In 13 years of running my blog I have never been exposed to such a tirade of abuse as I have for refusing to accept without evidence that Russia is the only possible culprit for the Salisbury attack. The abuse has mostly been on twitter, and much of the most venomous stuff has come from corporate and state media “journalists”. I suppose I am a standing rebuke to them for merely being stenographers to power and never doing any actual research, but that hardly explains the visceral levels of hatred exhibited.
Today they are all terrifically happy and sharing amongst themselves a lengthy twitter thread by a Blairite and chemist called Clyde Davis in which they all say I am “owned” and my article disproven. There are two remarkable things about this thread.
The first remarkable thing is the remarkably high percentage of those who are sharing it with commendations who are mainstream media journalists. Last I saw was George Monbiot five minutes ago, but there are dozens. I suppose it is important to them as validating their decision to support uncritically the government line without doing any actual journalism.
The second remarkable thing is that the thread they are all sharing misses out almost all my side of the conversation. An objective observer might think that made it hard to say who “won” the argument. To be fair, that is probably not deliberate but appears to be a result of how twitter does threading. Here I reconstruct by paste the thread with my responses. It may give a better idea of whether Mr Davis completely “destroys” my article, as the “professional” journalists are all claiming. And as Mr Davies is critiquing my article, perhaps you might refresh yourself on that first here.
Neither my reply nor Davies’ rejoinder are included in the thread which the mainstream “journalists” are circulating. Note that Davies responds to being challenged, with a riposte which is untrue. The OPCW have never changed their position on the physical existence of “novichoks” from the position I gave and referenced in my article. By contrast, Mr Davies gives no reference for his claim the OPCW has changed its mind. Personally I find it problematic that somebody like Mr Davies who blusters so loud on scientific method, responds to a challenge to his position with an apparent invention.
It is indeed true that Porton Down (which here means the British government), however, have changed their position since 2016 when, as I again demonstrated in my article with references, they said there was no evidence for the physical existence of “novichoks”. Now apparently they have said not only do they have one, but it is indubitably Russian. If a “novichok” is indeed in the possession of Porton Down, of course scientists, like diplomats and the others involved, will change their position on the existence of Novichoks. As will I. But that, in any sense, that will prove it is of Russian manufacture is a totally different question.
Then along came the man who really did put me to shame. A Mr Kevin Smyth who completely demolished Davis with a simple polite question:
That part of the exchange is also missing from the thread being circulated so gleefully at the moment.
So what does Davies tell us in this article delivered by twitter which “demolishes” my article.
1) Davies acknowledges that until recently Porton Down and OPCW doubted the physical existence of “novichoks”. He says they have now changed their minds. [Porton Down has indeed undergone a remarkable change of mind in the last week , but the OPCW has yet to see the evidence].
2) Davis states that chemists can tell if a compound corresponds to one of the “novichoks” described by Mirzyanov, but Davis specifically accepts that does not prove Russian manufacture.
3) Davis nevertheless states strongly it is Russia because he believes Russia has form and motive.
Nothing here can remotely be said to be conclusive. The question that puzzles me, is why are so many mainstream media journalists gleefully seizing on this series of tweets as a destruction of the need for sceptical inquiry? A possible answer:
1) Davies by claiming credentials as a chemist conforms to the corporate media urge for an appeal to authority. He validates the government line and he is a chemist. He can throw in the names of chemicals and molecular diagrams. That kind of thing impresses journalists. That he explicitly admits the chemistry cannot prove Russia did it, is apparently irrelevant.
2) Davies thus provides a smokescreen of respectability by which they can continue to advance their careers by cutting and pasting the government line without question.
In fact, all of Davies’ “chemistry” in this exchange sets out to prove something which was never disputed – that chemists are able to identify whether or not a substance is one of the “novichok” compounds described by Mirzyanov. But as he published the formulae two decades ago, and has been living in the USA, and as the US dismantled and studied the Nukus plant, and as Porton Down had never seen any evidence the Russians actually succeeded in synthesising “novichoks, this in no way adds up to evidence of Russian manufacture. As Davies, to his credit, finally acknowledged when confronted by an interlocutor for whom he did not have automatic hatred.
I can’t say the midgies bother me that much. But they are interesting to study.
Re: “Motive?”
Finnian Cunningham: Russian Spy Poison Attack: Is Nord Stream 2 the Bigger Target?
So what will be the subjects for discussion tonight on BBC1 at 22.45 tonight?
by
Chris Grayling
Keir Starmer
Afshin Rattansi
Mairead McGuinness
Brian Cox
Answers on a postcard
Salisbury
Prof Stephen Hawking
N Ireland border
Brexit
Rattansi is being ambushed on the Salisbury incident. Dimblebore is holding the government line. Some ganging up by Starmer and McGuiness.
