Category: MI5

About MI5

Subscribe Feeds

Bolivia: de staatsgreep in 2019 werd uitgevoerd door de CIA, Groot-Brittannië en de OAS met hulp van grote bedrijven

Posted on by Telmo Claro

De staatsgreep in 2019 tegen de democratisch gekozen regering Morales in Bolivia was vooral ingegeven door de ‘wereldhonger’ naar lithium, de belangrijkste grondstof voor accu’s, niet voor niets wordt lithium witgoud genoemd.

Declassified UK heeft een uitvoerig schrijven van Matt Kennard gepubliceerd (door mij overgenomen van Information Clearing House) waarin hij beschrijft welke rol Groot-Brittannië heeft gespeeld in deze smerige coup, die zoals zo vaak werd georganiseerd en geregisseerd door de CIA……

Overigens stond het hele westen inclusief de reguliere media achter deze coup, met grote graagte werden in november 2019 de leugens overgenomen van de Organisatie van Amerikaanse Staten (OAS) als zouden de zojuist gehouden verkiezingen in Bolivia zijn gestoken door de partij van Evo Morales…..(zo heeft Trouw en VPRO correspondent, zijne kwaadaardigheid Edwin Koopman, fiks lopen liegen over wat er wel en niet zou zijn gebeurd in Bolivia*) Die media en politici in het westen durfden zelfs te stellen dat er geen sprake was van een staatsgreep, maar dat Morales zelf was opgestapt na ‘massale protesten’ (waar het overgrote deel van het Boliviaanse volk niet aan meedeed…..), terwijl het leger hem heeft ontvoerd en met een militair vliegtuig deporteerde naar Mexico…..

Deze gang van zaken geeft ten overvloede nog eens aan dat de zogenaamde onafhankelijke (massa-) media, in handen van oligarchen en steenrijke investeringsmaatschappijen, de neoliberale status quo propageren en daar maar al te graag voor liegen (dat het gedrukt staat…)….. Schande overigens dat westerse regeringen (inclusief het disfunctionerende kabinet Rutte 3) zich achter deze coup schaarden, immers zij moeten via hun eigen geheime diensten hebben geweten dat e.e.a. op grove leugens was gebaseerd….. (zo niet zijn die geheime diensten geen knip voor de neus waard… oh wacht even, dat zijn ze ‘ook niet…’)

Evo Morales was de eerste president van de oorspronkelijke bewoners nadat witte psychopaten een paar eeuwen geleden het land innamen….. Hij was uiterst succesvol en heeft de arme oorspronkelijke bevolking (de meerderheid in Bolivia, dit in tegenstelling tot andere Latijns-Amerikaanse landen) uit de armoede getrokken, heeft deze bevolking verder onderwijs, medische zorg en zoveel mogelijk goede behuizing gegeven. De economie draaide prima, ondanks het nationaliseren van een aantal bedrijven door Morales, bedrijven die tegen een appel en ei de grondstoffen van Bolivia hebben gestolen…… (die nationalisaties waren mede een reden voor de staatsgreep)

Oké het was voor de mensen die verder nadenken dan de neus van de westerse media lang is al duidelijk dat hier een heel smerige staatsgreep werd uitgevoerd en waarbij schandelijk genoeg ook nog eens een aantal mensen van de oorspronkelijke bevolking werden vermoord door politie en leger, echter dat in feite de regering Johnson en de geheime dienst van Groot-Brittannië zo’n grote rol hebben gespeeld was althans voor mij een openbaring, wat een geteisem!!

Gelukkig heeft de partij van Morales de verkiezingen van 2020 ruimschoots gewonnen, echter het leed wat er werd aangericht met de coup is daarmee niet weggewist…..

Lees het artikel van Kennard en zegt het voort, daar men in het westen nog steeds volhoudt dat de coup van 2019 wettig was…… (hoe zot in je kop moet je zijn om dat te beweren…..)

Revealed: The UK supported the coup in Bolivia to gain access to its ‘white gold’

By Matt Kennard

After a coup in the South American country of Bolivia in November 2019, democratically elected president Evo Morales was forced to flee. Foreign Office documents obtained by Declassified show Britain saw the new military-backed regime, which killed 18 protesters, as an opportunity to open up Bolivia’s lithium deposits to UK firms.

  • Lithium – known as ‘white gold’ – is a key metal used in batteries and increasingly important to the world car industry

  • Britain’s Foreign Office appears to have paid Oxford-based company to optimise ‘exploitation’ of Bolivia’s lithium deposits the month after Morales fled country

  • UK embassy acted as ‘strategic partner’ to coup regime and organised international mining event in Bolivia four months after democracy overthrown

  • UK firm founded by British Army veteran was ‘now in line to offer its services’ to mining companies, Foreign Office noted after event

  • UK embassy provided data for the now discredited international report which was used to justify 2019 coup

  • UK embassy brought cybersecurity company with close links to the CIA to Bolivia in March 2019, eight months before the military takeover

March 09, 2021 “Information Clearing House” – On 10 November 2019, after the head of the army called for his resignation, Bolivia’s socialist president, Evo Morales, stepped down. It followed weeks of protests after the release of a report by the Organisation of American States (OAS) alleging irregularities in the election Morales had won the previous month.

Persecution from the new regime forced Morales to flee the country and an “interim president”, Jeanine Áñez, was installed. Widely condemned as a coup, resulting protests were met with lethal force.

Days after taking power, on 14 November, the Áñez regime forced through Decree 4078 which gave immunity to the military for any actions taken in “the defence of society and maintenance of public order”.

The following day, on 15 November, Bolivian military forces shot and killed eight protesters in the city of Sacaba. On 21 November, regime forces killed another 10 protesters in the neighbourhood of Senkata just outside the capital La Paz.

Despite the deadly violence, which was condemned by human rights groups, the British embassy in La Paz moved quickly to support Bolivia’s new regime, Declassified can reveal from documents we have obtained.

We have seen a project list for a Foreign Office programme in Bolivia called “Frontline Diplomatic Enabling Activity”, which the UK government describes as a “small pot of money that [embassies] receive and have authority over to spend on projects supporting [embassy] activity”.

‘Interim President’ of Bolivia Jeanine Añez speaks during a press conference at the presidential palace on 15 November 2019 in La Paz, Bolivia. (Photo: Gaston Brito Miserocchi / Getty Images)

The deposits

Bolivia has the world’s second-largest reserves of lithium, a metal that is used to make batteries and which has become increasingly important due to the burgeoning electric car industry.

The UK government has stated that lithium battery technology is a priority for its “industrial strategy”. In June 2019, it announced it was investing £23-million in “electric car battery development”.

The government has further noted: “It’s estimated that South America holds 54% of the world’s lithium resources, which are increasingly in demand to manufacture batteries for electric vehicles and energy diversification programmes.”

It added: “The UK aims to have a thriving, sustainable battery industry, which would translate to a £2.7 billion opportunity … and our bilateral partnerships are essential to ensure this.”

