Operation Nina – the Novichok Hoax

David Macilwain

There’s no shortage of commentators in the Western mainstream telling us how Russia planned its attack on the Skripals, or how Syria planned its chemical weapons massacres. Anyone who expresses a different opinion from this accepted narrative stands condemned and belittled as a “conspiracy theorist”. But the criticism works both ways – for us it is they who are the conspiracy theorists, as well as the conspirators.

The current impasse between the UK and Russia, initiated by the Skripal poisoning on March 4th and

crystallised by the identification of two Russian “suspects” last week, calls for new thinking. Despite what appeared to most Russians – and “dissident” observers – as the complete exposure of the UK’s dirty game, where its “smoking gun” evidence was quickly trashed by the appearance of the two “guns” on Russian TV, the UK’s leaders and their dutiful media remained unrepentant.

What we are dealing with here is effectively two conspiracy theories, but only one conspirator. The smallest details of the UK’s conspiracy theory are familiar to all of us, even if incomprehensible and stretching credibility beyond breaking point:

Two Russian agents, now identified, visited Salisbury in March carrying a bottle of Novichok disguised as perfume, and poured it on the front door knob of a former Russian double agent. Although hospitalised, along with his unwitting daughter, Sergei Skripal survived the assassination attempt. Not only did the Russian plot to kill him fail, but UK intelligence discovered the toxic substance as well as the assassins, and took extremely punitive measures against the Kremlin.

That’s their theory.

The Russians’ conspiracy theory goes like this:

Those in the UK’s version of the Kremlin – which may be No 10 Downing Street, GCHQ or Porton Down – devised “Operation Nina”, as I have labelled it, as a major “psy-op” to counter Russia’s strategic successes in Syria, where British special forces and mercenaries faced defeat. These forces had already used false-flag chemical weapons provocations in Syria with some success, and were planning another one in Eastern Ghouta, staged by their “White Helmets” poseurs. Staging a similar “chemical weapon attack” on the streets of Salisbury was a clever way to bring the chemical weapon threat home and link that threat to Russia. The wider desire to keep Iranian and Russian gas out of the European market was also a key motivator of the UK’s Syria strategy.

Following from this we can see there are also two “arguments for the defence” – refutations of the accusations made by both sides against the other. But it’s important to note that these arguments are different; the UK initiated the accusations of the use of chemical weapons by both Syria and Russia, while Russia and Syria initially “denied the claims”. (Notwithstanding the UK’s claims and widespread belief that Russia and Syria had initiated the chemical attacks that it was responding to)

Regardless of one’s affiliation however, what actually counts is evidence, both scientific and circumstantial, and more generally in terms of motive and reward for the act committed. Unfortunately, in the current media and political climate in Western society real evidence counts for little; if it did I wouldn’t be writing this article. But it is to be hoped that sooner or later such evidence will be considered by sensible informed people of good will; their conclusions will be monumental and devastating.

So what of this “evidence” on the veracity of the conflicting claims?

Russia’s “conspiracy theory” seems plausible. There can be little argument that the alleged Chlorine/Sarin attack in Douma did not take place as claimed; there was no motive for such an attack by Syrian or Russian forces, and no evidence one had taken place. No credible samples were taken from casualties and no residues of chemicals were found by the OPCW.

At the same time the actions and motives of the White Helmets and their partners in Jaish al Islam were quite clear. Enough is already known about the matrix of connections between these terrorist groups and mercenaries and the UK and its coalition allies to incriminate them.

Tying the events in Syria to those claimed in Salisbury is more circumstantial, but nevertheless quite compelling. The timing of the attack on the Skripals and its apparent coordination with the Syrian campaign in Ghouta is highly suggestive, while the link between Porton Down and Syria is substantial, if not umbilical. And it is something no self-respecting conspiracy analyst could ignore.

What we may ignore however, is the need to deny the UK’s claims against Russia over the Skripal poisoning. Those claims have already been thoroughly debunked by many serious commentators and analysts, – though as noted earlier – with little effect. More persuasive perhaps is that they have also been quite effectively debunked by “one of the world’s leading experts on Chemical Weapons” – former British Army commander of NATO’s CBRN force, Hamish de Bretton Gordon. With 23 years’ service in the army in the Middle East and Balkans and close links to Porton Down, one could hardly doubt his expertise, and might be reluctant to question his knowledge of chemical weapons agents like Sarin and “Novichok”.

It is De Bretton Gordon’s expertise and advice that dominates the Western media’s commentary and narrative on the alleged chemical weapons attacks in both Salisbury and Syria, as well as the statements and actions of the UK government and its allies. That opinion is of course quite crucial, in evaluating the threat posed by the use of these weapons and in calculating a proportionate response. It is also his opinion and testimony that has been crucial to the establishment of the “Novichok narrative” – something now ingrained in Western populations, and daily reinforced in their media.

Without this expert opinion on the presence and danger of Novichok in Salisbury, the whole Skripal poisoning affair would be nothing more than a “scare” or a hoax.

So what does Hamish de Bretton Gordon say about this deadly nerve agent, that is “seven to ten times as toxic as VX”? How much Novichok was contained in that bottle of Nina Ricci “Premier Jour” that would make it definitely the “dernier jour” for its victim?

“Less than half an eggcup full” he saidRepeatedly .

have already examined the relevant technical details of Novichok-type nerve agents as well as the incapacitating agent BZ that was found in the Skripal samples, and recommend further examination of the links in that article. This paper in particular gives a good overview of the agents, while this report details both the synthesis and analysis of Novichok agents by Iranian scientists, for the OPCW.