Brian Cox, the actor, not the astrophysicist, is on the panel.
Grayling squirming as Rattansi , Starmer and the audience demand answers regarding the Russian donations the Tories have gratefully received.
Good on Brian Cox for actually pointing out that this could be a rogue action too.
May’s taking this whole thing as her Falklands. Like Maggie before her it’s a chance to try and look strong and patriotic and sweep all the Brexit and austerity woes – the real issues facing this country – under the carpet. Incredible how she managed to meet and greet in Salisbury when she couldn’t in Manchester or at the Grenfell site
Terrible performance from all of them. Why is Cox there? He and Connery blabbing about independance as they live the Holywood dream.
Well put Craig,
The truth will out, the English state is buggered.
Even a blind man can see the duplicity of the English state.
It’s embarrassing to watch.
We can link all of it to the geopolitical machinations going on
Today.
Brexit , loss of face, dwindling credibility.
Scotland , Ireland, the English Westminster cabal is laughing stock.
Quite right to,
Hell mend them.
Regards and respect.
I find the argument between Murray and Davies to be an almost pointless carry-on.
I read Murray’s original piece yesterday (Wednesday) and, when Murray suggests that Porton Down would require a sample from the originating Russian lab to verify that the agent used was – in fact – from that lab, was not based upon an examination of the organophoshate agent itself but of everything else that comes along with it.
Water is water whether it comes from the Thames estuary or the Caspian Sea. But, if you take 100 ml of water from each location a lab can determine which is which…. Not from the water but from everything else that comes along with it. It is very nearly impossible to make a chemical preparation that is perfectly pure. Invariably there will be some contaminants. Those contaminants can function as a kind of signature pointing to the laboratory that produced the compound. When Murray said that Porton would need a sample from the originating lab to verify that the agent used in the killing of Skripal was, in fact, from a specific Russian lab – this is what I took Murray to mean.
It strikes me that, if the possibility of such agents has been intimated at over twenty years ago by this Uzbek chemist: Mirzayanov, other countries such as UK; US; Israel etc., etc., etc., would have been feverishly trying to verify the claims of Mirzayanov. Also, if the Americans have Mirzayanov within their grasp – which both Davies and Murray seem to accept – I cannot imagine that Americans not having followed this up long ago and established the truth or otherwise of Mirzayanov’s claims.
Bert.
The Guardian now allowing Craig’s scepticism to be heard
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/mar/15/uks-claims-questioned-doubts-emerge-about-source-of-salisburys-novichok
I was pleased and surprised to see that article. Someone must have slipped something into the water at Guardian HQ.
The Salisbury attack was appalling. But we must avoid a drift to conflict
Jeremy Corbyn
Britain needs to hold the perpetrators to account. Yet this is not a time for hasty judgments that could lead to a new cold war
15 March 2018
17.45
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/mar/15/salisbury-attack-conflict-britain-cold-war
Blimey Craig, you exist. The Grauniad actually quoted you and everything. About an hour ago. It’s a kind of victory.
As Craig has recently and repeatedly told us, the Guardian is a horrible neoliberal rag to which no-one need pay any attention at all.
Which is why it’s funny. How’s the molecular analysis coming along? Studied any metabolic disintegration recently?
Craig, you are a voice of reason and I salute you. I will condemn Putin when there’s ABSOLUTE PROOF he’s behind it all. Until then, I only see a Tory government hell-bent on destruction.
What you stated about comparing to a sample from the Russian facility does possibly have some relevance. Although the pure compound would have no information about its origin, there are often low levels of impurities, whose specific pattern, MIGHT identify a source if there was a sample for comparison. Of course this would not be evidence that this was carried out by the Russian state.
Of course it’s hardly worth discussing this absurd scenario. Russia wants to take an old spy, that they’ve pardoned, who has been living in the UK for years, with no on paying him the least attention and decides that killing him with a ‘nerve agent’ that COULD be tied to Russia to send a message of what exactly? By the way I am a US Physical Chemist … PhD 1983.
Answer: Precisely because it raises questions about our security and probity which can be exploited to divide and dismay. Fits perfectly. No problem getting at the target, either.
Ba’al
“Answer: Precisely because it raises questions about our security and probity which can be exploited to divide and dismay. Fits perfectly. No problem getting at the target, either.”
It is easy to produce a one sided argument. Have you looked at other possibilities that others may also have motives? Have you looked at the downside for the Russians?
So to take your last point first. It is easy to get at the target. This in itself is an own goal for the U.K. If it is easy to get to him then anyone could do so not only the Russians. Also why is it , given the litvinienko affair, that he was not given a new identity that would protect him? Why would his daughter , who still lives in Russia , come and visit him so openly? So in fact what you are saying is that the UKs services were really pretty lax about protecting this guy. Was it because they thought mistakenly, that he was not at risk, or because they were negligent? Therefore no one needs to ask the question you asked as you have already answered it.
