Mar 13

Skripal: Nerve Gas and Evidence

 

Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia in a restaurant minutes before they were found slumped on a bench, supposedly infected by nerve gas.

Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia in a restaurant minutes before they were found slumped on a bench, supposedly infected by nerve gas.

MPs and the mainstream media were queuing up last night to blame Russia for the Skripal Nerve Gas incident.  This morning’s headline in the Metro was ‘From Russia … with hate.’  Theresa May shot off a letter to the Russian Ambassador demanding an explanation.  The BBC reports: ‘The UK has given Russia a midnight deadline to explain why a Russian-made nerve agent was used in the attack.’

The principle of ‘innocent until proven guilty’ appears to have been suspended.  And it is a very Biblical presumption.  It is founded on the necessity to find at least two actual witnesses to a crime before any conviction:

Deut 19:15 One witness shall not rise up against a man for any iniquity, or for any sin, in any sin that he sinneth: at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established.

The Lord Jesus confirmed this word:

Matt 18:16 But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.

Nerve Gas: what evidence?

So what evidence lies against the state of Russia for the apparent attempted murder of Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia?  Alternatively, because a nation state is not an individual, can we argue that rules of evidence may be suspended?  However, if the latter is assumed, it could become murky. There are just too many agencies and state players – and political expediencies – to pass definitive judgment.

So what can we say we safely know?  What matters are agreed as fact?  Furthermore, what is in dispute?

We know Yulia Skripal and her father Sergei were found slumped on a bench in Salisbury.  We know they are currently ill in hospital.  As Yulia’s concerned friends have pointed out, we know no more than that.  What is their condition?   We know a policeman, Detectice Sergeant Nick Bailey, was affected by some substance as he responded.  He is still in hospital and well enough now to sit up and talk.  Or is he ‘seriously ill’?  However, we know from the BBC that a doctor who was out shopping attended Yulia and suffered no ill effects from examining her and her father as an ambulance was being called.  The doctor has not been identified but said Yulia was “slumped in her seat, completely unconscious.”

Yulia Skripal flew in the day before

Furthermore, the same BBC web page informs us:  ‘Yulia Skripal flew into London’s Heathrow Airport on a flight from Russia at about 14:40 GMT on 3 March’.  (Yulia lives in Moscow according to her Facebook page.  Curiously, no arrivals from Moscow appear to be scheduled to land next Saturday at Heathrow at that time.)  The next day, 4th March, ‘at about 13:40 GMT, Mr Skripal and his daughter arrived at the Sainbury’s upper level car park in Salisbury city centre’.  After that they ‘went to the Bishop’s Mill pub’.  Then they ate at the Zizzi restaurant at 14:20 GMT.  They stayed ‘until 15:35 GMT’.

So here is a strange co-incidence.  Father and daughter were both found incapacitated the day after she flew in from Russia.   If someone intends to kill them both he must know her movements.  It would be easy for a Russian agent to find Yulia’s departure time.  However, British intelligence could do that as well.  But who planted poison in their home?  Why have the police given no description of anyone they want to interview?  Did no witness see someone loitering around their home?  If there was a break-in, why did Mr Skripal not report it to the police?

With the death in New Malden of Russian businessman Nikolai Glushkov, the BBC reports police are appealing for witnesses who saw anything near his home.  Yet there has been no police appeal for witnesses who saw anything around the Skripal home.

Or perhaps there is no description or appeal because the police know no other party was involved.  In that case, was Yulia carrying something that accidentally went wrong?

Was DS Bailey infected at the Skripal home?

Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey

Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey

Returning to DS Bailey, Amber Rudd, the Home Secretary said: ‘The officer was one of the first responders on Sunday, acting selflessly to help others.’  That is as reported in the Independent (caution: video ad!)  ‘The latest update from the hospital is that the officer remains serious but stable and is conscious, talking and engaging.’  Police sources have also been giving the impression DS Bailey became ill because he rushed to help the couple as a ‘first responder’.

However, the Guardian stated this, some days ago: ‘DS Nick Bailey is seriously ill in hospital having visited the home of Skripal after the defector and his daughter were found slumped on a bench in Salisbury, Wiltshire, on Sunday afternoon.’

Did DS Bailey attend at the scene or not?  And if so, given he is a detective sergeant, in what capacity?  Suppose the nerve agent was at the home of Mr and Miss Skripal.  Numerous police who attended the scene in ordinary uniforms have not fallen ill, as reported in this story.

No nerve gas on the streets

Yet another Guardian story said:‘Earlier, the home secretary, Amber Rudd, described the use of a nerve agent in a busy city centre as “attempted murder in the most cruel and public way”.’  But if the nerve agent was at the home of the defector, it was not deployed ‘in a busy city centre’.  Albeit, we understand traces can adhere to clothing, if the two were in contact with it at their home.  And how did that happen?   The Guardian also spoke of ‘pressure’ on the government and police ‘for answers’.  Nevertheless, few are forthcoming. Why is the Government being so cagey about the evident contamination in the Skripal residence?

According to the BBC on Thursday 16th March, ‘Wiltshire Police said 131 people had been identified as potentially being exposed to the nerve agent – but none has shown any symptoms.’  The head of counter-terrorism, Assistant Commissioner Neil Basu, even said 35 people had been seen by doctors.

But the truth is, there was nothing wrong with any of them.  The BBC went on: ‘Salisbury District Hospital has also assessed 46 people who came forward expressing health concerns but they were not admitted.

‘In a letter to the Times, Salisbury NHS Trust emergency medical consultant Stephen Davies said only three people – the Skripals and Det Sgt Nick Bailey – had needed treatment.’

Here is the plain and honest truth.  We have seen men in chemical suits, the disruption of Salisbury businesses, and the scaremongering of AC Basu.  Despite all that, nobody at all has been affected by a nerve agent in the street.  As a more honest policeman might say: ‘There is nothing to see here; move along please’.

Nerve Agents

On 12th March, Amber Rudd identified the toxin as ‘Novichok’.  We only have the word of the UK Government for that.  Craig Murray says Porton Down have not identified it as such at all.  (Thanks to ‘Off-Guardian’ for that.)  On 16th March they said they had sent it to the OPCW.   Be that as it may.  This substance is one of a family of organophosphates known as ‘nerve agents’.  Nerve agents were discovered in the 1930s.  This website explains how they work.

Apparently, nerve agents, of which Sarin is the most famous, are relatively easy to make.  You take two base materials and mix them.  The difficulty, if you are the perpetrator, lies in keeping out of the way of the finished product.  New Scientist reports: ‘Andrei Zheleznyakov, a Russian scientist involved in their development, reportedly died not long after being exposed to a small amount that leaked out of a rubber tube in the lab.’

New scientist also tells us Novichok is ‘eight times as deadly as VX, the V-series agent that was used to kill North Korean exile Kim Jong-nam last year. Just 10 milligrams of VX on the skin can be lethal.’  So just 1-and-a-bit milligrams of Novichok will kill you.  Yet Sergei and Yulia are still alive, we are told, and DS Bailey is awake.

They quote John Lamb of Birmingham City University, UK: ‘The Novichok family was specifically created by Russia to be unknown in the West and as such it’ll be one of their most tightly guarded secrets.’

But is it?  Martin Boland of Charles Darwin University in Australia says: ‘Western intelligence agencies probably have knowledge of the exact Novichok structures, allowing them to detect a match,’ in hospital analysis of enzymes in the body.

How to make nerve gas

This website tells you how to make VX nerve agent, but warns you not to bother.  The author also explains why it is unlikely that it was VX used to kill Kim Jong-nam.

Putting it all together, Novichok, meaning ‘newcomer’, was developed in Russia in the 1970s.  It was manufactured at a plant in Uzbekistan.  So there is a definite ‘Kremlin link’.  But the Metro tells us US experts arrived post-Soviet era in 1999 ‘to dismantle and decontaminate the facility’ in Uzbekistan.

The US experts must have left after documenting everything they found.  They must know by now how to make Novichok.  According to RT, a Russian chemist named Vil Mirzayanov published the formula for Novichok in his book.  He now lives in the US.  And it would stretching credulity to suppose the clever boys and girls at Porton Down can’t make this nerve agent as well.  However, if they can, we can be certain the Home Secretary will not tell us.  The fiction that it is a closely-guarded Russian secret suits the narrative.

