March 4 2018 Sergei and Yulia Skripal are attacked with a nerve agent in Salisbury
March 6 2018 Boris Johnson blames Russia and calls Russia “a malign force”
March 7 2018 Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman of Saudi Arabia arrives in London for an official visit
March 13 2018 Valeri Gerasimov, Russian Chief of General Staff, states that Russia has intelligence a fake chemical attack is planned against civilians in Syria as a pretext for US bombing of Damascus, and that Russia will respond militarily.
March 19 2018 Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman of Saudi Arabia arrives in Washington for an official visit
April 8 2018 Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman of Saudi Arabia arrives in Paris for an official visit
April 8 2018 Saudi funded jihadist groups Jaysh al Islam and Tahrir al-Sham and UK funded jihadist “rescue group” The White Helmets claim a chemical weapons attack occurred in their enclave of Douma the previous day – just before its agreed handover to the Syrian army – and blame the Syrian government.
April 11 2018 Saudi Arabia pledges support for attack on Syria
April 14 2018 US/UK/French attack on Syria begins.
I have always denied the UK’s claim that only Russia had a motive to attack the Skripals. To denigrate Russia internationally by a false flag attack pinning the blame on Russia, always seemed to me more likely than for the Russians to do that to themselves. And from the start I pointed to the conflict in Syria as a likely motive. That puts Saudi Arabia (and its client jihadists), Saudi Arabia’s close ally Israel, the UK and the USA all in the frame in having a powerful motive in inculcating anti-Russian sentiment prior to planned conflict with Russia in Syria. Any of them could have attacked the Skripals.
Today, Theresa May is claiming -astonishingly – that the UK attack on Syria is “to deter chemical weapons attacks in Syria and the UK”. I don’t think the motive for a Skripal false flag could be more starkly demonstrated.
We do not yet know how many children and other civilians have died so far in what the media always pretend are magically “pinpoint” attacks on Syria. Denying the “collateral damage” is part of the neo-con playbook. The danger is that they will not stop but continue to push, testing how far they can go in weakening Syrian government forces to promote their jihadist allies on the ground, before they spark a real Russian reaction. That way madness lies.
It is also worth noting that the most ardent supporters of this military action, outside Saudi Arabia and Israel, are the Blairites in the UK and the Clinton Democrats in the USA. The self-described “centrists” are actually the unhinged extremists in today’s politics.
This attack on Syria is, beyond doubt, a huge success for the machinations of Mohammed Bin Salman. Please do read my post of 8 March which sets out the background to his agenda, and I believe is essential to why we find our nations in military action again today. Despite the fact the vast majority of the people do not want this.
One additional thing occurred to me, Craig,. Oil is at a 3 year high after the heightened tensions and Saudi is preparing for its Aramco IPO. Is that totally coincidental? After all Saudi was not able to influence the oil markets as it used to and getting their Jihadis in Syria to do their dirty work results in a win for big money. The prize is big enough for May to ignore popular opinion and risk a collapse at the local elections
The prize is likely bigger than you think – basically it is the last prize left on the shelf.
Saudi is influencing oil prices – this time in conjunction with the US. The aim for the last few years has been to weaken oil prices. it is calculated that this will weaken Russia and maybe help the failed economies of the west to masquerade as functioning economies for a while longer.
No-one knows the true position with regard to Saudi reserves. There is less now than there once was and the marginal cost of production is likely rising. This explains why they are trying to offload Aramco and why the west is happy to change the rules so as to maintain Saudi state secrecy – wouldn’t do to let people know the truth, and also allows for the old maxim “always sell your horse before it dies” to be given meaning.
The last place with lots of oil, lots of gas, and lots of other natural resources ranging from water to gold is Russia. It is Russia that they are after. Russia is the ultimate prize. This explains events in Georgia, Ukraine, Syria and the whole “Putin is Hitler” narrative,
Look at the UK and its increasingly draconian hate speech laws, then look at what they are saying about Russia. Try saying the same kind of things about any other country or group of people and you will be banged up. Hatred of Russia is essentially state mandated. Ask why? and the answer is Russian natural resources, and a totally collapsed economy solely reliant on printed money.