In February 2019, Evo Morales’ government had chosen a Chinese consortium to be its strategic partner on a new $2.3-billion lithium project which would focus on production from the Coipasa and Pastos Grandes salars (salt flats under which the lithium is deposited).

But after the coup, the regime’s new minister for mining cast doubt on whether the deal would be honoured by the new government.

These particular salt flats were of interest to the UK embassy.

One project it co-funded from 2019-20 sought to “optimise Bolivia’s lithium exploration and production (in the Coipasa and Pastos Grandes salars) using British technology”.

After the coup, this project was quickly moved forward.

The abstract for the project was authorised by its main funder – the Inter-American Development Bank (IADB) – on 25 November 2019, two weeks after the coup and days after the Senkata massacre.

The project gained full approval for funding of $100,000 weeks later, in mid-December 2019.

The IADB told Declassified: “The implementation of [grant] activities are conducted in close coordination with designated government authorities and their technical teams.” At that point its “close coordination” would have been with the Áñez regime.

A woman shouts anti-regime slogans in front of a police line during a funeral procession of the victims killed during clashes with police at the Senkata fuel plant on 21 November 2019 in La Paz, Bolivia. (Photo: Gaston Brito Miserocchi / Getty Images)

Satellite Applications Catapult

The British embassy in La Paz provided £5,000 towards this lithium project in 2019-20, but the Foreign Office refused to tell Declassified if these funds were disbursed after the coup in November 2019.

The goal was to “design and implement a satellite data-based application that can optimise exploration and exploitation of large/best lithium sources in the Coipasa and Pastos Grandes salars in Bolivia”, the documents outlined.

The Foreign Office noted that the project was to be implemented by Satellite Applications Catapult, an Oxford-based organisation “helping organisations harness the power of satellite-based services”.

The company receives about a third of its funding from the UK government but it did not respond to Declassified’s questions about the Bolivia project.

However, we found that on 19 December 2019 – two days after the IABD gave final approval to the project – the UK Foreign Office transferred £33,220 to Satellite Applications Catapult, in a payment listed as “programme spend”.

The department refused to tell Declassified if this funding was for the lithium exploitation project in Bolivia. The IADB told us: “Coordination with the British Embassy has been particularly cooperative in search for synergies”.

A picture of the Coipasa salt flats in Bolivia, photographed by an Expedition 33 crew member on the International Space Station. (Photo: Nasa)

International seminar

Then, in March 2020, four months after the coup, the British embassy in La Paz partnered with the regime’s Ministry of Mining to organise an “international seminar” for more than 300 officials from the global extractives sector.

A British company, Watchman, was brought in by the UK embassy to give the keynote presentation and outline the “creative solutions” it had enacted in Africa to bring local communities onside with mining projects.

The Foreign Office documents note: “Watchman UK and other consultancies are now in line to offer services in this important field to a number of Bolivia mining companies who wish to achieve win-win solutions to their controversies with indigenous inhabitants and towns located in the area of influence of their activities”.

Watchman is a risk management company set up in 2016 by Christopher Goodwin-Hudson, a nine-year veteran of the British Army who was later executive director of global security for the investment bank Goldman Sachs.

The company supports corporate clients “across the extractive, agribusiness and capital project sectors” who are having trouble operating because of local resistance. Watchman’s website carries the logo of the UK Foreign Office.

The firm’s associate director, Gabriel Carter, has held a number of senior roles in the private security industry and in 2012 founded an Afghanistan-focused security company that “supported numerous British and US development projects”.

Carter, also a veteran of risk management at Goldman Sachs, is a member of the Special Forces Club, an exclusive and secretive private members’ club for senior intelligence and special forces veterans in Knightsbridge, London.

Watchman did not respond to Declassified’s questions about the event and the UK Foreign Office refused to answer questions related to it.

Voor deze documenten waar ik vreemd genoeg geen werkende link kan maken naar het PDF zie het origineel op Declassified UK. (en veiligheidsgordels vast voor je gaat lezen!!)

UK Foreign Office documents from 2015-20 documenting a range of programmes run by the British embassy in Bolivia.

A long courtship

The quick moves of the British embassy on the lithium project followed years of trying to court Bolivia’s socialist government over the country’s reserves of the metal, the new documents show.

Morales had moved Bolivia away from the country’s traditional reliance on Western corporations since taking power in 2006. His government was widely praised for reducing poverty and increasing investment in schools, hospitals and infrastructure.

The Foreign Office notes that its “first engagement with the Bolivian Lithium Company”, known by its Spanish acronym YLB, was in 2017-18 when it paid £31,500 to organise a scientific UK mission. It focused on training the YLB on new technologies to explore and produce lithium in a “sustainable” way.

The documents note this project “allowed British organisations … to carry over projects on lithium in Bolivia with [Inter-American Development Bank] and [UK government] funding in the following years”.

The UK government noted: “Relationship with the Bolivian Lithium Company might also prove relevant as Bolivia becomes a supplier of lithium (a critical material) to the UK”, and referenced its “effort to connect Bolivia, Chile and Argentina (ie the Lithium Triangle) with the London Metal Exchange”.

The following year’s programme notes that “stronger links” developed between the YLB and the British embassy in Bolivia.

The documents also outline how in April 2019, the British embassy in Buenos Aires, Argentina, hosted a “high-level technical meeting” with the mining and lithium authorities of Argentina, Chile and Bolivia, as well as senior representatives of the London Metal Exchange.

Those three countries together share ownership of the “lithium triangle”, the region of the Andes rich in lithium reserves. At the time Argentina and Chile had right-wing governments friendly with the UK.

Also in attendance was Bolivia’s vice-minister of lithium and the chief executive of YLB. “The project from the British Embassy in Bolivia … consisted in securing and facilitating the presence of the Bolivian authorities in the meeting”, the Foreign Office documents note.

It added that, after the meeting, the Bolivian government was now “aware of the relevance of the London Metal Exchange” and particularly “its interest to establish a lithium standard” which was to be based upon the lithium triangle production. Such standards serve “to promote understanding and communication between metal producers and users”.

The following sections in this passage are redacted under two exemptions related to “international relations” and “commercial interests”. These are the only redactions made on the programme documentation for the five years of operations seen by Declassified.

The London Metal Exchange, the world centre for industrial metals trading. (Photo: UK government)

Darktrace

There is further evidence Britain was always priming the country for a change in government. In the year before the coup, the British embassy was promoting the UK cyber sector, bringing a company to Bolivia founded by the UK intelligence community, and with close links to America’s Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).

In 2009, Morales had expelled a US diplomat who he claimed was a CIA asset heading an operation to infiltrate Bolivia’s state-owned oil company.

Eight months before the coup, the UK embassy spent more than £4,500 organising a “major event” in Laz Paz on cybersecurity for financial institutions, attended by 150 executives and senior officials from the Bolivian financial sector, according to the Foreign Office documents.

Delivered in coordination with the Bolivian Stock Exchange, Bolivian banks were said to “now be acquiring specialised services to protect their systems from cybercrime”. Further, the bankers were now aware that fighting cybercrime had to be “based upon adequate and state-of-the-art technology”.

