De
reactie, of beter gezegd de hysterie na de ‘aanslag’ gepleegd op Skripal en zijn dochter is
werkelijk ongelofelijk, zonder ook maar één flinter van bewijs werd
en wordt Rusland (het liefst gebruikt men de naam Putin) de schuld in
de schoenen geschoven…. Alsof het een oorlogsdaad betrof, wezen een aantal NAVO landen Russische diplomaten uit, nogmaals op
basis van nul komma nada bewijs…… VVD volksverlakkers Rutte en Blok spraken zelfs over ‘plausibel bewijs….’ ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!
Drie dagen geleden werd bekend gemaakt dat de dochter van Skripal uit het ziekenhuis werd ontslagen, terwijl eerder vorige week werd gesteld dat wanneer de Skripals de aanslag zouden overleven, ze de rest van hun leven zwaar gehandicapt zouden zijn, als een soort van levende planten…….. Met het ontslaan uit het ziekenhuis van Skripals dochter werd de internationale hysterie nog eens verder aan de kaak gesteld en moeten er nog grotere vraagtekens worden gezet bij de beschuldigingen aan het adres van de Russen…………
Rob
Slane schreef eerder een artikel genaamd: ’30 More Questions That
Journalists Should be Asking About the Skripal Case’ (de link naar
dat artikel vindt je als eerste link in het tweede artikel van Slane,
dat hieronder is opgenomen). 30 vragen waarmee Slane duidelijk maakt
dat de Britse versie over de ‘aanslag’ is gebaseerd op lucht.
Intussen
is er weer heel wat meer bekend over de leugens waarmee Rusland
werd/wordt beschuldigd, reden voor Slane om een vervolg te schrijven
op zijn eerste artikel met de titel: ’20 More Questions That
Journalists Shoul be Asking About the Skripal Case’. (zoals gezegd hieronder te vinden)
Slane vraagt zich o.a. af hoe andere landen dan Groot-Brittannië op 26
maart het besluit hebben kunnen nemen Russische diplomaten uit te
zetten, terwijl de Organisation
for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) het
onderzoek naar de zaak nog niet had afgerond en de bloedmonsters nog niet kon analyseren (voor toestemming dit bloed te onderzoeken door de OPCW, was godbetert een proces nodig….)……
Zelfs de analyse van de bloedmonsters door Porton Down laten vragen open……. (Porton Down is een instituut van de Britse overheid, dus gekleurde onderzoeksuitslagen, die in het straatje van de regering May passen, zijn niet te ontlopen, ofwel: Porton Down ondersteunt de anti-Russische propaganda* van de Britse overheid en de reguliere westerse media…..)
Gezien alles wat intussen bekend is geworden, ‘zou je je zelfs af kunnen vragen’, of het hier niet om een false flag operatie gaat, ofwel een operatie gedaan om in dit geval een ander land (Rusland) in een kwaad daglicht te stellen.
20
More Questions That Journalists Should be Asking About the Skripal
Case
To
my knowledge, none of the questions I wrote in my previous piece – 30
questions That Journalists Should be Asking About the Skripal Case –
has been answered satisfactorily, at least not in the public domain.
Yet despite the fact that these legitimate questions have not yet
been answered, and many important facts surrounding the case are
still unknown, the case has given rise to a serious international
crisis, with the extraordinary expulsion of Russian diplomats across
many EU countries and particularly the United States on March 26th.
This
is a moment to stop and pause. A man and his daughter were poisoned
in the City of Salisbury on 4th March. Yet despite the fact that
investigators do not yet appear to know how they were poisoned, when
they were poisoned, or where they were poisoned, a number of Western
nations have used the incident as a pretext for the co-ordinated
expulsion of diplomats on a scale not witnessed even during the
height of the Cold War. These are clearly very abnormal and very
dangerous times.
I
pointed out in my previous piece that it is not my intention to
advance some sort of conspiracy theory on this blog. It remains the
case that I simply don’t have any holistic theory — “conspiracy”
or otherwise — for who carried this out, and I continue to retain
an open mind. But since the Government of my country has rushed to
judgement without many of the facts of the case being established,
and since this has led to the biggest deterioration in relations
between nuclear-armed nations since the Cuban Missile Crisis, it
seems to me that it is more important than ever to keep asking
questions in the hope that answers will come.
And
so, for what it’s worth, here are 20 more important questions that
I think that journalists ought to be asking regarding this case:
1. Have
the police yet identified any suspects in the case?
2. If
so, is there any evidence connecting them to the Russian Government?
3. If
not, how is it possible to determine culpability, as the British
Government has done?
4. In
her statement to the
House of Commons on 12th March 2018,
the British Prime Minister, Theresa May stated the following:
“It
is now clear that Mr Skripal and his daughter were poisoned with a
military-grade nerve agent of
a type developed by Russia. This
is part of a group of nerve agents known as ‘Novichok’.
Based on the positive
identification of
this chemical agent by world-leading experts at the Defence Science
and Technology Laboratory (DSTL) at Porton Down” [my emphasis added].
In
the judgement at the High Court on 22nd March on
whether to allow blood samples to be taken from Sergei and Yulia
Skripal for examination by the Organisation for the Prohibition of
Chemical Weapons (OPCW), evidence submitted by Porton Down to the
court (Section 17 i) stated the following:
“Blood
samples from Sergei Skripal and Yulia Skripal were analysed and the
findings indicated exposure to a nerve agent or
related compound.