So there is much here that just does not add up.  Above all, there is a great deal about which we have to trust our politicians to tell us the truth.  Moreover, since the Dodgy Dossier, that level of trust simply is not there.  The Russians have denied they were involved.   As even Al Jazeera reports, suggestions of British or US involvement are plausible.  Russia’s foreign minister said claims of Russian involvement were ‘rubbish’.  Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said that Russia had been refused access to the substance that was used to poison Mr Skripal.   It would not respond to the ultimatum until it was given access.

Needs to be a ‘direct act’

According to RT: Maria Zakharova for the Russian Foreign Ministry called the events in Parliament ‘circus show’.  She went on, ‘The conclusion is obvious: this is another information and political campaign, based on provocation.’

Miss Zakharova’s comments came after Mrs May said the ‘attempted murder’ of Skripal was either ‘a direct act by the Russian State against our country, or the Russian government lost control of this potentially catastrophically damaging nerve agent and allowed it to get into the hands of others.’

But what would Russia have to gain from murdering a double-agent they let go in a spy swap in 2010?  And with an easily-identified nerve gas?  We do know that in the shadowy world of the ‘spooks’ anything can happen.  We also know that there are people in this world who benefit from war and distrust between nations.

According to the BBC, ‘Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson said if the attack was shown to be a “direct act” by the Russian state it would be a “clear violation of the chemical weapons convention, a breach of international law and a threat to those who abide by the rules-based international order”.’

There is a big ‘if’ there.  And scant evidence of it.  The best Mrs May can do is to say it’s “highly likely” Russia was involved.  So on no more than a ‘highly likely’ she is setting back diplomatic relations between the UK and Russia.  She could also disrupt businesses in both countries with sanctions.  This is not statesmanship.  Who benefits from such trouble-making if not the warmongers?

The Russian response to the OPCW

Russia was never going to respond to an ultimatum.  Furthermore, to give twenty-four hours for a response is quite unreasonable.  It is certain the police are still gathering evidence.  Not even the Home Secretary has all the facts yet.  To act as if they know it all already itself raises suspicions.

But Russia’s Ambassasdor to the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons at the Hague has made a statement.  We are grateful here to the Off-Guardian website.  In a measured response, Alexander Shulgin told the OPCW:

‘… clarifications under the Convention are provided to the requesting member state as soon as possible, but in any case no later than 10 days following receipt of the request. As such, the ultimatum’s demand that information be provided immediately, by the end of today, is absolutely unacceptable.

‘Britain’s allegations that they have everything, and their world-famous scientists have irrefutable data, but they will not give us anything, will not be taken into account. For us, this will mean that London has nothing substantial to show, and all its loud accusations are nothing but fiction and another instance of the dirty information war being waged on Russia.’

How to respond – an object lesson

On Thursday 16th March, Jeremy Corbyn wrote in the Guardian warning against “hasty judgements”, and not to “rush ahead of the evidence”.

Jeremy Corbyn was right to object to the UK’s incursion into Iraq, right over Afhganistan, right to voice concerns about destabilising Libya and Syria.  He is right to be cautious now.   The Bible says:

Prov 14:29 He that is slow to wrath is of great understanding: but he that is hasty of spirit exalteth folly.

Contrast Mr Corbyn’s statesmanlike approach with that of our Foreign Secretary, Boris Johnson, Who says Russian President Vladimir Putin is “overwhelmingly likely” to have ordered the nerve agent attack on an ex-spy and his daughter.  How can you have “overwhelmingly likely”?  The Bible warns:

Prov 25:8  Go not forth hastily to strive, lest thou know not what to do in the end thereof, when thy neighbour hath put thee to shame. 

Childish - Her Majesty's Secretary of State for Defence, Rt Hon Gavin Williamson.

Childish – Her Majesty’s Secretary of State for Defence, Rt Hon Gavin Williamson.

Even worse is the behaviour of Her Majesty’s Secretary of State for Defence.  He said Russia should ‘go away and shut up’.  As reported by RT, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei  Lavrov dismissed Gavin Williamson (41) as lacking in ‘upbringing’.

He has a point.  The Lord disposed of Mr Williamson’s predecessor, Sir Michael Fallon.  Sir Michael’s friends excused his inappropriate advances towards women by saying he was drunk at the time.   Instead of a drunk in charge of our defences, we now have a petulant schoolboy.  There is so much to pray for here!

Nation shall speak peace unto nation

It is rather sad to find the BBC so often leading the anti-Russia charge.  That’s despite this motto chosen by Lord Reith on its coat of arms: ‘nation shall speak peace unto nation.’  It is a reference to a verse from the prophet Micah:

Micah 4:3 And he shall judge among many people, and rebuke strong nations afar off; and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up a sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.

That is a millennial prophecy of the just rule of Messiah, the Lord Jesus.  Nevertheless, it shows one thing above all.  The heart of God is for peace.  And if so, those who engage in sabre-rattling in what is supposed to be a time of peace are opposed to the purpose of God.

So let us keep a sceptical eye on what our politicians say and pray that the truth will come out.  The words of Jesus himself:

Matt 10:26 Fear them not therefore: for there is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed; and hid, that shall not be known.

Share

103 comments

1 ping

Skip to comment form

  1. Here’s a simple question: where did that picture come from? I presume you didn’t take it yourself. Did someone who knew what was going to happen think – ah we need a picture for the propaganda stories in the papers?

    1. It was I believe, taken by another diner. How it comes to be in the public domain, I do not know.

      1. Stephen thanks for this article. I am a retired police officer involved in anti terrorist issues. I called LBC with similar questions that you have posed. They did not put me on air even after several calls detailing the issues they just wanted to knock Russia.1 Why are we ignoring, the presumption of innocence? 2. As a result of Government PM and Foreign Sec statements that have also broken the rules of sub judice and therefore my also have committed the offences of Perverting then course of justice.?Even Kier Stamer the previous DPP has ignored this on Question time.
        The protracted police response is not normal. If this was as portrayed a public chemical incident then the first res ponders are very well drilled in their response particularly the fire brigade. If you look at the pictures of the the so called experts in chemical suits, a few days later you will see police and fire brigade standing beside them in their normal uniform, WHY?
        No one has mentioned that possibly a suspect or suspects is on the loose with a nerve agent.No Police warning or guidance, which would be the norm, very odd indeed?You would have thought precautionary advice apart from the very vague advice given by the department of heath re washing you cloths thoroughly(it self a nonsense) would have been circulated across the media as a public heath warning and reassurance message. There are several options to what happened, and its hoped the police will follow them all up. However please note as NSY( my old unit) have taken over the investigation the local Police will be reduced to knocking on doors and only be told results that effect the general public. The Met have had a decontamination and investigation unit working 24/7 in London for several years, I dont believe they were deployed, very bizarre? So as I see it the options are
        A, the Russians did it , B a rouge x soviet state or individual did it,C, The USA or UK did it to discredit the Russians as part of Clinton democrat agenda to destroy Trump, D, The Skiprals themselves feel foul of the substance they had in their possession, either by the daughter bringing into the UK or moving it prior to use by them. If any of the above scenarios play out, May, Johnson, the French and any other government who have agreed with the UK and its allegations will struggle to stay in power. An already insecure public trust will be brought to an all time low. However although im no fan of Corbyn, but he will be seen to have said the right things and be upheld as trustworthy and virtuous. Curious and curious said Alice.

        1. I am also in the belief that there are ulterior motives that are fuelling Mrs May and B. Johnson into attempting to “pin the blame on Russia” . Could it be something to do with the fact that Terrorist organizations have obtained Chemical weapons, sold on by UK (of which Sputnik news have documentary evidence) and possibly the fact that the CIA/NSA and certain “high nett worth” usa banks were funding such terrorist organisations? I am also horrified by the blatant disregard of the law by UK’s Government; the rallying of Nato members to join the fiasco; the lying that is going on, and the masking of the facts. There are many facts that have been ignored, swept under the carpet in relation to the nuclear poisoning of Alexander L. which would prove beyond all reasonable doubt that Russia is not the culprit, as is also true of this case . I wonder as a former Police officer if you would like to read my short story based on my findings while working as a Contractor. I think you would find it interesting, as both you and I are anti-terrorism.