Presentations were delivered by British company Darktrace, a cybersecurity firm set up by Britain’s domestic security service, MI5, and its signals intelligence agency, GCHQ. The company was incorporated the day after the first of whistle-blower Edward Snowden’s exposures was published in The Guardian.

Since its founding, Darktrace has hired personnel from the US intelligence community, including directly from the CIA and the National Security Agency, where Snowden used to work.

Recruits from the CIA

Alan Wade, who sits on Darktrace’s advisory council, is a 35-year veteran of the CIA and its former chief information officer.

Darktrace also recruited Marcus Fowler, a former US Marine and 15-year veteran of the CIA, as its “director of strategic threat”. At the CIA, Fowler worked on “developing global cyber operations and technical strategies” and “conducted nearly weekly briefings for senior US officials”, he says.

In July 2013, Evo Morales’ presidential plane was grounded in Austria after US intelligence agencies suspected it had Snowden on board.

Bolivian President Evo Morales (C) speaks to the media at the airport in Vienna, Austria, 3 July 2013. Morales’ plane landed in Vienna after the aircraft was denied access to French and Portuguese airspace over suspicions that US whistleblower Edward Snowden was on board. (Photo: Helmut Fohringer/EPA)

Morales blamed the US and other international actors for the November 2019 coup. “It was a national and international coup d’état,” he said soon after. “Industrialised countries don’t want competition.” He added: “I’m absolutely convinced it’s a coup against lithium.”

The WikiLeaks diplomatic cables show that the US embassy in La Paz worked closely with the political opposition in Bolivia to remove the Morales government after it took power in 2006.

Morales expelled the US Drug Enforcement Agency in 2008 and the US Agency for International Development in 2013, accusing them of “conspiring” against his government.

For the March 2019 event, the UK embassy also brought an expert from the London-based think tank Chatham House, whose co-president is Eliza Manningham-Buller, a former director-general of MI5.

Its funders include the US State Department, UK Foreign Office, the British Army, and the oil companies BP and Chevron.

After the event, Britain’s Foreign Office noted that “several companies in the field [are] now being hired and consulted”. It is not known if Darktrace was one of them.

The embassy kept up the engagement soon after. “New dialogue with the Bolivian government on cyber”, notes the Foreign Office in its 2019-2020 programme. It is unclear if this referred to the coup regime.

‘Important input’

The day after the Bolivian election on 20 October 2019, the Washington-based Organisation of American States – the grouping of countries in North and South America – released a report on the vote which Morales had marginally won. It cited “an inexplicable change” that “drastically modifies the fate of the election”.

It also raised doubts about the fairness of the vote and fuelled a chain of events that led to the November coup.

However, a subsequent study by independent researchers using data obtained by The New York Times from the Bolivian electoral authorities found that the OAS statistical analysis was flawed.

Its conclusion that Morales’ share of the vote jumped inexplicably in the final ballots relied on incorrect data and inappropriate statistical techniques, the researchers found.

Declassified can now reveal that the British embassy provided data for the OAS’s discredited report.

The British embassy spent £8,000 putting together an alliance of civil society organisations which “coordinated an operation for citizens’ observation of the elections in 2019”.

This alliance carried out a survey on voting intentions before the elections, which “was an important input for the OAS mission report, which identified irregularities in the process”, the Foreign Office notes.

The OAS failed to respond to Declassified’s questions about the UK embassy’s role in its discredited report and the Foreign Office refused to answer any questions about it.

The British embassy’s projects to prepare for the election went even further. In February 2019, it spent £9,981 to bring the Thomson Reuters Foundation to the country to train 30 Bolivian journalists on “verification techniques and pre-planning an election on coverage that is balanced, accurate and free of polarisation”.

The Foundation said that “ahead of the elections in Bolivia” it was teaching “practical skills and tools to recognise fake news and attempts to influence the electorate with false information”.

Declassified previously revealed how the British government is using journalism as an influencing tool in Latin America. Also recently revealed was that the British government secretly funded Reuters in the 1960s and 1970s at the behest of an anti-Soviet propaganda unit linked to British intelligence.

‘Marxist solidarity’

Days after the November coup in Bolivia, the UK Foreign Office released a statement saying: “The United Kingdom congratulates Jeanine Áñez on taking on her new responsibilities as interim President of Bolivia.” It added: “We welcome Ms Áñez’ appointment and her declared intention to hold elections soon.”

UK Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab arrives at 10 Downing Street on 3 February 2021 in London. (Photo: Hollie Adams / Getty Images)

Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab stated: “We hope that the current crisis in Bolivia can now be resolved swiftly, peacefully and in a democratic way. The Bolivian people deserve to have the opportunity to vote in free and fair elections.”

Then Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn offered a completely different view, saying: “I condemn this coup against the Bolivian people and stand with them for democracy, social justice and independence.”

Raab proceeded to attack Corbyn, quote-tweeting him and stating: “Unbelievable. The Organisation of American States refused to certify the Bolivian election because of systemic flaws. The people are protesting and striking on an unprecedented scale. But @jeremycorbyn puts Marxist solidarity ahead of democracy.”

But Raab and the Foreign Office made no further comments as the new regime’s forces carried out the Sacaba and Senkata massacres the following week.

Jeff Glekin, Britain’s ambassador to Bolivia since January 2019. (Photo: UK government)

In March 2020, four months after Morales was overthrown, the new regime was organising a series of new initiatives “with the UK as a strategic partner”, the documents note.

That same month, Britain’s ambassador during the coup, Jeff Glekin, offered a glimpse of the UK interests involved in backing the new regime.

Glekin spoke to the Bolivian media about British Week, which was bringing 12 British companies to the country for the first time.

“Many are looking for new markets in the world and Bolivia can be an opportunity to grow,” he said. “Due to the political changes in Bolivia, a more open environment for foreign investment is perceived and I believe that this will open new doors to companies that want to share their technology, their products and make alliances with different companies.”

Glekin, who remains in post, added: “We are working with the Santa Cruz Mayor’s Office … and we invite Santa Cruz corporations to participate in the event.”

In the documents seen by Declassified, a disproportionately high number of UK embassy projects have focused on the eastern city of Santa Cruz, which was the centre of opposition to Evo Morales’ government.

Glekin continued: “The previous government was not very in favour of foreign investment. So, with the changes that we are going to see, it will be easier to enter the market and do business. The companies to come are from different parts of Great Britain and from various sectors. They are modern firms that are doing innovative things and want to enter the market and share their services and products in Bolivia.”

Glekin added: “The demand for lithium is growing and Bolivia must take advantage of that opportunity.”

When new elections took place in October 2020, Evo Morales’ Movimiento al Socialismo won 55% of the votes against six rivals on the ballot, easily avoiding the need for a runoff. The runner-up was former President Carlos Mesa with just under 29%.