Mr Murray is wilfully misconstruing the PM’s statement. I’m no supporter of May, but Mr Murray is indulging in the very behaviour that he critisiices in others. The quote from May is:-
“‘We cannot allow the use of chemical weapons to become normalised, within Syria, on the streets of the UK or anywhere else in our world.’”
The point here is “become normalised”
Does Mr Murray disagree with this assertion from May?
we can no longer allow the rogue nations of USA UK ISRAEL SAUDI ARABIA FRANCE THE EU AND NATO to do what they like, continually contravene international law and treaties and ‘normalise’ terrorism – there Roy, fixed it for you
Far too many Putin apologists around. The man is a thug.
Have you stopped beating your wife?
The use of chemical weapons became normalised when we condoned Saddam using them in the war against Iran and on the Kurds. But back then, he was OUR monster.
And if you really want to discourage the normalisation of the use of chemical weapons, it really is best to make sure a) that they have actually been used and b) who used them before dropping bombs on people.
We used them in WW1 when we bombed the Iraqis and also dropped mustard gas. LEO Charlton of the Royal Flying Corps refused to obey orders.
‘Most notably, Charlton resigned his position as the RAF’s Chief Staff Officer in Iraq as he objected to the bombing of Iraqi villages.’
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lionel_Charlton
It was ever thus.
Although there is some disagreement over whether Iraq was responsible.
The main point is surely that May, by referencing the Salisbury attack, is making it clear that, from a British point of view, these airstrikes are as much a shot across Russia’s bow as they are a response to the Syrian incident.
There is absolutely no need for her to reference Salisbury as whatever happened there should be totally unconnected to the Syrian incident. By her doing so she exposes a bit more the obvious game that is being played out by the West.
Who would possibly object to that. But the risk for that to be normalised is not the question and definitely not an argument for bombing Syria where recent gas attacks has not been executed by Mr Assad, even according to Mattis, but rather by NATO sponsored jihadi groups.
I see Thereas May, the most creepy oddball ever to set foot in Downing Street, used the G word in her speech today — a “grave” decision indeed. Good students of history and politics know what that supposedly means.
But even here she has screwed up. The idea that this cowardly attack was a “grave” decision is an abuse of the term. They have done everything possible to placate the Russians here and there’s a very good chance that they have failed.
Putin right now is debating whether to call their bluff or not. He would, as all Russians are inclined to do, weigh up the possibilities and come to a decision based largely on how resolute he considered his opponents to be.
Theresa May is weak. We know that. After losing a few seats in an election she locked herself in a room crying for 8 hours. She’s a weak, blundering idiot, truth be told. Her handling of Brexit makes that clear.
As for Trump, whilst possibly exaggerated, I do actually believe that the Russians have something on him. We might get to see some interesting video clips this week. Let’s be diplomatic and call them “leaks”.
Remember julian assange has been neutralised, still offline.
I hear the interesting video clips about to be released related to Hilary Clinton , not Trump – namely horrific images recovered from Anthony Weiner’s laptop (which he shared with his wife Huma Abedin).
There was someone from the military on the BBC saying the attacks were legal because they wer ‘self-defence’ ie. intended to deter future chemical attacks in Britain. If I understood him right that’s a pretty novel concept.
It’s the usual abuse of language and law. There are 2 possible scenarios where interventions like this are legal, when you are under direct immediate attack or on humanitarian grounds (where you intervene to protect others who are under direct attack). The second as I understand it requires a specific UN mandate which they do not have.
Interesting to see the Russian emphasis on international law. We shouldn’t assume that means they are going to take this lying down. It would be important in terms of any possible moral arguments down the road for them to be able to say that in responding the aggression they had the law on their side, which they do.
If on the other hand the Russians intended to back down and play it by ear, it’s hard to see why they would put such emphasis on the legalities.
The signs are that this will escalate, I’d say, and Russia will not lie down. They of course also know that May and Trump are weak leaders who lack support and credibility in their own countries and elsewhere.
