I did not anticipate that an open public meeting in Salisbury itself would be 95% sceptical of the official Novichok hoax – but it was.
Thanks to UK Column for putting this on. I hope you find it enlightening – there is information which goes beyond my previous articles on the subject. In about a week there will also be a film of our tour of the key sites in Salisbury.
The video settings prevent me from embedding it but you can watch it here.
https://youtu.be/3K9jUOYsga0?t=1464
———————————
My reporting and advocacy work has no source of finance at all other than your contributions to keep us going. We get nothing from any state nor any billionaire.
Anybody is welcome to republish and reuse, including in translation.
Because some people wish an alternative to PayPal, I have set up new methods of payment including a Patreon account and a Substack account if you wish to subscribe that way. The content will be the same as you get on this blog. Substack has the advantage of overcoming social media suppression by emailing you direct every time I post. You can if you wish subscribe free to Substack and use the email notifications as a trigger to come for this blog and read the articles for free. I am determined to maintain free access for those who cannot afford a subscription.
Click HERE TO DONATE if you do not see the Donate button above
Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received.
Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:
PayPal address for one-off donations: [email protected]
Alternatively by bank transfer or standing order:
Account name
MURRAY CJ
Account number 3 2 1 5 0 9 6 2
Sort code 6 0 – 4 0 – 0 5
IBAN GB98NWBK60400532150962
BIC NWBKGB2L
Bank address NatWest, PO Box 414, 38 Strand, London, WC2H 5JB
Bitcoin: bc1q3sdm60rshynxtvfnkhhqjn83vk3e3nyw78cjx9
Ethereum/ERC-20: 0x764a6054783e86C321Cb8208442477d24834861a
In a major scandalous move the EU has sanctioned Swiss military analyst Jacques Baud.
Their allegations of Russian propaganda and disinformation against Baud are – regardless of the fact that treating such actions by themselves as crimes already lacks any legitimacy – are without a shred of evidence and completely baseless and made up.
Obviously the people behind this decision are clueless. If they had actually read Baud´s scholarship they would know that his entire premise is to use almost exclusively Western and Ukrainian legacy media as proof and evidence.
He merely holds up the mirror.
The fact that he draws honest conclusions from what Western media are reporting is not his problem but that of the EU.
The EU is driving this war without any regards towards either the European, or the Russian, or especially the Ukrainian populations instead dedicated exclusively to its own filthy political economic interests. Honest experts like Baud are naturally an obstacle when reaching for total control of the airwaves.
The EU employees responsible should stand in court and answer for their policies and crimes.
Moon of Alabama with a call to support Baud:
“EU Sanctions Swiss Intelligence Expert Jacques Baud”
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2025/12/eu-sanctions-swiss-intelligence-expert-jacques-baud.html
Here the official EU statement from today:
“COUNCIL DECISION (CFSP) 2025/2572
of 15 December 2025
amending Decision (CFSP) 2024/2643 concerning restrictive measures in view of Russia’s destabilising activities
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION”
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=OJ:L_202502572&qid=1765811542533
p.s. I assume Baud´s forceful rebuttal of the MIG-lies and drone lies of recent months bothered them.
He came up with some important details which put holes into the already stunningly flimsy argumentation of the Estonian government for instance. Or consider the idiotic lies over drones against airports and installations in Denmark, Norway, Poland or Germany.
(Who was behind pushing for this decision? The Baltic states???)
Additionally to his general points against NATO.
AG
December 15, 2025 at 22:08
Baud seems the very model of a Kremlin asset.
From https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Baud (auto translated):
“Following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, Jacques Baud published *Putin, Master of the Game?* The book was accused by some media outlets of “systematically defending Vladimir Putin ” [ 33 ] . Journalist Ian Hamel wrote that “for most specialists on Russia and Ukraine, Jacques Baud has sadly succumbed to conspiracy theories. Some even go so far as to accuse him of being in the Kremlin’s pay” [ 33 ] . Journalist Mattia Pillonel, for his part, wrote that Jacques Baud seeks to “exonerate Russia in Ukraine” and that he “himself distorts the truth of the facts that undermine his point of view” [ 20 ] . Jacques Baud claims that Vladimir Putin did not want to conquer Ukraine but simply to “demilitarize” it , which, according to journalist Julien Pain, is a classic Kremlin argument [ 21 ] . Questioning Russian responsibility for the Butcha massacre , Jacques Baud notably asserts that “the Butcha massacre is already largely refuted” and that it could in reality have “been planned by British intelligence services and implemented by the Ukrainian SBU ” [citation needed] .”
Good God JK Redux, spare me your incompetence. I have spent the entire day informing people about this shocking scandal because it is seriously threatening academic freedom in Europe. If you don´t get that what on Earth are your learning from this blog?
