Author Topic: Novichok nerve agent attack - UK  (Read 12406 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.



Offline Quetzalcoatl

  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 4447
Re: Novichok nerve agent attack - UK
« Reply #272 on: October 14, 2018, 04:42:19 PM »
Who is this Craig Murray who is apparently an oracle to you? Have you checked out any other sources apart from him?

Online Rai

  • PIZZASAURUS
  • Global Moderator
  • Too Much Spare Time
  • *****
  • Posts: 6606
Re: Novichok nerve agent attack - UK
« Reply #273 on: October 15, 2018, 12:22:17 PM »
Who is this Craig Murray who is apparently an oracle to you? Have you checked out any other sources apart from him?

He is a failed ambassador who has been peddling Putinist conspiracy theories about the Skripal assassination attempt. Even though he became what he is due to his experience with Western human rights abuses in Central Asia, he is still Putinist scum.


He has been thoroughly debunked

http://twitter.com/EliotHiggins/status/1047598356535676928
« Last Edit: October 15, 2018, 12:25:15 PM by Rai »

Offline goatboy1290

  • Not Enough Spare Time
  • **
  • Posts: 114
Re: Novichok nerve agent attack - UK
« Reply #274 on: December 25, 2018, 04:43:23 PM »
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2018/12/british-government-covert-anti-russian-propaganda-and-the-skripal-case/

Quote
So what do we have here? We have a programme, the Integrity Initiative, whose entire purpose is to pump out covert disinformation against Russia, through social media and news stories secretly paid for by the British government. And we have the Skripals’ MI6 handler, the BBC, Porton Down, the FCO, the MOD and the US Embassy, working together in a group under the auspices of the Integrity Initiative. The Skripal Case happened to occur shortly after a massive increase in the Integrity Initiative’s budget and activity, which itself was a small part of a British Government decision to ramp up a major information war against Russia.

Offline goatboy1290

  • Not Enough Spare Time
  • **
  • Posts: 114
Re: Novichok nerve agent attack - UK
« Reply #275 on: December 29, 2018, 06:58:22 AM »
A recent UN panel (see link) proves beyond any reasonable doubt that the White Helmet 'humanitarian' group is anything other than a sub contracted paramilitary organisation, affiliated with various terrorist outfits and whose sole aim of destabilizing the Assad regime.



The extensive report backs up claims made by courageous independent journalists (Vanessa Beeley and Eva Bartlett) who spent months among the rubble while MM journalists wrote propaganda puff pieces attempting to undermine the horrific truth of the situation. I myself shared eye witness videos on this thread that have since been corroborated en masse by the evidence collected in this UN report.

https://www.rt.com/op-ed/447385-white-helmets-un-panel/

Quote
Utter silence. That is the sound of Western corporate media days after a more than one-hour-long panel on the White Helmets at the United Nations on December 20.
Journalists were present, so the silence isn’t due to lack of access. And in any case it was live streamed on the UNTV channel, and remains available on Youtube for keen observers to watch.

More likely, the silence is due to the irrefutable documentation presented on the faux-rescue group’s involvement in criminal activities, which include organ theft, working with terrorists — including as snipers — staging fake rescues, thieving from civilians, and other non-rescuer behaviour.

This raises some interesting questions.

1. If RT news are simply a propaganda outlet why is their news channel the only one carrying the vitally important outcome of this independent UN report?

2. Given that the White Helmets group is not a volunteer outfit but rather its members were paid ($150 pm each) with US/UK taxpayers money, is it reasonable to assume that our MM and governments have made us complicit in war crimes?

3. Given that the crime of stealing organs from Syrian civilians who had sought help from the White Helmets (many of them children) seems to have been widespread was the White Helmet outfit also a profit making enterprise. This is a sickening level of evil is it not?!

4. And most important of all, what are the implications for the already fragile trust people have in their democracy and the MM should this shameful incident ever come to light. Let us not forget that our MM and political establishment led the charge for the White Helmets to receive the Nobel peace prize!

5. Finally, what is the prognosis for the Skeptical movement when self professed 'Skeptics' on one of its most respected websites refuse to even look behind the tissue of lies at the truth.

It will be interesting to see if this post elicits any response.

On the Skripal affair I remain doubtful but draw no final conclusions. I may yet be totally wrong. On this issue however it seems I have been proven right. This shameful episode raises serious concerns about the extent to which our own MM are compromised by the deep state. The news is clearly a dirty, murky business but there are good journalists out there, doing good work and swimming against the tide. It is our job as citizens and especially as skeptics to support such people and to hold the charlatans to account.To help create a climate where truthful and professional journalism can flourish.