            • Rocks
            • Rox G on 27 March 2018 at 14:26

            What are the many facts that have been ignored, swept under the carpet in relation to the nuclear poisoning of Alexander L. which would prove beyond all reasonable doubt that Russia is not the culprit ?

            If you know of such facts, it is certainly in the public interest that you should let them be known.

    2. you can see the guy taking the photo in the background. He has a special camera, it can see round corners.

  2. Stephen, thank you so much for this. God bless you. Peter

  3. The Russians are cncerned too that the daughter is a Russian citizen, and as such they have a direct interest in the matter so are entitled to information as to why a Russian citizen was attacked on British soil. This whole scenario works both ways. It is embarrasing to see the British Government abandon all principle of Habeas Corpus in the frenzy to point a finger at Russia.

    1. Why habeas corpus ? They are treating the victims free in an NHS hospital in Salisbury, not imprisoning them. They are in intensive care, in no position to be moved to Russia or anywhere else, and Mr Skripal at least would not want to go there.

      As for the rights of habeas corpus of anybody arrested, nobody has been arrested. As for ‘innocent until proven guilty’ , it is normal to believe that a suspect is guilty before you can arrest him and charge him and attempt to obtain a prosecution if there is sufficient evidence for a trial. You can believe that a country is guilty of something (this is commonplace in any newspaper), but there is little possibility of arresting a country or (in most cases) doing much about it, and that’s where w e are, with the agreement of many other countries.

  4. Too many suspicious circumstances and deaths here that point to Russia, read Alexander Litvinenko’s book to understand where Putin is coming from.
    Russia’s fingerprint on this chemical which is used in Syria is not difficult to match with the right instrumentation and this is what has been done.
    Dead men don’t lie and I am a chemist who understands how these things are found.
    I think that to suggest that Russia is innocent is an act of denying the truth.
    James 1:26

    1. The biggest problem, apart from the lack of hard evidence, is that all we know has come from the British Government. In a fallen world, and after previous history, I am not inclined to trust them to tell me the time.

      1. I agree with Stephen, not with Stephen. Isn’t Russia in this fallen world too ? Russia’s recent history has been irresponsible to say the least.

        1. Has it really? It’s the UK which has been irresponsible, causing chaos across the Middle East, Leading to the rise of Islamic State and the death, ruin and displacement of hundreds of thousands of people. Russia is trying to bring peace and order to the region. The EU, of which the UK is still a part, destablised Ukraine again leading to deaths and to the destruction of businesses and then objected when the ethnic Russians looked east for support. Russia has acted in its best interests for sure, but has stood up for the Christians of the Middle East, for the institution of marriage within its own borders and has not started any of the world’s recent troubles.

            • Rocks
            • Rox G on 14 March 2018 at 13:11

            And the USA ? Did they have no part in this ?

            I agree with you that Crimea is really part of Russia, and would have favoured a plebiscite to determine the eastern frontier of Ukraine.

    2. No matter from where it emanates in the Universe, atoms, elements and molecules are exactly the same. Nerve gas is like any compound, it’s made up of atoms and molecules that contain neither data nor metadata to indicate its source. I’m wondering if the idiotic good for nothing British government ministers are expecting the investigators to see ‘Сделано в России’ (Made in Russia) when they look at the substance through their electron microscopes? Laughable!

      1. That is not true, I’m afraid. There are different isotopes of elements, which means that their individual atoms and the molecules made from them do vary. In this way it is sometimes possible to identify where the owner of a skeleton originated, or even where he travelled during his life, by the different isotopes incorporated into it from food in different places. Teeth can reveal such information too.

        Whether any of the elements in this nerve agent would be recognisably different if it were made in Russia or somewhere else, I couldn’t say, but it is possible.

        It’s not quite as simple as I have made out. A quantity of the element will have a mixture of different isotopes in different proportions. This gives a greater variety to be identified.

        1. What you’re referring to is contaminants. Expecting to find those in a substance constructed in a clean laboratory is a very long shot.

            • Rocks
            • Rox G on 27 March 2018 at 22:02

            No it’s not ! I think you need to look into this more thoroughly, as your A level chemistry seems to be a bit rusty .

            Every atom of every element (and thus of every molecule) is one isotope or another. In chemistry and for normal purposes, it doesn’t matter which isotope it is, as long as it’s reasonably stable. So EVERY substance in EVERY laboratory or in you or anywhere else is composed entirely of isotopes !

            All atoms of carbon (under normal stable circumstances) are either carbon 12, carbon 13, or carbon 14. Carbon is an important element in novichok, and the proportion of these isotopes could certainly vary according to where it was made, and the original source of the carbon. It would be ridiculous to claim that any of the isotopes was a “contaminant” . However “clean” your laboratory is, you can’t eliminate some of the isotopes in the mixture which is your raw material (and there is no reason why you should want to).

            In the air we breathe, the oxygen occurs as three isotopes, oxygen 16, oxygen 17, and oxygen 18, This is true of the oxygen in the water we drink, too . And of the oxygen in novichok. But the ratio of the isotopes does vary from time to time and place to place. Which does Krankkase think is the “contaminant”, and how does it come from an unclean laboratory ? I’m sorry, but this is nonsense.

            Novichok also contains nitrogen 14 & nitrogen 15, probably only one isotope of phosphorus and one of fluorine, but inevitably chlorine 35 & chlorine 37 .

            • Stephen
            • Stephen on 28 March 2018 at 09:50
              Author

            And after all that, the closets Porton Down was prepared to go was this was an agent ‘of a type developed in Russia’.

            • Rocks
            • Rox G on 28 March 2018 at 21:42

            It would take a long time to get a place of origin from studying the isotopes, and they would have to be transferred to harmless molecules before they could go to a laboratory which could attempt that . It’s not the sort of science that Porton Down does.

            Krankkase (sick cheese ?) wrote
            ” No matter from where it emanates in the Universe, atoms, elements and molecules are exactly the same. ” and then waffled on about “contaminants” .
            I didn’t want him to mislead most of you.

  5. The long and hard fought level of democracy that we have in this country is under attack. Other countries like russia have no respect or love for it. So they will take any opportunity to undermine the culture and systems that we have and this may have been done this time under the pretence of diplomacy.

    1. Well, in the past was surely done by the expansionist Soviet Union, but today? By Russia? What’s the point?

    2. A naive comment. We would have had the same claims of ‘No democracy in Russia’ back in 2012 when Vladimir Putin was previously elected to the Presidency if it were not for the fact that observers were invited from all over the world to witness the proceedings, whereby they declared it to be fair and without intimidation.

      I’m fully aware that videos have been released of scrutineers stuffing the boxes with votes. However, who’s to say that they weren’t doing it on behalf of opposition candidates? It was always expected that Putin would win by an enormous margin, such is his popularity in Russia, so there would have been absolutely no need to organise any shenanigans – and the installation of the CCTV cameras that showed the ballot-box stuffing was ordered by Putin himself!

      In case it escaped your notice, the political elites have long been undermining the Christian culture of the West, whereas President Putin has criticised them for doing it. Furthermore, following the case in Austria whereby a migrant sodomised a small boy at a swimming pool and was released by the court on the grounds that he didn’t know it was unacceptable, President Putin made loud criticism of it, stating: “A society that can not defend its children has no future.”

      Continual post-war US and British governments have a long history of subverting governments of other sovereign countries that refuse to be subservient to their wishes, whereas Putin has criticised this practice, and defended the sanctity of sovereign nation states – something not recognised by the Western political elites (most particularly the US), as demonstrated by their interference, subversion, destabilisation and overthrowing of governments such as Greece (1946-49), Italy, Syria (1949, 1956-57), Iran (1953), Guatamala (1954), Indonesia (1957-59), Laos (1960), Cuba (1960-61), Brazil (1961-64), Dominican Republic (1965-66), Indonesia (1965-67), Bolivia (1971), Chile (1973), Afghanistan (1979-89), Haiti (1981), Nicaragua (1982–89), Panama (1989), Iraq (2003), Libya (2011), Ukraine (2014), and currently, Syria. As President Putin himself stated,

      Neither President Putin nor modern Christian and conservative Russia is the villain here, but they are the victims of attempted subversion by Western political leaders, who are no friends of either Christianity or the principle of national sovereignty.

