conditions on Earth. They’re not designed to withstand impact, because if anything hits your spaceship it’ll be moving at at least four kilometres per second and probably closer to twenty; strong construction won’t stop it so there’s no point trying. Hence the foil; it’s light, practical to launch, and it reflects the heat of the unmoderated Sun. Likewise, there’s no air to displace, so you don’t need to make a smooth fuselage like an aircraft’s, except for re-entry.

            There’s masses of thin nonsense on YouTube. If I started addressing it point by point it’d take longer than I have left to live, and they’d be churning out more the whole while. Yeah, you can take a twenty second clip of some ex-NASA bod saying they “destroyed” the technology, but it’s basically meaningless. Much better than me guiding you would be to compile your own kit of scientific thinking tools and hack on into it yourself. Read Bad Science, I promise you’ll feel richer for it.

          • Clark

            Moocho, Sep 11, 15:24: I’ve watched the video The 10,000 Dollar Baller Challenge which you linked and I don’t wish to be involved. It is a stunt; if they were acting in good faith they would have paid out long since. Earth was shown to be roughly spherical by observation of lunar eclipses and its approximate circumference was calculated by observations of shadows over two thousand years ago. Simple observations of the movement of the Sun and of the night sky all contradict a flat Earth. The Foucault pendulum demonstrates its rotation, as do tides etc.

            Starting around 13:00 the video includes language implying an anti-Semitic conspiracy theory about Freemasons, and appears to have been inspired by anti-scientific attacks upon Neil deGrasse Tyson by elements of US Right-wing fundamentalist Christians, creationists and climate science deniers. Sorry, life is too short to waste on such unpleasant nonsense.

            Do you regard any science as valid? For instance; the device you are using to post on this blog on the Internet; do you consider that it was designed according to principles developed scientifically by ordinary people like you and me, or was such technology gifted upon us by some different class of people or beings who know the real secrets but have had us taught a fake scheme which seems right but is actually a clever deception?

          • Moocho

            Sorry, but what you say here is simpy not true. The challenge was set on 3rd Setember – a week ago. hardly long enough for peope to devise experiments, carry them out, prove the curvature and motion of the earth, document their findings, send them in, have them reviewed, win and be paid. So what ou are saing is not based on realistic expectations, check the date of the video for yoursef. As for the comments about Neil de Grasse Tyson,again, I can see no truth in what you are saying, it is absoutely not antisemetic in any way, and those claims you are making are not backed up by anything in the video. how is it antisemetic to oint out tat NdGT is a freemason? The Apollo astronauts were freemasons too, which is ver susicious. If you are so confident in what you believe, and you are clearly very nowledgeable in this field, this shoud be easy or you. focaults pendulum is not evidence, that is a proven fraud which does not stand up to the scientific method. If earth is a ball, and spinning on its axis at 1,000mph, orbiting the sun at 67,000mph, all while the entire solar system travels at 500,000mph, and the milky way galaxy is travelling at 670,000,000mph, surely we should be able to detect this very easily? This however, appears to not be the case. Other bits ou mention are refuted in The Science of Flat Earth – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jSxsVicp5uM&t=1108s . Watch it, it is really interesting

          • Clark

            “The challenge was set on 3rd Setember – a week ago”

            Fair enough; I didn’t bother to check. Let me know if they ever pay out.

            Look, I’ve discussed with loads of conspiracy theorists. Others who have also tried it say it’s a waste of time, but I’m still persevering. One thing all conspiracy theorists I have discussed with do is set the agenda, by treating the other party as someone who must continually respond to demands, which is exactly what you are trying to do here. I’m not going to play that game. Treat me as an equal or I’ll just stop talking to you. I’ll lose nothing, since science is far more interesting than fake arguments.

            Every bit of science I’ve done has checked out. The various disciplines fit together, supporting a unified system. Physics supports electronics which supports the behaviour of batteries, which supports chemistry. Physics covers optics which supports telescopes and microscopes. Optics supports spectroscopy which enables us to measure some of the composition of the stars. Gravitational theory and thermodynamics enable us to calculate estimates of stellar temperatures and pressures. Nuclear theory developed from experiments on Earth can be applied to those compositions, temperatures and pressures within stars giving us astrophysics. And on and on and on in these and other diverse fields, to the frontiers of scientific knowledge, where we are still learning.