As to divide and dismay: whom exactly has it divided and dismayed? The losers here at present is common sense, Putin and the RFG and Corbyn. Everyone else is cock-a-hoop enjoying a triumphalist self congratulatory orgy of arrogance.
In the midst of all this, it seems that the Skripals and the people of Salisbury have been relegated to the status of convenient victims, the first left in a unit not equipped to deal with chemical weapons and no specialist expertise, and the second told to wipe thier mobile phones with baby wipes to counteract the deadliest poison known to man, so poisonous and potent that it failed to kill its intended targets and we failed to try and hunt the perpetrator of such a ‘heinous’ crime. No wonder some French politician described this as fantasy before he was told to toe the line.
This divide and dismay has been so successful in uniting the west’s warmongers who will now no doubt find more evidence of such chemicals in Syria and Iraq. Job done.
Meant Syria and Iran
I agree, and sympathise with what Clyde Davies says here. The one drawing half-arsed conclusions from insufficient data is Craig. Whether through simple hostility to the UK, which he shares with Putin, though for different reasons, or through co-ordination, knowing or unknowing, with this country’s antagonists (I nearly said ‘enemies’, but we’re not quite there yet) I don’t know – not enough data.
Far from losing the argument, Davies is honest enough to concede that on chemical grounds alone, there is no certainty about tying the material to Russia. But who can tell what the intelligence case is? Only one inference can be made, and that with certainty. May wouldn’t be making this song and dance if the balance of probability were not heavily in favour of Russian ownership. And assessing that would not rely solely on analytical data.
It’s just as well that this blog has very largely become an echo chamber for Scots Ultranats (to its credit, the SNP hasn’t bought his narrative) and people who think Sputnik is the Word of God. And it’s just as well we are not yet in a state of emergency, in which case Craig would assuredly be in a cell. Mind you, if the situation were reversed, the Russians wouldn’t need to bother with a state of emergency, would they?
“I don’t know” would have sufficed.
It might for you. Because you don’t *know* either.
Ba’al Zevul, 20:45:
– “May wouldn’t be making this song and dance if the balance of probability were not heavily in favour of Russian ownership”
Hmmm. Why more trusting of May than of Blair and his bunch re. Iraq?
Ba’al
And I used to think you were so full of common sense.
Davies makes no chemical argument, the area of his supposed expertise although he has long left that behind in his role in Nottingham University, but purely political ones.
It is very telling that after the false promises that Iraq had WMD complete with testubes in the UNSC presentation, and assurances to parliament by Blair, and of the pretext on which Libya was illegally bombed by NATO after Cameron, Sarkozy and Clinton ‘convinced’ us all of impending viagra driven massacres, that you think it beyond a British PM to embellish the facts.
“But who can tell what the intelligence case is?”
I can tell you what the intelligence case for the Iraq War was. It was a lie. It was just another PM who was telling it. I’m surprised you’ve been sucked in again!
“Far from losing the argument, Davies is honest enough to concede that on chemical grounds alone, there is no certainty about tying the material to Russia.”
Then his entire twitter post becomes pointless. He is a chemist who is basing his conclusion that The Russians Done Did It! on anything and everything except…. the chemistry.
As Murray said, Davies twitter thread is an appeal to authority, yet the argument rests entirely upon areas in which Davies is not in any way an authority.
Pointless, in a word.
Does this not then suggest that May’s tirades are similarly grounded? Has she offered any evidence over and above Mr Davies’? Is it not all based on emotion, beliefs/prejudices, the usual suspects, pre-selected motives (whilst disregarding all other possible motives). I have such a terrible case of déjà vu as when MH17 happened.
One this is for sure, under the current regime, just like Litvinenko and MH17, this event will never be disassociated from Russia, no matter what evidence comes out.
All the hot air doesn’t hide the fact that the “evidence” is circumstantial. One of a group of chemicals, believed to have possibly been synthesized by the Russians back in the 80s, appears to have been used to try to kill a Russian ex-spy. If an ordinary chemist like Davies knows so much about it, it can hardly be a secret. If it isn’t a secret, then presumably a competent chemist with the right equipment and support can make it. Which means it could be made outside Russia. So we have a weapon (but one which has yet to be definitively traced to its lab of origin)
Opportunity – well, anyone could have walked up to the victim who was living openly in Salisbury.
Motive. This is tricky. Putin may have wanted to send a message to his voters that he’s tough on traitors, or to the West that he’s a vicious bastard, or just fomenting trouble generally. None of those is particularly convincing. Putin is widely acknowledged to be going to win the election easily anyway. We already know what sort of person he is. Surely there is enough trouble what with Syria, Ukraine, the FBI investigations. What would be the point of this stunt? It may have been the Russians, but surely when investigating a crime it is correct to keep an open mind until all the evidence is in and it consistently and convincingly points to the perpetrator. At the moment they have not found who actually did the poisoning, nor how, nor exactly where. So there are many questions still remaining before any conclusion can be drawn.