Does it occur to you that you are imitating to the fine point the idiotic propaganda methods endangering our freedom used by the NATO offices and propagated by them which have been set up more than ten years ago for this very purpose?
You are quoting people who bad-mouth Baud without giving a single serious argument.
That´s exactly what has been happening here since 2022. People who have never read the books lest checked the quoted evidence and then checked the evidence offered there are quoting someone else who also has never read the books. And so it goes and builds up into an intellectual Ponzi Scheme where actual hot air and zero arguments and evidence are shared to eventually ban an outstanding scholar´s right to speak out and publish.
I suggest you take the time and read his books and the books of Nicolai Petro and Richard Sakwa and a number of others. And then after you have researched what they offer as evidence to a minimum degree that allows you to claim some scrutiny come back with your claims.
But not earlier than 2 or 3 years. Because that´s the amount of time necessary if you are willing to question what you already believe to be the truth. At least that´s the place where I came from.
I like “intellectual Ponzi scheme.” That is helpful.
AG
December 16, 2025 at 00:44
Incompetence is in the eye of the beholder.
You (imo) uncritically quote the spoutings of pro Putin “useful idiots” and “fellow travellers”.
Nostalgia for a lost life in the vanished DDR?
Or regrets that life in the Zapad has not been more rewarding?
But perhaps we should both refrain from personal comments?
“Play the ball, not the man”?
Following linked piece comes from German NACHDENKSEITEN which is a West German blog read mainly by oldstyle older gen. critical people, many of whom were affiliated with or felt sympathy for the peace movement in the 1980s.
I have way more radical views than this outlet but they are the largest and most important online alternative site in Germany. We are lucky to have them. And yes, the government tried to silence them by way of ending their status as a non-profit registered association on bogus grounds. It didn´t help. Readers are still supporting them in great numbers.
machine-translation:
“Now even Jacques Baud is being sanctioned – the EU continues to fight freedom of expression.”
In a scandalous move, the EU has sanctioned Swiss ex-military officer and author Jacques Baud for allegedly spreading “pro-Russian propaganda” and “conspiracy theories” about the war in Ukraine. This unacceptable action demonstrates that, in order to score points in the battle of opinions, EU officials continue to ridicule their own rhetoric about “freedom of expression and the rule of law.”
A commentary by Tobias Riegel
https://archive.is/OCxoh
p.s. Sorry, ball or not – but Incompetence is NOT by design always in the eye of the beholder. As that would suggest that there is no such thing as truth beyond laws of nature. If that were the case we could shoot ourselves right now.
1) German daily BERLINER ZEITUNG instead of denouncing Jacques Baud simply talked to him:
The EU sanctions Jacques Baud: “Like a bolt from the blue”
The EU has sanctioned a Swiss citizen. His bank accounts are frozen, and he is not allowed to travel. To buy food, he needs a “humanitarian exemption”.
Dec. 19th 2025
https://archive.is/m0R0j
2) Jeffrey Sachs spoke to Glenn Diesen on Dec. 19th:
He said that Amanda Sloat, National Security Council’s Deputy Director for Europe under Biden until she left office 2 years ago, confirmed to Sachs in private that the war could have been prevented if the US had agreed to not expand NATO into Ukraine.
see TC: 17:50 for this
https://glenndiesen.substack.com/p/jeffrey-sachs-an-open-letter-to-chancellor
3) Sachs wrote an open letter to German chancellor Merz criticizing him and Germany´s role in the ongoing war and vis-á-vis Russia in general:
https://braveneweurope.com/jeffrey-sachs-an-open-letter-to-chancellor-friedrich-merz-security-is-indivisible-and-history-matters
The same Amanda Sloat Jeffrey Sachs quoted apparently was victim to another one of those Russian pranks.
During this prank she eventually admitted the same thing as with Sachs: That NATO expansion to Ukraine was the core reason for this war.
Now none other than RESPONSIBLE STATECRAFT´s Branko Marcetic reported about this prank in a very serious manner.
I am personally not a fan of using such pranking as source for this kind of serious testimony. But maybe times are simply changing in “journalism” and the way we “gather” evidence and confessions…
“Pranked Biden official exposes lie that Ukraine war was inevitable
She isn’t the first to admit — after the fact — that taking NATO off the table to avoid Russian invasion was considered, and dismissed”
https://responsiblestatecraft.org/trump-jose-antonio-kast-chile/
p.s. Still I am puzzled: Sloat in essence admitted the same thing in both incidents. Are the story of Sachs and the prank somehow connected? Or is this only coincidence?
Either way, the fact that Marcetic takes even the prank seriously is substantial.
He ends:
“(…)
This hews awfully close to what has long been both alleged by a variety of officials and other sources about the talks: that, as Ukraine’s Pravda newspaper first reported, Zelensky had been pressured to reject a deal to instead seek victory on the battlefield, with the governments of the U.K., U.S. and a variety of Eastern European NATO states reportedly being especially favorable to this ultimately disastrous idea.