            I don’t believe science due to being conditioned. I don’t believe science at all. Science isn’t a belief system; it’s the only possible system of organised disbelief and disproof. No. I accept science because every bit I’ve checked out for myself has been confirmed, it has all fitted correctly into that magnificent framework.

            The vast majority of the history of the construction of the framework is publicly recorded. If science asserts something, you can go and look up the experiment, which someone actually performed, upon which the assertion is based, and you can do that experiment for yourself. That’s why I accept science; precisely because I don’t have to accept anyone’s word.

            But I do simply accept the majority of it, and that’s because (1) life is too short to check it all, (2) every bit that I have checked for myself has proven correct and (3) I have a pretty good understanding of how it all fits together, ie. I know that contradictions would show up between different disciplines, and they’d be virtually impossible to hide.

            Continued…

          • Clark

            The thing that is anti-Semitic in that video is that at about 13:00 the narrator starts speaking rather aggressively and accuses Tyson and whoever the other photograph shows of misleading the ‘”goyim”. That is a J_wish term meaning “cattle”, and is used derogatorily to refer to non-J_ws who may be exploited and deceived. The fact that it was attributed to an attitude of a Freemason shows that the maker of the video equates Freemasonry with J_ews, as did the Nazis. That’s about as anti-Semitic as you can get, so I do NOT intend to interact with the makers of that video.

          • Clark

            Foucault’s pendulum is not a fraud. I have watched the one in the Science Museum, London. There are many all around the world. You can go and watch one yourself; here’s a list:

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Foucault_pendulums

            Now, I said you had to treat me as an equal. I asked you a number of questions, but in typical conspiracy theorists’ style, you simply ignored them and, also typically, referred me back to YouTube. As I said, I refuse to play that game. Science does not need to be a spectator sport, so if you have some problem with Foucault’s pendulum, describe the experiment you did such that I can replicate it. That’s how we do science. That’s what makes it science as opposed to dogma.

            Please review the questions I asked earlier, and give me some sort of answers. The point of this is that I already know from my own experience that much of science works, so to make your case you have to outline the boundaries of the deception that you are proposing. You have to show me where the lies of “those in the know” take over from what I can check myself. While you’re at it, I think you should outline the extent of your own scientific literacy and experience. You might be surprised at how I’ll answer after you’ve done that.

            While I’m at it, I’ll point out that I’m not going to try to demonstrate the curvature of the Earth, because it’s easy to work out that that is hard. It isn’t easy to spot if a 30cm ruler has a one degree bend in it. Simple maths says that I’d need over sixty miles of Earth’s surface to get a one degree bend! I tried sighting down Loch Ness with 10×50 binoculars, I could see about five miles. I’d hoped I might be able to see some curvature, but I couldn’t.

            No. What I’d do is refer to the experience of aircraft pilots and ocean navigators. But I suppose you’ll just say they’re all Freemasons. Sorry; that’s not good enough. People go on holiday all over the world; where is the boundary of your proposed conspiracy?

            I’ll leave it there for your reply.

          • Moocho

            your choice, I just thought it apt as the challenge has only just been released and you are the ideal candidate to prove them wrong. They are conident enough that the earth is flat that noone will be abe to prove what is not true. I would still be interested to ear our thoughts on the science of flat earth vid as it is um, thought provoking, to say the least. be careu though, cos they say once you go flat, you never go back and contains what appear to be coherent, logical arguments with evidence to back them up – long range photos of structures and land masses which should be buried under, in some cases, miles of curve . interesting you refer to gravitational theory, as this is one of their arguments – gravity is a fraud and cannot be proven to exist in any experiment. buoancy and density explain why things drop to the ground and float and newton was just another freemason indulging in pseudosciene. oh well, i’ll keep an eye on it.

          • Moocho

            I responded twice to you ast night and my comments got deleted twice and then i received a temporary ban from commenting, so some of what ou are saying here is disingenuous, as what i posted was in no way controversial or offensive, personal or anything else. i’m not a partcularly scientific person, which is why i want ou to review the science o flat earth to tell me your opinion. i would also love for you to conduct our own flat earth tests, as an adamant globaist who knows his onions. got to go now as getting kicked out and commenting is a nightmare – many kes on m keyboard do not work, hence a the spelling mistakes – i have to paste many letters in one by one!