This Davies character just leaps to conclusions because he has a particular view of Russia, nothing in his chemical “expertise” supports the strength of his conviction.
If Black wrote in 2016 that the West didn’t even know if these things existed…
That points to either 1. Russia or 2. Someone who got secrets from Russia (WikiLeaks)
I think WikiLeaks was doing house-cleaning, assassinating people who worked with Steele.
i.e. Revenge killings.
bob – so many silly posts from you..it gets tiring…
here is this.. maybe it will slow you down a bit..
“The former Soviet scientist, Vil Mirzanyanov, who ‘blew the whistle’ and wrote about the ‘Novichoks’, now lives in a $1 million home in the United States. The AFP news agency just interviewed him about the recent incident:
Mirzayanov, speaking at his home in Princeton, New Jersey, said he is convinced Russia carried it out as a way of intimidating opponents of President Vladimir Putin.
“Only the Russians” developed this class of nerve agents, said the chemist. “They kept it and are still keeping it in secrecy.”
The only other possibility, he said, would be that someone used the formulas in his book to make such a weapon.
“Russia did it”, says Mirzanyanov, “OR SOMEONE WHO READ MY BOOK”.
I read this the first few times you posted it.
At least I post original thoughts. ; )
No one knows what to make of the formulas in his book. I mean, you can’t argue that Black’s “we don’t even know if these exist” remarks in 2016 are meaningful, yet at the same time argue this Mirzanyanov made-it-all-public-in-his-book stuff.
You’re going to have to choose or reconcile the two statements
The likely reconciliation is that the Mirzanyanov stuff isn’t all-that.
Has May expelled any Chinese diplomats yet for China’s attempt to blow up Parliament in 1605?
@Bob – Black did NOT write that.
For goodness sake, you don’t think all of a state’s information about chemical weapons is in the public domain, do you? That you can search JSTOR and other indexes to articles in scholarly journals and if what you’re looking for isn’t mentioned there, then nobody knows about it? Really?
1) Say someone chucks a potato through your window. Potatoes come from South America. Do you assume the potato chucking must have been commissioned by a government in South America?
2) How the campaign is running against Craig and others who question the British state line on Salisbury is very interesting. If it really does mark a step forward, that supports the view that war is coming. And if both sides know that war is coming, it doesn’t matter much which side did it.
3) Clyde Davies is such a plonker that it almost hurts to realise that he doesn’t know it. Its embarrassing. The poor guy. “Chemistry is a science“, he explains. Can we all imagine the pained look on his face, his mental turmoil, when he typed that word “science” with asterisks on either side?
Do we really think he heard the official line and then applied his intellect to weighing it up against alternative hypotheses, and concluded that the evidence in support of it was overwhelming? Of course he didn’t. It’s obvious he didn’t. How the human mind – well, some people’s minds – can work to think up reasons for what they’ve submissively sucked up, eh? And they can get awfully nasty with it, too… as if they’re running away from something.
No apologies whatsoever for posting this, BTW. Psychological warfare is about pyschology. You poor poor sod, Clyde. I hope you’re reading this, possum.
4) You know how some among the Zionists who are by no means bereft of intellect whore themselves when necessary, saying the most patently obvious lying sh*t, often self-contradictory lying sh*, and really f*cking stupid sh*it with it – sometimes saying it quietly, like Chomsky against a boycott, but usually shouting it as loud as they can, and often accusing their opponents of wanting to commit genocide, that kind of thing? Well it’s a bit like that.
5) The Tories – and some of their pals in Labour, but especially the Tories – are in full hate-spitting mode. Apparently the Russians are “defying” them, the French are “defying” them too, and according to the defence secretary Gavin Williamson (are we all sure that the guy is emotionally mature enough for the job?), Russia should “go away and shut up”.
lol.. good comments…
i was thinking of clyde when i read 1)…. according to clyde, if it looks like a potato, and smells like a potato, then obviously south america is behind this… it is hard to challenge a superior intellect like that…
N_
“1) Say someone chucks a potato through your window. Potatoes come from South America. Do you assume the potato chucking must have been commissioned by a government in South America?”
Yes but what if they instead chuck some borsch? Would you not have some justification in thinking they are Russian?
Just playing devil’s advocate.
“Yes but what if they instead chuck some borsch? Would you not have some justification in thinking they are Russian?”
Borsch wouldn’t go through a window. It would have to be a boiled beetroot.
But apart from that you’re spot on. It would definitely be a Russian that did it.