A Foreign Office spokesperson told Declassified: “Presidential elections held in Bolivia in October 2020 were free and fair. There was no coup. The UK has a strong and constructive relationship with current and former Bolivian administrations.” DM

Matt Kennard is head of investigations at Declassified UK, an investigative journalism organisation that covers the UK’s role in the world.

Follow Declassified on Twitter, Facebook and YouTube. Sign up to receive Declassified’s monthly newsletter here. You can become a member and supporter of Declassified by visiting here.

Click for Spanish, German, Dutch, Danish, French, translation- Note- Translation may take a moment to load.

========================================

* Zie ook wat Edwin Koopman heeft durven zeggen over deze coup: ‘Bolivia: een jaar na de coup wint de socialistische partij alsnog de verkiezingen‘ Met daarin hetvolgende plus link naar een bericht van Trouw met daarin een voorbeeld van foute berichtgeving over Bolivia, geschreven door de neoliberale fantast Edwin Koopman (werkt ook voor de VPRO) die een uiterst gekleurd verslag gaf over de situatie voorafgaand aan de verkiezingen in Bolivia, waarbij hij verzweeg dat de OAS de coup van 2019 organiseerde op basis van de uitslagen (waarbij Koopman de overwinning van Morales als dubieus durfde neer te zetten) Zie ook andere fratsen van Koopman door op het label met zijn naam te klikken, direct onder dit bericht….): ‘Bij de verkiezingen in Bolivia worden de kandidaten met stenen bekogeld en gaan aanhangers met elkaar op de vuist‘

Zie verder ‘Bolivia: de coup is voorbij, tijd om secretaris-generaal Almagro van de OAS af te zetten en te berechten‘

‘Amnesty, Human Rights Watch, en massamedia doodstil over moord op journalisten in Bolivia‘

‘Bolivia: CIA en OAS hebben op valse gronden een coup tegen de Boliviaanse president Morales opgezet‘

‘Bolivia: OAS heeft gelogen over verkiezingen: Evo Morales onterecht afgezet middels staatsgreep!‘

‘Bolivia: de coup heeft alles te maken met grondstoffen‘

‘NOS liegt weer over Evo Morales (Boliviaanse president) die met coup werd afgezet‘

‘Bolivia coup een ‘CIA job’, aldus anonieme Duitse veiligheidsanalist, met lessen voor de toekomst‘

‘Bolivia: misdadigers die vechten voor het kapitalisme‘


 ‘Bolivianen eisen hun president terug‘

 ‘Bolivia: staatsgreep maakt eind aan succesvol presidentschap Evo Morales‘

‘Bolivia: bewijs op tafel dat VS aanstuurt op een coup”




Bolivia’s Remarkable Socialist Success Story: President Evo Morales has transformed his country’s economy with an unapologetically left-wing agenda.

‘NAVO gaat VS helpen in Zuid-Amerika terreur uit te oefenen: Colombia lid van de NAVO……..‘

 ‘VS couppleger in Venezuela belooft VS Venezolaanse olie als hij de macht heeft overgenomen‘

‘Halliburton en Chevron hebben groot belang bij ‘regime change’ in Venezuela‘ (zie de links in dat bericht naar meer artikelen over Venezuela)

 ‘9 ‘ex-FARC rebellen’ vermoord door leger Colombia: FARC-EP opgericht‘

 ‘Mensenrechten- en milieuactivisten worden massaal vermoord in Brazilië en Colombia, waar het laatste land NAVO bases heeft…….‘

 ‘Koenders heeft vrijlating gegijzelde Spoorloos makers in Colombia bewerkstelligt……. AUW!!!‘

 ‘Paus Franciscus in Colombia om vrede te prediken……‘

 ‘People of Brazil: my sincere condolences with ‘your’ fascistic, psychopathic president Bolsonaro……‘

 ‘VS commando’s vechten o.a. in Midden- en Zuid-Amerika, aldus het VS ministerie van oorlog………‘

 ‘NAVO naar Zuid-Amerika? Weg met dit agressieve, terroristische bondgenootschap, NU!!!‘

 ‘Bolton geeft toe dat de VS een fascistisch beleid voert……‘

 ‘Bolsonaro, de fascistische nieuwe president van Brazilië, werd volgens Avaaz en fake news brengers als de NYT gekozen door manipulatie via WhatsApp‘

 ‘Bolsonaro wint Braziliaanse verkiezingen >> weer zijn we een fascistisch geleid land ‘rijker…’‘

 ‘Braziliaanse verkiezingen: democratie versus (neo-) fascisme, ook een groot gevaar in Europa‘

 ‘Katy Sherriff (Radio1 correspondent Z-Amerika) brandt socialistische partij Brazilië af……‘ (Sherriff was destijds correspondent voor de zogenaamd onafhankelijke NOS (!!), ze beschuldigde o.a. Lula da Silva, de voormalige socialistische president van Brazilie af als corrupt, toevallig werd afgelopen week, het is nu 13 maart 2021, bekend gemaakt dat Lula is vrijgesproken door het Hooggerechtshof in Brazilie!! Sherriff is nu werkzaam voor…: Amnesty International >> hoe is het gvd mogelijk..??!!!)

Machthebbers en elite misbruiken media en fake news voor uitbreiding en bestendiging van macht…….

Posted on by Telmo Claro
Oké mensen, niets nieuws, maar gezien het continu volhouden van leugens in de reguliere westerse media (en door het grootste deel van de politici), kan de waarheid niet vaak genoeg herhaald worden (als was het tegengif), inclusief het noemen van de bewijzen dat het om leugens gaat. Dat geldt bijvoorbeeld voor alle leugens over ‘fake news’ (nepnieuws), maar ook die over de illegale oorlogen van de VS tegen Afghanistan, Irak, Libië, Syrië, Iran en Venezuela (de laatste 2 een economische oorlog die deze landen op de knieën moeten krijgen voor de VS…..)…….

Overigens zijn de reguliere westerse (massa-) media in handen van super welgestelden (plutocraten) en investeringsmaatschappijen, die daarmee die media al sturen, ofwel winst über alles! Die winst gaat op zeker ver voor de waarheid, waarbij het inhumane neoliberalisme (‘fascisme light’) ten koste van alles moet worden beschermd en gepropageerd……. Over manipulaties gesproken……
Kit Klarenberg is de schrijver van het hieronder opgenomen artikel, eerder geplaatst op Sputnik, daarin beschrijft zij het boek van T.J. Coles met de volgende titel: ‘Real Fake News: Techniques of Propaganda and Deception-based Mind Control’.