Sloat is not the first to have made this admission. As I documented two years ago, former NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg and former Biden Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines both likewise explicitly said that NATO’s potential expansion into Ukraine was the core grievance that motivated Putin’s decision to invade, and that, at least according to Stoltenberg, NATO rejected compromising on it. Zelensky has now publicly agreed to this concession to advance peace talks — only three years later, with Ukraine now in physical ruins, its economy destroyed, hundreds of thousands of casualties, and survivors traumatized and disabled on a mass scale.
All of this will surely go down as one of the great missed opportunities of history. Critics of the war and NATO policy have long said the war and its devastating impact could have been avoided by explicitly ruling out Ukrainian entry into NATO, only to be told they were spreading Kremlin propaganda. It turns out they were simply spreading Biden officials’ own private thoughts.
(…)”
Anyone who tells the truth about the Nato-Russia war sounds like a pro-Putin person because that’s where the truth is.
Hi AG, I have been following Jacques Baud for years. His analyses and insights are always excellent. I hope he keeps broadcasting through Youtube. I believe he lives in Brussels and maybe severely impacted by this malicious EU move. The EU has become a disasterous institution which is sad because I always saw it, until von der Leyen, as a peace project. How could I have been so wrong! I’ll certainly buy a book maybe two! It was through you that I came across Thomas Roeper of Anti-spiegel. I can’t get into his site anymore, blocked by Cloudflare. I really like his blog. I know he is in St Petersburg and hopefully immune to EU sanction. His colleague Alina Lipp was also sanctioned.
Same bad experience here.
Although in hindsight we probably were indeed a bit naive.
But then even a German scholar like Ulrike Guérot who had been a cheerleader of the EU-US project now has hit the ground. Her university kicked her out on laughable grounds in a context not unlike Baud and all the others – they especially did not like her critical work on the EU and Ukraine. Guérot once a darling of the Atlanticist establishment.
She has some helpful texts about how and when the EU project in her view changed. Legacy media for sure did not report on that downward slope And even people like Noam Chomsky did articulate hopes of a more humane “third” power in the early 90s. But of course he too failed in some matters like any human (I do not allude to Epstein here!). The eventual selling out of the progressive elements of the EU at latest happened after the banking crisis of 2008 Guérot – and I believe even the much more realistic Michael Hudson – have stated.
Can someone here suggest a way to read Anti-Spiegel? I can read it without a problem.
Röper is fine. He is working 24/7. Lipp I have not followed. But she too has solved the existential questions caused by those assholes in Brussels. They all should be really really ashamed of themselves and stand trial. But I guess they get paid that much to leave their conscience in the cupboard and get rid of the key.
Perry Anderson had an interesting essay on some individuals who crafted parts of the EU legal framework. Haven´t read it since.
Dunno if you ever read it.
Vol. 42 No. 24 · 17 December 2020
The European Coup
Perry Anderson
https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v42/n24/perry-anderson/the-european-coup
In case it is new to you go down to the letters too which reached Anderson. One of them is by the very person he is portraying, Luuk van Middelaar!
In commentary here there were a few very good suggestions on books very critical of the EU from early on.
From personal studies I have realized that Europe was intended as an anti-USSR project from its outset. And the huge purge of Communists all over Europe in the late 1940s and eary 1950s e.g. was a formative historic event which set the stage for what we have today. So in some normative manner what we see now concurs with what the “founding fathers” had in mind.
My two cents.
Baud has pushed a blatant pro-Kremlin position all along.
His analyses are full of waffle and generally incorrect.
https://thepostil.com/the-military-situation-in-the-ukraine-an-update/
his entire premise is to use almost exclusively Western and Ukrainian legacy media as proof and evidence.
I thought these were nothing but lies, fake news and far right propaganda???
Pears, you are very eager to rubbish any writer who questions the Starmer-Kallas narrative on Ukraine, but strangely never mention or recommend your own favourites.
At least JK is open and honest about his admiration for Steve Rosenberg and other mouthpieces for Britain’s corrupt, genocidal establishment.
zoot
December 16, 2025 at 06:42
I have no “admiration” for Steve Rosenberg (a fat gay Jew according to one poster here) but he does a good job making Russian newspapers widely available to English speaking viewers of his channel.
Hardly a “mouthpiece” for Britain’s corrupt, genocidal establishment.
Rather a mouthpiece for the Russkiy corrupt, genocidal establishment.
As it were…
I have seen Mr Rosenberg on BBC World sometimes and it’s true that he is a little podgy (let us say) and that his name is Jewish, but I was not aware that he is gay. Moderately cheerful, perhaps, but hardly gay. After all, who in his right mind could be gay in grim, economically falling to bits Russia, in the grip of a widely disliked leader where posting the wrong things online will get you arrested for terrorism or lose you your job?