Borsch is very popular in Ukraine too.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/mar/15/uks-claims-questioned-doubts-emerge-about-source-of-salisburys-novichok
I note Craig’s views are mentioned in this Guardian article. The level of Russophobia being stoked up by the mainstream media is frighteningly reminiscent of the period when claims to the validity of the Iraqi WMD dossier were challenged.
i liked how someone else put it – ” You could call this an Orwellian armageddon pretext…….”
Precisely Monteverdi. See my comment below.
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2018/03/bothered-by-midgies/comment-page-4/#comment-721836
Wonder if all these commenters will still be around when Russia isn’t in the frame for an atrocity. Somehow I doubt it.
When Russia starts to apply shock therapy under the aegis if the WTO and WB to bring the west to its knees . When Russia starts to arm rebels at home , as we did in Chechnya. When Russia gets Mexico to invade the US and then cry wolf . When Russia stages a coup in Canada or maybe France. When Russia builds 100 of bases surrounding Europe and carries out exercises. When Russia sends Islamic terrorists to carry out regime change in the country of one of our allies. When any of these, let alone all of the above happens, then we will all be around and on your side.
as shelagh fogofwarity and ian my westminster friends do not lie dale on spooky global tel aviv run london radio said today
you are with us or you are against anyone questioning the daily meme is now a putin agent.
and what of the mk ultra simbot james obrien what a name for a man full of spook vauxhall memes.
lbc obrien a soros style a boot stomping on year ears forever.
putin”s russia as a terror state.
is it not of interest that all these so called britishers are proud zionist just like all the guys and girls that beat on corbyn today the friends of tory blair and teresa and her chums.
it would seem none have the interests of the uk but are all blackmailed or on the payroll of foreign powers.
neil kinnocks son on the radio talking like he was bomber harris putin must be made to suffer who is this guy
and the new defense minister telling the russians to shut up is this not now a policy to put the weakest freaks in power controlled by past perverted deeds.
15 million came to the uk under may maybe they can be rounded up press ganged for the coming fight the poor british are to broken and medicated and burgered.
who is going to stand up and fight for this westminster shower soon to be fracked country.
believe belief have faith and trust
in satanists
count me out
You have omitted Ferrari, Majid Nawaz of Quilliam infamy, Andrew Castle, Nigel Farage, Matt Frei and many others from that list..
SKY presenter Kay Burley calmly demolished by academic Tara McCormack here, starting 10:25 into this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HlLZoefuf0Q
As a matter of interest 24 opposition MPs have signed an Early Day Motion (EDM 1071) in support of Theresa May’s “blame Russia without evidence” meme.
http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/business-papers/commons/early-day-motions/edm-detail1/?edmnumber=1071&session=2017-19
Most seasoned politicians steer clear of EDMs in case history gives them a bite in the butt. There are others like Chris Leslie, Yvette Cooper, Chris Bryant (who all also voted for the Iraq War on a lie) and Pat McFadden (who was not an MP at the time). There are many more of these Blairite career MPs who support the Tory leadership over this assumed false-flag.
Of those who have signed the EDM most of them were not MPs at the time of the Iraq War. Of those that were MPs (8 of them) all 7 Labour members voted for the war. Only Alistair Carmichael, a Lib Dem MP voted against the war. He may have supported the war personally but have given way to the party whip, though I do not know that for a fact. So there you have it. Another false flag. The same Blairite scumbags in support. Momentum needs to take a good look at these career politicians in the Labour Party.
Isn’t it funny how the accusers, normally the ones who must provide evidence of guilt, are twisting the tables to make claims without substantiating evidence and then demanding the accused provide proof of their innocence to avoid being judged guilty. Keep hanging in there, Craig–I think history will be on your side.
This is an extremely important point because whatever is applied in the international arena is likely to be used as a template inside countries, especially against political dissidents.
“War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength.” – George Orwell, 1984
I’m starting to think that they want us to question the poisoning. This could be WMD 2.0 and designed to make May look rubbish so that she either has to resign or will lose an election later this year.
I am grateful that you present the possibility of alternative perspectives on Salisbury. They are absent elsewhere which gives me pause. I listened to a couple of women on A Salmon’s show who asked questions that should be explored. An ex MI5 agent suggested that the VX weapon that murdered KJU relative last year was Porton Down, invented but it was mad to suggest UK perpetrated murder!
Thanks for putting up with those pesky midgies. As one who knows little of such matters it is invaluable to be prompted to consider more widely than MSM facilitates!
The Torygraph’s latest is that the ‘nerve agent’ was brought in from Russia in the daughter’s luggage!