My final thought, Skripal affair aside it is clear that an information war is raging on a scale not seen since the cold war. War is a two sided affair. It is time to admit that the truth has had many casualties on both sides and start the process of bringing our skeptical input to bear wherever we can. There are no 'civilians' in this information war. We are all foot soldiers for truth if we choose to be. That is, and has always been my motivation in being a skeptic.

(The report comes from the Global Counter Terrorism Research Network - under UN resolution 2129 - https://www.un.org/sc/ctc/news/2016/10/21/global-counter-terrorism-research-network-fact-sheet/ )
« Last Edit: December 29, 2018, 08:19:14 AM by goatboy1290 »

diessoli

  • Guest
Re: Novichok nerve agent attack - UK
« Reply #276 on: December 29, 2018, 09:23:58 AM »
Does that really meet your standard for 'beyond reasonable doubt'?

But maybe you have seen the actual report and accompanying material? I couldn't find it. It's not on the web site of the foundation that created the report (http://democracyfund.ru/).

Apart from that report (which is no 'UN report' btw), we have the testimony of Vanessa Beeley which is part of a conspiracy mongering site (what they write about climate change says it all really (I like to use that topic as a go-to metric since I happen to know quite a bit about it)).

I don't find all that very convincing.

D.

Offline goatboy1290

  • Not Enough Spare Time
  • **
  • Posts: 114
Re: Novichok nerve agent attack - UK
« Reply #277 on: December 29, 2018, 02:14:19 PM »
Quote
But maybe you have seen the actual report and accompanying material? I couldn't find it. It's not on the web site of the foundation that created the report (http://democracyfund.ru/).

The 'report' was the verbal testimony of sevearl agencies working under the auspices and direction of the UN and authorised by a specific UN resolution 2129. I thought the last link I submitted made that clear. democracyfund.ru was just one contributor, albeit a major one as far as I can see.

Here is the actual UN site that describes what the panel entailed:

https://www.unmultimedia.org/avlibrary/asset/2338/2338981/

Quote
DESCRIPTION
Independent researchers from different countries and civil society representatives studied the activities of the so-called “White Helmets” organization in Syria and shared their findings with the international community.

Once we are beyond the semantics of what constitutes a 'report' and whether a 'discussion' might qualify it might be useful to actually analyse what is said. Wouldn't that be a novel idea!!! There was well over an hour of testimony.

Quote
we have the testimony of Vanessa Beeley which is part of a conspiracy mongering site (what they write about climate change says it all really (I like to use that topic as a go-to metric since I happen to know quite a bit about it)).

The UN seem happy to consider Vanessa Beeley's testimony. Aside from that she is now not the only voice offering corroborating evidence. Eventually, you have to admit that such evidence cannot be ignored. And what is this 'conspiracy mongering' site you refer to? Seems a bit slack, I could go on the BBC website or indeed any MM website and find opinions, articles, op-ed's arguing climate change isn't real. Does that discredit the whole site and anyone else that reports on it?

Look, one can almost marvel at the ability of nearly every poster on this website to side step the issue of evidence in favour of character assassination and straw man tactics. There is a large and growing consensus that one does not want to be on the wrong side of when history judges these events. At least I don't want to!

diessoli

  • Guest
Re: Novichok nerve agent attack - UK
« Reply #278 on: December 29, 2018, 03:17:43 PM »
Quote
But maybe you have seen the actual report and accompanying material? I couldn't find it. It's not on the web site of the foundation that created the report (http://democracyfund.ru/).

The 'report' was the verbal testimony of sevearl agencies working under the auspices and direction of the UN and authorised by a specific UN resolution 2129. I thought the last link I submitted made that clear. democracyfund.ru was just one contributor, albeit a major one as far as I can see.

Um, no. your link does not make that clear at all.
Where does it say that several agencies are involved?


Quote
Here is the actual UN site that describes what the panel entailed:

https://www.unmultimedia.org/avlibrary/asset/2338/2338981/

That is what I actually already looked at (always go to the primary source, right?).


Quote
Quote
DESCRIPTION
Independent researchers from different countries and civil society representatives studied the activities of the so-called “White Helmets” organization in Syria and shared their findings with the international community.

Once we are beyond the semantics of what constitutes a 'report' and whether a 'discussion' might qualify it might be useful to actually analyse what is said. Wouldn't that be a novel idea!!! There was well over an hour of testimony.

This is not just about semantics. An official report carries a lot more weight and there will actually be proper documentation accompanying that report.

You're not resting your claim "sevearl agencies working under the auspices and direction of the UN" on just that one sentence that says something about independent researchers, do you?
Did it it occur to you that the UN techies that uploaded the video maybe just used the copy given by the panel organisers and posted that as the description?
Maybe you should watch the video.


Quote
Quote
we have the testimony of Vanessa Beeley which is part of a conspiracy mongering site (what they write about climate change says it all really (I like to use that topic as a go-to metric since I happen to know quite a bit about it)).