          • Clark

            I’m sorry to learn of your keyboard problems. I’m using an ancient IBM keyboard which I got out of a skip; they don’t make them like this any more! All my computers (and other tech gear) come out of skips; I put GNU/Linux software on them myself. To help you avoid deletions and bans, here are the moderation rules; two versions, posted a year apart:

            https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2016/06/moderation-rules-commenters/

            https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2015/06/some-rules-for-comment-moderation/

            Don’t worry; despite its odd appearance, the Lunar Module was not made out of grey paper and baking trays! You can look up quite a lot of details of what it was really made from on-line; Wikipedia has an excellent selection of links.

            The difficulty with detecting the curvature of the Earth is that local variations of height above sea level completely overwhelm the curvature. I might try to come up with some figures for you at some point, but it’s a bit late at night to start doing maths now.

          • Clark

            I just had a look on Wikipedia, and the problem is more complicated than I thought. Refraction of light due to the atmosphere also overwhelms the curvature of the Earth. I should have guessed, because the curvature is very gentle.

            “gravity is a fraud and cannot be proven to exist in any experiment. buoancy and density explain why things drop to the ground and float and newton was just another freemason indulging in pseudosciene”

            I’ll take the easy bit first; it doesn’t matter whether the ghastly Sir Isaac was a Freemason or not; his experiments can be (and have been) replicated by non-Masons. And he was ghastly; he was Master of the Mint, very combative and claimed others’ results as his own.

            OK, here’s a vid; less than five minutes. Galileo’s experiment, performed with feathers and a bowling ball, dropped in a vacuum – no density or buoyancy to provide the alternative to Newton’s alleged deception:

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E43-CfukEgs

            That’s not intended to convince you. I linked it anyway because it’s amazing to watch. Of course we’d have trouble doing that one at home. But I think I still have some big glass wine-making bottles and I should be able to both lower and raise the air pressure in them, and show that objects still fall at pretty much the same rate.

          • Clark

            Moocho, last night I took a look into some of the material you’ve been linking.

            Eric Dubay is the person behind it, and he has a personal website and one called Atlantean Conspiracy. I hadn’t heard of Dubay, and I had only vaguely heard of Atlantean Conspiracy. I found no proper science at any of these sources. I did find a lot of blatantly false claims, and silly arguments that could convince only those with essentially no scientific understanding whatsoever.

            It didn’t take me long to find more sinister material. There is outright Holocaust denial and anti-Semitism on Dubay’s sites. He is claiming that Muslims and Christians are under almost complete mind control by the Jews. So what he’s saying about science is that it’s a set of delusions imposed by Jews.

            If you’re genuinely interested in science, start with a simple school level course. Dubay’s material is pseudoscience and utterly misleading.

          • Moocho

            you rely on NASA, the BBC and Wikipedia or your case – all known, establshment propaganda outlets, not to be trusted at all. you refuse to watch The Science of Flat Earth – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jSxsVicp5uM&t=1108s and review it (not an Eric Dubay video, it’s by Truth Centre), instead choosing to jump from one excuse to the next to avoid admitting to the fact that the flat earthers (the genuine ones, not ones such as the Flat Earth Societ which is and aways as been controlled opposition) have many, compelling arguments to back up their case. They are so confident they are offering 10,000 dollars to anyone who can prove them wrong. you claim to be a scientist (of sorts) yet you refuse to review material which refutes the science you ave been taught. you said “gravitational ThEORy” yourself – gravity is a theory, not proven fact. A true scientist woud be more than a to look at “science” which refutes their knowedge because that is what science is supposed to be about – gathering evidence, scrutinising it and reviewing it. It should be a piece of piss to measure the curve from earth with a the technology we have, but no-one can find any. The people who tell us the earth is round are liars, with filthy track records. It’s end of conversation time, and if you delete this, like someone did my other riposte (maybe you as you are a mod here, i believe) , it speaks volumes. actions speak louder than words

          • Clark

            “you rely on NASA, the BBC and Wikipedia or your case – all known, establshment propaganda outlets”

            No. I already told you:

            “I don’t believe science due to being conditioned. I don’t believe science at all. Science isn’t a belief system; it’s the only possible system of organised disbelief and disproof. No. I accept science because every bit I’ve checked out for myself has been confirmed, it has all fitted correctly into that magnificent framework”

            As to NASA, who would you expect me to refer to regarding the construction of the Lunar Module?