Thanks however to De Bretton Gordon’s expert opinion, it is only necessary to focus here on the toxicity of Novichok. According to the OPCW, the LD 50 – that is the quantity required to kill 50% of the target population – of VX is 10 milligrams by skin contact. The equivalent for Novichok would be less than 1.5 milligrams as he explains:

We now know that the attack in Salisbury, the ultra-secret and very deadly nerve agent novichok was used. The two Russian suspects we know are Russian military intelligence officers and they brought the novichok from Russia with them two days before the attack.

It is thought to be 10 times more toxic than VX and very persistent. Probably less than half an egg cup full of agent transfixed the world for two weeks and greatly increased the tensions between the west and Russia.”

Half an eggcup full is about 15 mls or 15 grams, which is about 10,000 times the LD 50. So had this amount of Novichok been distributed around Salisbury there was sufficient to kill about 5,000 people. FIVE THOUSAND PEOPLE.

So how to explain that not even the Skripals, who allegedly got the stuff on their hands, were killed by it? What is so difficult to understand about this?

If Russia – for reasons unknown – had really wanted to kill Sergei Skripal with this toxic nerve agent, why wouldn’t they have brought it in a small glass phial containing just one drop – about fifty times the LD50 – and spilt its contents on him while he was sitting on the park bench?

But we needn’t ask that question, because Russia didn’t want to kill Sergei Skripal or his daughter Yulia, leave alone kill or injure half the population of Salisbury – by accident.

The question we do have to ask is why thousands of highly trained scientists in the UK refuse to call out the lie being told by their government; the Novichok story is a highly toxic HOAX!

can you spare $1.00 a month to support independent media

OffGuardian does not accept advertising or sponsored content. We have no large financial backers. We are not funded by any government or NGO. Donations from our readers is our only means of income. Even the smallest amount of support is hugely appreciated.

Our Bitcoin JTR code is: 1JR1whUa3G24wXpDyqMKpieckMGGW2u2VX

newest oldest most voted
Notify of

Where is Julia?
Where is Sergei Skripal?
Where is DS Nick Bailey, his wife and children?
Where is the doc who gave Julia CPR?


It is… amazing, how Higgins manages to dig up so much exclusive material relating to stories of white hot importance, before the rest of the UK’s media… combined. How does he do it? Beat them over and over again? But even that story doesn’t seem to worry or prod them into doing some investigative journalism of their own to verify his ‘scoops of poop.’

Mulga Mumblebrain
Mulga Mumblebrain

It’s just like the Zionazi, ‘former’ organiser of Islamophobia in the USA, Rita Katz, of the SITE group, who nearly always scooped everyone else with first releases of jihadist videos, of beheadings etc. What an amazing ‘terrorist hunter’, as she is known by the Islamophobia industry, she is. A real comrade-in-arms to Higgins and other similar hate and lie-mongers.

Call me AL
Call me AL

I do not think that you can put the Off-Guardian in the same sentence of the MSM; the UK MSM, like the US are just paid propagandists.


He invents it, just like he did over Kiev’s stitch-up of the MH17 “investigation”.


The speculation is that for Higgins to have the information about Colonel Anatoly Chepiga, he or someone else had to have hacked a database or databases, or he received the information from a hacker or hackers. Either way, the information was not obtained as open source information. With his current close ties to The Atlantic Council, Higgins may not even be doing much of his own research but simply receiving work already done and all he has to do is put his name and that of Bellingcat to it.


It’s pretty clear that Higgins’ operation is just a conduit for NATO/UK/US listening stations across UK and Europe to get material into the public domain for their psyops programmes. I for one don’t believe he does much really, once you’re on the gravy train it just keeps giving, they dish the shit and he doles it out.

The whole Skripal affair is a pure psyops operation where the British acted hastily for reasons which we can only speculate about and rolled it into one of their COBRA emergency response exercises. They will have had several bio-accident or terror scenarios worked out for Salisbury and the areas around purely because of Porton Down and the other many military installations and service contractors thereabouts.

The other story lines which have been produced are pot boiler to keep this whole fictitious threat in the public conciousness for any old war they chose to wage, military or economic and there are many possible flash points at the moment built on false flags and fake narratives.


Higgins using the oldest trick in the book a looky-likey to fool the public. Actually as Craig Murray says “But once you understand is that – as Bellingcat confirm if you read it closely – only the photo on the left is Chepiga, you start to ask questions.” And it appears not to be the same person really…

Clearly the Guardian’s hack in Moscow Andrew Roth asked no questions of Higgins’ “Sofa Search” techniques which have been exposed numerous time to be nothing more than hoaxes. But hoaxes paid for by the Atlantic Council the NATO funded think tank. Of course Higgins motivated by NATO’s largess says he got lucky and can tell it’s the same person in the photos, not because of electronic face recognition profiling [provided by Craig Murray] but, wait for it, the shape of his ears???

Surely the Graun itself is better positioned with a person in Moscow to investigate this case, rather than take the word of some faker like Higgins who’s never set foot in Russia, speaks no Russian and constantly speculates about images he’s found on the internet. Apparently not.

Now if the Guardian thinks this is serious journalism worth paying for Viner is seriously barking.