I heard that he married Rosa Klebb (Melanie Phillips).
AG
Rosenberg’s latest:
https://youtu.be/aPbt0nUPJrk?si=ISjmebaZpbUupPmo
“His analyses are full of waffle and generally incorrect”.
That sentence is hilariously self-referential.
“Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye”.
“I thought these were nothing but lies, fake news and far right propaganda???”
It’s what, when used against the other side, is often called “Kremlinology”. Trying to divine truth by reading between lines and analysing discrepancies, omissions, etc. This very blog post by Craig is such a thing and was there ever such a goldmine of discrepancies?
I did post a longer response around Dec. 17th but that got lost. And I don´t have the time nor memory to reconstruct it.
It did end with the suggestion to maybe reread “Manufacturing Consent”. Since the nature and modus operandi of propaganda, PR, advertisement industry are closely related and not that simple to sort out at least as your last sentence seems to suggest. (Context is everything. And good propaganda doesn´t give away itself easily.) On the other hand this is not news to you. So I am not gonna waste your time.
For sake of documentation:
Jacques Baud with Daniel Davis about the sanctions:
25 min.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VwNH3FLeZLA&t=666s
Since we will not agree on anything at least concerning this subject of Russia (just your introductory sentence renders it very difficult to imagine) – for ending on a lighter note here a joke from a Robert Wright piece in June 2022 about the propaganda work of the ISW – Institute for the Study of War – for Responsible Statecraft:
“Here’s a joke I recently heard a Russian tell:
A Russian is on an airliner heading to the US, and the American in the seat next to him asks, “So what brings you to the US?” The Russian replies, “I’m studying the American approach to propaganda.” The American says, “What propaganda?” The Russian says, “That’s what I mean.”
I’ve heard a new catchy word, “estonization of EU politics”. As, for example, here: https://dspace.ut.ee/items/d6753367-3a24-4770-bf23-1b4b2828e477
Yuri K
December 16, 2025 at 17:44
“Estonia’s long-standing framing of Russia as a systemic threat”
What reasons could Estonia have for regarding Russia as a “systemic threat”?
Hmmm…..
Well, JK, one of the reasons could be the forcible incorporation of Estonia into the USSR. That, of course, did not make for happy Estonians either then or , for some, now.
But you know, most Europeans these days don’t regard Germany as a systematic threat, despite WW1, WW2 and sundry atrocities against various groups and nationalities.
Has Russia threatened Estonia since the end of the USSR – even rhetorically (the benchmark here being the threats of Kaja Kallas against Russia)?
The thought also occurs that Estonia would be well advised to stop systematic discrimination against the ethnic Russian inhabitants of the country.
“The thought also occurs that Estonia would be well advised to stop systematic discrimination against the ethnic Russian inhabitants of the country.”
Something I confess I was unaware of until I visited and spoke with a hotel worker who was of Russian heritage.
Wasn’t Estonia part of the Russian empire until 1917? Taking a territory back isn’t all that aggressive is it? Ask Thatchler.
Luis Cunha da Silva
December 16, 2025 at 19:46
Perhaps one difference is that Estonia only escaped from Russian hegemony in 1991.
And of course (from Wikipedia) ” The Soviet Union began Russification, with hundreds of thousands of Russians and people of other Soviet nationalities being induced to settle in Estonia, which eventually threatened to turn Estonians into a minority in their own land.[140] In 1945 Estonians formed 97% of the population, but by 1989 their share of the population had fallen to 62%.[141] The military presence was pervasive, with closed military zones occupying around one-fifth of the Estonian land and the entire surrounding sea. Access to coastal areas required permits, rendering the Estonian people physically isolated from the world outside the USSR.[142][143] Economically, heavy industry was strongly prioritised, but this did not improve the well-being of the local population, and caused massive environmental damage through pollution.[144] Living standards under the Soviet occupation kept falling further behind nearby independent Finland.[140]”
Happy memories of the USSR…..
David Warriston
December 16, 2025 at 20:40
Perhaps the Russian planters could fvck off back to Russia?
After all, why would any Russian want to live in the Zapad?
“Perhaps the Russian planters could fvck off back to Russia?”
I wouldn’t recommend using that planter logic on the Shankill Road, Belfast.
Nor on an Israeli kibbutz. In fact you might be arrested under UK terror laws for voicing the latter in London. But you’ll be fine with the Russian version.
David Warriston
December 16, 2025 at 21:26
The planters in NI arrived in the 1600’s https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plantation_of_Ulster.
The Russian plantation of the Baltics was immediately after WW2.
How long does a plantation (Israel anyone?) have to last before it may no longer be challenged?
The Russian plantation of the Baltics was immediately after “WW2”.