The UN seem happy to consider Vanessa Beeley's testimony. Aside from that she is now not the only voice offering corroborating evidence. Eventually, you have to admit that such evidence cannot be ignored. And what is this 'conspiracy mongering' site you refer to? Seems a bit slack, I could go on the BBC website or indeed any MM website and find opinions, articles, op-ed's arguing climate change isn't real. Does that discredit the whole site and anyone else that reports on it?

http://21stcenturywire.com/ is the web site that she is an editor of, not just a contributor. And yes if I find such obvious drivel on a news site it does discredit the whole outlet since it makes clear what kind of quality standard they have.

Also: it's not the UN that invited her but the hosts of that panel (Russia and Syria).


Quote

Look, one can almost marvel at the ability of nearly every poster on this website to side step the issue of evidence in favour of character assassination and straw man tactics. There is a large and growing consensus that one does not want to be on the wrong side of when history judges these events. At least I don't want to!

I can't speak for others but maybe that's because your evidence is a) not convincing and b) rather difficult to engage with.
In the video we just see a few slides with so called eye-witness testimony but no corroborating material. They say they have hundreds of the videos they took online for public consumption, but at least I can't seem to find it.
So all we have to go on is this video and we're supposed to just take the participants word for it?
How can one engage with that kind of evidence?


D.





Online Rai

  • PIZZASAURUS
  • Global Moderator
  • Too Much Spare Time
  • *****
  • Posts: 6606
Re: Novichok nerve agent attack - UK
« Reply #279 on: December 29, 2018, 04:18:49 PM »
I would like to see a single example of verifiable, actual evidence that Vanessa Beeley has ever offered. Just one.

I would also like to know why are we still talking about thoroughly discredited Russian/Syrian propaganda bullshit about the White Helmets on a sceptical site.

Offline goatboy1290

  • Not Enough Spare Time
  • **
  • Posts: 114
Re: Novichok nerve agent attack - UK
« Reply #280 on: December 29, 2018, 05:32:43 PM »
Given that the UN are now lumped in with RT news as a discredited propoganda outlet one might wonder what avenue actually remains for any alternative information to make it into public discourse.

I have previously tried in vain to get people to comment on first hand video testimony, interviews conducted by Vanessa Beeley of familys who suffered at the hands of the White Helmets. I suppose at this end of the game we are just going to have to agree to disagree.

If you let me know what your version of a 'verifiable' source is I may yet be able to provide one!

Offline PANTS!

  • One leg at a time.
  • Poster of Extraordinary Magnitude
  • **********
  • Posts: 11403
  • What seals? I auditioned for this job.
Re: Novichok nerve agent attack - UK
« Reply #281 on: December 29, 2018, 06:46:24 PM »
Go back to Russia, you schill. 
Now where I come from
We don't let society tell us how it's supposed to be
-Uptown, Prince 👉

The world is on its elbows and knees
It's forgotten the message and worships the creeds

Online Rai

  • PIZZASAURUS
  • Global Moderator
  • Too Much Spare Time
  • *****
  • Posts: 6606
Re: Novichok nerve agent attack - UK
« Reply #282 on: December 31, 2018, 11:06:48 AM »
Given that the UN are now lumped in with RT news as a discredited propoganda outlet one might wonder what avenue actually remains for any alternative information to make it into public discourse.

I have previously tried in vain to get people to comment on first hand video testimony, interviews conducted by Vanessa Beeley of familys who suffered at the hands of the White Helmets. I suppose at this end of the game we are just going to have to agree to disagree.

If you let me know what your version of a 'verifiable' source is I may yet be able to provide one!

A propaganda event hosted by Russia and Syria on UN premises is really not something produced by the UN, you know. Any state can have their people talk about any bullshit.

The video testimony is unverifiable. There is no confirmation on the identity of the interviewees, no independent verification of their stories and it all comes from a known propaganda hack. It is anecdotal evidence at best and cheaply fabricated lies at worst. Is there anything you can provide besides oral testimonies of unkown individuals recorded at an unkown location about events that are only known from this particular interview?

Bearing in mind that no source outside of Russia and Assadists has ever confirmed any part of the smears against the White Helmets?