Currently, so far as we can see, there’s even less evidence than Murray allows. There’s only thin and unconfirmed data that Chepiga exists in the form described. No evidence that alleged photo is of him and no evidence it even represents a real person and isn’t the result of manipulation.

We don’t claim it isn’t Chepiga. Maybe it is. But there’s no reason to accept this at this stage – and it really doesn’t appear even from Bellingcat’s own ‘research’ that this photo and those of ‘Ruslan’ are the same individual.


It is always worth checking https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/
and today is no exception.
“Matt” might want to take a look too. On the other hand…

Paul X
Paul X

Very well worth a read! Thanks. The media have never been more certain, one man in Salisbury WAS a Senior Russian Colonel in a Special Forces Unit. Except he wasn’t! If they were Agents, which Craig Murray seems to think likely then they were there to in some way supervise/observe when Sergei made his decision about whether to return to Russia on the conditions Julia had communicated to him. If the answer was Yes then maybe the agents were there to assist/protect the party on their way. Instead MI6 – undoubtedly also present at such a crucial moment – must have decided they couldn’t let the double spy to go, the likelihood of him turning for a 3rd time was too great and after 8 years working with the British SIS knew too much. I suppose it was quite ‘generous’ to incapacitate them rather than kill them? I wonder whether the guy who suggested they say it was done with a Russian nerve agent has been put on holiday leave? They should have just said it was food poisoning and whisked them away anyway without any publicity for their lengthy ‘de-briefing’. And given the cat a thought during the panic.


Not read Murray’s piece but that’s my theory too which i concluded after i realised that these two are agents, abd too senior to be involved in dirty deeds. It’s the most logical theory based upon the available facts.

David Macilwain

It’s too easy to be distracted by these considerations, into plot scenarios that seem plausible – as does this one about GRU contact with Skripal. But there is a big problem – as you admit – why not just say it was food poisoning, or kill Skripal in his home where nobody would ever know about it? If we accept that MI6 was “in on this” – in other words organised it – then we can hardly imagine they would do something so bizarre.
The whole point is that they didn’t intend to kill Skripal or his daughter, but to keep them, and the Russian nerve agent story, alive as long as possible, with as much publicity as possible. Look at the circus in Salisbury, and how the whole thing was played to influence public and international opinion.
Ergo, the GRU agent theory – even if it is right, is irrelevant. I have no reason yet to change my idea on the theory of the “gay honey trap” expounded in the other Operation Nina article.


When the attempt to force life to fit something it is not tries to openly interject and manipulate, the nature of everything becomes disjointed and unreal as to be beyond parody because it is already a bizarre and macabre parody of life.

The power to ‘make reality’ and enforce it uses positive and negative incentives to undermine and override the natural relational being.

Even if there are those who use deceit to capture and handle ‘assets’ there must be a willingness to be deceived for them to gain and maintain access.

It can also be called the power to deny reality – including the reality of others as ourself.
The nature of denial is hidden by its nature.
The mind will not uncover its own lack of true foundation, but You can choose NOT to look away from what fear protects by keeping hidden.

Denied self is pushed ‘out of mind’ under a wish to separate or split from the feared or hateful or spit it from you. Such is the appeal or lure of a false power… to seem to ‘save you from (what you made of) yourself’. But at a cost of freedom to be yourself.

The freedom to be yourself is innate as your natural Inherence, but the taking of a false sense of self in power or in protection from feared and hated powers, precludes anything but ITS defence at your (and everyone’s) expense.

Mistaken identity is the phishing ruse where the forms of trusted or known things are used to mask a hidden meaning or agenda.

The target may never know they were hacked because they may be induced to place responsibility anywhere BUT where it belongs. And so in projecting blame for fear and loss at anything that triggers by association, as if our security, is to maintain and exacerbate the conditions of conflict and insecurity, that are ‘managed’ so as to seem meaningful, necessary or unavoidable as a surface narrative identity.

Freedom to feel what you feel and abide its movement, to know who you are within being and share it, is something that was originally our nature, but now must be consciously relearned – as a result of having learned to be who we are not to such a degree that we may even doubt our existence.

Are you the thinker of your thought? Or rather do you consciously accept and stand in willingness to live the consequence of what you accept true?
False thinking makes a self-justification after the event that then seeks reinforcement.
This introduces complex burdens on what would otherwise flow.
The picture is thus ‘breaking up’ and the signal losing potency.
When the Old Gods left, humanity had to wake in a new way.

Tony Kevin
Tony Kevin

Well argued in your 28 Sept comment on your own piece, David McIlwain. Whether B and P were Russian agents of some kind send to talk to Skripal (Craig Murray), or Russian gays attracted to a UK honeypot trap ((yourself), or simply ‘innocent’ cultural tourists , four things are now clear to any impartial observer:
1. They were not carrying any Novichok
2. They were not sent to Salisbury to kill or injure Skripal
3 . Boshirov is not Chepiga.
4. The UKG is trying desperately to sustain a massive public disinformation exercise , to whose failing credibility Theresa May still desperately clings.
This story has more to run.
Tony Kevin.


The politics in the Western world has gone from idiotic to insanity.
The little that I viewed from Trump,s speech given at the UN , I am tempted to believe that his speech was a poor attempt at satire , but then again I am only too aware of the reality.