The samples tested positive for the presence of a Novichok class
nerve agent or
closely related agent”
[my emphasis added].
So
the Prime Minister said that Porton Down had positively
identified the
substance as a Novichok nerve agent. The statement from Porton Down
says that their tests indicated that it was a Novichok
agent or closely
related agent.
Are these two statements saying exactly the same thing?
5. Why
were the phrases “related compound” and “closely related agent”
added to the statement given by Porton Down, and is this an
indication that the scientists were not 100% sure that the substance
was a “Novichok” nerve agent?
6. Why
were these phrases left out of the Prime Minister’s statement to
the House of Commons?
7. Why
did the Prime Minister choose to use the word “Novichok” in her
speech, rather than the word Foliant,
which is the actual name of the programme initiated by the Soviet
Union when attempting to develop a new class of chemical weapons in
the 1970s and 1980s?
8. When
asked in an
interview with Deutsche Welle how
scientists at Porton Down had found out so quickly that the nerve
agent was of the “Novichok” class of chemical weapons, the
Foreign Secretary, Boris Johnson, was asked whether Porton Down
possesses samples of it. Here is how he replied:
“They
do.
And they were absolutely categorical and I asked the guy myself, I
said, ‘Are you sure?’ And he said there’s no doubt” [My
emphasis].
If
Mr Johnson’s statement is correct, and the Defence Science and
Technology Laboratory (DSTL) at Porton Down has samples of “Novichok”
in its possession, where did they come from?
9. Were
they produced at Porton Down?
10. How
long have they had them?
11. Why
has the DSTL not registered possession of these substances with the
OPCW, which it is legally obliged to do under the Chemical Weapons
Convention (CWC)?
12. Does
this admission by Mr Johnson not indicate that “Novichoks” can be
made in any advanced chemical weapons facility, as indeed they were
under the auspices of the OPCW
in Iran in 2016?
13. If
so, how can the Government be sure that the substance used to poison
Mr Skripal and his daughter was made in or produced by Russia?
14. In her
statement to the House of Commons on Wednesday 14th March,
the British Prime Minister stated that there were only two plausible
explanations for poisoning of Mr Skripal and his daughter:
“Either
this was a direct act by the Russian State against our country. Or
conceivably, the Russian government could have lost control of a
military-grade nerve agent and allowed it to get into the hands of
others.”
Other
than the actual substance used, is there any hard evidence that led
the Government to conclude these as being the only two plausible
scenarios?
15. On
March 26th, a number of countries expelled Russian diplomats in an
apparent response to the incident in Salisbury. Yet at this time, the
OPCW had not yet investigated the case, nor analysed blood samples.
Why was the clearly co-ordinated decision to expel diplomats taken
before the OPCW’s investigation had concluded?
16. Has
this not put huge pressure on the OPCW to come up with “the right”
conclusion?
17. It
is reckoned that the OPCW’s investigation into the substance used
will take at least three weeks to complete, whereas it took Porton
Down less than a week to analyse it. What accounts for this
difference?
18. Will
the OPCW be using the samples of “Novichok” that Boris Johnson
says are held at Porton Down to compare with the blood samples of Mr
Skripal and his daughter?
19. If
not, on what basis will this comparison be made, since the first
known synthesis of a “Novichok” was made by Iran in 2016?
20. If
the OPCW discovers that the substance is indeed a “Novichok”,
will this be sufficient evidence with which to establish who carried
out the attack on the Skripals or — given that other countries
clearly have the capability to produce such substances — would more
evidence be needed?
===================================
* Anti-Russische propaganda waarvan de zaak Skripal maar één voorbeeld uit velen is……
Moet wel toegeven dat ik de vraagstelling van Slane niet helemaal begrijp, immers de hijgerige reguliere westerse massamedia brengen met grote graagte zoveel mogelijk ‘nieuws’ (voornamelijk ‘nepnieuws’) waarmee Rusland als de slechterik wordt afgeschilderd….. Neem alleen al het continu volhouden door deze media van de leugen dat Rusland De Krim heeft geannexeerd, terwijl men dondersgoed weet dat de bevolking van De Krim (inclusief de oorspronkelijke bevolking) zich in een door internationale waarnemers als eerlijk en goed beoordeeld referendum hebben uitgesproken voor aansluiting bij Rusland. Vooral de VS coup tegen de door hen democratisch gekozen president Janoekovytsj, stak de bevolking van De Krim, waar de door de VS geparachuteerde fascistische junta (gecontroleerd door neonazi’s) de druppel was, die hen tot het besluit brachten te stemmen voor aansluiting bij Rusland……
Zie ook: ‘Novitsjok Skripal sprookje? Lees dit bericht!‘
en: ‘Skripal vergiftiging roept steeds meer vraagtekens op…..‘
‘Skripal vergiftiging roept steeds meer vraagtekens op…..‘
en: ‘Novitsjok (novichok) uitgelegd door wetenschappers, Groot-Brittannië zit ‘goed fout….‘
en: ‘Rusland mag niet deelnemen aan onderzoek naar ‘aanslag met novitsjok’ op Skripal‘
en: ‘Russisch zenuwgas verhaal is nonsens ook aldus Jeremy Corbyn….. Jimmy Dore met commentaar!‘
en: ‘OPCW bevestigt: novitsjok (novichok) van aanslag op Skripal komt uit Rusland……‘
en: ‘Skripal false flag operatie zakt als soufflé in elkaar…….‘