  6. Yes it’s the illuminati who benefit from war & distrust amongst nations. They were behind world war 1 & world war 2 & now they are trying to instigate world war 3! In the last days “evil men & impostors will grow worse & worse deceiving & being deceived” (2 Timothy 3:13)

    1. I have a feeling that the First World War started between the end of the activities of the original Bavarian illuminati, and the beginning of the allegations about the modern fictitious illuminati.
      It was “profiteers” who were said to benefit from the First World War. In England, they were mostly depicted as nouveaux riches Northern businessmen. One would expect “illuminati” to be more refined.

  7. I would not say Russia is innocent but neither can we say they are not. There is, most definitely, too many assumptions by the news at this time, they always do that to sell more newspapers. A lot of political posturing too.

  8. We know Yulia Skripal and her father Sergei were found slumped on a bench in Swindon. ?
    I thought they were found in Salisbury.
    I think you need to correct this, Stephen

    1. Duh.

  9. Yes, I also think the narrative given by the Government and its agents the media is untenable. I believe this is either a CIA or MI5 (probably working with the EU) action to discredit Russia, you only have to look at all the nonsense the Democrats in the US are throwing out to discredit both Russia and the US President to see the power of evil trying to set up a war between the US/EU/UK with Russia. After all Soros and Obama and the EU set up, provoked and manufactured the war with Russia in Ukraine. I believe this poison attack is designed to harden the British public’s attitude to Russia which will then make a war easier in the future. Why is it that most of our troops are currently camped out of the Estonia/Latvia/Lithuania border with Russia for 6 months over the winter in -40′ if this isn’t all about larger dark players setting up a war ?

    Thank you Stephen you have given a good deal of very useful information here.

    God bless, Naomi

  10. If detectives went to Sergei Skripals home, then they must have at least photographic evidence of their findings. Are these going to be concealed? or who is there to demand the true findings. How do we know if Sergei or Yulia brought this grave illness on themseles?

    1. That is interesting. Yulia had just flown in from Russia. It’s all very odd.

    2. When there is a trial, all the evidence is displayed. You don’t expect detectives to reveal their hand while a criminal investigation is still taking place. We are all used to watching or reading detective stories in which a detective (say Morse) does reveal to his colleagues and to us what he is thinking based on what evidence, more or less, as it goes along. But he doesn’t have these details in newspapers or television news every day. Perhaps the closest to doing that is Montalbano, but he uses the local television station to his own advantage, only saying what he wants the people he is trying to catch to know or to think.

      How do “we” know if Sergei or Yulia brought this grave illness on themselves ? Well, “we” don’t. But is Jason suggesting that they were playing carelessly with novichok, or is he suggesting that they were assassinated with it because they deserved it ?

      I think, however, the real issue here is not the death of a man of dubious integrity and morality, and the probably accidental death of his daughter (sad, but there are lots of accidental deaths). The real issue is the use on civilians in a British city of a chemical weapon from abroad which would not be allowed even in a war. That is why it has been raised in the United Nations. In the Second World War, what everyone in Britain dreaded was the use of gas on cities, and everyone was equipped against it, but it didn’t happen. This is a very serious matter.

      1. If you choose to believe the Government, that is.

        1. Was the substance novichok knowingly to them already at Sergei’s home? or did it somehow become concealed in finding its way there via the daughters visit – and if so how? These points are a must as I see it in the process of elimination. A dead person con not speak, so hopefully may they recover. What a dread when such awful, silent, yet destructive weapons can operate against mankind.

    3. Jason B
      His rank in this case is just a title. His is shown in uniform with his Sergeant rank. However many qualified detectives prefer to be called by that rank as it is considered to be senior or more important than uniform ranks (this is not the case) This is often a local practice as many prefer to maintain a previous title. Its simply vanity and allows for some extra bonus claims for personal clothing and retirement kudos on their CV. I suggest he is now a uniform Sergeant but is known by his previous rank of Detective Sergeant. This is the reason he responded to the call with his colleagues, as detectives do not respond to calls, they are nearly always a slow time follow up support unit.

      1. Amos, thanks for all your comments. They are really helping us understand. On this one, is it alternatively possible that DS Bailey was wearing that uniform for the photo, and that he is a real detective? Furthermore, that he did not attend the bench scene as a first responder but went instead as a detective to the Skripal home and became infected with whatever it was there? This would tie in with not one single person from the street having to be treated in hospital.

        1. Stephen, I can only see a few possibilities
          1. he was passing the scene(IE bench when the call came out and simply attended as first responded, to a medical incident, this would be done regardless of uniform or CID officer.
          2. He attended the scene or the house with uniform officers, as many powers are only available to uniform officers, and as a CID officer potentially involved in covert policing he would not want to declare who he was.
          He is a current CID officer who previously worked in Uniform( hence the photo) or is a CID officer now promoted to uniform but maintaining his rank with intentions of returning to CID and not reverting to as police sergeant rank, in the mean time. My real observation is why no mention what so ever about suspect/suspects and how much agent was used in comparison to the volume that may normally be contained in the vessel. Amos

  11. I have far more confidence in the integrity and accuracy of the UK government in this matter than the Russians. Putin has openly threatened the lives of Russian traitors abroad. Col Skripal will be regarded by the Russians as a traitor and hence it is hardly surprising that the Russians attempted to kill him. It is clear that the Russians were behind the murder of Litvingenko as only they had the means and motivation to kill him. There have been many other suspicious deaths of Russian dissidents in the UK. In short, the Russians have form. The Government now have the evidence that demonstrates that is at least highly likely the Russians perpetrated it, and will be sharing this evidence with our allies.

    Russia’s motivation in this action is first to deter other potential traitors and secondly to remove Skripal, who with a deep knowledge of the Russian intelligence service was of considerable value to the UK. The timing of the attempt immediately prior to the Russian presidential elections reinforces the Russian people’s view of him as the strong leader they want, who is prepared to act in their national interests and ignore protestations of the West. The particular means the Russians chose was deliberate to show to their people that they did it. False denials of their actions by Russia is consistent with their modus operandi, and will be readily discounted by the Russian people.

    The UK have no interest in falsely attributing the assassination attempt to Russia. Our economic and diplomatic interest is to have good relations with Russia, but we are now forced to take action against them or be perceived to be weak. Taking so little action over Litvingenko effectively gave our permission to Russia to kill Skripal. We must act in concert with our allies to deter Russia from murdering their nationals on our soil in the future – and putting British bystanders at risk.

    1. Maybe. And maybe Skripal was of no further use to our lot. But who trusts the British Government to tell us the truth? And no bystanders were at risk, whoever did it. Furthermore, our Government have been engaged in Cold-War sabre-rattling against Russia for some years now, sending troops to Estonia and trying to obstruct Russia as they defended the Christians in Syria. The British Government, frankly, is evil, bent on war, and cares nothing for human life. Fixing an assault and then blaming it on Russia fits the pattern perfectly.

      1. The United States, France and Germany and NATO have endorsed the UK view that there is no plausible explanation other than this was Russian action. These nations would not have backed the UK purely on our say-so but on their own assessment of the evidence that the UK has provided. Extreme limitation of accessability to the means, i.e. novochoc, of itself makes Russia the Prime suspect. However, only the Russians have the requisite and credible motivation to attempt to murder Skripal. Hence, there is little reasonable doubt of Russian culpability. It is highly unlikely that such an attempt by Russia would be commissioned without the direct approval of Putin, knowing as they would what the international response was likely to be. Proving culpability will require identifying the individuals who perpetrated it, but we can’t wait until then, may be months or years away, to take proportionate action against Russia, the nation that is demonstrating that it is the principal threat to our national interests. Whilst the West is weak, divided, or prevaricates, Russia will continue to expand its sphere of influence, and then its borders. Only by acting decisively and united can we prevent a dangerous deterioration in the risk to world peace.