Paul X
Paul X

Trump’s epic press conference was broadcast live on RT. Whatever you think of him it was an extraordinary performance. He is a highly manipulative personality and to write him off as “Dumb” is dangerous. He gave a stream of consciousness seemingly unable to stop talking, darting from subject to subject as if on a strong stimulant. Even the journalists were getting tired. He swoops from gross sentimentality to the crudest of threats, to individuals as well as whole nations. . He is exactly like the Boss of an organised crime outfit. In many ways he is the classic American politician, part Showman, part Gangster, full time actor. It’s disappointing to hear the liberals concentrating on his vulgarities, his hair style, his sex life, his assumed idiocy. They should treat him more seriously, a dangerous Rightwing racist, a white supremacist, a man keen to stamp his and America’s boot on one or more poor nation just to prove he has balls. But no, the main criticisms are about the junk good he eats!

Jim Scott
Jim Scott

But who is in charge PaulX?
Is it Trump, is it the CIA or is it Netanyahu who is more manic than Trump?

Mulga Mumblebrain
Mulga Mumblebrain

The coming collapse of the Western Empire of Full Spectrum Dominance has sent the Western Elites, particularly of the Five Eyes terror states, into outright, barking, insanity. Always dangerous among genocidal psychopaths.


The pivot to the East will most likely be like the pivot from the GB to the USA. Global dominance uses the USA as it does any other asset. Power goes to where the power is – and positions itself to where it will be fed. I use the term power here in the worldly sense. The term full spectrum dominance isn’t really a US directed power but a control of all areas of global influence in respect of key points that work to the undermining of the old order and the establishing of the new.

Rhisiart Gwilym
Rhisiart Gwilym

Laff of the day! Someone identifying him/her/theirselves here just as ‘Matt’ is offering the ultra-lightweight* lying fraud Eliot Higgins as a >>credible analyst<<! Yes, really! Effing Brown Noses Bellingcat, FFS! Even the beeb’s up to it! As the admin commentator points out in this comment stream, this shallow rubbish has a distinct whiff of desperation about it. They’ll be quoting space-lizard spokesreptiles next.

Intellectually lightweight, that is. A look at his picture suggests a different description of his adipose flab problem. Some serious work needed there Eliot, as also with your intellectual honesty.


Look guys. Putin did it. Ok?

How do we know he did it? Because he’s evil.

How do we know he’s evil? Because he did it.

End of.

So let’s get bombing Syria. Or somewhere. Anywhere. We don’t care.

The Guardian.


Beware possibility of nasty virus


Let us put any doubts about the passport photos to rest:

Between the FSB conducting urgent searches at the Interior Ministry in response to Bellingcat’s investigation and the Russian MFA repeatedly accusing Bellingcat of having hacking the passport images (rather than denying they’re genuine) certainly speaks to the authenticity of the material.

And with the additional information gleaned from the article I posted, it only serves to further strengthen Bellingcat’s case.

There are some saying that the two photos of the spy don’t look similar. One of the authors of the article addressed this very point by using photo comparison software to match the two photos of the suspect and two photos of Putin. The results? The photos of the suspect are 84% similar, while those of Putin are 80%. If these photos don’t match, then Putin was replaced by a doppelganger some time ago:


PS: You edited my earlier comment to claim that I upvote my own comments. It’s true, I do. But only when I notice someone repeat-downvoting my comment. If a post a comment and it gets 40 downvotes in 5 minutes, then it’s clear someone is repeat downvoting me. I usually equalize it. Ideally, your system should block such attempts in the first place.


Bell-End Higgins is a nonentity, an unemployed clerk and hobbyist without special training or expertise, who sits in his armchair and makes pronouncements to suit his paymasters in the NATO Atlantic Council. Anything and everything he says can be safely discounted. Wotsisname down the pub would be a more credible source. America spends $100 billion a year on its spook organisations. Is this the beast they can come up with? I think we should demand a refund from our spooks at GCHQ.


you invalidate anything else you gave to say by giving Bellingcat such credence. Higgins compiles his “reports” after watching youtube videos for a bit then copy pasting atlantic council reports. it’s an actual joke


According to Microsofts State of the Art facial recognition system the photos are not of the same man, even artificially aging the 2003 photo it still says they are different people, upload the photos yourself if you want to check the facts here-



It’s over for the “t’was a false flag!” extremists:


It’s funny how the above article, meticulously researched as it is, is dismissed by the extremists merely for supporting the West’s claims, but evidence-free screeching accusations of this being a “false flag” are regularly made.

People will believe what they want to believe. The so-called “alternative media” has pumped its readers with so much BS about this, and about other topics, like MH17, that even presenting detailed evidence to prove them wrong at this point is futile. The brainwashing is complete.

Just read some of the other comments here. Most of them consist of the following: “The Russophobic West wants WWIII with Russia, and anyone who doesn’t believe that this was a false flag is blind/a sheeple/etc.”

Can anyone spot the fallacy?

Note from admin: this poster repeat up-votes his own comments


lol. Can anyone spot the mug?


Can anyone smell the shills? I count five, Now that’s a first.
Off Guardian must be hitting the spot to warrant this much attention for one article.


Excellent work!

Anybody who criticizes the Russian government’s narratives, as well as any article on this website, must automagically be a “shill”, paid by Soros/CIA/NATO. After all, everything the so-called “alternative media” and Russian government state is true, so anyone who disputes that is a “shill”.

OK, fine, you caught: I was paid $34.43 by MI6 for this post. How did you ever figure me out?

(I must note that the above was sarcasm, because there are some delusional enough to think that I am being serious. I have been accused of being a hasbara/shill/etc. so many times that at this point, the healthiest response is to use humour to deflect the paranoid accusations.)