That’s just not true: they became part of Russia in 1721 (mostly, some bits in 1795).
Following your logic, Russia has to regard Germany as a systematic threat. And pretty much the rest of Great Powers of Europe:
Germany started war with Russia in 1914 and 1945, Russia never started war with Germany; the score with Russia is 2:0.
Great Britain started war with Russia in 1853 and invaded Russia in 1919, Russia never started war with or invaded Great Britain; the score with Russia is 2:0.
France started war with Russia in 1812 and 1853 and invaded Russia in 1919, Russia never started war with or invaded France; the score with Russia is 3:0.
And those small client border states like Estonia are simply regarded by Russians as proxies of the NATO Great Powers – which, in fact, they are. Curiously, when it comes to the question “Is Russia a threat to NATO countries?” the collective West relies on the opinions of NATO countries and ignores what Russia says. However, when it comes to the question “Is NATO a threat to Russia?” the collective West again relies on the opinions of NATO countries and ignores what Russia says. Unfortunately, nothing in your minds has changed since those “Russia has no voice no veto” days of the 90s. Of course, Putin isn’t able to heal you from hypocricy. His only option is to really scare you, and someday he probably will.
Better news from UK:
The “terrorism” case against Richard Medhurst has been dropped!
A very understandably angry Medhurst with a great strong rant:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TtS6Q5Cz-CE
“However, it is only a partial victory for freedom of the press, as the UK authorities handed Austria all their intel/files for them to continue the persecution.”
https://consortiumnews.com/2025/12/16/uk-drops-terror-case-vs-journalist-on-gaza/
As said many times before, ‘the process is the punishment’.
Hi Craig any thoughts on the two articles by John Helmer?
From Helmer’s article on Dawn Sturgess:-
that the expert pathologists who had conducted the post-mortem investigations between July and November 2018 had recorded enough fentanyl, cocaine and other drugs in Sturgess’s bloodstream to have been the cause of her heart and then brain death before Novichok was detected by the British chemical warfare laboratory at Porton Down.
Complete bollox, it’s been established that Dawn didn’t do drugs.
“…it’s been established that Dawn didn’t do drugs”.
By whom, and how? Please supply references. I have never seen that assertion made before, in years of reading about the affair.
Well you haven’t read very deeply. It was in a statement made by her family after the enquiry and the police issued a formal apology.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/crime/general/wiltshire-police-issue-apology-to-family-of-dawn-sturgess-following-inquiry-report/ar-AA1RHYkq
I’ve an idea Charlie Rowley mentioned it in his evidence too.
Any real evidence that she did have enough fenatyl and cocaine in her to cause death?
“In Rutty’s report dated November 29, 2018, he revealed that blood testing of Sturgess on July 2, 2018, identified that she had taken a combination of illicit, potentially lethal drugs before her collapse. Rutty says these included cocaine and fentanyl. Rutty avoided disclosing the precise reports of the toxicology testing so that the dosage Sturgess had consumed of cocaine and fentanyl has been concealed”.
https://johnhelmer.net/the-sturgess-post-mortem-records-reveal-no-russian-novichok-was-found-until-the-british-government-ordered-it/
“The Wiltshire police investigation, including blood and toxicology tests carried out at Salisbury Hospital, where Sturgess and her partner Charles Rowley were admitted on June 30, 2018, showed the couple had ingested Class A drugs, the potency and combination of which were the cause of Sturgess’s death. In the coroner’s files too, there is evidence of police arrests of drug dealers in a Salisbury area network which supplied several of Sturgess’s and Rowley’s associates who were interrogated by the police, and who admitted they were together before Sturgess’s collapse”.
https://johnhelmer.net/british-coroner-hides-british-police-evidence-in-the-novichok-case-as-bbc-prepares-to-broadcast-new-lies/
Family statement is a hearsay.
This gets a bit boring but you omit Helmer’s quote from the actual toxicology report prior to the above “bollocks” statement.
“A toxicology result,” according to Rutty’s report, was also entered which showed the presence of clopidogrel, rocuronium, atropine, cocaine and its metabolite, ephedrine and pseudoephedrine, fentanyl, midazolam, ethyl sulphate, mirtazapine and its metabolite, zopiclone and its metabolite as well as nicotine and its metabolite. An EEG (a test to look at brain activity) was performed which showed very low amplitude with little, if any cerebral activity which was considered to represent diffuse cerebral dysfunction which could be due to severe hypoxic brain injury (brain injury due to a lack of oxygen).” The report did not find any signs of “novichok”. Some of the traces were clearly from the hospital medical treatment, others from prescription drugs and alcohol use, but fentanyl in this context, and cocaine?