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/03/15/suitcase-spy-poisoning-plot-nerve-agent-planted-luggage-sergei/
Thanks for that Sharp Ears. From your link:
– “The nerve agent that poisoned the Russian spy Sergei Skripal was planted in his daughter’s suitcase before she left Moscow, intelligence agencies now believe. Senior sources have told the Telegraph that they are convinced the Novichok nerve agent was hidden in the luggage of Yulia Skripal, the double agent’s 33-year-old daughter. They are working on the theory that the toxin was impregnated in an item of clothing or cosmetics or else in a gift that was opened in his house in Salisbury, meaning Miss Skripal was deliberately targeted to get at her father.”
This is still rather odd. They are “convinced” it was in her luggage, but not sure where exactly; “impregnated in an item of clothing or cosmetics or else in a gift that was opened in his house in Salisbury” – why this uncertainty? Surely, they have those items; why can’t they tell where the highest concentration was? And is this alleged Novichok very slow acting? Why weren’t these new details revealed before, when the Leader of the Opposition, no less, wanted evidence linking the poisoning to Russia?
Sounds very implausible for a targeted killing and for a very toxic agent without the possibility of widespread contamination.
Yes, I agree. A military poison so deadly it had never been deployed in warfare, just slung into someone’s baggage to end up wherever it will? Baggage goes missing all the time on flights…
Surely that would also have the risk of going very pear-shaped at customs?
And wouldn’t the Russians assume the security services might be interested in having a look through her luggage where things would have more chance of going somewhat awry?
Agreed. This story has to be a load of utter baloney. Theresa, this number’s for you…
“Your Rolex is a phoney,
Your Walkman ain’t a Sony,
And everything you told me was a load of old baloney,
You’re a gasbag, self inflated,
You’re a gasbag, completely overrated,
Ever since I met you,
I’ve been getting the gasbag blues…
https://www.amazon.com/Gasbag-Blues/dp/B071KWPVZ6
Par for the course. If that is the case it was probably planted at Heathrow like the Lockerbie bomb that killed Bernt Carlsson and hundreds of other people. And they call Russia criminal.
The intelligence agencies would seem to be giving up on proving this was a Russian government action. If the poison was in the daughter’s luggage, it could have been planted there at all sorts of times. And there would be no assassin working on British soil, no one to catch, and no reason to suspect that any further stocks of the poison are in the UK.
Seems a logical false scenario Clark. Would not then luggage-handlers be falling down like flies?
Don’t ask me, John. It’s our
stupidityintelligence agencies that came up with this one!Ha, ha.
You underestimate just how fiendish these Ruskies are John! They can put their magic poison into a handbag in Moscow and it can fly all the way to Heathrow, then travel to Salisbury before precisely hitting the right double agent and his daughter. Be afraid. Be very afraid.
Clerk
On the contrary. As the Chief Medical Officer advised, it can be wiped away with baby wipes which are then discarded in the ordinary rubbish bin.
Moreover it was never found nescessary to transfer the Skripals and PC Bailey to a unit specially equipped to deal with chemical weapons. It obviously is extremely well targeted
Sorry Clark not Clerk
What?! This super-duper nerve agent, so powerful that US chemical weapons experts are reportedly terrified of it, seven times stronger than Sarin, can be neutralised with baby wipes and then disposed of in the domestic rubbish? Link please.
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5487305/amp/Health-bosses-tell-500-people-wash-possessions.html
Thanks. So I think we can safely assume those aren’t ordinary baby wipes, but “babies taken from incubators and left to die on the cold floor” wipes.
Clark
I disagree. They must be military grade baby wipes.
Sounds implausible, real pot luck effort that.
They obviously don’t have a clue yet, officially.
The basic premise of Mr Davies argument appears to be that Novichoks have been synthesised, beyond doubt, and the most likely culprit is Russia, on balance of probabilities. In other words, he is proposing a conspiracy theory – because he hasn’t provided evidence – and yet is still mocking Craig for his lack of scientific rigor. That mainstream journalists consider this a knockout blow is quite startling evidence that these journalists are so utterly indoctrinated, they’ve entirely lost their critical faculty.
I mean, this isn’t even funny. I was chuckling mightily at all this nonsense, presuming it was all part of the ‘Great Game’ of politics, where facts don’t really matter, but some nebulous ‘Geopolitics’ are at play. Novichoks, well they *sound* Russian don’t they? Like Vodka, and Stalin (who of course was Georgian). Throw in some defector, and we’ve got some cold war mischief to entertain us all, and take attention way from rampant child abuse in Telford. But MSM journalist appear to believe it, or at any rate want us to think they believe it. I do wonder why. It’s like they want to look stupid – if so, they’ve been hugely successful.
I also like the line: “I’m not right wing you fool. I’ve voted Labour for the past 35 years …” Oh dear. He hasn’t been paying attention much recently, has he?
Off topic. Breaking news from RT that a US military plane has crashed in Iraq with casualties reported.
At least the Irish Times keeps it’s head: https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/unlikely-that-vladimir-putin-behind-skripal-poisoning-1.3425736
Jeopardized future spy swaps?