You did quite well. Most hasbara trolls only get a shekel a line.


Mr Matt, I think it’s fair to say that most people here were already highly skeptical about anything published by “Bellingcat” long before his latest piece.

It is fairly to manipulate photographic images these days. What he says does not constitute proof of anything.

Bellingcat is not an unbiased observer of events.

He is widely regarded as an establishment stooge. The establishment are clearly very keen for members of the public to believe their narrative on the Skripals. Bellingcat is part of their team.

King Kong
King Kong

“Mr Matt, I think it’s fair to say that most people here were already highly skeptical about anything published by “Bellingcat” long before his latest piece.”

This is the understatement of the Century.
Well done. 🙂


Do some homework: Eliot Higgins of Bellingcat, Who is He? Everything You Need to Know…” https://thetruthspeaker.co/2016/02/28/eliot-higgins-of-bellingcat-who-is-he-everything-you-need-to-know/


and you double-down again! quoting bellingcat is like quoting alex jones. best left to the extremists

King Kong
King Kong

Quoting Bellingacat is like quoting Joseph Goebbles.


The fact is this whole Skripal thing is a mess no matter how you look at it. A common argument which in truth is utterly meaningless is the “The Russians would never be this incompetent in an assisination”. Equally however we are meant to assume that this is the best “false flag” that the UK could concoct. Both are equally implausible.
By this point it is pretty sane to assume that a super toxic very deadly nerve agent, (Cadbury Novichoccy), is not what caused the Skripals hospitalisation. But affected by something they were. Lavrov, a man who chooses his words with care and precision, was evidently leaked the information from the Swiss lab that BZ had been found. For Lavrov to make such a statement the source must have been very trusted. And the excuse put out by the OPCW in response was pathetic and highly unlikely and irregular methodology in a scientific sense. There is no excuse for contaminating a live sample in this way. Such a dummy marker may well be used in excersises but not in a live sample. Thus it is safe to assume that BZ was likely the substance that incapacitated the Skripals producing visible symptoms entirely consistent with BZ.
Tragically we can ignore the unfortunate Amesbury couple as of any value to deciphering what actually happened. However someone should be facing a murder charge for what happened to Dawn Sturgess. This was a senseless liquidation that shows the contempt of the state for us all. We should all be furious about it.
Into the plot enter Mr&Mr Boshirov-Petrov or whoever they are. Despite Breitbarts pics proving Boshirov To be Colonel Mustard I have seen no evidence that they are Russian state actors. But neither have I seen anything to prove they are not and their interview certainly did the near opposite.
The Skripals were knocked out for a reason. I think we are too distracted by the hastily conceived effort to turn the actual incident itself into a false flag. Such a method of attack on the Skripals looks way more like an emergency reaction from a field operative to neutralise without lethality. Couriers, handlers or whatever it is not impossible that Borishov and Petrov are state actors and were there for a meeting or to collect something important. Such as Sergi’s signed affidavit that he was the main source of the Steele dossier and that it was all fake. Sergi had a ticket home as a hero if such a theory has meat. The more time that passes, the more it swills around my neurons, the more sense that theory makes. It’s also the simplest.
Putin, Russia indeed, keeps outsmarting our best diseased minds. Tactically in Crimea and Syria, by intelligent weapons development, by what they aid in being published to the global audience, to energy supply deals, arms supply deals and their measures to counter sanction warfare. They keep winning. Time after time. It is infuriating the Five Eyed Beast. This explains the increasingly desperate tactics we see from a system that is so corrupt and used to invincibility that it is incapable seeing it’s own ridiculousness.


I don’t doubt your sincerity, but much of what you say is opinion, not fact.

I have not the faintest idea by whom or why the Skripals were poisoned.


Of course it is opinion. The ‘”fact” is that it is a mess. I am sure you can’t dispute that.


John2020: “I have not the faintest idea by whom or why the Skripals were poisoned.”

I’d go further: I haven’t the faintest idea whether or not the Skripals were poisoned at all, Lavrov’s statment notwithstanding. Or did they have a serious dose of Montezuma’s revenge? They’re both still alive, after all, and there was this case in NZ last year:
That’s gone quiet, but nothing conclusive had been discovered, last I heard. And I didn’t ever hear that anyone was blaming the Russians for this incident.
The explanation with the fewest moving parts – so to speak – is usually the right one.


“And I didn’t ever hear that anyone was blaming the Russians for this incident.”
Surely they are slipping .How could they have missed the opportunity .


Summitflyer: “Surely they are slipping .How could they have missed the opportunity .”

Heh! I don’t think that NZ is important enough for the MI6 to have thought of that. Even were it the case that they’d heard of said incident.


It simply is not possible for such a shambles not to be by design but that design includes the effective paralysis of reasoned thought under threat of harm or under the phishing ruse of a higher purpose to which collateral sacrifices have to be made.

We ‘think’ as if rational thought is the valid means for making sense.
Post truth politic (lies backed by power) is not meant to make sense but to undermine the capacity of any other view to make sense.

To possession of power, is the fear of being dispossessed, and all vectors of threat become ‘enemy’. The ‘population’ is thus designated ‘enemy’ by its own leadership excepting it conforms and complies to proscribed behaviours. Then it (we) effectively becomes a farmed and managed asset.

It may be that compelling private arguments are brought to bear on politicians, journalists et al, as to why certain agenda has to be conformed to, and why people have to be protected from truths they either cant understand or would misunderstand.