            “not an Eric Dubay video, it’s by Truth Centre”

            I don’t believe you. The style and content are identical, the information links to Eric Dubay’s three websites, the Truth Center YouTube channel hosts Dubay videos and covers all the same subjects as Dubay.

            “gravity is a theory, not proven fact”

            You (deliberately?) misunderstand the meaning of the word ‘theory’ in this context. If you learn music, you’ll learn “the theory of music”. That does not mean music might not exist. If you want to take a UK driving test, you’ll first have to pass your “theory test”. That doesn’t mean it might be OK to drive through red lights or break the speed limit.

            In the sciences, a theory is an abstract framework that organises or accounts for a multitude of facts.

            “It should be a piece of piss to measure the curve from earth with a the technology we have”

            Actually it’s nearly impossible at the surface because refraction of light by the atmosphere bends light more than the surface curves. It’s a “piece of piss” to calculate the curvature; it was done over two thousand years ago by careful observation of shadows.

            – – – – – – – –
            But you’re back onto the offensive, which is where conspiracy theorists always try to be. I no longer believe you’re being serious. Far from trying to alert me to mind control, I suspect that you’re trying to find out if you can achieve mind control yourself.

            Treat me as an equal in your next comment, or it’s goodbye from me.

          • Clark

            I’m feeling sympathetic, just in case you’ve been taken in by Dubay’s nonsense and you aren’t just having a laugh at my expense.

            Like I said, I didn’t post the BBC video to convince you, but just because it’s rather wonderful to watch. Biig vacuum chamber!

            Wikipedia isn’t an “establishment propaganda outlet”; it’s crowd-sourced, anyone can contribute, and their edits will remain so long as they followed the rules. You can see some of my own edits here:

            https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Criticism_of_the_9%2F11_Commission&action=historysubmit&type=revision&diff=661172358&oldid=650511014

            To see my individual steps, search for 87.114.174.210 (which was my IP address at the time) on the following page:

            https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Criticism_of_the_9/11_Commission&offset=&limit=500&action=history

            I make my own decision about whether I find a source factual or not. I don’t believe certain things because I found them at an establishment source. I link certain material because I assess it to be factual.

          • Clark

            Moocho, I’m sorry I get cross. I’ll try to explain why.

            I accept science because I know that it works. The bits I have used have enabled me to understand the behaviour of material things in time and space. I can use the theories and maths to predict how objects are likely to behave. I can use scientific theories to understand, design or repair things. I’ve been doing this for forty years. If it didn’t work I would have abandoned it long since.

            But then I’m told this is all wrong, and I’m referred to websites that propose a different system which is incompatible. The world would behave totally differently if it followed these theories. The system I know and this new system cannot both be right, and the websites insist that the one I’ve been using since my early teens is totally wrong, but I know that this new system wouldn’t work.

            So I look around these websites and they have two possible explanations for this:

            1) I’m suffering massive, total delusion, forced upon me by Jews and Freemasons, or,

            2) I am a Jew or a Freemason, and everything I’m writing here is a deliberate lie to enslave others.

            In other words, I’m either crazy and stupid (“sheeple”), or an evil liar (“elite”).

            It’s not much of a choice, is it? I’d have to be an utterly scummy person either way. Rubbish or evil. Do you understand why I get annoyed now?

    • giyane

      ” Everyone knows Britain is bankrupt.”

      Question is , did Gordon Brown know? If he didn’t know, why didn’t he explain how the Tories had bankrupted us after he found out. If he did know, why has Corbyn not explained to us what the Tory side of his own party are concealing. I find it difficult to understand how not explaining things to people helps them understand the issues. Are we so conflicted that our brains are sitting in pickling jars in a mental hospital?

      Are there some things so dark, like shshshsh! compound interest, or shshshsh! business rates, that nobody is allowed to mention them, or Maggie’s Market Forces might be listening and silence you.