Coles gaat ook in op de geschiedenis van fake news, maar dan wel het ‘fake news’ dat machthebbers gebruiken om hun positie veilig te stellen…… Het eerst bekende gebruik van fake news was dat door de Babylonische heersers, die daarmee hun goddelijke aanwijzing probeerden te bewijzen (en dat lukte destijds wonderwel goed, later nam het christelijk geloof het over om de koning en koningin als door god gegeven functies neer te zetten, deze achterlijke gedachtekronkel werd ook in de bijbel opgenomen). Terwijl de adel aanvankelijk bestond uit de sterkste en wreedste boeren die de boel met veel geweld onder hun duim wisten te houden en het volk uitbuitten tot het erbij neerviel……..
Trouwens over religies of geloven gesproken: als er één groot fake gebeuren is zijn het de religies wel, al gaat het dan in het westen wel over ‘lang’ vervlogen tijden, tegenwoordig gebruikt men zoals gezegd de media (en de politiek) als vehikel om ‘fake news’ (nepnieuws) te brengen……. De voorbeelden van het verkondigen van fake news zijn overweldigend zie wat dat betreft niet alleen het bericht hierna, maar ook de links die na dat artikel zijn opgenomen.

HOW ELITES USE MAINSTREAM MEDIA TO ‘MAINTAIN AND EXPAND THEIR POWER’

Fake News
(Sputnik) – For quite some time, debate about ‘fake news’ has reverberated clamorously in both mainstream and alternative discourse. One could easily conclude the issue was a pressingly new plague, restricted to certain corners of the web – but academic TJ Coles begs to differ. In fact, he tells Sputnik fake news has been ubiquitous for thousands of years.
It’s difficult to pinpoint the precise moment the term ‘fake news’ entered the Western political and media lexicon, but the election of Donald Trump as US President certainly turbocharged its usage. For the controversial leader and his supporters, the label can be automatically applied to any and all media reporting critical of him, while his opponents play much the same game when roles are reversed.
This tit-for-tat sparring inspired TJ, director of the Institute for Peace Research, to write a book on the subject — the fruit of his labours, Real Fake News: Techniques of Propaganda and Deception-based Mind Control, was published in September.
“All that talk made me think ‘hang on a minute, we’ve always had fake news’. It’s the nature of power — all power structures want to maintain and expand their power, so it’s therefore important to present information that benefits them, and keeps populations in a psychological and/or intellectual prison. The ‘fake news’ peddled by elite financial, commercial and political financial interests, duly regurgitated by major media organizations, eclipses any bogus story perpetuated by alleged ‘bots’ on Twitter, or whatever,” TJ says.

BABYLONIAN BEGINNINGS

In his work, TJ traces the birth of fake news all the way back to ancient Babylon, when rulers sought to perpetuate the notion they were descended from Gods and thus had a right to dominate and control the populace — history’s first recorded instance of the ‘divine right of kings’.
Similarly, Plato famously popularized the idea of the ‘noble lie’ — privileging untruths told for the benefit of elites and the population alike. These ideas very much endure in the modern day — TJ notes Wikileaks’ dump of the Clinton campaign’s internal emails amply demonstrates her team felt it wouldn’t be good, or necessary, for Hillary’s supporters to be aware of her close connections to Wall Street, so did their utmost to conceal the mephitic kinship.
“Elites the world over are acutely aware information is power, and actually quite open about their use and abuse of the news to shape public perceptions and preserve sociopolitical conditions benefitting them. For instance, the UK Ministry of Defence regularly publishes projections of how planners think the world will look in 10 — 20 years, and they routinely note the media is one of the key ways to maintain the current paradigm, and discuss the various ways information can be ‘weaponized’ against the public,” he says.
TJ suggests elites shape and control the public mind so effectively because they exploit fundamental facets of human nature. First, the well-established instinctive inclination to reflexively believe something reinforcing one’s existing beliefs, rather than assessing whether alternative facts or viewpoints have any value, or indeed considering whether what one believes might be wrong, or informed by confirmation bias.
This tendency is greatly exacerbated by the use of internet and social media algorithms that present a ‘personalized’ picture of the world to users, unfailingly presenting individuals with content they want to see, and tacitly suppressing information contrary to their existing opinions.
“Elites also know how easy it is to exploit guilt, which is why atrocity propaganda is so widespread today. Most sympathize with the victims of major atrocities, and naturally want to do something to help, so this aspect of human nature can be easily manipulated to justify aggressive foreign policy actions — ‘look at what we’re letting happen to poor defenceless people, we have a responsibility to protect them’ etcetera. It’s funny, when it comes to the economy, the powerful are quick to say people are naturally selfish, so it’s everyone for themselves, but when it comes to foreign policy, we should care about our fellow human beings and do something to help,” TJ says.

ABSENCE IS EVIDENCE

As the academic’s work makes clear, atrocity propaganda doesn’t even need to have any grounding in reality whatsoever. In the lead-up to the NATO-backed violent overthrow of Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi in 2011, the mainstream media was awash with reports government forces fuelled by viagra were conducting mass rapes of civilians, and planning a borderline genocidal massacre of rebel forces — claims used to justify the imposition of a no-fly zone over the country, and NATO airstrikes.
The stories were subsequently found to be entirely without foundation — similarly, serious question marks hover over the veracity of numerous claimed chemical weapons attacks in Syria, which likewise have provided a pretext for Western attacks on the country.
“It’s especially easy to exploit guilt when you present bite-sized news reports about an atrocious event stripped of all context, and exclude the voices of people who are actually on the ground. Occasionally, contradictory voices do filter through the system, although largely by accident. For instance, the BBC made the mistake of inviting Peter Ford, former UK ambassador to Syria, on air to discuss chemical weapons attacks — he quickly demolished their propaganda. He hasn’t been invited back since,” TJ says.
Ford is surely but one of a great many talking heads to effectively be banned from appearing on the BBC for daring to state views and evidence contrary to ascendant elite narratives. However, the British state broadcaster’s blacklisting activities also extend to its own employees — in April 2018, the BBC admitted that for decades, job applicants and serving staff were subject to political vetting by MI5, in an effort to prevent “subversives” gaining employment with the Corporation.
Often, individuals were ostracized on extremely tenuous grounds. For instance, respected film director John Goldschmidt was blacklisted in the late 1960s, with two projects he was working on for the Beeb cancelled midway through production without warning or explanation — MI5 deemed him a potential subversive as he’d spent a few weeks in Czechoslovakia in his youth, as part of a student exchange program. Similarly, award-winning journalist Isabel Hilton was refused a job by BBC Scotland in 1976 — that she spoke Chinese and had been a member of Scottish China Association at Edinburgh University made MI5 extremely anxious.
Under the policy, popular children’s book author and playwright Michael Rosen was also outright sacked from the BBC in 1972 while a graduate trainee for a number of ‘transgressions’, including student activism at Oxford, and producing a film featuring clips of US soldiers being tested with LSD. The American Embassy in London complained about the project to both MI5 and the BBC directly, whereupon Rosen was shown the door.
The policy was wound down in the 1990s, and it’s unknown whether any comparable structures existed at other major news organizations — although City University research suggests dissenting voices remain rare in the British mainstream media. The 2016 study concluded UK journalists are overwhelmingly white, male, and elite-university educated — and are far more trusting of politicians, the government, police and military than the general population, which the study’s authors partly attributed to reporters’ “reliance on these institutions as sources of information”.
Such widespread faith in the establishment may account for why so many prominent reporters see no problem with maintaining close relationships with the intelligence services. The Guardian’s Luke Harding has frequently, openly and proudly advertised his warm bond with British spying agencies in articles and books — and equally frequently been condemned for uncritically running stories of questionable probity potentially provided to him by agency staff. In a September article he claimed Russian diplomats had held secret talks in London with associates of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, in an attempt to assist in his escape from the UK. The covert action would’ve allegedly seen Assange smuggled out of the Ecuadorian embassy in Knightsbridge under cover of Christmas Eve in a diplomatic vehicle and transported to Moscow.
The story was entirely based on the testimony of anonymous sources, the identity of which Harding didn’t even hint at in the piece. In response, Craig Murray, former UK Ambassador to Uzbekistan, slammed the article, calling it a “quite extraordinary set of deliberate lies” and “entirely black propaganda” published by an “MI6 tool”.
“I was closely involved with Julian and with Fidel Narvaez of the Ecuadorean Embassy at the end of last year in discussing possible future destinations for Julian. It is not only the case Russia did not figure in those plans, it is a fact Julian directly ruled out the possibility as undesirable. The entire story is a complete and utter fabrication. It is very serious indeed when a newspaper like the Guardian prints a tissue of deliberate lies in order to spread fake news on behalf of the security services. I cannot find words eloquent enough to express the depth of my contempt for Harding and Katherine Viner, who have betrayed completely the values of journalism,” Murray wrote.
Similarly, in 2007 the Campaign Against Sanctions and Military Intervention in Iran published an analysis of 44 articles written by Daily Telegraph Defence Editor Con Couglin on Iran — including stories suggesting North Korea was helping Tehran prepare a nuclear weapons test, and the country was grooming Bin Laden’s successor. They found the pieces almost invariably were based on “unnamed or untraceable” sources in intelligence agencies or the UK Foreign Office and “published at sensitive and delicate times” when there’d been “relatively positive diplomatic moves” towards Iran, and contained ‘exclusive revelations’ about Iran combined with eye-catchingly controversial headlines, which were typically based on a single sentence in the wider article.