“Interesting to see the Russian emphasis on international law. We shouldn’t assume that means they are going to take this lying down”
I suppose as an exercise, the Russians could apply to the UN Security Council for clearance to strike NATO forces who have launched an attack against a civilian neighbourhood in Damascus–as an “intervention to protect others who are under direct attack.”
Of course they will be voted down, but it would express a willingness to do so and bowing to international law at the same time. Parlour tricks but …
«wer ‘self-defence’ ie. intended to deter future chemical attacks in Britain. If I understood him right that’s a pretty novel concept.»
But was already quite familiar to “45 minutes” Tony Blair, and it worked once. The WMD-self-defense argument has been recently rediscovered by a leading Conservative MP:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/apr/11/mps-caution-may-against-syria-action-without-commons-vote
«Tom Tugendhat, the chair of the foreign affairs select committee, said: “Striking Syria’s stockpiles of chemical weapons would degrade their ability to commit further war crimes…”»
Using their definition of deterrence, you can basically attack anyone, anywhere, at any time. Of course, the flip side is that anyone else can attack anyone too.
You reap what you sow in this world. The silent majority who sit back and watch all this must be filled with doubts and concerns right now because this is simply chaos and anarchy.
The presumption that they have these stockpiles is an affront to the OPCW. If we could imagine that organization as actually impartial and self-respecting, this might steel their resolve to intervene more even handedly than they have in the Salisbury affair or in last year’s sketchy report in Syria.
One of the biting ironies of this situation is that the two countries that have most recently and very publicly completed the destruction of their chemical weapons stocks under OPCW supervision, stand accused, including by the US, which has stalled on its commitment to destroy its stocks (citing lack of funds–obscene), and Israel which has refused to sign up to the OPCW regime, much less to destroy its own stocks.
102 cruise missiles launched, zero deaths, 3 injured…how many were shot down…101?
Source for that? It certainly tallies with what Syrians were saying on Facebook before the post was taken down.
To be fair , a ‘weapon of mass destruction’ was unleashed on the streets of a British city not that long ago and killed no one. That being the case what’s a few cruise missiles between friends?
Is there any chance a confidence motion might succeed?
No chance – bear in mind most of the labour party are neo-cons and would rush to support may and her tory cabal
Would a failed confidence motion still be worth the exercise?
Jazza, Especially when they’d do anything to destroy their leader – the only individual who has spoken sense. (In politics, that is.
Where`s the Proof of the above statements?
The arguments of this blog have become potty. I expect the next post to mention lizards.
Here we have yet another bombing – killing and wounding people – and soldiers are people too.
Instead of condemning it on that basis, and indeed pointing out the influence of the Israelis – who just bombed the Syrians themselves, and the Saudis too – its all mixed up with Skripal false flag ridiculousness.
Not sure I agree, the attack on Syria was connected with the media hype over the skripal poisoning in terms of what is called “framing the narrative”. It has been proved many times that Intelligence services fabricate news stories and plant news stories in attempts to manipulate public opinion. This is also a perfect example.
The Russians passed a domestic law to allow assassinations… they have a history of carrying out these assassinations in this country by novel poisons. Assad has a 4 and a half year history of using chemical weapons.
Lets set aside the overwhelming likelyhoods here and join in the preposterous claims of the Russians. *They* wouldn’t be “framing the narrative”, fabricating or planting information – would they?
Why do we even think there was a Skripal poisoning? We’ve only those untrustworthy British Police and investigating experts saying it. Surely the Skripal’s could have been bumped off years ago and replaced by substitute ROBOTS… and perhaps all the hospital nurses were also ROBOTS… and the OPCW staff… and me… and everyone else on the planet… except those who haven’t been replaced yet and are followers of Craig’s blog. Scary isn’t it?
“Lets set aside the overwhelming likelyhoods here”
Are you referring to the increasing likelihood of the falsity of the incredible UK official narrative?
“Why do we even think there was a Skripal poisoning? We’ve only those untrustworthy British Police and investigating experts saying it.”