That’s weak.
Especially since America & Britain have ousted most of their spies.
May now in trouble. The narrative hasn’t stuck. She’s got 48 hours to nail it down.
mike
You’d’ve thought Mrs May and her party and her followers to whom she apologised after the loss of her mandate in parliament would’ve realised by now that none of her narratives ever stick. Rather than looking for clues in the chemistry, we should be looking for things which they badly need to divert our attention such as the airlifting of USUKIS proxy terrorists from Eastern Damascus for re-cycling in another proxy, colonial war.
The school kids have not yet succeeded in overturning the school bus as it rounds a dangerous corner at speed. A lot of high jinx has been created in Tory headquarters, but the adults, Putin and Xi have kept control of the narrative.. If every time the buffoons of Bullingdon and Bilderberg were naughty, school was banned, that would’ve been a plain victory for the boisterous juveniles,
if we accept that the novochoks were first developed inn russia, i am sure it would be documented in the russian secret information system. For someting so dangerous they would have to create safety literature and detailed description of methods and procedures, that is one reason, though far from conclusive, that Russia may be involved No sane chemist would embark on such work without being fully acquainted of risks. it definitely cannot be any kind of random operator..ie requires advanced handling techniques and equipment.This points to state involvement. but which state?Three possible obvious candidates russia, uk, Israel.but also germany and FRANCE would have the means.not sure of motive. are they after the Russian money/Maybe some former ussr satellites?nTrying to get a bigger share of loot? Revenge for betrayal could have been arranged easily and horribly without nerve agent, it seems to defy common sense. that is why multiple rat smells are emanatingbfrom this story. it smells like a hysteria inducing manufactured crisis to prepare way for something worse or distraction from brexit disaster.now out of control!
I am sure you did not intentionally miss the elephant in the room. The US worked with the Uzbekistan government to clean up a facility holding this agent. Not only would they have done exactly what you described but would have made a note of how this can be very successfuly used as a plausible false flag in future.
Well if the downed aircraft isn’t blamed on Putin then the Salisbury Spring Pantomime is still worth following.
ok some bad stuff was in luggage, was it a binary precursor, was it a mixed binary, was it a stand alone toxin. Was it a Novichok?
When did Yulia, get to the UK, what were her movements before arrival (countries / airports over the previous week)?
Was the luggage carry on or hold. How was the toxin contained? What assistance is the UK giving to the airline and Russian airport / security services?
Was Yulia the intended victim? Was she a spy? Was she a would be assassin?
What was smeared on the handle of the car? A second precursor? The same chemical as identified in the luggage?
Where do the police believe Yulia and her dad were @1.00pm on Sun 4th?
Why was a Det sgt first on the scene? What was the lockdown in the Amesbury Business park about, where there is an ambulance station but two ambulances taken away on flatbeds from Odstock Ambulance station.
Why was an air ambulance called up? why was it reported that Yulia was transported to hospital in it. Why if the reports were untrue did the police not correct the story?
Why the drip drip?
What has “retired” Sergei Skripal been doing since 2010? Maybe doing intelligence work for governments or private parties? Maybe he pulled the “double agent” trick again. That might create some motives.
any number of scenarios are possible… 1) he was involved in the steele dossier.. 2) he was thinking of flipping back to russias side.. 3) possible suicide…. none of these 3 have been explored as i see it.. well, we are not told anything except russia did it and we are supposed to be happy with that… it is hard for a cynical mind find any rest with this story…
Great questions, P.
I should have added to my previous post: Unless a convenient distraction arrives as a new bone for our zombified press to chew on. In which case, the Skripal story will slip from view, and the set-up will stand, until such time as some “new” revelation is released to revive the ‘Russia did it’ narrative.
What do you make of this?
Strikeback: retribution, aired only a month back:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strike_Back:_Retribution
Series Episode 50, season episode 4
“The rest of the team track McAllister and Zaryn to a training camp in the countryside. They save McAllister from being hanged and collect Zaryn. When their transport breaks down after eluding the first wave of enemies, Josef jams all communication. Believing her brother to be increasingly unstable, Rosa wishes to tell Section 20 everything she knows about Lowry in exchange for her safety. Meanwhile, General Lázsló shuts down Section 20, forcing Donovan to work in secret. She discovers that Zaryn is in fact Karim Markov, a Russian scientist who allegedly killed his colleagues with Novichok, a nerve agent they invented. The rest of the team arrive at a building to deactivate the signal jammers and alert Donovan, who drives with Jensen to pick them up while the rest engage Magyar Ultra. In the process, Josef and Rosa are killed. After they escape, Donovan is forced to hand Markov over to General Lázsló under Whitehall’s orders. However soon after, Lowry ambushes and kills the Hungarian soldiers before kidnapping Markov.”