PRISON BREAK

Despite his bleak analysis, TJ does not view the elite monopoly on information as insurmountable, or invincible — there’s much individuals and groups can do to shatter the stranglehold.
“People should keep a keen eye on sources that analyse news reporting and misreporting, such as Glasgow University Media Group and MediaLens, which offer alternative information and tell you what media coverage is actively omitting from the real story. However, change must come from within too — people should divorce themselves from preconceptions, and question their beliefs wherever and whenever possible. When presented with information that doesn’t conform to our predispositions, we should ask ourselves whether it’s true, rather than reflexively dismissing it outright,” TJ says.
While having less trust in the media more generally is a must, the academic also warns against placing too much faith in alternative news outlets and social networks, despite them being valuable resources with a significant positive potential.
“Independent media is growing in size and strength, but its overall reach is still relatively tiny — while print circulation is obviously down, people still get the vast bulk of their information from mainstream outlets. Similarly, social media could’ve democratized the spread of information, but it hasn’t — and in fact any such potential has probably been neutered by the proliferation of ‘fact-checking’ resources, which are anything but unbiased and disinterested arbiters of truth,” TJ notes.
One-such ‘fact-checker’ is the Atlantic Council, a NATO-offshoot with a board of directors comprised of a ‘who’s who’ of contentious US political figures, including Henry Kissinger, Condoleezza Rice, Colin Powell, Robert Gates, Michael Hayden and David Petraeus, among others.
It partnered with Facebook in May to “independently monitor disinformation and other vulnerabilities” and combat the spread of fake news on the platform. To date, the collaboration has resulted in untold hundreds of pages and personal accounts being shut down — rather than being promulgators of propaganda though, the overwhelming bulk of the banished were alternative news sources, political organizations and individuals, highlighting issues and events the mainstream media downplays or ignores, such as US interventionism, drug legalization and police brutality.
Moreover, that elites exploit social media’s information-sharing capabilities to suit their own objectives is well-established.
“The US State Department has used major social networks to recruit revolutionaries on several occasions, most notably during the ‘Arab Spring’, connecting ‘moderate rebels’ — actually violent jihadist lunatics — in select countries. Washington wanted Assad, Gaddafi and Mubarak gone, because they weren’t following orders — but there were no Twitter or Facebook ‘revolutions’ in the Gulf states, because the American empire wanted their rulers to remain in place. In Cuba, the CIA even went as far as creating a social network for the same purpose,” TJ concludes.
The views and opinions expressed by the contributors do not necessarily reflect those of Sputnik

This report prepared by Kit Klarenberg for Sputnik

=========================================
Zie ook:
‘New York Times: eerste Israëlische inval in Gazastrook sinds 2014 >> fake news!‘

‘Noord-Koreaans ‘bedrog met nucleaire deal’ is fake news o.a. gebracht door de New York Times‘

‘‘Fake News’ misbruikt door dictaturen en de reguliere (massa-) media‘

‘Twitter weert waarheid: Paul Craig Roberts in de ban, Roberts >> de grote criticus van de illegale oorlogen die de VS voert‘

‘Russiagate sprookje ondermijnt VS democratie en de midterm verkiezingen‘

‘Bolsonaro, de fascistische nieuwe president van Brazilië, werd volgens Avaaz en fake news brengers als de NYT gekozen door manipulatie via WhatsApp‘

‘Facebooks zuivering van de alternatieve (nieuws) media staat nog in de kinderschoenen‘

‘Politico rapport bevestigt: Russiagate is een hoax‘ (Russiagate, de enorme leugen op basis waaraan we de huidige censuurgolf te danken hebben……)

‘The US military’s vision for state censorship‘

‘Israël en VS werken samen in tegenwerken van critici op beleid t.a.v. Palestijnen‘

‘Facebook censureert de waarheid over Columbus en de verovering van de Amerika’s…….‘

‘Facebook censuur gestuurd door het westers militair-industrieel complex en de NAVO in het bijzonder……….‘

‘Why the Coordinated Alternative Media Purge Should Terrify Everyone‘ (Tyler Durden op Zero Hedge)

‘First They Came for Alex Jones — We Told You We Were Next — We Were‘ (Matt Agorist op The Free Thought Project)

‘CNN, de grote brenger van ‘fake news!!!’‘

‘Facebook en Twitter verwijderen nu volledige accounts………‘

‘Facebook (en Twitter) onderdrukt meningsvorming door het verwijderen van (echt) onafhankelijke media‘

‘Wie het nieuws controleert, controleert de wereld……‘

‘Facebook en Twitter verwijderen de eerlijke journalistiek en oprechte opinie >> censuur…..‘

Facebook verlaat ‘tranding news’ voor ‘brekend nieuws’ van 80 reguliere mediaorganen, ofwel nog meer ‘fake news…..’‘

‘Facebook komt met nieuwsshows van betrouwbare media als CNN en Fox News…. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!‘

‘Censuur op het internet met vliegende start in de VS, ‘het land van het vrije woord….’‘