The cocaine was found in trace quantities, insufficient to be from recent use and certainly not enough to cause death. Given how widespread it is, a survey of banknotes found the majority were contaminated, I wouldn’t be surprised if we all have some in us.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/464200.stm
Although Novichok might not have been positively identified the presence of organophosphates, the class of chemicals to which Novichok belongs was found so it’s not true to claim that no signs were found
Fentanyl is used legitimately as a pain killer so may have been administered by the hospital although concerns over widespread contamination have been voiced as per the cocaine. Either way no mention of a dose large enough to kill.
https://dsiweb-prod.s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/uploads/Day-11-5-November-2024.pdf
Who asserted? ..” Complete bollox, it’s been established that Dawn didn’t do drugs. ” then, not much later….” The cocaine was found in trace quantities, blah blah blah “. So, she did, in fact ” do ” drugs. Wait…..I’ve got it, the cocaine traces were clearly the work of those evil Ruskies, who broke into the morgue and injected them into the lifeless body of the unfortunate Ms Sturgess; obvious when you think about, eh?
” Fentanyl is used legitimately as a pain killer so may have been administered by the hospital although concerns over widespread contamination have been voiced as per the cocaine.”. Wowza! the plot coagulates, call Columbo…..it may have been ” contamination ” wot dunnit: maybe she sat next to someone in a pub and that person had been taking coke, blew their nose and particles of that * Devil’s Dandruff ” * somehow * were absorbed by D.S.
The fact of the matter is you don’t have a clue about any aspect of Dawn Sturgess’s personal life, but in your pathological need to demonise Russia you’ll believe/assert/propagate any amount of totally improbable nonsense.
Dunning–Kruger effect.
You’d best direct your rants at Dawn’s family:-
https://www.lbc.co.uk/article/dawn-sturgess-novichok-russia-poisoning-salisbury-5HjdNtD_2/
” wrongly characterised as a drug user…”
Or maybe they’ve been ‘got at’ by MI5, or maybe they’re all crisis actors.
I’m not suggesting anybody deliberately infused Dawn with cocaine but that she may have picked it up accidentally. Either way neither the cocaine or the fentanyl were present in anywhere near lethal quantities as Helmer claims.
As for Ms Sturgess’ family, how many drug addicts keep their loving families up to date with the details of the drugs they take?
I am trying desperately to imagine a suspect in court telling the bench, “I don’t know how the cocaine (and fentanyl) got into my body but I may have picked it up accidentally”.
If TPTB hadn’t hijacked this sad story, Dawn’s death would have barely made the local news. Just another death amongst the forgotten underbelly of our great democracy.
@ Tom Welsh. Indeed, I know from personal experience, and that of friends and acquaintances, the lengths people will go to hide their drug habits from parents and family; particularly * hard * drug use: equally, the degree to which parents will opt to deny their own suspicions and evidence that their children are * on * drugs.
@ Stevie Boy. Quite. Aye, D-K Effect coupled with a virulent detestation of ” a particular subject/person/country ” makes people like Mr Migraine, let’s say, a * tad * unbalanced
OK, so the pathologist is wrong, Dawn Stugess’s friends and family are all wrong but your best mate 3,000 km away in Moscow HE knows what really happened…
“OK, so the pathologist is wrong, Dawn Stugess’s friends and family are all wrong but your best mate 3,000 km away in Moscow HE knows what really happened…”
You mean “the SECOND pathologist”. The one the government imposed because it didn’t like the first pathologist’s report – that Dawn Sturgess died of a drug overdose.
And even the second pathologist went as close as he safely could to stating that he wrote what he was told to write. He was TOLD that death was caused by Novichok, so he accepted that.
Not what a pathologist is supposed to do, but it’s always possible to find a susceptible person.
As for “your best mate 3,000 km away in Moscow”, don’t be so silly. I am British, and I have no connection to Russia or anyone in it. Being British, I have an old-fashioned preference for honesty, logic, and fairness.
It long became obvious to me that this whole story seemed to make more sense if viewed as a ‘false flag’ operation.
There was no evidence, witness or photographic, which placed the two GRU agents at Skripal’s house. I think that the Russian government should have told us why they were in Salisbury. The answer, I think, was to contact Skripal.
A number of articles on the inside pages of The Observer made for interesting reading. In one of them, it was claimed that Skripal had not believed that Putin wished to harm him. If so, Skripal would have had his reasons for thinking that. That raises the serious possibility that he was correct.
Another article featured somebody who had once spoken to Skripal and was rather shocked to discover that he agreed with Putin on several important areas of foreign policy. Would Putin really want to kill somebody who agreed with him? Seems rather unlikely.
I do think that the Russian government may be right when it accuses the British government of kidnapping the Skripals. If they were to speak publicly it would clarify what happened. Why are they not being allowed to speak?