Straw man argument. Accepting that the Skripals were poisoned is not tantamount to accepting that they were poisoned with Novichok or that the Russian state poisoned them.
You’re really David Icke and I claim my five pounds.
The CIA’s ‘Operation Mockingbird’ being the proof of media manipulation by intelligence agencies should you require it.
Billy, added to what you have said we have had the head of MI6 spouting forth about an assassination manual, training in door knob assassination etc blah blah blah, how has the head of MIK stooped to regurgitating such lies? What we do know is the Government, as the public start seriously questioning Russia’s involvement amidst their failure to produce any evidence to support their highly suspect case, are now trying to push the message across. The Head of MI6 should know better. But if he is up there willing to lie for our Government, we don’t have any semblance of truth left in this country. Just a Dictatorship
Define “goes down”, please.
I have no connection with Fred.
Sorry my comments wer aimed at Roy Moore
I feel sick this morning, the attack on Syria is disgusting! How the hell can this government get away with this. We should be marching the streets. I am horrified and speechless to think as I slept children who have suffered for so long are being bombed again.
On a positive note, at least you slept. Some of us heard about it before going to bed and lay awake all night wondering if we’d ever get to pay the interest on our credit cards again.
Were you addressing me Jock Rockwell?
I’m responding to this sequence of comments on page 2 here:
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2018/04/just-whos-pulling-the-strings/comment-page-2/#comment-737532
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2018/04/just-whos-pulling-the-strings/comment-page-2/#comment-737541
but my replies don’t thread correctly.
The self righteous moral alliance consists of May, Macron, Trump, nutinyahoo and MBS. No comment.
Some of the greatest humanitarian names of the modern age, right up there alongside Blair, Bush, Cheney, Cameron and Hillary. People who wept bitter tears for the innocents of the Middle East and acted.
Russia could soon deal with France. Putin should tell Macron the Germans are marching on Paris. They’ll surrender by tea-time.
Letter that the UK National Security Advisor Mark Sidwell sent to Head of Nato about why he believed Russia was responsible for Nerve Agent attack on the Skripals
https://theduran.com/skripal-case-britain-letter-nato-blame-russia-guesses-single-source/
There are a great many “highly likely” qualifications in the letter Sidwell sent to NATO. It is my understanding that this usually means, in “intelligence-speak” that they have excellent local information which they believe to be true, but it comes from local agents and therefore a small element of qualification must be used. This is where they use the term “highly likely”- to indicate what they believe to be completely accurate information but from a local source who maybe a double agent.
I am still sticking to my theory that the nerve agent used on the Skripals may have come from the Syrian research lab targeted yesterday. A development programme there would provide ideal cover to deny it was held in Russia. At the same time Russian diplomats are clearly rattled and asking a lot of questions which makes me think this is a “rogue” operation of some sort from within Russia. It would also be more difficult for Russia to exercise control over comings and goings from a Syrian lab.
I think the words “highly likely” mean just what they say. People seem to try and interpret them as meaning “probably not” because they contradict what they want to believe.
Even when there is a great degree of certainty that someone committed a crime the media have to use the word “alleged” a lot till after there has been a trial and conviction. I don’t think we could take that as meaning the word “alleged” can be interpreted as meaning “probably innocent”.
However, this usage of the term “alleged” is typically associated with standards of due process to eventually adjudge the allegation. In this case, and in Salisbury, verdicts were rendered before the investigation could properly begin (and arguably were rendered, in the form of missile strikes here, to vitiate the investigation).
I think you need to do a hell of a lot more research and digging on this – either that – or you are a government lackey who has been brainwashed into believing the utterly ridiculous case the Government has put forward for the Skripal poisoning.
Since no-one with any sense is going to trust anything either side says, or any information they might glean of the internet, we have to fall back on that tried and tested legal principal, cui bono? The answer to that question is not Russia (see Tales of Portonblimp Down 2 for why not).
N_
April 14, 2018 at 11:37
“I have no connection with Fred.”
