by David Sims
RUSSIA IS BEING framed again by Jewish liars, who, this time, are speaking through the mouths of members of the British Parliament.
You might remember a previous incident of this sort. In February 2014, a Zionist-backed coup transferred political control of Ukraine from the native Ukrainians who had previously held the highest administrative offices, to new officials who were mostly Jews. These Jews, once in power, quickly did a number of things, one of which was to ship all of Ukraine’s gold to the US Federal Reserve bank in New York, from which (if the fate of Germany’s gold is any guide for prediction) it will never again emerge.
Why did the Jews take over Ukraine in 2014? They wanted to use the country as a stage for political theater. The first play to be performed on that stage began when the Jewish bosses in Kiev arranged to have a Malaysian passenger jet shot down, and immediately afterward blaming it all on the Russians (i.e., with detailed news reports appearing within hours, as if all the important and relevant questions could be answered with such speed).
Now there has been another deadly play of political theater.
On 4 March 2018, in Salisbury, in the United Kingdom, someone tried to assassinate a former Soviet intelligence officer named Sergei Skripal (age 66) and his daughter Yulia (age 33), using a nerve gas called Novichok A-234.
The government of the UK quickly identified the particular nerve gas that was used in the attack.
Most suspiciously quickly.
The UK government immediately cast the blame on the Russian government. However, it is likely that the nerve gas had come from a British chemical laboratory in Porton Down, which has a UK-classified auxiliary military role of dealing with chemical weapons. The Porton Down facility is only eight miles away from Salisbury.
The suspicious thing about the accusations by the UK government is the speed with which its forensic and evidentiary analyses were carried out. Real science usually does not move that fast.
The World Tribune raises some compelling questions about the attack:
Following are some of the unaddressed factors:
1. Motivation: What was the Russian Government’s alleged motivation for attempting to kill Skripal? Certainly, he was a former officer of the Soviet (and later Russian) military intelligence service, the GRU (Main Intelligence Directorate; since 2010 known as the Main Directorate of the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces) who had been found to have been working for the UK Secret Intelligence Service (SIS/MI6) during the 1990s and early 2000s.
Significantly, he was not — as was the historic custom of the former Soviet Government — executed for treason, but simply imprisoned after he had been arrested in December 2004 by the Federal Security Service (FSB), and then tried and convicted, and sentenced to a mere 13 years in prison. However, he received full amnesty from the Russian Government and was sent to the UK in 2010 in an exchange of intelligence illegals captured by Western (mainly U.S.) agencies. So it must be assumed that the GRU felt that he had nothing of importance which he could disclose to the UK Government that he had not already disclosed in his period as a double. Moreover, he retained his Russian Passport and kept getting consular services while in the UK. His family was permitted to travel and live in Russia.
Why, then, eight years later, would Moscow seek to have him killed? That is not to say that Russia was not involved in the attack, but merely, from evidence so far available, there is no ability to build a compelling case against Russia based on definitive physical evidence or on motive.
2. The Methodology of the Attack: The description of the type of attack and the alleged weapon used (a nerve agent within the Novichok family) were raised by the UK Government as prima facie evidence of Russian Government involvement, and the allegation was made by the British Government — again without supporting evidence — that the Russian Government had continued to manufacture and stockpile weaponized Novichok (meaning “newcomer”) family nerve agents in contravention of post-Cold War understandings. Open source literature suggests that five variants of the Novichok family had been developed and weaponized between 1971 and 1993. The UK Government was not specific about which strand of Novichok was allegedly used against Skripal and his daughter (although it was believed to have been the A-232 variety, which could be used in a spray).
However, there were numerous official and media allegations that the attack somehow paralleled the very different case of Alexander Litvinenko, a former officer of the Russian Federal Security Service (FSB) and, before that, the KGB, who had defected to the UK where he received political asylum. He was, on November 1, 2006, hospitalized (and later died) from having received a lethal dose of polonium-210, a chemical derived from a rare and highly radioactive metal. Both the circumstances of Litvinenko’s background (and relationship with the Russian Government), and the methodology and weapons of the attack bear no relationship with the background of Skripal.
3. Access to Nerve Agents: It is important to note that the UK Government throughout its statements on the matter implied that only Russia had access to the Novichok agents, and that they were still in use with the Russian Armed Forces. Those allegations were incorrect as to the spread of knowledge and possession of the agents were concerned, and there is no evidence that the Russian Government retained Novichok in its arsenal (although it would certainly have samples in its archives).
The reality was that several Soviet satellite states also were known to have had access to Novichok during the Cold War, and Wikipedia notes: “In 2016 Iranian chemists synthesized six Novichok agents for analysis and produced detailed mass spectral data which was added to the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons Central Analytical Database.” Moreover, the fact that the UK Government’s chemical and biological warfare agency at Porton Down was able to identify the nerve agent used in the Skripal case as Novichok indicates that Porton Down also has — presumably as with the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Chemical Defense (USAMRICD), at Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland, and other concerned agencies around the world — attempted to obtain samples of Novichok agents and probably attempted to replicate them in order to discover antidotes. Vil Mirzayanov, one of the developers of Novichok, defected to the U.S. in the early-1990s, revealed the project and delivered all the data, including production techniques, to the U.S. and the UK.
It is fortunate for the victims that the toxin was promptly identified and that the proper antidote was ready to hand, else Sergei and Yulia Skripal would likely be dead. However, that same promptitude makes it appear more likely that the British government is itself the poisoner, rather than the Russians.