        1. I do hope you don’t act on such scanty evidence (‘must have done it’) in your own life. It’s called ‘gossip’.

          1. Guys no mater which way this ends up the reality is the administration of this substance, is either accidental or poorly delivered. There is much noise on the media that they are not dead yet as Putin wanted them to suffer and let the world know about it. This is nonsense, chemical agents cannot be controlled, in this way. The only possibility is it has passed its shelf life IE past its sell by date. If this is the case this lends credence to a rouge element in its use, as the official response is that all Russia cold war stock has been safely destroyed, by the very organisation the UK have sent a sample to for verification. Having said this any evidence in an investigation is disclosed to the defense during disclosure rules, and anything that is qualified by an agency is also supplied to the defense for their own analysis. The 24 hour deadline by the PM and its refusal to supply the Russians a sample for their own validation is both worrying and breaches all rules of evidence, and would be dismissed in a court of law in most countries. So either the PM never wants this to go to court, or they have made a massive mistake. If no court proceedings then no actual investigation and no compliance with any accepted rules, but Magna Carta has still been breached and integrity and respect for those involved has been lost.

            • Rocks
            • Rox G on 17 March 2018 at 19:25

            Imagine Epistle knew that Mohammed Khan hated his Christian son, and that Mohammed Khan drove a green Jaguar. His son is found run over, and witnesses say they saw a green Jaguar do it. Epistle would not just treat this as gossip and consider the whole thing to be an accident. He would report it to the police. That is what has happened here. It wouldn’t be the final legal verdict, but people would be saying “It must have been Mohammed Khan”. Call that “gossip” if you like. It’s free speech, innit ?

            • Stephen
            • Stephen on 17 March 2018 at 19:38
              Author

            It is not what has happened here.

            • Rocks
            • Rox G on 17 March 2018 at 19:49

            Amosf2007, I think they are still alive because of prompt action in getting them to the intensive care unit. The nerve agent would kill them because it would stop them breathing and stop their hearts beating, but the intensive care unit takes over these functions no matter what is wrong with you. It allows time for attempts to cure the original illness, or in this case to use antidotes until the nervous system. is working normally again. If there is no real recovery, then the intensive care equipment is eventually switched off (finally ending the life of somebody who was virtually dead anyway, in the sense that they could not have functioned without it),.

            On a more optimistic note, IF homoeopathy works, then there are great benefits to be had from the incredibly dilute dispersal of novichok in Salisbury generally, so much diluted that it can’t be detected. This ought to cure nervous diseases. The place might be able to turn itself into a kind of spa when this is all over .

        2. [Epistle]: “The United States, France and Germany and NATO have endorsed the UK view that there is no plausible explanation other than this was Russian action.”

          Bear in mind that all the governments of these countries have been enforcing the mind-bending agenda of Cultural Marxism onto the people countries, as has the UK government, whereas Russia has resisted it, much to the chagrin of the Western political elites. NATO itself has been guilty of expanding right up to Russia’s borders and installing missile bases there, thus breaking a promise to Mikhail Gorbachev that it would not do so. They are liars, deceivers, and villains.

            • Rocks
            • Rox G on 23 March 2018 at 01:08

            Go back a bit, and remember that Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia were new independent countries created by the very careful peace conferences after the First World War.

            The USSR was quick to invade them in 1940, fair enough to stop Germany invading them, which it did later; but then as soon as it could the USSR invaded them again and hung onto them for some 50 years. After the USSR broke up, all three Baltic states left it. It’s hardly surprising that (along with other Soviet-influenced countries including Poland) they were keen to join the EU and to be protected by NATO.

            Missile bases there are probably a mistake, I agree.

          1. You make the usual mistake of confusing the USSR with modern Russia, which is a completely different thing altogether. It’s amusing how Russia is constantly conflated with the Soviet Union considering the former was only one of the eventual fifteen constituent republics of the latter. Stalin was not even Russian, but Georgian – one of those other fifteen, as was Ukraine, which also produced some prominent high-ranking members of the Soviet Communist Party, such as Lazar Kaganovich, former President Nikolai Podgorny, and Nikita Khrushchev who, although born in Russia, grew up in Ukraine.

            • Rocks
            • Rox G on 27 March 2018 at 23:25

            Russia was always the dominant state of the USSR, which was often commonly referred to as “Russia” (the same as Britain is often referred to as “England”). Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia have frontiers with Russia, not with Georgia or Kazakhstan.

            Your references to individuals is interesting, but w hen Lloyd George was prime minister (in fact of the UK), Germany was under the impression that it was at war with “England”. not with Wales.

            Georgia: Area almost 70,000 sq km, population almost 4 million.
            Russia : Area 17 million sq km, population almost 145 million.

  12. Remember David Kelly and the Blair cover up over 15 years ago.lm sick of the lies.
    Pray the truth comes out and the BBC has a mighty move of the Holy Spirit. Amen

  13. My son, labelled as a conspiracy theorist, has gone down this road for a long time and I’ve been forced to agree with him in many areas – he introduced me to the UK Column which seems quite sound. Too long Christians have been prepared to back the UK Government in every thing. It has been a long time since the West was always on the side of the angels!

  14. See also comments from Richard North at the European Referendum blog (not about Brexit but this provides a distraction from it no doubt welcome to some people).
    Messing with these extremely dangerous chemicals smells more of lunacy than political calculation. One might think a state-sponsored assassination would be done with a more reliable weapon.

  15. I believe we are being completely manipulated by the elite here. The whole thing is being totally hyped up by the politicians and the media. I live in Salisbury and life is going on just as normal except you have never seen so many armed police in your life and this has gone on for nearly two weeks now. If it were so serious why are normal people wandering around the town doing their daily business, holding the street market and so on. The facts don’t add up. I believe what I said above in that

    1 The Russian’s DIDN’T do it (why would they there is no motive)
    2 That someone else DID do it to provoke a war with Russia to take attention off everything else – BREXIT, Trump draining the Swamp, collapse of EU and the Islam Hordes invasion of our Continent.

    And yes Kelly was murdered, I know his best friend here, he worked at Porton Down which is also in Salisbury and yes the CIA et al are very capable of false flags as we have seen in Syria which is also a proxy war. But for me the most telling fact is that we have our Army camped out in field tents in the middle of winter on the Russian Border and they have been their for months

    This has all been planned from above and it has been planned here in the West.

    1. It is very interesting that Naomi lives in Salisbury (unless of course she really lives in a Russian trolling institute in the Urals, but that could apply to anybody, even me).

      When two people are killed by a very advanced Russian military chemical weapon shortly after eating in an Italian restaurant in Salisbury, and their table and chairs have to be destroyed, it’s difficult to “hype it up” !

      We hope that most of Salisbury is not contaminated at all . I myself thought at first that it was strange to have men in elaborate protective suits in areas where normal people can wander freely, but thinking about it, they have got to get from somewhere which might be contaminated to somewhere specialised where they can take the suit off, I would hope with a makeshift cleaning of the outside of the suit first. They can’t go into Zizzi wearing normal clothes with the suit in a suitcase, and change in the restaurant toilet before they come out again, carrying the suit under their arm to avoid contaminating the suitcase. It’s not that simple.

      I don’t think “serious” equates with completely evacuating Salisbury, which would cause enormous distress and alarm. However, everyone is screaming out for proof of how the Novochok got there, and from where, and the necessary enquiry justifies the presence of so many policemen still at it. Some of them are doing routine work like looking at CCTV footage. It’s not as if you can use a Geiger counter, unfortunately. It seems to me that Stephen is on the right track when he (almost) suggests that Yulia might have brought it with her, but not deliberately. Then it’s difficult to see how they could be sure that it would kill her father (presumably the target) and not her alone. I suppose they thought that either of them, becoming ill, would be attended to by the other and “catch” it. But the doctor didn’t ……

      It is very like a good detective story, but we must remember that it isn’t. and we won’t be kept up to date with the latest developments. Armed police — I don’t like that, but who knows what might happen next ? Even Hercule Poirot and Dr Watson took the precaution of being armed when it seemed appropriate.

      1. Their table and chairs in Zizzi were destroyed? How convenient. Whatever infected the Skripals, it was clearly at their home, yet we have all this hype about Salisbury city centre, wrecking people’s businesses just for political expediency.