‘Facebook en NAVO werken samen in censuur op niet welgevallig nieuws……‘

‘Facebook helpt Saoedi-Arabië: doodstraf door onthoofding van vrouw die het waagde kritiek te uiten…..‘

‘Aanval op alternatieve media ‘succesvol’: meer en meer sites worden van het net geweerd………‘

‘ThinkProgress eiste censuur van Facebook en werd inderdaad gecensureerd…. ha! ha! ha! ha!‘

‘VS staatscensuur op Facebook (ook in de EU)‘

‘Facebook stelt perstituee van New York Times aan als censuur-agent…… ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!‘

‘Het echte Facebook schandaal: manipulatie van de gebruikers en gratis diensten voor eertijds presidentskandidaat Obama…….‘

‘Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook doneerde aan de politici die hem in de VS aan de tand voelden >> in het EU parlement maakte hij gebruik van megalomane EU politici…..‘

‘Facebook wil samen met door Saoedi-Arabië gesubsidieerde denktank censureren…. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!‘

‘Media Too Busy Defending John McCain to Report the News That Actually Affects You‘ Onder andere aandacht voor PRISM.

‘Westerse massa misleiding in aanloop naar WOIII……‘

‘VS gebruikt sociale media om ‘fake comment’ te verspreiden en de bevolking te hersenspoelen met leugens, ofwel ‘fake news….’‘

‘Eis een nee tegen censuur op het internet!‘

‘Facebook e.a. hebben lak aan AVG (GDPR), misbruik persoonsgegevens gaat gewoon door…….‘

‘Jeremy Corbyn wordt gedemoniseerd als antisemiet…….‘

‘VS gebruikt sociale media om ‘fake comment’ te verspreiden en de bevolking te hersenspoelen met leugens, ofwel ‘fake news….’‘

‘Facebook: verrijking van oliemaatschappijen en andere grote bedrijven, plus wereldwijde corruptie…….‘

‘Rusland krijgt alweer de schuld van hacken, nu van oplichters Symantec en Facebook……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!‘

Facebook Purges Independent Media for “Political Disinformation”


Facebook Blocks Links to Free Speech Competitor ‘Minds’

Skripal vergiftiging roept steeds meer vraagtekens op…..

Posted on by Telmo Claro

Beste bezoeker, ben het zelf niet helemaal eens met de kop boven dit bericht, immers dat zou er op kunnen duiden dat de Russen inderdaad de Skripals, een voormalig geheim agent en een ander stel (kilometers verderop) in Groot-Brittannië, hebben vergiftigd……

Het verhaal dat de nu als dader aangeduide ‘Russen’, te weten Boshirov en Petrov, ‘van een Russische geheime dienst’ (eerst alleen door May zo aangeduid en niet door de politie herhaald) de Skripals hebben vergiftigd, is te zot voor woorden. De Russische geheime diensten als FSB en GRU (in Nederland aangeduid als GROe) zijn niet het equivalent van de AIVD of de MIVD, denk je nu echt dat leden van de Russische geheime dienst dan een gifstof zouden gebruiken die in de voormalige Sovjet Unie werd ontwikkeld? Genoeg andere stoffen die bijvoorbeeld naar de VS of GB zelf zouden kunnen wijzen.
Ook het klungelige gedrag wat Craig Murray in het hieronder opgenomen artikel, oorspronkelijk van zijn site noemt*, is al een bewijs dat het onmogelijk de goed georganiseerde Russische geheime dienst kan zijn geweest. Om het anders te zeggen: deze diensten staan bepaald niet bekend als organisaties met louter klungels…..

 Bovendien vond e.e.a. plaats terwijl er al een heksenjacht op Rusland bezig was en dat land zonder enig bewijs wordt beschuldigd van de meest waanzinnige acties, om er een paar te noemen: de manipulatie van de VS presidentsverkiezingen, de Brexit en het onafhankelijkheidsreferendum in Catalonië……. Beste bezoeker dat was het nog niet: nee Rusland zou dit ook nog eens hebben gedaan in de aanloop van het WK voetbal, waarbij het bepaald geen rel als deze kon gebruiken…..
In een bericht van vorige week meldde ik al over de twee foto’s van de zogenaamde Russische geheime dienst medewerkers**, waar de tijdcode (tot op de seconde) dat elk van hen door een douane gang moesten lopen, op de foto dezelfde was….. Ofwel deze ‘geheim agenten’ werden op de foto’s gescheiden van elkaar getoond, terwijl ze gezien de tijdcode op die foto’s, tot op de seconde wel op dezelfde plek waren…… ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! Foutje in de beeldmanipulatie moet je maar denken…….
Waar Murray niet over spreekt is het stilzwijgen van de Skripals, waarom hebben vader en/of dochter nog steeds niet met de pers gesproken, dezelfde pers die vanaf het begin angstvallig door de Britten uit de buurt van de Skripals werd gehouden…….
Nee, wat mij betreft is de zaak zo klaar als een klontje, dit is een ‘false flag’ operatie, die door verschillende partijen (klungelig) kan zijn opgezet (hoogstwaarschijnlijk met hulp van de CIA, dat ‘nog wel eens’ grote flaters begaat, zoals [te] opvallend veel sporen achterlaten…). Zo hebben de VS, Groot-Brittannië, Oekraïne, de Baltische Staten er alle belang bij Rusland zoveel mogelijk te demoniseren, zodat er met een beroep op de ‘agressie van de Russen’, nog meer troepen kunnen worden gestationeerd langs de Russische grens…… Zoals keer op keer blijkt: alles wat daarbij kan helpen, wordt uit de kast getrokken…..

Buiten overheden heeft ook het militair-industrieel complex belang bij zoveel mogelijk spanningen op de wereld, niet alleen tussen het oosten en het westen, maar ook tussen het noorden en het zuiden, neem de grootschalige terreur van de VS (en de NAVO) in het Midden-Oosten, Afrika, Azië en Latijns Amerika………………..
Lees de uitleg van Murray zoals afgelopen vrijdag geplaatst op Information Clearing House:
Skripals – The Mystery Deepens
By Craig Murray

September 07, 2018 “Information Clearing House” – The time that “Boshirov and Petrov” were allegedly in Salisbury carrying out the attack is all entirely within the period the Skripals were universally reported to have left their home with their mobile phones switched off.

 A key hole in the British government’s account of the Salisbury poisonings has been plugged – the lack of any actual suspects. And it has been plugged in a way that appears broadly convincing – these two men do appear to have traveled to Salisbury at the right time to have been involved.

 But what has not been established is the men’s identity and that they are agents of the Russian state, or just what they did in Salisbury. If they are Russian agents, they are remarkably amateur assassins. Meanwhile the new evidence throws the previously reported timelines into confusion – and demolishes the theories put out by “experts” as to why the Novichok dose was not fatal.

This BBC report gives a very useful timeline summary of events.

 At 09.15 on Sunday 4 March the Skripals’ car was seen on CCTV driving through three different locations in Salisbury. Both Skripals had switched off their mobile phones and they remained off for over four hours, which has baffled geo-location.