A rare example of an intelligent article on this subject from 2018:
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/sergei-skripal-poison-russia-theresa-may-diplomats-iraq-war-jeremy-corbyn-a8257911.html
Good thinking. It seems strange to me that Mr S could have been dealt with more quietly when by himself at any time , so the “attempt-event” was deliberately timed when J had to be present , to involve her eg to bring Mr out into the open more(yet that seems unnecessary as it seems he could get out and about quite easily evenly travelling abroad) or to affect her?Also anniversary of son’s death. Were the two “agents” actually her minders in some way but unknown to her? There was some thoughts back then about a rogue GUR group or such people seeking retrilbution in some way?
Ai says both are in New Zealand well I doubt that surely being traceable there but I suppose UK Intel 5i’s more easily track visitors to NZ. Is it still a case of cherchez her boyfriend Vikeev still missing, find the Skripals and are these still being used as a kind of bait by western Intel agencies? Who manages Skripals savings, pensions, incomes, expenditures, monitors social connections their daily lives???
Old horse face has emphatically denied the Skripals are in NZ, and she is the one source of truth you’ll recall !
“I think that the Russian government should have told us why they were in Salisbury.” Why ?
MI6 operates in Russia, it operates in Ukraine and everywhere else but they aren’t going to admit that are they. MI6 certainly knows why these two were in Salisbury, why don’t they tell us ?
“MI6 certainly knows why these two were in Salisbury, why don’t they tell us ?”
To be fair, they have: it’s just that commentators like Helmer and Murray have ripped their narrative apart like wet tissue paper.
The recent inquest/inquiry was perhaps unique in the annals of UK justice in so far as three of the key witnesses- Sergei Skripal, Yulia Skripal and Charlie Rowley- were not required to attend either in person or via video link. I think that speaks for itself.
“…three of the key witnesses- Sergei Skripal, Yulia Skripal and Charlie Rowley- were not *allowed* to attend either in person or via video link”.
FTFY. There will be no charge. 😎
Because it would challenge the claim made by the British government.
Personally, I think that Skripal and the Russian government are entitled to talk to whoever they want.
Indeed. Rowley, Sturgess and their chums were already well known to the local police, who would not have been in the least surprised to hear that Sturgess had died. At the first PM, she was recorded as having died of a drug overdose.
Some time later, evidently people near to Theresa May decided that the Novichok story was rather thin; no one had even been killed by the fantastically lethal nerve agent. Presumably, some clever person may have realised that the death of an isolated, socially derelict drug addict could easily be “repurposed” to fake up the required evidence of Novichok’s deadliness. So a second PM was ordered, and the finding of death by Novichok was… more or less… established. Rather shaky, but no one was asking until a bit later, which gave enough time to tidy up the documentation.
While they did a fairly complete job of plugging gaps, they completely overlooked the glaringly obvious fact that the whole story was utterly ludicrous. Thereby simultaneously insulting our intelligence and giving a broad hint that their intelligence wasn’t all that great.
Indeed “Operation Mincemeat” provided a fairly close precedent. Find a suitable dead body, cook up a suitable story, and off you go! There are a lot of civil servants and wonks with boring office jobs who long to become James Bond. Just as the CIA was basically founded by bored bankers and lawyers who thought that overthrowing a few governments and murdering some heads of state would be smashing fun.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mincemeat
Mint Press sent the following message/email out to supporters a couple of days ago:
Dear supporters,
Indiegogo has cancelled our campaign and will not provide us with our $50,000 payout that we raised through the fundraising platform To Help Keep MintPress Alive.
Their reason? Allegedly, our project did not meet ‘their guidelines’.
This is an unacceptable response as MintPress has used Indiegogo to raise funds to support our independent journalism for nearly a decade.
We completed our fundraising campaign in October and have followed up consistently over the past three months to receive the payout. Today, we received this sudden rejection – a stark departure from our decade-long positive relationship with their platform.”
Indiegogo did say that all donations will be refunded back to you.
We don’t know for sure, however, we suspect that this is part of a coordinated financial attack against us as we were also recently banned from GoFundMe and Paypal for our journalism that exposed the architects of the forever war machine.
We apologize to our donors and ask that you support us directly on our website: MintPressNews.com/donations/
MintPress is 100% reader supported and we are STILL AT RISK OF SHUTTING DOWN unless we meet our fundraising goals.
I was impressed by the research and presentation of this account of the Skripals’ poisoning and shared it on my Facebook page.but after seeing that it was presented by an organization that was promoting some dodgy anti-vax and climate denial propaganda plus far right politicians like Andrew Bridgen I deleted it. Surely, Craig, you would be better keeping a separation from conspiracy theorists being that I haven’t included you as one, or possibly some of the contributors to this
I have never subscribed to the weird modern view that you must agree with somebody on everything before you can associate with them, or cooperate with them on anything.
That may be so but it may result in those you wish to convince will be deterred by the presence of certain bedfellows and the fact they receive finance from the Heritage Foundation. It might be a good idea to present the same evidence to a different audience that is equally horrified by those drumming up war with Russia, expanding NATO and feeding the arms race.