        1. Well, so it has been said, e.g. Guardian on Monday 12th March.
          “Traces of contamination have reportedly been found on and around the table where the two Russians sat. Some of the furniture and other items are said to have been destroyed to prevent further poisonings. Scotland Yard, which is running the investigation, would neither confirm or deny claims of contamination at the restaurant. ”

          Don’t forget that they were somehow contaminated with a very dangerous fine powder, not “infected”. So they would have been carrying this around Salisbury on their clothes, and eventually the ambulance which took them to hospital had to be taken away by a specialised team. Unless you think this was all staged by the British Government to cause panic, a very expensive exercise with very little useful result. Sometimes I feel that Stephen and Mark and some others have so little faith in this country that they will not believe until they have personally put a finger into a contaminated place and become contaminated themselves. But then they would blame Theresa May rather than Putin.

          It would be better if the table and chairs had been taken away “as evidence” rather than destroyed, and maybe they have been. Perhaps somebody assumed wrongly that they were being taken away from Zizzi to be destroyed. But, should this ever come to court, a contaminated table is never going to be produced in court as evidence, so it will depend on experts’ statements that they found a contaminated table anyway. Adequate samples could have been taken from it in situ, and since the Guardian report on Monday a lot more was announced about that.

          However, as with all criminal investigation, you really can’t expect in real life to be kept up to date with the finding of every clue, and in real life it is commonplace for areas related to a crime to be cordoned off for a long time, apparently unnecessarily, even if the crime was a stabbing with no possible future risk to the public. If the use of a nerve agent is considered to be virtually an act of war (and that is what makes it essentially different), perhaps the government will pay compensation for loss of business.

            • Stephen
            • Stephen on 17 March 2018 at 19:19
              Author

            You really would expect them to be taken away as evidence so the OPCW guys could examine them. Destroying evidence is so very un-police-like. It’s a weird thing to do, unless there was nothing on them and they did not want anyone to know that.

            • Rocks
            • Rox G on 17 March 2018 at 19:57

            Perhaps they were taken away to a secret destination, and not to be destroyed. As I repeatedly point out, we can’t expect to be kept abreast of every detail just because this is such a good story.

            It certainly beats all the repetitive stuff about how it is/isn’t possible not to have a hard border with the Irish Republic !

            I know two people have died (but actually, not yet). However, people are dying all the time and attract far less attention . One of the people who might die was really not an entirely savoury character.

  16. Putin ended the Rothschild control over Russia by nationalising the Russian central bank. He banned GMO’s and created a currency to compete against the American dollar.

    Now you know why they want to get rid of him.

    1. But (as well as Northern Ireland) Germany and France ban most genetically modified crops, and they are very much on the British side against Putin’s supposed involvement in the Salisbury attack. One may get the impression from the labelling of “no GMO” foods in the UK that GMOs are commonplace, but actually it’s their PRESENCE in food which has to be shown on the label by law, and it’s difficult to find any examples in the shops. Americans are completely the reverse, and thrive on them. I don’t quite see how a preference for or against GMOs comes into this, actually.

      Rothschilds have a long history, but nowadays they are just one relatively small merchant bank. Individual members of the family are privately wealthy, but could they really have been controlling Russia ? Other régimes have picked on wealthy Jews as scapegoats in the past.

      The recovery of the ruble is slow. In 1901 it was a silver coin weighing 20 grams, whereas the US dollar was a silver coin weighing 26 grams. On 16th March 2012, ten rubles was worth 34 US cents. On 16th March 2017 10 rubles is worth 17 cents. So a ruble is worth almost 2 cents. The pound has seen inflation too, but £10 is still worth more than $15 . Generally speaking, the more “competitive” and stable currencies in the world have a basic unit with a relatively high value. For example, 10 Swiss francs is worth more than $10 , but 10 Congolese francs is only worth one US cent.

      1. Sorry, that should of course be 16th March 2018.

    2. Agreed, Mark J. In the year 2000, there were eight countries without a Rothschild-controlled bank, namely: Afghanistan, Iraq, Sudan, Libya, Cuba, North Korea, Iran and Syria. By 2003, the number was down to six after the removal of the governments in Afghanistan and Iraq. By 2017, two more were removed from the list, ie. Sudan and Libya – which also banned GMO, but with Gaddafi’s overthrow, Monsanto were in there quicker than a hungry dog devouring a snack. Now, all that’s left is Cuba, North Korea, Iran and Syria – with Russia now added to the list. As with all the instances of attack and regime change, they were preceded by demonising propaganda, just as we are now seeing against Iran, Syria (also bans GMO), and Russia – whilst Cuba will obviously re-await its turn later.

      The Rothschilds may indeed be a somewhat small merchant bank, but together with their client network, which includes the likes of Goldman-Sachs, their empire is much larger and influential than it may seem. Furthermore, these families have a record of hiding behind the ‘antisemism’ shield, much like George Soros.

      The US dollar itself is not as stable as may seem, because its value is dependant on being the international reserve currency, particularly for oil and gas. Once countries begin to trade widely in alternative currencies, its value will crash. This was an imperative for removing Gadaffi from power after he formulated plans to sell his country’s oil in euros, as well as the creation of a new African standard currency based on the Gold Dinar. Even Russia is now selling its gas to China in currencies other than the dollar, which is itself further reason for Washington DC and its vassal allies to amplify a propaganda war against both those countries. NATO’s (the Rothschild Wehrmacht) big problem is that its member countries’ economies would be devastated by a war against a Russia-China alliance.

      1. It would be very difficult to demonstrate that the banning of GMOs in Syria was worthwhile as a means of reducing early death there or improving health at all. As a policy in that country, it is complete nonsense.

        The Rothschilds have not historically been awfully keen on the Werhrmacht. Your phrasing is curious. Obviously any major war between NATO and Russia or between China and the USA or the USA and anybody else on this scale would be a disaster for everybody.

        1. “As a policy in that country, it is complete nonsense.” Assuming you to be a religious Christian, that’s a strange comment. From a religious point of view, GMO seeks to alter that which is determined by God.

          The German Wehrmacht encompassed the entire military machine of National Socialist Germany in exactly the same manner that NATO encompasses the entire military machine that seeks to preserve the Rothschild international banking system of debt slavery.

            • Stephen
            • Stephen on 27 March 2018 at 14:02
              Author

            He’s not, poor chap.

            • Rocks
            • Rox G on 27 March 2018 at 23:38

            Are there irreligious Christians ? I might well be one of those ! I spend a lot of time in churches, actually. Stephen would be surprised. Don’t I sometimes seem to know rather a lot about it ?

            But, coming back to the point, your criticism would apply equally to thousands of humble farmers and horticulturists who have done their best to improve the strains of plants and animals from the point of view of human beings. If it weren’t for them, your wheat would be little more than grass, your meat would be very tough and fat, and your milk would be very expensive. Your strawberries would be tiny, your apples would be sour, etc etc. God did not make them like you expect to eat them.

            If you depend on the occasional handout from the aid agencies which can get through the fighting at great risk to themselves. you don’t give a fig if it’s GMO or not. It’s exceedingly strange to imagine that this would be a consideration at all. It’s not a lot better, I think, in government-controlled areas.

            • Stephen
            • Stephen on 28 March 2018 at 09:53
              Author

            This is why Christians have to stand against such abuses.

        2. Thanks Stephen. Being a newcomer to this website, I’m not familiar with the individual standpoints of contributors.

          Rox G: Okay, neither am I a religious individual, so let’s take the argument from a more material standpoint. In 2012, a study carried out by French scientists of rats fed on corn supplied by Monsanto suffered with tumours, as well as damage to kidneys and liver, and it was these findings that caused the Syrian government to ban GMO from the food chain. The Russian government followed suit after its country’s scientist confirmed the results in their own tests.

            • Rocks
            • Rox G on 27 March 2018 at 23:45

            And what about the USA ? Do they find that millions of people are dying from these causes, more so than before the widespread consumption of GMO there ?

            I am not saying, actually , that there may not be concerns, but I don’t think this would go along with being genetically modified per se. Each new foodstuff would have to be assessed individually, in a way that traditional ones (e.g , parsnips, nutmeg) never have been ! Did you know that nutmeg can induce hallucinations, but nobody has banned it ?

            My point is that there is no point in banning something which might kill you when you are 60 if you are only going to live to be 35 anyway, or younger if you don’t get the food which is being banned.