The development of propaganda, to become corporate PR to become mind-capture to become ‘making and enforcing reality’, is a logical outcome following on from nailing ‘truth to a post’ and killing it so as to have the ‘power’.

The alliance of self-interest in negative agenda is a negatively defined sense of self. Put another way, it is the love that you are, being phished by a fear agenda into accepting a fear-defined identity by acting out from it and defending it as if your true self.

To defend a lie call not only more and more layers of lie to cover and divert, but for the sacrifice of truth.
This abstract phrase translates in human terms into genocidal and destructive agenda that runs us from the shadows of a state of self-denial considered to be a necessary self defence or survival.

Self-denial operates projection of the denied self and judges and attacks it outside and way from a sense of self-control – which is a private reality control filter also known as judgement or narrative identity.

We do not want to revisit feared and hated experience and so we define and interpret reality so as to evade, block or control it. We do this as collective reinforcements of shifting ‘alliances and enemies’. And we thereby manifest or bring about the very thing we thought to escape or overcome.

This is also to say that we do not and cannot escape the premise from which we are operating or accepting as true. An insane premise must bring an insane result no matter how tortuously contrived or presented and defended against Reason (it its meaning of Sanity).

A fresh perspective is as simple as the yielding to being of the old. But no one can change what they are unwilling to own, and while we insist “YOU ARE DOING THIS TO ME” we are locked into hating and suffering our own shadow as our sense of self.

The further use of victimhood and grievance in contrived and forceful allegations or falsely flagged incidence of being attacked is more than giving power away to a sense of aggrieved self-justification. It is worshipping the lie as the claim to power over truth. This is the ‘lie and the father of’ it in terms of the private desire to be as gods by joining in the partaking of the mind of judgement of good and ill – as a divided, split and polarised sense of self-autonomy overlaid upon, and masking over the true.

Such a war on life is approaching its ‘victory’, in achieving a fantasy of control over the Living. Fantasies of self gratification are not glimpses of an eternally unfolding fulfilment, but fleeting illusions to a hollowing out of capacity to feel and know love’s presence moving as our own life.

Who can hear, let them hear!


I am aware logic rarely wins an argument. Us humans are emotional creatures that bend and twist any information to either pervert or sidestep it in accordance to our invested world view.
No doubt a careful analysis of my own musings would throw up many instances of confirmation bias if looked at entirely objectively.
What I do find refreshing however is that people are starting to feel a wholesale despair. They know things are very broken and that official narratives are invariably lies. Such a despair will lead some into finding a rock to hide under. But for very many it will lead to rage and propell them to action. Such a time draws near.
My job takes me into the homes of a few people every day for long enough to have a short conversation. I do not choose these people and they are a random cross section of society. The level of awareness of our perilous position cannot be underestimated, people are very aware. Indeed most seem relieved to talk and are indeed awaiting the catalyst so they can engage.
Our position can seem insurmountable, hopeless even. But I think it is far from it. Change can happen very fast. And people’s all around the world are ready for it.


Yes people are not altogether unaware of madness afoot – but are framed in beliefs or narratives that are part of the madness.

There is a naiveté that thinks the few who ‘control’ the world or the corrupt politicians or the corrupt corporations or the corrupt bankers etc etc etc could be overthrown, cast down etc etc then all shall be well.

There is NO awakening if inner responsibility in this and no real change.

Rage as a basis for initiating change is blind and destructive.
And is as likely to call down destruction upon ourselves as deal it to the ‘bad guys’.

Rage as a self-honesty is another matter. Owning what we feel is a basis for a more honest communication – within ourself and among ourselves.

Anger is fuelled by hurt or grievance.
Anger fuels hurting and causing grievance and yet there is this insane idea that we can deal righteous anger with impunity – as if it will not come back to us, and to our children.

I see owning our feelings as the way to reclaim the energy we otherwise are driven by.

If we would sweep out the’ interlopers’ or that which does not in truth belong – then we must start with our self.

The mind will not understand this because it thinks instead of looking. It is trained or predicated to NOT see or to keep hidden anything that would undermine its sense of power and protection.

One way of achieving this is ‘trouble abroad’ to divert from trouble at home.

I cannot change my world by coercion, persuasion or manipulation excepting I delude myself under the attempt.
I change my world by redeeming the meanings I give and receive – instead of running on false narrative based upon corrupted definitions.

I do not need you or it to change first before I can truly live. I can be the change I would prefer to meet or see and extend faith to you and to others because whatever the appearance of current choices – consciously or unconsciously active, you are a being of choice and are choosing within the framework OF your current sense of self-definition.

Undoing the false in ourselves is the demonstration and witness that ‘teaches’ a different foundation from which to live than grievance and fear of loss. People will ‘learn’ according to their willingness and readiness. Tolerance for pain – and this includes psychic-emotional pain – is limited, and the questioning arising from such results will be stirred to seek a true cause so as to change it for a better outcome.

But as with health challenges – people will first try to ignore, override, suppress symptoms or awareness of symptoms, and often seek a magic answer in ways that redistribute the problem so as to seem to not have it – but instead have a whole raft of new issues and ‘side’ effects from toxic interventions.

Aligning in health is an inner awakening responsibility and not a set of actions by which to change the state of the body externally so as not to have to change one’s alignment in sickness or conflicted thought and action. Not to say there is not action, but that actions automatically unfold from our perceptions and our perceptions are choices of interpretive mental filters and not fact. Moving within being is not going outside of our own life. Nor is anyone or anything else coming in while we are AWOL in fragmented distraction.