Thanks for clarifying that N_ I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt if that’s in my gift. Suspicion was aroused by your commonality of phrase with ‘fred’ on the subject of nationalism, particularly the Scottish variety.
Theresa May has said that “No other group could have carried out this attack. Indeed, Daesh for example does not even have a presence in Douma.” and the White House says of Jaysh Al-Islam, the group which was defending Douma, “We have no information to suggest that this group has ever used chemical weapons,” it said, adding that it was unlikely the group could have fabricated such a long number of reports pointing to regime involvement.
Interesting, then, to find this report from the impeccably anti-Assad Voice of America, suggesting that Jaysh used chlorine against Kurds in Aleppo:
https://www.voanews.com/a/kurdish-officials-rebels-may-have-used-chemicals-aleppo/3276743.html
I didn’t see my own posts on page 1 of this thread removed. Are you sure?
Having said that, it would be nice to have a link to the guidelines on this forum.
TASS: the Russian military say that Syria, using Russian-maintained air defence facilities, mainly Soviet-made, intercepted 71 of the 103 cruise missiles launched by the US and its allies.
According to that TASS report, missiles were launched from US, British and French aircraft and from US ships.
Another TASS report says there have been no casualties among civilians or the Syrian military.
Russia is convening a UNSC meeting to discuss the aggression committed by three of that body’s permanent members.
N, I have just tapped into Al Jazeera news station. The UNSC has voted against Russia’s proposal but, amidst very very stormy questions where it appears, a lot of countries are deeply cynical and seriously questioning whether there was any actual gas attack in Douma. I think therefore, there has probably been a lot of abstentions
Last nights co-ordinated attacks on a Syrian air base by US, UK and France was in many respects a show of strength and more symbolic than strategic.
That it happened at all is the result of 3 misguided world leaders determined to challenge the presence of Russia in Syria & its continuing support & assistance of the Assad regime. The alleged use of chemical weapons in the Syria conflict, and in particular Douma, gives cover for the air strikes but does little to resolve this particular problem.
May’s rush to arms when Parliament is in recess & her conflation of Salisbury & Syria is worrying on so many levels and gives reason to question her judgement. Perhaps we can have an emergency debate when Paliament reconvenes on Monday??
my understanding is that May is going to inform parliament about the airstrikes on Monday – once they are all back from a month long holiday – talking about her actions after the fact rather than seeking parliamentary debate – May is hideous and is acting outside british law as well as international law
Since 2002 the 9/11 families have been litigating against Saudi Arabia and related entities whom they’ve charged with responsibility in the 9/11 attacks, according to Jersey widow, Lori Van Auken. For years the complex case was dealt with major setbacks, mainly due to rulings that went along with the Saudi defense team’s claims that the plaintiffs had insufficient evidence and Saudi Arabia was protected by sovereign immunity. Declassification of the 28 pages on July 15, 2016 as well as passage of the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act (JASTA) that September changed everything. A convergence of events leading to the fifteenth anniversary of the attacks brought momentum that even the power of the security state could not withstand.
https://www.911tap.org/557-news-releases/734-9-11-case-against-saudis-moves-forward
What is happening now is a link in a chain of consequences that stretch back beyond 2001. The anti-war movement has not been able to process the evidence brought forward by 9/11 critics, and has dismissed it without engagement.
To answer the question, ‘Who is pulling the strings ?’, it is clear- to those who have engaged with said evidence, where to look.
The Russian Ministry of Defence given a press briefing now. Russian assets monitored all missiles, numbering 103,
No targets of consequence were targeted.This was in reality an expensive fireworks display achieveing zilch, but impressing the Western Media Propaganda machine and their braindead war groupies.
Would appear that an undertable deal was made for a token attack to satisfy the numpties as in Shayrat airbase last year. Otherwise Putin is operating the Rope a Dope tactic and keeping his powder dry.
Mattis in his press conference states it is only one attack and no others are planned.This is all theatre, but is terrifying not just the people but the warmongers. High stakes poker for the life of the planet.
Putin is not wasting his missile supply on targeting inconsequental low value attacks.
It will be 24 hrs before the war fog clears and the political and military consequences can be assessed.