      • Paul Barbara

        @ giyane September 10, 2018 at 01:50
        ‘…Forces might be listening and silence you….’
        Twenty odd minutes ago, I had an experience (I have had it happen before, but this time the phone went dead too) where I was commenting on an Indy topic (Syria) and I looked up the link for I^rael using white phosphorus on a school and a UN compound. As soon as I typed that in search to get the link, I lost the internet. I had been working away for perhaps 3 or 4 hours (with a slight break for grub) and had a dozen links open at the top of the computer.
        That strongly suggests real-time monitoring to me (it has happened a number of times before, and almost always when I am searching or commenting around that certain ME ‘Exceptional’ regime).

        • Sharp Ears

          E-mails on that kind of subject are delayed too. I have evidence and experience of it. I am in the SE. Recipient on the SW.

          Try GCHQ :). Morwenstow, Cornwall.

          GCHQ Bude | GCHQ Site
          https://www.gchq.gov.uk › gchq-bude
          33847). Footer navigation. Govern Communications Headquarters logo MI5 logo Secret Intelligence Service logo. Services and information. Contact us · FAQs · Careers at GCHQ · @GCHQ on Twitter · @NCSC on Twitter …

          GCHQ: Home
          gchq-careers.co.uk
          Latest Vacancies. Technical Opportunities Cheltenham, Bude, Scarborough, Manchester, North Yorkshire Find out more and apply · Intelligence Analyst Trainee Manchester Register your interest · CyberFirst Degree …
          Experienced Professionals
          Apprenticeships
          About GCHQ
          Lif….

        • Charles Bostock

          Paranoia and a manifestation of deluded self-importance. Do you really believe the services have nothing better to do than to monitor harmless people like you?

          • Radar O’Reilly

            CB, you know full well that *everything* goes into a database nowadays. The French computer company “Amesys/BULL” brought out a single box, designed to store a complete year of data-traffic for an entire country in 2008 (with keyword search). A decade later, Everything gets stored, with later keyword, pattern searches whether or not ‘harmless’ people are paranoid or self-important. UK Mi5 has traditionally opened a file on anyone who wrote a snail-mail letter to their local paper, ever.

            Now it is background digital, and the services just have to balance the paradigm of security/privacy – with genuine national security exclusions, but “everyone is monitored” and will be forever.

        • Radar O’Reilly

          “Real-time monitoring”, well it really depends on how much of a threat you are or appear to be to TPTB. After-all, they may be omniscient, but they are also skinflints, manpower remains the biggest cost, so it’s more likely to be your device(s) selectors copying your metadata to/feeding your bulk-personal-dataset with frequent reviews using automated high-level search triggers, rather than a team of cyber-geeks hiding in the bushes.

          Remember, according to open source documents , that any monitoring of a subject has to be done in such a way that they could never even guess that there might be monitoring going on! That’s a legal requirement on your telco or service provider, which they seriously adhere to.

          Any glitches and drop-outs are therefore probably random telecom errors, affecting your neighbourhood similarly. Emails have absolutely no guarantee of transmission, so shouldn’t be relied upon for anything, even DKIM, DMARC’ed ones.

          Surprisingly when I once made an online honeypot for my digital trailers, I captured just six IP addresses, two in USA and four in UK who had read a page that I created, during one week. When I complained in internal emails about this, my next week’s ‘trackers’ were geo-located to Syria and Ukraine. Hilarious! Gloucestershire does have a sense of humour and there is really not that much manpower deployed ‘live’ – hopefully tracking real targets instead of us ‘useful idiots’ , from UK POV, probably.

          If you have upset some agency seriously, then expect full remote control capabilities (RAT remote access Trojan – end point compromise) of all of your devices, almost impossible to detect. This (RAT) is actually quite proportional use of RIPA/ECHR_art8 etc and in my view a good thing (more focused – less fishing). Now that cross-border hacking/RAT is permitted nearly everywhere I’m amazed that the GRU/8200/NSAs RATs aren’t becoming more visible as they fight in your devices, your routers, your PCs, if you’re a particularly juicy person or bot, or whatever the majority of posters are on here. As many of the RATs depend on existing bugs in your device OS, they might conceivably give some other error conditions, but as many of the exploits that the RATs use cost around a million quid each (Apple iOS) or a tenner (Android), they should in theory be so well engineered and deployed that subjects should never suspect a thing.