Use the world to re-educate our mind about our mind!
Life is always in any case changing – but living the leading edge is not living under the emotional burden of what is not here. We literally ‘make’ our world by what we choose to give focus to and this still applies when unsettling and challenge obliges us to find new ways to live. Embracing ‘what is’ does not reject grievance but not does it embrace the framing of the mind in grievance apart from establishing communication with the one who is living as if it is still here or the only basis for power and identity left them.

How much is the awareness of conflict captured by the fascination and addiction with conflict?


“There is NO awakening OF inner responsibility in this and no real change.


MI6, not Kremlin, was behind Skripal poisoning. In fact I’m going to entitle my next post with that sentence. It’s a laborious task having to dissect propaganda – ie journalism – but if the media won’t do it then who will?


And that our most wonderful intelligence and police could not find or reveal identies of the two…..but a national newspaper and very dodgy amateur investivigative website both with russophobic agendas…. have?????Jeez….what timing for UN general assembly too……

Jerry Alatalo

Number of interviews by Peskov and Boshirov since March 4: One. Number of interviews by Yulia and Sergei Sjripal since March 4: None. Number of false flag chemical attacks claimed by Theresa May to have been carried out by Russia and Syria since (and including) March 4: Two. Amount of evidence to substantiate Theresa May’s accusations against Russia and Syria since March 4: None.

People who can’t see the events were part of a coordinated false flag operation to manipulate public opinion into acceptance of another criminal war of aggression, – exactly as occurred leading to Iraq 2003, are blind. The warmonger class are clearly trying to “sell” another horrific criminal war. No thanks … We don’t want one, and innocent Syrians who’d suffer more than they already have for 8 years certainly don’t need violent escalation. Enough is enough.

Paul X
Paul X

I still don’t understand why if Russia did order Agents to kill Sergei they decided to use a nerve agent uniquely (apparently) linked to themselves. There are so many ways they could have done it but if they did use the Russian nerve agent they were effectively saying it was them; strange sort of assisination! They could have issued a press statement.
I agree the British story fits neatly with the use of chemical weapons in Syria and the hope the war could be widened; May linked the two things very explicitly in New York yesterday.
But I still think the particular incident had more to do with Sergei’s wish to return to Russia to see his Mother before she died. MI6 couldn’t risk him going and spilling the beans about whatever he’d been up to in Europe and perhaps especially contacts with Christopher Steele, the top spy who wrote the Urination Dossier to try and stop Trump being elected.
In that scenario Julia was the message bringer. Possibly she had plans to leave the UK with her father that very weekend. He had to be stopped.
I wonder where he and his daughter are now? I wonder how his mother is and whether he’ll ever get to see her or whether Julia will ever get to marry her boyfriend as she intended?


“I still don’t understand why if Russia did order Agents to kill Sergei they decided to use a nerve agent uniquely (apparently) linked to themselves.”

Because Putin wanted to send a message that he could. That’s the boneheaded explanation used in the West to explain the actions of designated dictators of designated enemy countries.

Apparently it seems to be quite good enough as an explanation for the mostly braindead masses in the West. Can anyone claim it isn’t?

The establishment in the West set the plausibility bar pretty damn low when it comes to furnishing their plebs with official narratives. Just when you think it can’t get any lower, that bar comes down another notch and you’re left cursing the credulity of your fellow shitizens.

Putin did it to send a message. That’s all, ok? Ours not to reason why. After all, we’re civilised over here. We’re thinking rationally, that’s our problem. Over there they don’t behave like us decent folk. In fact, the more implausible the explanation seems to us, the more effectively it proves
their guilt as irrational monsters.

It may be recalled that back in the early 2000s, soon after USA realised to its chagrin that Putin was less than keen on the total ransacking and pillaging of his country, the CIA seeded several articles in their compliant media positing that Putin was either autistic or a psychopath.

Why else, after all, would Anna Politkovskaya, the journalist and critic of the Putin government have died on Putin’s birthday, except as a birthday gift for a psychopath?

Realising that it didn’t really fly, they gave up on the ‘Psycho Putin’ gambit not long later, and went back to the mad dictator motif – strongly suggesting that the individuals producing this pablum aren’t a whole lot more intelligent than the zombies consuming it.

H.P. Loathecraft
H.P. Loathecraft

According to the serial perjurer and apparently Russophobic racist James Clapper, Russians are (paraphrasing) ‘genetically predisposed to commit evil acts’, so…

George cornell
George cornell

You mean Clapper, the arch scumbag who lied to Congress?


Wonder if either of them is still alive?


And also Nick Bailey. (perhaps the real poisoner?)


and this is the question that one would have thought would be on the lips of every self-respecting journo looking for a scoop. who has asked this question? Nobody. no-one. not a single “journalist” has asked this most legally-pertinent question. one would have to wonder why


This is the sign of the whole ‘story’ being a no go area. Whatever ‘facts’ or asserted facts are published, the WAY of it ‘stinks’ of a deceitful and malign intent.

Unless of course it is serving a higher power as a way of awakening us from being aligned in or subject to such intent.


And where is DS Bailey, his wife and children?
And where is the doc who gave CPR to Julia?
And, of course, where is Julia? And where is her dad?