Episode 51, season episode 5
The team apprehend Lowry’s accountant from Rosa’s intelligence and then gain access to and freeze her accounts. Corporal Will Jensen (Dunster) finds that Lowry is being bank rolled by Milos Berisovich (Peter Firth), a Belarusian mob boss. Lowry visits her father-in-law in Hamburg for more money, but is forced to return empty handed. Section 20 track Berisovich’s meth lab in Turov where Markov is making more Novichok, and destroy it, though Berisovich escapes with Markov. Novin goes undercover to Berisovich’s mother’s funeral to confiscate his ledger. Though they succeed, McAllister and Wyatt are captured by Berisovich’s men, and are being held with Lowry, who Berisovich still wants to make a deal with. The rest of the team rescue the men, but in response, Berisovich calls Yuri, his best henchman, to track down and kill Section 20. back:
Episode 52, season episode 6
Section 20 track down Maya, a local Muslim woman Lowry radicalised, to a local airport. When she attempts to release the Novichok,, Reynolds shoots her. The Novichok, is fake however, as Berisovich does not want an attack committed in his country. In the meantime, Yuri finds the team and attempts to kill Reynolds; she shoots him but he escapes. Jensen traces the gas’ radiation background and learns that Markov’s lab is in Pripyat, Ukraine. By the time Section 20 arrives, Berisovich had already called in the FSB to extract Markov and confiscate the Novichok,. Yuri resurfaces to kill McAllister and Wyatt. However they turn the tables and strangle him to death. They then manage to engage the FSB and contain the gas. But in the process Reynolds is exposed. Markov works on an antidote but is killed by the Russians before he can complete. McAllister improvises and saves Reynolds, before Novin blows up the lab. Lowry uses the remainder of the gas to kill Berisovich for trying to betray her. She later gets a call from an acquaintance, who reveals that her husband is still alive.
Robbie05
Such a technology intensive / dangerous attempted murder on a pair of now harmless people is certainly not just performed for simple reasons like revenge. There must surely be a “bigger picture” here. The question is what this is / could be?
Fact: This Nerve gas (supossingly Novichok) is claimed to kill within 10 minutes unless an antidote is immediately taken.
So how come that Sergi and daughter are still alive? Was the dosage purposely set low so that they would have a survival chance?
Fact: This attack took place just 12 kms from the UK Chemical & Biological research establishment at Porton Down, where for sure a selection of Nerve Gases and their antidotes are available (otherwise why does this place exist at all?).
If you really want to kill someone with such a nerve gas, then why do it so close to a place that could possibly save the victim ? An attack further away would have meant certain death.
Fact: A sudden death / murder receives only a relatively short lived amount of media attention. Whereas achieving a drawn-out emotional fight for life naturally (as in this case) receives a great deal of media attention and public outcry over a long period.
Fact: When the public is emotionally outraged by such an event, then Politicians are more able to easily sell their retaliation measures to the public, such as Economic sanctions or even using force.
Was this attack perpetrated by a group who wished to cause a great deal of public outcry rather than just eliminate someone, and if so, who of the possible perpetrators (Russia; UK; USA or Mosad etc) would benefit most from this event ?
What benefit would Russia have now to kill this ex-agent ? He has almost certainly already given all of his secrets to the Western Secret Services. As a pensioned-off ex-agent he also had no further use for Britain, in fact he was more of a liability. Maybe someone thought of a final good use for him and “kill two birds with one stone.
I don’t see that Russia had anything positive to gain from doing this act, whereas the ant-Russia lobby certainly does.
Roy Nicholls
My mind refuses to look for motives for a crime someone didn’t do. I do sometimes speculate about the motives for Boris Johnson supporting Al Qaida terrorists in Syria, in parliament, and why there was no uproar among the great and the good in that mother***er of all Zionist clubs in the UK. I do sometimes speculate on why anyone in the Muslim community would want to spy on me for MI5 as an apparently unwelcome new member of their faith community and I do therefore occasionally speculate on the intentions of our Creator in allowing universal spying to be invented and practised universally in our times.
My conclusion in all this vague speculation is that God wants us to look over our shoulder at this particular time in order for us not to fall into the honey traps set by the enemies of truth. Maybe if Blair had been aware of the Zionist honeytraps he wouldn’t have been blackmailed into invading Iraq in 2013. William Blake uses a brilliant adjective ” charter’d street ” to describe or insinuate the corruption of power in the city of London in circa 1800. Has it become less owned/ bought/ betrayed in the last 200 years? As others have pointed out today, anyone who now challenges the official narrative is being demonised.
Or as a Caribbean lady friend once said to me ” everyone has to keep their own back yard tidy”.
Neither Boris’s political yard nor his personal back yard are tidy. Means he is bought.