There is a tab on this blog called “Invite Craig to Speak”. Organise a meeting, invite me and I will come, just as I did for the organisers. It was an excellent event and I disagreed with perhaps one or two marginal comments all evening.
You are sadly infused with cancel culture. I realise that is the fashionable way to think. I don’t spend my time scanning people to find things we might disagree on, then refusing to associate with them. How will people ever learn from one another if they only associate with those who already agree on everything.
Yes, absolutely right.
Somebody once put a comment on a book by Roger Stone:
“This man is a thug but he is right about LBJ”
craig Post author
December 17, 2025 at 11:24
JK: The Russian plantation of the Baltics was immediately after “WW2”.
Craig: That’s just not true: they became part of Russia in 1721 (mostly, some bits in 1795).
JK: I distinguish occupation (by the Russian Empire) from plantation and forced population movement (by the USSR).
Do you say that that Russian Empire in the 1700’s imposed plantation and forced population movement on the Baltic States?
The official version is so amateurish it beggers belief. I fail to understand how those that believe it fail to question even the most simplistic aspects. I shouldn’t be, an obviously educated nieghbour with the uptmost sincerity told me yesterday that Putin was responsible for our recent cold snap??? Is there something in the water that makes us stupid?
Well there’s fluoride in the water supply of some six million people in England, about 10% of the population, which may explain it. In the US around 75% of the population have fluoride in their drinking water, which quite likely accounts for quite a lot of things about the US.
Found this when I did a quick search, albeit from 2015:
The extent of water fluoridation in the UK
https://fluoridealert.org/news/the-extent-of-water-fluoridation-in-the-uk/
I do not like the idea of fluoride in water.
It turns out that Senator Jesse Helms opposed the idea too. Well, that is one thing he got right!
Agree 100% with no fluoride in our water, or any other pollutants come to that. Our local supplier wants to start mixing in ‘treated’ sewage with the drinking water. That’s one way to deal with the sewage problem, get us to drink it and pay for the privilege.
Of course, IMO, the overwhelming reason for the decline of people’s intelligence can be put down to social media; smartphones; apps for everything. And, more recently the rise of AI. In general, it appears that many people don’t read and don’t write and by extension don’t think. Opinions nowadays are dished up on line, rather than analysed and created in people’s heads/brains. Responsibility has been passed to the Internet.
Questions in my mind…where is Pablo Millar what is he up to? Is Dawn’s Kelly barrister Mansfield going to review the Inquiry and refute it’s validity? Would he be available for interview?
Are Sleepas technically still Russian citizens?
By whom, where, when, are Skripals recieving follow on medical checkups and treatments, especially who immediately after hospital and ongoing- well I hope they are having checkups.
Previously also queried who are Skripals current minders managers controllers, financial, legal, do they have credit cards, phones, allowed social media , contact with friends , are they allowed access to public media eg here, Helmet, mainstream media to read about the Inquiry and any other pertainable issues such as politics of the moment, what were their hobbies personal interests, what books magazines do they read…surely they must do or are held in tightly controlled circumstance and do they actually believe the current narrative that manages them now- which for a lot of people might mean continuing psychiatrist after care…I am not a number?
If so, must be very tricky and expensive for their managers , but such might mean they are traceable.
Yup watched the video by UK column good event, did not see a reference though to Rob Slane who did so much…maybe he was asked but declined or did not want to be mentioned , those his articles are still available at intelorg, could be interesting to see if his questions have been answered(I doubt) , are more questions now , what remains valid. Cheers Rob if you still follow these events.
Very good article by Kit Klarenberg on substack eg Skripals taxi driver having his suspicions confirmed that unmarked police cars were “accompanying” them “coincidentally”, inside one was a man in his 40’s and lady bleached hair….very similar description to the couple in Salisbury.
Jo: Thank you for the referral to Kit Klarenberg’s substack article. Strictly speaking it was not a taxi driver, but a friend and former next door neighbour of Sergei Skripal who drove Sergei to Heathrow on Saturday 3 March to collect Julia.
A question arising in my mind after reading Kit’s article: why did the police not make it clear at the time that the couple shown in a short publicly available video clip walking along Market Walk on the afternoon of 4 March were definitely NOT the Skripals?
craig
just seeing this now.. it is refreshing that you are finally picking up on the topic of tarring and feathering’ russia, which this hoax being one of a long line of lies and b.s. that the uk intel agencies have fostered on the uk public.. kudos for finally seeing this!
Evidence guccifer 2.0 the DNC someone in USA sue USA intelligence services and Obama admin officials. Also spread to as many as possible:
https://mrkeconomicsmmtgeorgism.blogspot.com/2023/08/evidence-russian-interference-based-on.html?m=1