            • Stephen
            • Stephen on 28 March 2018 at 09:56
              Author

            They may be ‘assessed individually’ but by people who are, and who report to people who are, easily swayed (let’s go no further) by the multinational GMO companies. The idea it is all done totally altruistically and objectively is nonsense.

            • Rocks
            • Rox G on 28 March 2018 at 21:49

            I don’t suppose that modern strains of wheat were “bred” altruistically either, but you still eat bread.

  17. We know who’s running the show in the World. Our battle is not against flesh & blood, but against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenlies. But even Satan cannot operate beyond what God allows. We need to keep our focus on our Lord Jesus Christ, and be salt & light to this fallen world by preaching the Gospel in the hope & prayer others will be saved & called out of this world; not by getting involved in politics which is a murky business at best, and demonically inspired at worst. We are in this world, BUT NOT SUPPOSED TO BE OF IT! Our nation is under judgement, as is Russia; which is why we MUST BE SAVED! Watch this space to see how it unfolds by all means, but pray the Lord’s will be done; not ours, and not the worlds. Thy Kingdom come, and Thy will be done; NOT MINE!

  18. btw, still think Theresa May is a Christian?

    1. Yes, in the best sense.

      1. Would a genuine Christian defend the anti-Christian ideology of Islam? Of course not!

        Would any genuine Christian give succour to the LGBT agenda, including the right of people -including children – to determine their gender according to one that differs from the one they’re born with, ie. as determined by God? Of course not!

        Make no mistake: Theresa May’s position is far closer to that of Cultural Marxism than Christianity. She’s both a fake Christian and most definitely no social-conservative.

  19. Why is any of this on a Christian talk site?? All very political and we should not but naming and calling goverment officials with derogatory names. The Lord frowns upon it and warns against it

    1. Simply because we are supposed to be a prophetic voice to those in power. As in tell them to stop lying. And if our Lord called Herod ‘That fox’, we can call our Defence Secretary childish.

    2. Further to Stephen’s response, I would also add that Christianity is under attack from the mainstream political class (including those who claim to be ‘Christian’), and if genuine Christians choose to ignore this fact then they – and all they stand for – is going to be walked over and crushed under foot. Not for nothing are socially-conservative Christians now being labelled as ‘far right’ by the government and its media mouthpieces to the point that those from other countries are now being denied entry into the UK, whilst anti-Christian Islamists are not.

  20. Thanks for the informative article. I think the point you made about the TINY amount, (one and a bit milligrams), of Novichok nerve agent needed to kill someone, is very important. To get an idea of the amount, I looked up that one teaspoonful holds about 4000 mg of white granulated sugar.
    However, the New Scientist article, quoted above, did go on to say that the Sergei and Yulia’s ‘survival so far suggests the Novichok poison was designed to be slow-acting or to be absorbed through the skin, because this route of administrations takes longer to cause symptoms than inhalable nerve agents like sarin’. But this was a quote from John Lamb who also said that nobody, apart from the Russians, would know how to make Novichok, which is a claim that is challenged by your article.
    Curiouser and curiouser!

  21. A good article you voice my thoughts and views.

    Thank you for the posting

    God Bless.

    Susie .

  22. His predecessor Sir Michael Fallon might well have done better, but he allegedly touched a woman’s knee 15 years ago. Priorities first. He had to go.

    1. The man was a Bellicose drunk.

      1. Wheresas Putin is a pacifist teetotaller.

        1. Putin is a teetotaller.

            • Rocks
            • Rox G on 23 March 2018 at 01:28

            As I said.
            But actually, we are both wrong. He is not a complete teetotaller.
            https://ruexperts.com/putin-doesnt-drink-alcohol-genetic-warfare/

            If you do not observe total abstinence from alcohol, you are not a teetotaller. That is where the “total” bit in the word comes from.

            Would you say he is a pacifist, or warlike ?

        2. Rox G, you’re splitting hairs. As the article you linked to states, Putin only drinks alcohol on occasions when political protocol requires it.

          As for your question, he’s clearly neither a pacifist nor warlike. He will not allow Russia to be walked over by military means, but neither has he a record of military aggression. In short, he’s well balanced on the issue.

            • Rocks
            • Rox G on 27 March 2018 at 23:49

            How does he feel about the invasion of Ukraine ?

            I agree with him that the Crimea is really part of Russia, but he should have used gentler means to determine a more satisfactory eastern border of Ukraine.

            • Stephen
            • Stephen on 28 March 2018 at 10:00
              Author

            So firstly there was an invasion of Ukraine by the EU and Soros agents to remove the democratically-elected president, Viktor Yanukovych, because he was more sympathetic to Russia than to the EU. Then when the trouble really got going, the ethnic Russians in the east of Ukraine looked to Russia to help defend them. All the loss of life and destruction of property started with EU/Soros-financed agitation. See our article here.

  23. Let’s not be too protective of the Russians. I agree that we cannot always trust politicians – follow the money and the power – but let’s face it, the Russians do not have a good track record, with about a dozen people connected to Russia mysterously deceased in the UK over the past 12-15 years. If this was a secret UK organised thing we would be in SERIOUS trouble.
    7 Reach down from heaven and rescue me; deliver me from deep waters, from the power of my enemies. 8 Their mouths are filled with lies; they swear to the truth of what is false. (Psalm 144)
    2 Pray in this way for kings and all others who are in authority over us, or are in places of high responsibility, so that we can live in peace and quietness, spending our time in godly living and thinking much about the Lord.[a] 3 This is good and pleases God our Savior, 4 for he longs for all to be saved and to understand this truth: 1 Tim 2.

  24. The government and the media have together destroyed the business and tourism of Salisbury. The shops which have been closed by the police for two weeks apparently get no compensation because this is treated as a ‘act of terrorism’ and is therefore excluded from their policies. Much of the local economy relies on tourism to the Cathedral, the medieval market town and Stonehenge which will all be devastated. Everyone who phones me from outside the area says, “Well we won’t be coming down to Salisbury”. The ordinary people get crushed, the small hotels and B&B establishments the family businesses. Does anyone care ?

  25. While trying to be analytically fair, Stephen G’s article reads to me as being biased against the UK, EU, et al, while giving Russia a huge portion of ‘benefit of the doubt’. The implication that this was set up by the UK government, the USA, or any other western government is, to me at least, naive. Much of his hypothesis relies on what he has read in other media sources, yet criticising similar sources which don’t support his view. The logic of his view, if followed through, is that all the deaths of ex-Russians living in this country, such as Livinenko, are organised by the UK government to somehow put Russia in the international hot seat of judicial opprobrium.
    The truth is that until enquiries are exhausted, we will not know the truth, and perhaps we never will. At the moment, my view (for what it’s worth!) is that this has Russia’s fingerprints all over it. But time will tell.
    Stephen G’s article seems to me to ask more questions than it answers, and is best summed up summed up by his response to Boris Johnson’s comment: ‘there is a big “if” there”. Actually, many big ‘ifs’!

    1. Every blessing to you, Patrick. Theresa May, over the weekend, spoke of defending our ‘democratic values’. These now evidently do not include a presumption of innocence. Your ‘fingerprints all over it’ comment is from the same drawer. There are no Russian fingerprints here. That is the problem. Andrew Marr yesterday allowed Boris to say Russia has been stockpiling Novichok. He produced no evidence. It’s just an assertion. Even Porton Down will only say the poison was of a type ‘developed’ by Russia (Soviet Union actually). And now police say they have found no evidence of forced entry at the home of Nikolai Glushkov, who was up in court on fraud charges the day he was found hanged. I don’t know how Mr & Miss Skripal were infected. I do know it was not ‘in the street’ as Amber Rudd claimed and the economy of Salisbury has been devastated for nothing. Nor do I know and nor have I mentioned anything about the Litvinenko affair. But this particular affair stinks of injustice, smoke and mirrors, and above all of war-mongering. Russia are our allies against Islamic terrorism, or would be if our Government had brains – or the peace of God.

      1. Surely the legal presumption of innocence refers to an individual who is being tried for a crime ? It doesn’t apply to wartime tactics, or to suspicions about the activities of any foreign country or terrorist group. For example, I might have suspected that China was selling cheap radios to the UK with the goal of closing down the British radio industry completely. I don’t need to prove that to voice my strong suspicion.