 There is no CCTV footage that indicates the Skripals returning to their home. It has therefore always been assumed that they last touched the door handle around 9am.

 But the Metropolitan Police state that Boshirov and Petrov did not arrive in Salisbury until 11.48 on the day of the poisoning. That means that they could not have applied a nerve agent to the Skripals’ doorknob before noon at the earliest. But there has never been any indication that the Skripals returned to their home after noon on Sunday 4 March. If they did so, they and/or their car somehow avoided all CCTV cameras. Remember they were caught by three CCTV cameras on leaving, and Borishov and Petrov were caught frequently on CCTV on arriving.

 The Skripals were next seen on CCTV at 13.30, driving down Devizes road. After that their movements were clearly witnessed or recorded until their admission to hospital.

 So even if the Skripals made an “invisible” trip home before being seen on Devizes Road, that means the very latest they could have touched the doorknob is 13.15. The longest possible gap between the novichok being placed on the doorknob and the Skripals touching it would have been one hour and 15 minutes. Do you recall all those “experts” leaping in to tell us that the “ten times deadlier than VX” nerve agent was not fatal because it had degraded overnight on the doorknob?

Well that cannot be true. The time between application and contact was between a minute and (at most) just over an hour on this new timeline.

 In general it is worth observing that the Skripals, and poor Dawn Sturgess and Charlie Rowley, all managed to achieve almost complete CCTV invisibility in their widespread movements around Salisbury at the key times, while in contrast “Petrov and Boshirov” managed to be frequently caught in high quality all the time during their brief visit.

 This is especially remarkable in the case of the Skripals’ location around noon on 4 March. The government can only maintain that they returned home at this time, as they insist they got the nerve agent from the doorknob. But why was their car so frequently caught on CCTV leaving, but not at all returning? It appears very much more probable that they came into contact with the nerve agent somewhere else, while they were out.

“Boshirov and Petrov” plainly are of interest in this case. But only Theresa May stated they were Russian agents: the police did not, and stated that they expected those were not their real identities. We do not know who Boshirov and Petrov were. It appears very likely their appearance was to do with the Skripals on that day. But they may have been meeting them, outside the home.

The evidence points to that, rather than doorknobs. Such a meeting might explain why the Skripals had turned off their mobile phones to attempt to avoid surveillance.

 It is also telling the police have pressed no charges against them in the case of Dawn Sturgess, which would be manslaughter at least if the government version is true.

 If “Boshirov and Petrov” are secret agents, their incompetence is astounding. They used public transport rather than a vehicle and left the clearest possible CCTV footprint. They failed in their assassination attempt. They left traces of novichok everywhere and could well have poisoned themselves, and left the “murder weapon” lying around to be found. Their timings in Salisbury were extremely tight – and British Sunday rail service dependent.

 There are other possibilities of who “Boshirov and Petrov” really are, of which Ukrainian is the obvious one. One thing I discovered when British Ambassador to Uzbekistan was that there had been a large Ukrainian ethnic group of scientists working at the Soviet chemical weapon testing facility there at Nukus. There are many other possibilities.

 Yesterday’s revelations certainly add to the amount we know about the Skripal event. But they raise as many new questions as they give answers.

 Craig Murray is an author, broadcaster and human rights activist. He was British Ambassador to Uzbekistan from August 2002 to October 2004 and Rector of the University of Dundee from 2007 to 2010. https://www.craigmurray.org.uk

==See Also==

=================================
* Ik nam het bericht over van Information Clearing House, maar dat is in dit geval geen veilige site (met een slot in de adresbalk)

** Zie: ‘Skripal: GB klaagt 2 Russen aan voor vergiftiging middels een sci-fi techniek: de 2 waren tegelijk op 1 plek, waar 1 Rus te zien was……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!‘

*** Waar Oekraïne en de Baltische Staten (voorheen onderdeel van de Sovjet Unie), zoals GB (Porton Down), de beschikking hebben over de novitsjok formule…….

Zie ook:
‘Novitsjok Skripal sprookje? Lees dit bericht!‘

‘Joël Voordewind (ChristenUnie, Tweede Kamer) eist actie n.a.v. false flag actie Skripal‘

‘Rusland schuldig verklaard voor aanslag op Skripal, echter onafhankelijke controle van ‘het bewijsmateriaal’ wordt geweigerd……‘

‘Novitsjok (Novichok) een Russisch chemische wapen >> één grote leugen, zoals de massavernietigingswapen van Saddam Hoessein‘

‘Rusland mag niet deelnemen aan onderzoek naar ‘aanslag met novitsjok’ op Skripal‘

‘Rusland verlangt terecht een excuus van de Britse regering voor valse beschuldiging ‘aanslag’ op Skripal…..‘

‘Novitsjok (novichok) uitgelegd door wetenschappers, Groot-Brittannië zit ‘goed fout….‘

‘Stef Blok (VVD minister BuZa): de Russische schuld voor de aanslag op Skripal is ‘plausibel…’ ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!‘

‘Brits ministerie van Buitenlandse Zalen geeft toe dat Porton Down niet heeft gezegd dat ‘novitsjok’ uit Rusland komt….. Blok (VVD) alweer met 10 km/u. finaal uit de ‘novitsjok-bocht’‘

‘Skripal: geen (onomstotelijk) bewijs voor Russische schuld en toch stuurt Rutte 2 Russische diplomaten het land uit……..‘

‘Skripal: wat journalisten echt zouden moeten vragen aangaande ‘de aanslag met gifgas’‘

‘Russisch zenuwgas verhaal is nonsens ook aldus Jeremy Corbyn….. Jimmy Dore met commentaar!‘

‘OPCW bevestigt: novitsjok (novichok) van aanslag op Skripal komt uit Rusland……‘

‘Skripal false flag operatie zakt als soufflé in elkaar…….‘

‘Novitsjok (Novichok) een Russisch chemische wapen >> één grote leugen, zoals de massavernietigingswapen van Saddam Hoessein‘

‘Nieuwe ‘novitsjok aanslag’ nadat de Skripal vergiftiging definitief kan worden afgeschreven als false flag operatie‘

‘‘False flag terror’ bestaat wel degelijk: bekentenissen en feiten over heel smerige zaken……….‘
=============================

Terzijde verdere berichten over demoniseren van Rusland:
‘‘Fake News’ hysterie willens en wetens gelanceerd om sociale media tot zwijgen te brengen, Rusland te demoniseren en daarmee de waarheid te verbergen……..‘

‘Rusland heeft niets van doen met manipulaties van de VS presidentsverkiezingen via Facebook, wel maakt Facebook meer kapot dan je lief is…….‘

‘‘Russiagate’ een complot van CIA, FBI, Hillary Clinton en het DNC………..‘

‘CIA en 70 jaar desinformatie in Europese opiniebladen…………‘

‘CIA deed zich voor als het Russische Kaspersky Lab, aldus Wikileaks Vault 8…..‘ (zie ook de andere links onder dat bericht)