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

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’

Tags: NOVEMBER 18, 2018 FRIENDS OF GREED 3 ELITISM, FAKE NEWS, MEDIA, POLITICS, PROPAGANDA,SPUTNIK

(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 scenario van GB volledig onderuit gehaald door Israëlische expert

Het hieronder opgenomen artikel van News Front kwam ik tegen op het blog van Stan van Houcke. Hierin veegt de Israëlische internationale terrorisme expert en schrijver Alexander Brass de vloer aan met het Britse fantasieverhaal over 'de door Russische agenten met novitsjok vergiftigde Skripals'.

Onder meer wijst hij op de uiterst kundige geheime dienst van Rusland, in dit geval de GROe. Onmogelijk dat zo'n dienst alle bewijzen die in hun richting wijzen, daadwerkelijk hebben achtergelaten. Zoals eerder op deze plek al geconstateerd: als Rusland Skripal had willen doden, dan was hij dat al lang geweest, zonder dat iemand maar argwaan zou krijgen over de 'natuurlijke' doodsoorzaak........

Terecht stelt Brass dat de manier waarop novitsjok werd gebruikt in deze zaak, althans zoals in het fantasieverhaal van de Britten, dit te vergelijken is met de vernietiging van een stad middels een atoombom en dat om één persoon te vermoorden...... Als zo vaak gezegd, als er inderdaad novitsjok werd gebruikt was iedereen die ermee in aanraking was gekomen al lang en breed overleden, plus een flink aantal omwonenden...... Ofwel ook hier is sprake van een false flag operatie.......

Brass wijst verder als voorbeeld op de gelukte en mislukte aanslagen op 'tegenstanders' door de Israëlische geheime dienst Mossad.

Brass stelt verder dat de bewaking van het huis waar Skripal woonde*, met meerdere camera's werd gedaan, echter de camera die de boel had moeten filmen, op 'het moment waarop de twee Russen de deurknop insmeerden met novitsjok', was uitgeschakeld door de Britten......

Voorts wijst Brass op het feit dat de Skripal zaak moet voorkomen dat Rusland deel mag uitmaken van onderzoeken in Syrie naar het gebruik van chemische wapens. Echter er zijn wat mij betreft meer redenen, zoals de wil van de VS en Groot-Brittannië om een oorlog tegen Rusland te beginnen en dit land failliet te laten gaan, dat laatste zal (gelukkig) op zeker niet lukken en laten we hopen dat het eerste al helemaal niet zal plaatsvinden......... De pogingen om Rusland uit onderzoeken te houden naar gifgasaanvallen, maakt uiteindelijk geen verschil, Rusland zal en moet gedemoniseerd worden....

Niet voor niets dat de reguliere westerse (massa-) media en het overgrote deel van de westerse politici, alle gifgasaanvallen toerekenen aan het reguliere Syrische leger en Rusland, hoewel daar geen flinter aan bewijs voor gegeven kan worden..... Sterker nog: zelfs de echte aanvallen met gifgas zijn na onderzoek voor het overgrote deel toegeschreven aan de 'gematigde rebellen' (o.a. door Nederland gesteunde terreurgroepen die zich schuldig maken aan massamoord, verkrachtingen en martelingen). Lulliger nog: de westerse landen weten dat deze 'gematigde rebellen' over gifgas (chlorine en sarin) beschikken, iets waar ze nooit moeite mee hebben gehad........

Lees dit ontluisterende verhaal en zegt het ajb voort, de berg met leugens en de ronduit anti-Russische propaganda, moet eindelijk voor het 'grote publiek' doorgeprikt worden, zo niet worden we langzaam maar zeker in een oorlog gesleept die maar één aanduiding kan hebben: WOIII.......

SKRIPAL CASE: ISRAELI EXPERT ON THE WORK OF THE SPECIAL AGENTS

Date of publication: 28 09 2018, 12:05

An Israeli expert on international terrorism, writer Alexander Brass, shared his view on the case of the Skripals poisoning in Salisbury. Brass draws parallels between the work of the special services of Israel and Russia – he believes that if to compare the British version with the practice of the special agents, then the absurdity becomes obvious.

“Alexander, so what, in your opinion, happened in Salisbury?”

-There was a rough provocation by the British special services. In my opinion, this is obvious.

– Why do you think so?

“There’s a lot of stupidity on stupidity.” The story with Petrov and Boshirov does not hold up any professional peer review. According to the Brits, the Skripals were poisoned by GRU** agents (this is what the department is called, although this is now the Main Directorate of the RF General Staff).

I want to explain how the special services work. If you need someone to eliminate, then this is a very serious operation, which is being prepared for a long time. A very significant material and human resource is allocated. We are talking about dozens of employees. On the territory of this state, an “advanced command post” is being created.

In the operation, a technical support group, a logistic group, a cover group, an external surveillance group and a group of performers are involved.

The performers themselves appear at the very last moment. They do not go anywhere, lighting up on cameras, do not use public transport, but move on rented cars, which they do not rent themselves. And the more they will not stop in hotels, but will live on safe houses provided by the logistics group.