Offline goatboy1290

  • Not Enough Spare Time
  • **
  • Posts: 114
Re: Novichok nerve agent attack - UK
« Reply #283 on: January 05, 2019, 08:48:09 PM »
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2018/12/the-strange-mind-of-christopher-nigel-donnelly.html

The 'Institute for Statecraft' and its offshoot the 'Integrity Initiative' have links to both the White Helmets and the Salisbury/Skripal affair. They are funded by the FCO (UK) despite claiming to be an NGO (https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2018-12-12/debates/298F9A3C-307A-40ED-9CB1-3B2A98F14165/InstituteForStatecraftIntegrityInitiative?highlight=integrity%20initiative#contribution-8E3E15C6-664B-4FDC-B1EE-E959391DD5B1)

Pablo Miller appears repeatedly in key documents uncovered by 'anonymous', the so called 'Hactivist' group. I make no comment on the voracity of these documents but would direct people to review the content. PAblo Miller was Skripal's handler and he is implicated in the creation of the so called 'Steel Dossier', apparently now de-bunked as largely a work of fiction. Perhaps this last point is highly pertinent to our discussions on this issue here. It certainly deserves more attention, especially given the apparent link between apparently separate issues of such import. Why was a D-notice served on Pablo Miller immediately after the Skripal poisoning? Perhaps to limit the exposure regarding these links? Is it possible (as I have been saying for months) that there is more to this than meets the eye? These are not Russian documents, this is a British Information warfare outfit. If the documents are not faked (possible but unlikely on this scale?) then we have a new avenue to investigate. The financing is not in question (as the above Hansard link makes clear), the main issue is the association of certain key individuals, Skripal and Miller primarily. In the world of police work such a link would be of critical importance. Skripal was not just an EX spy. He was perhaps an active part of the UK's premier information warfare activities against the Russians. This gives both sides a potential motive depending on his role. That becomes the most imporaatnt question. What was his role.

Full link to 'Moon of Alabama' article - The 'Integrity Initiative' - A Military Intelligence Operation, Disguised As Charity, To Create The "Russian Threat"

Full link to Cybergerilla 'Anonymous' trenche of documents relating to the Integrity Initiative - https://www.cyberguerrilla.org/blog/operation-integrity-initiative-british-informational-war-against-all-part-4/

Quote
As we wrote in April:

Pablo Miller, a British MI6 agent, had recruited Sergej Skripal. The former MI6 agent in Moscow, Christopher Steele, was also involved in the case. Skripal was caught by the Russian security services and went to jail. Pablo Miller, the MI6 recruiter, was also the handler of Sergej Skripal after he was released by Russia in a spy swap. He reportedly also lives in Salisbury. Both Christopher Steele and Pablo Miller work for Orbis Business Intelligence which created the "Dirty Dossier" about Donald Trump.
In 1979, before becoming a spy, Pablo Miller served at the 4th Royal Tank Regiment. (BBC Newsnight 'journalist' Mark Urban, who recently published a book based on interviews with Skripal, served together with Miller in the same regiment.) The 4th regiment's motto was "Fear Naught". Pablo Miller's email address given in the Chris Donnelly list is "fearnaught4rtr@hotmail.com".

In March, at the very beginning of the Skripal affair and before there was any talk of 'Novichok', we asked if Skripal was involved in creating the now debunked "Dirty Dossier" and if that was a reason for certain British insiders to move him out of the way:

Here are some question:
Did Skripal help Steele to make up the "dossier" about Trump?
Were Skripal's old connections used to contact other people in Russia to ask about Trump dirt?
Did Skripal threaten to talk about this?
If there is a connection between the dossier and Skripal, which seems very likely to me, then there are a number of people and organizations with potential motives to kill him. Lots of shady folks and officials on both sides of the Atlantic were involved in creating and running the anti-Trump/anti-Russia campaign. There are several investigations and some very dirty laundry might one day come to light. Removing Skripal while putting the blame on Russia looks like a convenient way to get rid of a potential witness.
The most recent release of Integrity Initiative documents includes lots of in-depth reports (pdf) about foreign media reactions to the Skripal affair. One wonders why the Initiative commissioned such research (pdf) and paid for it.

After two years the Muller investigation found zero evidence for the alleged 'collusion' between Russia and the Trump campaign that the fake Steele dossier suggested. The whole collusion claim is a creation by 'former' British intelligence operatives who likely acted on request of U.S. intelligence leaders Clapper and Brennan. How deep was the Russia specialist Chris Donnelly and his Institute for Statecraft involved in this endeavor?


After reading through all the released Initiative papers and lists one gets the impression of a secret military intelligence operation, disguised as a public NGO. Financed by millions of government money the Institute for Statecraft and the Integrity Initiative work under a charity label to create and disseminate disinformation to the global public and back into the government and military itself.

The paranoia about Russia, which objectively does way less harm than the 'western' "rules based system" constantly creates, is illogical and not based on factual analysis. It creates Russia as an "enemy" when it is none. It hypes a "threat" out of hot air. The only people who profit from this are the propagandists themselves and the companies and people who back them. 

The Initiatives motto "Defend Democracy Against Disinformation" is a truly Orwellian construct. By disseminating propaganda and using it to influence the public, parliament, the military and governments, the Institute actively undermines the democratic process that depends on the free availability of truthful information.

It should be shut down immediately.