It’s possible that we will never hear of Nick Bailey and his family again. The state has no moral compass. The doc is safely neutralised. Skripal will have eventually to pass over, sadly, he is rather old and feeble anyway. Yulia may be a problem; perhaps another Reuters interview?

Paul X
Paul X

According to the Daily Mail (!) Julia has intended to marry her Secret Service boyfriend and buy a Moscow flat with a nursery. Probably she and her father looked forward to Sergei returning to Russia to be in his Motherland (he was a patriot) with his extended family. His elderly sick mother was unable to travel and therefore he had to get permission to return to see her and say goodbye. The ‘statements’ issued on Julia’s behalf are strange and indicate her unhappiness with the situation she faces. She clearly has guts and one wonders how she is coping with imprisonment that may last for the rest of her life, all for trying to help her Dad.


Bog standard Mafia assassins like “The Iceman” carry out killings with cyanide that are often taken as natural causes unless there is a very close investigation. More sophisticated spooks use things like thalium to pass undetected. Mossad uses specially developed biological weapons that mimic natural causes. For all the sense the Skripal hoax makes, they might as well have clubbed him to death with a vodka bottle with Putin’s fingerprints on it.


It is good we keep this discussion going in the public eye….because USA-UK is determined to keep blathering about it so the russophobic media becomes the message…..and so we have the continued opportunity to challenge that.Truth must out….


That false narratives are pushed as if true by governments and Media without meeting any high profile criticism – or publicity to such criticism – is an expression of power to dictate what can and cannot be said in public by anyone with something to lose. The irony is that it is the populace that generally enforces such censorship, perhaps because pointing the finger is the way to NOT be the target.

Under a sense of power to dictate the narrative is the sense of all the various agencies working together. This either flips the mind into – “it must be basically true if so many all say so” and if it isn’t true, the power to knit so many agencies together is itself fearful and best hidden from or evaded.

That the minds of so many are NOT their own is indicated as the ‘post truth’ justification; ie; ‘they are not fit to think for themselves and so are managed by those who presume to’ under systems of technocracy drafted behind closed doors to which ‘leaders’ are obliged to conform and comply to.

The persistence in asserting the lie, in new variations of deliberately questionable evidences, references and of course as a basis for sanction or war, becomes established in so many minds that it is fed allegiance loyalty and support as ‘history’. As if it actually occurred as is told.

The use of the lie in war – including trade war or even war on ‘consumers’ is the belief there is no truth and thus the narrative given power is the one that draws allegiance if not acceptance in the ‘heart’.

Power by terror and threat of terror is the means to break the career, reputation, body or life of those who do not comply and conform. However, history reveals that such ‘power’ is unstable as it undermines the very principles of trust and cooperation. Truth is not a ‘narrative’ so much as an awakening to narratives, such that the identity, model or definitions of self and world freely align in a heart recognition. For the mind of lies is not the tool by which to reveal truth, but the heart knows when it has been truly heard. Resonance with true is no mere marketing ploy but an inner recognition.

A loop of self-referencing narratives can all support each other so as to make ‘sense’ to the wish to assert them as true, but if they have no basis in truth, they are simply a false way of seeing that of course cannot SEE at all!

How much of our ‘world’ or world-view that we react to as ‘real’ is an entanglement of private nightmares – acted out or defended against as if true?

What would ‘power’ be to a shared reality?
Would it not be the true as revealed in the willingness to listen, receive and ‘know’ in the sense of the Heart’s recognition. I use the term ‘Heart here as the seat of consciousness and the recognition of wholeness, and not as any kind of sentimental, romantic or wishful substitution of manipulative intent.

The mind in its own spin, denies the heart even while presuming to protect it as symbol – not least from itself!
Because such a mind has conviction in regard to its own lack of worth, it must then project that as the presumption of all others, and then jostle for position by judging and undermining others so as to seem ‘higher’ or ‘better’ or more ‘worthy’ or simply justified in withdrawal of relations or open attack.

Using examples in the world to illuminate the mind we generally look out FROM, rather than look AT, is an educative and reintegrative endeavour. The persistent OVERUSE of ruses is always their undoing as anything but ruses. the primary ruse operates to redistribute guilt and fear so as to seem to have less relative to targeted others, as a protection from raw fear as a direct experience. As the ruse fades and fails in such a purpose it becomes meaningless, superfluous or nonsensical. If the hate simply acts outright without even a seeming of justification, it is revealed as clearly and recognisably NOT who we are or what we want to become, and this initiates a deeper curiosity-need as to what and who we truly are, as a fresh foundational sense of wholeness of being. Because we no longer accept a false foundation AS a foundation from which to live – and this includes merely reacting to the false in opposition, so as to change the form but keep the momentum.

Sick and sickening narratives lack a true significance.
Identity set ‘against’ is allowing ourselves to be defined by what we hate or fear, rather than in the living and sharing of what we love and are. Releasing the identity of victimism, the manipulations of guilt and the attempt to get rid of it is undoing a basis for perpetual hate. War is a hateful intent. The event is what we each and all make of it.

If a life is ONLY a fragmentary glimpse before being snuffed out, then All the king’s horses and all the king’s men
must try to put Humpty together again. The very idea of an implicit wholeness or totality is beyond the ‘mind’ of either/or judgement. but not beyond recognition and acceptance. The conviction in hatefulness is the block to love’s awareness now, but what if our judgement upon ourselves is WRONG – despite all the ‘evidences’ gathered in support of its premise?