Such groups do not come under the passport of their country, do not go to the embassy for obtaining a visa, leaving fingerprints. This is complete nonsense. Professionals do not work that way.

If the GRU acted, both the killers and the other participants in the operation would come to the UK on the passports of other countries that have visa-free relations with it. Here, two alleged GRU officers go to the embassy, ​​leave their fingerprints there, get a visa, stop at the hotel, pass under all the cells. This you will not find even in ladies’ detective novels.

– Maybe it is unprofessionalism associated with the degradation and decay, which after the collapse of the Soviet Union took place in all structures and institutions of society, including in the special services? Lost skills, methods, no one to teach young people. There is such an opinion.

– This is an opinion at the level of kitchen conversations. Where did the armed forces and the military-industrial complex of the Russian Federation manage to raise such a “bardak” to such a level as they could organize the World Cup and the Olympics at such a high level?

The GRU has always been and remains one of the most professional and most intelligent intelligence agencies in the world.

If the GRU decided to eliminate Skripal, then I have a question: why was the “Novichok” used? This is not a remedy, it’s a chemical weapon of mass destruction. It’s like dropping an atomic bomb on a city to kill one criminal. When special services eliminate an object, they always try to do it so that no autopsy shows that he was poisoned.

– Can you give examples?

– I can give many examples. In 1978, the well-known international terrorist Vadia Haddad, one of the founders of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), was killed. “Mossad” did not take responsibility for this, but sewed in a bag you can not hide. A potent biological poison was mixed with chocolate. Within three months he died of a painful and incomprehensible illness in the GDR clinic. His autopsy was conducted at the University of East Berlin. No trace of poison was found. The doctors assumed that he died of leukemia.

– How did you know that he was killed by Mossad?

– Information about this began to leak a few years ago. It came from Algeria. One of the former Mossad agents during another trial gave evidence that he witnessed how this happened, calling the specific names of the performers. This man also confirmed that he was a participant in this operation. This information was also confirmed by other, non-overlapping sources.

– Were there any cases when the Mossad operation ended unsuccessfully and the enemies of Israel were still alive?

– Take the last unsuccessful attempt of the Israelis to kill Khaled Mashaal, one of the leaders of the terrorist organization Hamas. He would have been killd if he had not been given an antidote at the last minute.

Everything happened on September 25, 1997 on one of the streets of Amman – the capital of Jordan. Just some passer-by, who was next to Mashaal, “accidentally” stumbled and splashed the liquid from the can of Coke to his neck. The next day Mashal would have died of a heart attack, and no traces. But the performers were seized on the spot. After that, the King of Jordan Hussein demanded that Israel provide an antidote, and in return promised to release Israeli agents.

– That is, substances that leave no traces are not detected by expertise and imitate death from the disease, the secret services have long been known?

– That’s it. Could the GRU not have been able to use some other poison, and not the “Novichok”, which leaves traces everywhere? If such technologies were in the special services already in the 1950s, do not the GRU have them today?

–Let’s talk about the cameras. The UK on this some kind of fad. In no country in the world there is such a number of surveillance cameras per capita.

If I’m not mistaken, about one camera for 15 people. Literally every meter is looked through. MI5, the British counterintelligence service, is considered one of the best in the world. And if Britain took care of Skripal, he was very well guarded. At least his house was hung with all the cameras, which are only possible.

If, according to MI5, these agents visited Salisbury, they came to the house of Skripal and coated the door handle with this substance – so show the records from the cameras! How can it be that it was at this point that the cameras suddenly turned off?

“But maybe these agents found the cameras and turned them off?”

“If you say that the GRU has deteriorated so badly that it has lit up everywhere and left its mark, why did this degraded intelligence agency manage to turn off the surveillance cameras near the Skripal house at the right time?” Where is the logic?

–When our agents killed the Chechen terrorist Zelimkhan Yandarbiyev in Qatar, they got caught and were captured by the local police. True, they carried out the task …

“And how many Israeli agents were arrested?” This does not mean degradation. I do not know what happened after the collapse of the USSR in the GRU, but I know what happened in the Foreign Intelligence Service, since I had been friends with one of the very high-ranking officers of this service for many years in retirement. We had very close, friendly relations with him for many years. Unfortunately, he died a few years ago.

He told me that the degradation of the special services is only an appearance. He retired, because he already had years of service and he did not agree with the mess that was going on in the country. But there was no mess in the secret services! Who wanted to – left. But was there a leak of information? Have they discovered an agent network?

Agents of Soviet special services worked all over the world. Have any of them suffered? No one. The mess can be anywhere, but not in the special services.”

– Let’s admit. All this really looks strange – first let out Skripal, then kill him. Would not it be easier to just leave him in jail?

“– Now about the personality of Sergei Skripal himself. The main version, which is voiced by the British side, is revenge. But in special services there is no such thing as revenge. Neither the Israelis, nor the Russians. Only the Cubans had it. We must understand that the special services are a very practical organization. Why revenge? A person is eliminated only when he can cause real harm. The Skripal has already done harm. He could not do more harm.”

– For example, as a lesson to other potential traitors, no?