          Smile, you’re on Candid Capture.

          • Paul Barbara

            @ Radar O’Reilly September 10, 2018 at 10:36
            Let’s just say for now I am well known by the Bill and the Spooks.
            On almost all occasions when I suddenly lose the internet, is when I am searching or writing a comment or something else about a certain ‘Exceptional’ ME regime.
            The Spooks from that regime are the one’s who are most on my case, and have been for decades (it is mainly benign).
            This is the first time I remember that the phone also went dead, for about 15 minutes.
            As for phone intercepts, it was well known for yonks that if you hear odd noises on your phone, clicks or playbacks or whatever, it is because they want you to know what they are doing, to make you ‘paranoid’.
            Anyhow, the timing was perfect on this one: I searched the words I thought would bring up the article, entered it, and instead of a list of possibilities immediately got something to like ‘Oh, you seem to have lost the internet’ or ‘disconnected’ or something. Such perfect timing.
            Obviously, I’m not worried, but thought it worth mentioning in case others have similar experiences.

          • Radar O’Reilly

            True Paul, the legal warrants for monitoring are supposed to make sure that everything is hidden from the target, the omnipotent RATs can certainly be abused (and have been) for intimidation and even ‘fake evidence planting’ making nowadays a complete mockery of ‘digital-evidence’.

            Some State’s probably ‘play’ more than some others, to attempt intimidate, but it is very naughty, not clever, and basically doesn’t work once one realises that these tricks are in play. In fact it can strengthen the resolve of a “target” who could so easily become next week’s viral meme as a “victim” if the unit8200s’ of the world slightly overstep their remit.

            I have sympathy for both sides of spookland, at least in UK there remains room for real debate based on real facts, probably.
            Keep on carrying on, to quote my tea-cup.

      • Blunderbuss

        Gordon Brown bankrupted us with PFI and then claimed (New) Labour would never privatise the NHS.

        • Hatuey

          You’re right. And you’ll be paying back those PFI debts for the next 90 years.

          Funnily enough, they don’t count PFI obligations in estimates of national debt. If they did, Britain would have the worst GDP to debt ratio in first world. If I remember correctly, they don’t count pensions either. Most other countries would count both of these things, as standard.

        • Sharp Ears

          Taxpayers to foot £200bn bill for PFI contracts – audit office
          Cost of privately financing projects ‘can be 40% higher’ than using public money
          Rajeev Syal
          Last modified on Tue 23 Jan 2018

          ‘Taxpayers will be forced to hand over nearly £200bn to contractors under private finance deals for at least 25 years, according to a report by Whitehall’s spending watchdog.

          In the wake of the collapse of public service provider Carillion, the National Audit Office found little evidence that government investment in more than 700 existing public-private projects has delivered financial benefits.

          The cost of privately financing public projects can be 40% higher than relying solely upon government money, auditors found.’
          /..
          https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jan/18/taxpayers-to-foot-200bn-bill-for-pfi-contracts-audit-office

          Years back the Guardian produced a spreadsheet listing ALL the debt by item and amount. The list was endless. I cannot locate it now.

          PFI is the biggest financial con trick ever perpetrated on the taxpayers.

      • Hatuey

        Britain has been bankrupt since at least 1945. The post-war Labour government — you know, the humanitarian one that built the welfare state — did everything it could to revive the British Empire and failed. Then the Tories had one last attempt with Suez, in 1956; America’s slap down couldn’t have been more humiliating.

        If it wasn’t for Scottish oil you’d simply say that the decline steadily continued until the Thatcher years and since 1979 the economy has been run on a smash and grab basis, selling national assets, throwing a third of the population on the scrap heap, increasing borrowing, increasing debt (government and private), etc., etc.

        The next phase of smash and grab involves dismantling and selling the NHS, stripping down the welfare system, and cutting tax for businesses and the rich. These plans are being implemented right now but the media (and BBC in particular) is playing its part in keeping people distracted.

        The simple truth is that an economy that depends largely on credit-driven consumer spending isn’t an economy at all.

        Looking ahead, without Scottish oil and exports, England will be lucky to maintain its place in the second world and Brexit has the potential to send it swiftly into the third.