These attacks are illegal under International and UN Law.
No Congress,British Parliament or French Assembly approval.
Trump ,May and Macron are now war criminals under Nuremberg Statute.
each of the cretins you mention have only been in post for a year or two – what does that say about their culpability to the deep state, corrupt security services and any old hidden rogues
Just Because You’re Paranoid, Doesn’t Mean They’re Not Out to Get You
The bias of the MSM over the past few weeks has been quite literally jaw dropping and the Russophobia has been clearly evident to all of us on this blog except for the usual suspects.
The big question for us all is how this is perceived by the public at large?
So I find myself watching a bit of crap TV – The Gadget Show – 7pm Friday 13th – trying to take my mind off thinking about the possibility of WW3.
5 minutes in – an item about a £20k delivery drone being tested by the Russian Postal service appears with the presenters setting up the story line akin to a ‘youv’e been framed’ clip’. Guess what – the drone crashes into the side of a building…………….ha ha ha
Not too much of a problem there then. I suppose we could say at worst they are ridiculing Russian technology. But here’s the rub – the final sentence of the story and I quote
“so they say it was wifi influence that got in the way…..as its from Russia I absolutely believe anything they say ”
WTF – this is the Gadget Show – why is this featuring on the show – and why now? Educating the kids perhaps. If you do want to see it you will need to go onto Channel 5 catchup. It might be me reading too much into it but watch closely the presenter and Craig Charles after the line is delivered – not looking too comfortable with what’s just occured.
My 87 year old mum was distressed this morning by the “terrible news”. Her current affairs diet is controlled by the BBC and whatever I can sneak in under the radar. Even my mum can see this as weak propaganda bs. She got a new term in her vocabulary in the last month; false flag.
Hell, Helen Keller could figure this stuff out.
About 5 mins from start
What we really need to know to understand the Skripal case is just what were the Skripals up to exactly and on who’s behalf, and what, if any connection could it have had with the situation in Syria and who would want to either facilitate it or indeed to stop it. If engaged themselves in anything nefarious involving chemical weapons on behalf of the UK, the US or some middle-eastern country, then it’s in some ways a case of the biter bit, whatever their intentions or role a well-meaning spoke has been put in their wheels, alternatively the whole thing has been a fabrication and they and their pets will now fade into well-deserved obscurity.
Tony M, your questions become even more valid when considered how Yulia Skripal is being detained without access to communication and the CIA suddenly offering them new identities in the USA. Over the course of the past week I have tended to the view that they were involved in some double dealing with the UK and USA and are active participants in the whole thing. I guess we will never know.
Boris Johnson tweeted that he welcomed the strikes. At least 100 missiles struck Syria at 4am, China is among the countries denouncing the attack in Syria.
Of course it’s disgraceful that Theresa May can launch an attack on another nation without parliamentary consent. It’s now beginning to look like the PM was waiting on the get go from the orange man child Trump.
May and Macron signed their own political death warrants tonight.
Yeah I think France has the highest Muslim population in Europe, of any city Paris, so I doubt the strike would’ve went down well in Le Hexagon. As for Theresa May the next GE is scheduled for 2022, four more years to go, and god knows how many more bombing sorties.
Boris Johnson may have been telling everyone else to welcome the British bombing, rather than saying he himself welcomes it.
“Welcome the news of UK military strikes against major chemical weapons facilities in Syria alongside our US and French allies. The world is united in its disgust for any use of chemical weapons, but especially against civilians“
I propose that from now on, the combined ‘allied’ forces of the US,France,UK are named the ‘ISIS Air Force‘.
Seconded
Were you wanting a few scandalous remarks on page 3 as well?
Splendid. There will be no more Russkie doorknobs in Salisbury or elsewhere. Porton Down can recall their stocks and use the pets incinerator before sprinkling the ashes on Salisbury plain.
So if I disagree with what you’re saying here (and I do), and tell you to go fuck yourself, that is between you and me? I don’t think so.
Right wing Blairite labour MP went to see the Saudis just before the attack