        More seriously, and more similarly to the present case, it has always been commonplace to suggest that a bomb appears to be an IRA attack or an ISIS attack. It doesn’t break any legal or moral code to suggest this without definite proof. But when Seamus O’Seamteachs or Mohammed al-Bomma is brought to trial on the basis of reasonable evidence, even then he is considered innocent until proven guilty. So too it will be with Ivan Toxochof.

        Mr and Ms Skripal were not “infected” as with a disease. They were brought into contact with an extremely toxic powder, and they carried some of this with them into Zizzi and possibly elsewhere unfortunately, whether you like it or not. It’s better to lose a few tourist pounds than a few more lives, or people’s good health. Salisbury can function very well with one less pub, and without its branches of Zizzi, Greggs, and the other businesses (how many of them are there ?), but I do hope the government will compensate them in these circumstances which would be excluded from their insurance policies.

        1. That’s people’s livelihoods you are talking about.

            • Rocks
            • Rox G on 20 March 2018 at 15:58

            That’s why I hope the Government will compensate them. It’s better than having to compensate people who might in a few months’ time exhibit symptoms of nerve gas poisoning.

            • Stephen
            • Stephen on 20 March 2018 at 17:18
              Author

            Nobody has needed to be be treated for any such symptoms except the Skripals and DS Bailey.

            • Rocks
            • Rox G on 20 March 2018 at 20:01

            It’s early days, Stephen. Medical conditions can develop slowly. And anyway, when places were first cordonned off, you didn’t know what was going to happen next any more than Amber Rudd did. If she had failed to save people’s lives, you would have been among the first to blame her.

            To take one very simple example, you can sunbathe blissfully in the Mediterranean summer sun, and have no sign of the resulting skin cancer until well into the snowy winter, or later.

            • Stephen
            • Stephen on 21 March 2018 at 11:10
              Author

            Not sure it’s like that with nerve agent.

  26. PUTIN
    At the breakup of the Soviet Union in the 1980’s security of military property was not good to say the least. Many people In Russia and beyond could have got hold of biological weapons and their manufacturing know how.
    I do think that Mr Boris Johnson should prove to the general public just ‘how’ he is so sure that today’s Russian government is responsible for the chemical attack in Salisbury before dragging the western world into a pointless nuclear holocaust. Talk,Talk is much better than threat ,threat Mr Johnson.
    There are many very nasty people in the world who would love to bring down Mr Putin’s conservative government, and would go to the most extreme ends to do so.
    Russia has worked very hard to develop good relations and trade with the West. It makes no senses what-so-ever for the Russian government to then order the assassination of a father and daughter in Salisbury England using extremely dangerous biological nerve agent.
    A .22 pistol with a silencer fitted would be a massively safer way to bump off one old retired general and his daughter.
    Paul UK

    1. What you say about it being preferable to use a pistol makes a lot of sense, and the conclusion is that there was some very special motive for doing it this way, and the same when somebody used polonium. It certainly produces publicity and the impression that Russia has some very powerful weapons up its sleeve, but admittedly it may not be Russia which wants to give that impression. Nonetheless, it does seem most likely that it was Russia, and that is basically what Boris has said. He would not be able to give you a blow by blow account of who did exactly what when.

      If you think Putin might reply to Boris with a nuclear holocaust, you are not painting him in a much better light than Boris is.

  27. Stephen, thank you for your article. Clearly there is a lot we don’t know about the detailed events; I look forward to anything the government allows the press to report once they know all the facts, even though that might be a convenient message rather than the whole truth. There is a problem with being a politician, in that one has to make decisions based on scant evidence. I’m glad I’m not a relevant member of the cabinet in this case. If this was done by Russia then clearly some action has to be taken for the UK to appear strong; we have a place in the world and that can be used for good if we maintain it. Given that not all the facts are known, the actions should stop short of anything that is not reversible. Diplomatic relations may be restored over time as the nations agree to admit more diplomats.
    It might be that the UK had some evidence of spying by some of the expelled diplomats and found, or concocted, an excuse to expel them. We simply don’t know yet.
    The timing is also remarkable. Clearly the reports, accusations and diplomatic reactions would not have affected Mr Putin’s chances of winning another term as president, indeed the wide publicity makes Russia appear strong and probably improves those chances, but it is remarkable that the case was not used to bury another UK government embarrassment on the same day, as one might expect (see Yes Minister).
    It is notable that in Syria Mr Putin has effectively a free weapons test range for long-distance and aircraft-mounted powerful physical weapons, and that now in the UK he has a test range for subtle weapons such as Polonium and nerve agents, along with a set of potential targets of former Russian agents. Whether the UK wants to be a free test range is another question; our government has aimed to show that there is a diplomatic price to pay for such actions, even though it will cost us just as much. Could we stop all potential Russian activities on UK soil if it needs such a small amount of a substance to effect an assassination? Perhaps that is most unlikely. Something sewn into a coat hem or held within a metal case clasp or button is easy enough to sneak through customs if you have the motive; they might already have a few more doses of various substances in the UK.
    If this was done by Russia then perhaps it is less a test of the UK than a test of Mr Trump. The UK has been fairly consistent in its response to such matters over the decades, always keeping a wary eye on Russia and being prepared to respond in equal measure when necessary. Mr Trump has said “America first” as a more introverted policy than previous presidents so Mr Putin probably wants to know how much that affects US support for the UK as his closest ally. Just the same, the UK and other NATO members probably want to know that the US would back them up, given Trump’s policy, so again this does not bias the cause of the poisoning to any particular culprit.
    Does this case worry me? Not really. I wish for a Godly, peaceful and respectful relationship between the UK and Russia so I am not an enemy and would not be an intended target. Other risks are greater for me. If this case did escalate further then I might write to my MP or add to an online campaign for moderation. If it were part of end time events then I know my destination is with Christ. I will continue to pray for wisdom for our politicians; I dislike both sabre-rattling and roll-over actions that have been displayed by various people. I see the awkwardness of having to act on scant information when lies abound; that has always been the nature of spy craft but it shows up as foolishness in the speeches of politicians and the sensationalism of the media. Boris is just Boris and Mr Putin has a pinch of salt to take him with, just as we do.

  28. All 140 “diplomats” expelled by so many countries are supposed to have been identified as spies, in which case genuine diplomatic activity would not have been hindered at all. The expelled spies would never be let back in. They will have to train some new ones to pass off as diplomats when things cools down.

    It did take attention away from Brexit, which was a relief, and when a breakthrough on Brexit was announced, it took attention away from “Salisbury” , which was a relief !

    Indeed smuggling can be very easy. Despite rigid security checks of everybody (often carried out by Russians !) it would not be difficult to smuggle something damaging into the British Museum. I see no harm in giving my opinion on this : it must be obvious to anybody who wanted to do it. The Victoria & Albert Museum has no such checks, despite many of their exhibits being more fragile and also valuable. But how much worldwide publicity would anybody get from an incident there, compared to the British Museum ? However, that viewpoint makes Salisbury a strange choice, except that it is near Porton Down. One might wonder why he was living near Porton Down ! That is the real “coincidence”.

    Trump has, well, come up trumps. But you never know what he might do another day. Perhaps that makes him the ultimate deterrent ! John Major (you might feel) would never have used his nuclear weapons, but Trump might do, if you really upset him on a bad day,

    It is sometimes a struggle to remember that someone called “Boris” is supposed to be on our side ! It’s all become a bit surreal.

  29. Reply to Rox G.

    To clarify my meaning for Rox G. :
    I do not think that Putin’s government would initiate a nuclear attack on the west. What I am suggesting is that the arrogant devious behaviour of the western press and our government is infuriating the Russian government and its people.

    The Russians have formally requested a sample of the chemical used in Salisbury so that they can attempt an analysis of this chemical and then they mighty be able to identify were it might from: This to me sounds an entirely reasonable response from the Russians.

    By ignoring the Russians our government is playing a very arrogant and stupid, dangerous game. They might think that the west is planning a massive attack on Russia : paranoia creeps in on both sides and wham, nuclear war across Europe breaks out and then “everybody” looses big time. That is why I say to Mr Boris Johnson and co: “Talk, talk, is better than threat, threat.

  1. […] Update from Christian Voice […]

Leave a Reply