“– No. I once asked my acquaintances who worked in your special services (I have never had any contact with active staff, only with retirees): “Why did not Kalugin be killed?” And they answered me with a counter question: “Why haven’t you eliminated the defector? “I said: he has already done harm. To eliminate him, it is necessary to develop a very serious operation, to send people, people should risk their lives. For the sake of what – for the sake of revenge? They say:

“For the same reason, we do not touch Kalugin and do not touch anyone.” Israelis are not even exterminated by former terrorists. At the moment when the terrorist stops terrorist activities, regardless of what he did before, he is left alone. The only ones who were persecuted to the end were Nazi criminals.”

There is an opinion that he was eliminated because he taught at the counterintelligence school and taught young employees how to deal with the GRU.

“– And what, in MI5, except for Skripal, no one knows how to do it? I think they know it better than him.

– In such cases, there is a very simple practice. When Skripal was taken on treason, he probably was intelligibly explained: either you go to life imprisonment and you will be in solitary confinement somewhere beyond the Arctic Circle, or you will receive 12 years of strict regime in the European part of Russia. But for this, you must fully tell what you have handed over, and give evidence. To cooperate with the investigation.

Similarly, when the former colonel of the Defense Intelligence of Israel’s Defense Intelligence Department, I did not name him, went into business and got into debt.

He went to Lebanon to buy heroin and conduct a drug deal, and was captured by Hezbollah. He told everything he knew, inflicting enormous damage to Israel’s defense capability. Because he was an officer on this site, he worked for Lebanon.

The Israelis exchanged him, they pulled him out. He was told: let’s make a deal. You will not be prosecuted. But you must thoroughly, in every detail, tell what you told them. We need to know what they know. The same was with Skripal. And there was simply no need to eliminate him.”

So there was no motive for Russian special services?

“–There was no motive. Then, imagine: they used “Novichok”, they carried it with them in a bottle from under the perfume. In the practice of special services this does not exist. Performers go light, with other people’s passports. They receive weapons on the spot. And when such a group of liquidators works, it works autonomously, without affecting the local residency. In case of failure, do not harm the residence.

When the surveillance is working and the capture team is working, they do not know each other in person, they communicate only through certain communication channels.”

– The question is also why the poison did not act instantly, and Skripal was still wandering about for a few hours.

“– It’s a different matter. The British are so disrespectful to Russia that even provocation can not be done at a decent level. It’s even humiliating. Therefore, Russia does not comment on this in any way. And why is it necessary to comment on some kind of nonsense?

It took half a year to Brits to find the “suspects.” Although they left their full personal data and fingerprints in the embassy when they received visas. This is a separate nonsense. Then Russia said: please! Here they are, here’s their interview. If they were active GRU officers, they would not have left their fingerprints in the embassy for anything”.

“– Who are they?”

“– I do not know who they are, but certainly not employees of special services. If the GRU needed to kill Skripal, he would now be dead. This would have been done quietly and without scandal”.

“– Why Britain needs this?”

“– This is a well-thought-out strategy of demonization and international isolation of Russia. In the UK, as in the rest of the Western world, everything works very simply. Most people do not read newspapers at all. And those who read, do not understand half.

But everyone sees the headlines. Provocation with the Skripals is needed to exclude the Russian Federation from the Commission for Investigating the Use of Chemical Weapons in Syria. This is a minimum program”.

Tags: EU; Russia; Skripal case; UK

===================================
*  Of hij en zijn dochter daar nog wonen, weet ik niet (waarschijnlijk niet, kan er niets over vinden).

** GRU de militaire geheime dienst van Rusland, in het Nederlands: GROe.

PS: met alle anti-Russische propaganda (leugens) stelt men dat Rusland een onbetrouwbare handelspartner is, zo merkten ook de NRC en de NOS op, precies zoals VS ambassadeur voor Nederland, plork Hoekstra al stelde...... De VS eist dat Duitsland afziet van het Nord Stream 2 (NS2) project, een gaspijpleiding van Rusland naar Duitsland, een pijpleiding die niet door corrupte Oost-Europese landen als Oekraïne loopt. Logisch daar de VS het gas dat werd gewonnen met de door haar zwaar gesubsidieerde schaliegaswinning, wil verkopen aan de EU en dat tegen een godsvermogen........ Zie wat dat betreft ook: 'VS sancties tegen Rusland ingegeven door eigenbelang'

Skripal vergiftiging roept steeds meer vraagtekens op.....

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)

'Clinton te kakken gezet: Donna Brazile (Democratische Partij VS) draagt haar boek op aan Seth Rich, het vermoorde lid van DNC die belastende documenten lekte'

'Russia Is Trolling the Shit out of Hillary Clinton and the Mainstream Media'

'Russische 'hacks' door deskundigen nogmaals als fake news doorgeprikt >> Intel Vets Challenge ‘Russia Hack’ Evidence'

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

'Russiagate, of: hoe de media u belazeren met verhalen over Russische bemoeienis met de VS presidentsverkiezingen........' 

'Publicly Available Evidence Doesn’t Support Russian Gov Hacking of 2016 Election'

'Wall Street Journal wil punt achter Russiagate'

GRU in Nederlands GROe, label veranderd op 5 oktober 2018.