          • Hatuey

            The City since the Big Bang has played a pivotal part in disaster after disaster when you look at it, squandering trillions and lining the pockets of a very select few.

            The yardstick when measuring a country’s financial and banking system is to look at what they have achieved in terms of development, plant, technology, industry, and infrastructure. Looking at the achievements of the UK over the last 50 years in those terms would take about 20 seconds.

            Where’s the fruits of all that oil money? Where did the money from Thatcher’s privatisations go? What has deregulation produced for the population as a whole? Zilch.

            These are gargantuan sums of money we are talking about and poor Britain doesn’t have a thing to show for any of it. Everything The City touches turns to dust.

          • SA

            Hatuey

            I should have switched the sarcasm indicator on. Of course. Thatcher’s successful project was to destroy this country’s industrial base in order to crush the unions. It seems that she was not aware that with industry comes a lot of other infrastructure, research, learning and expertise that was also lost.

      • Herbie

        “Are there some things so dark, like shshshsh! compound interest, or shshshsh! business rates, that nobody is allowed to mention them, or Maggie’s Market Forces might be listening and silence you.”

        You’re allowed to argue over the effects, but not the cause.

        Most mainstream politics is of this nature, so far as the financial system is concerned.

        Parties offer a choice of effects rather than fundamental analysis, which is considered too radical.

  • Tony_0pmoc

    Barrel Bomber 2.0,

    i will get some more coal in. I reckon it could be a really long cold hard winter – much like the summer but in reverse. If an anti-cyclone hits us, like it did in the winter of 1962/63 when it was so cold, that the igloo I built with windows of ice at Christmas, which was still there at Easter…we are going to be in big trouble, especially if The Russians cut off the gas. I’m amazed they haven’t already. Can we please start being nice to Russians and tell the Americans to Fuck Off.

    You don’t get much wind in an anticyclone – so all the windmills will be useless..

    Tony

    • J

      I overheard a (Conservative) councillor last year, he was explaining (to the mayor or someone) that fracking was so necessary because if we go to war we’ll need our own supply. Of course I was intrigued, it could only mean one thing in context, although I did suppose he was slightly mad.

      • giyane

        I reckon quite a lot of northern industrial towns might disappear without trace into sink-holes the size of the existing coal mines if they start fracking nearby. The councillor can join Mrs Thatcher in the fiery underground chamber of one of the pits she closed down. the spiteful old cow didn’t quite finish the job of destroying this country’s industrial base, but her snake-eyed heirs and alien-froth live on.

      • Michael McNulty

        Pro-frackers never explain where we’ll get our fresh water from, do they? Gas is a consumable, use it once and it’s gone, but water should be recyclable until the sun burns out. So why exchange an eternal resource for a one-off resource that’ll leave us in deadly straits? Either it’s to do with population reduction Agenda 21, or the people who profit don’t care because they’ll be dead when the problems of poisoned water appear. It also means they care more for money than for their own bloodline.

    • Deb O'Nair

      “…especially if The Russians cut off the gas.”

      That’s what the US is busy with. Escalating sanctions against Russia (based on psyops propaganda) will inevitably lead to demands to stop importing gas, opening the European market to all that surplus US gas (at 4 times the price). The Russians will not cut off the gas to spite the EU knowing this is exactly what the US wants.

      • laguerre

        “Escalating sanctions against Russia (based on psyops propaganda) will inevitably lead to demands to stop importing gas, opening the European market to all that surplus US gas (at 4 times the price).”

        It’s not a trick that’s working though. Nordstream 2, under the Baltic, is going ahead.

  • Curious

    The UK government should be confronted with the latest picture of Sergei and Yulia Skripal “at Zizzi’s” with the face of the photographer in the mirror between them. The picture has been presented as the latest one taken of them — Yulia had just arrived the previous day from Moscow, so this is not an old photo. There is no attribution for this photo; who took it? Where did this come from? How did media receive it and why has the UK government shown no interest in who the photographer is and the identity of the fourth person sharing the table?

    • Paul Barbara

      @ JMF September 10, 2018 at 04:49
      There’ll be a leafletting outside the BBC (Portland Place) Tuesday 11 September at 16:30, nearest tube Oxford Circus, followed by a social in a local pub.

1 10 11 12 13 14 19

Comments are closed.