An Age of Deceit!

Damning new evidence that Dr Kelly DIDN'T commit suicide: The disturbing flaws in the official government story surrounding the death of Blair's chemical weapons expert 

By Miles Goslett For The Mail On Sunday22:00 12 Jan 2019, updated 01:22 13 Jan 2019
From: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6585263/amp/Damning-new-evidence-Dr-Kelly-DIDNT-commit-suicide.html?__twitter_impression=true&fbclid=IwAR01lV0RQCBGpt8OUsdcppqaDeY5arD4Tc_0zWc1PF0N4P-5lQk7ChlzWSY

• Official explanation was that the weapons expert had taken his own life 
• But since Dr Kelly’s death in 2003, time has done nothing to dispel suspicion 
• Successive governments have refused to allow full coroner’s inquest to be held 

More than 15 years have passed since Dr David Kelly was found dead in an Oxfordshire wood in one of the darkest episodes of Tony Blair’s time as Prime Minister. 

The official explanation was that the distinguished weapons expert had taken his own life by overdosing on painkillers and cutting his left wrist, devastated after being unmasked as the source of the BBC’s claim that the Government had ‘sexed up’ the case for the Iraq War.

But since Dr Kelly’s death in 2003, time has done nothing to dispel the cloud of suspicion that hangs over the episode. The troubling questions surrounding it have only increased as the years have passed. 

Successive governments have refused to allow a full coroner’s inquest to be held, fuelling the sense of a cover-up.

I have spent years examining the case and, like some surgeons, barristers, coroners and judges I know of, I cannot accept the official explanation that Dr Kelly took his own life.

Last year, I published a book containing the evidence I had discovered. Since then, I have amassed more compelling information from new, highly credible sources – evidence which casts yet more serious doubt on the claims that Dr Kelly cut his own wrists. It also raises further disturbing questions about the circumstances of his death.

By continuing my investigation, I have sometimes been dismissed as a conspiracy theorist. But I have no political axe to grind, and there is nothing fantastical about the facts of this case.

The 59-year-old scientist’s body was discovered on July 18, 2003, days after he had been grilled publicly in front of a Select Committee of MPs about his contact with the BBC journalist Andrew Gilligan.

Gilligan had reported that the Government dossier, which claimed Iraq could deploy weapons of mass destruction at 45 minutes’ notice, was unreliable – exaggerated or ‘sexed up’ for political purposes. 

And Dr Kelly, a chemical weapons expert who worked for the Foreign Office and Ministry of Defence, was soon unmasked by Downing Street officials as the BBC’s informant.

He always denied being the main source of the story but was nonetheless thrust into the spotlight against his will.

Less than an hour after Dr Kelly’s body was discovered – and before it had been formally identified or seen by a medical professional who could estimate a cause of death – Blair instructed his Lord Chancellor and an old friend from university, Charles Falconer, to set up a public inquiry into the circumstances surrounding his death.

Lord Hutton was hand-picked to chair the inquiry, which eventually concluded that Dr Kelly took his life and cleared the Government of wrongdoing.

But the establishment of the Hutton Inquiry ensured that the microscopic investigation of the death which would have happened during a coroner’s inquest never took place. Whereas the coroner would have had formal powers, the Hutton Inquiry had none.

Witnesses could not be compelled to attend, no evidence was given on oath, and Hutton had total control over who would appear and what documents could be disclosed.

The result, in the eyes of many, was a whitewash.

In his report, Hutton concluded that Dr Kelly had taken his life and that nobody could have anticipated this. He stated that ‘the principal cause of death was bleeding from incised wounds to his left wrist which Dr Kelly had inflicted on himself with the knife found beside his body’.

He said that Dr Kelly had coronary heart disease, that there were co-proxamol painkillers in his blood, and that these things might have helped bring about death ‘more certainly and more rapidly’.

Hutton then added: ‘I am further satisfied that no other person was involved in the death of Dr Kelly and that Dr Kelly was not suffering from any significant mental illness at the time he took his own life.’

I have updated my book after being contacted by John Scurr, a world-renowned consultant surgeon specialising in vascular surgery – surgery on veins and arteries. He does not believe it possible that Dr Kelly died in the manner officially found.

Scurr told me that Dr Kelly’s half-sister, Sarah Pape OBE – a leading plastic surgeon based at the Royal Victoria Hospital in Newcastle – rang him shortly after Hutton published his report in January 2004 to say she didn’t believe Dr Kelly had taken his own life.

Scurr told me: ‘Sarah Pape clearly had concerns about whether Dr Kelly could have died from slashing his wrist. We had an in-depth conversation about it. She took the trouble to contact me after the Hutton Inquiry finished to discuss whether one could actually die from slashing the ulnar artery [which passes through the wrist on the little finger side].

‘She doubted whether he could have done that on a personal and a medical level. She is a plastic surgeon and has considerable medical knowledge.’

Scurr’s claim is doubly significant because Ms Pape gave evidence to the Hutton Inquiry but did not disclose her doubts on that occasion.

Scurr has his own significant professional doubts too – remember, he is an expert when it comes to blood vessels.

He said: ‘I don’t believe it’s possible to die from simply cutting your ulnar artery. It is a very small artery and it is unlikely you could lose enough blood to cause cardiac arrest and death. It is much more likely he died from another cause. One possibility is a heart attack caused by whatever reason and this was an attempt to mask that.

‘The relative absence of blood at the scene and the fact that a rather blunt knife was used are significant. If one were to cut the wrist holding the knife in the right hand, the artery that would be cut is not the ulnar artery, which is on the inside of the hand, but the radial artery on the outside of the hand.

‘It seems more probable that somebody else took the knife and actually slashed the wrist, taking the stroke across the ulnar artery.’

Scurr’s point is that anyone wanting to cut their wrist would first have come across the radial artery, located under the thumb, rather than the ulnar artery, which lives under the little finger and is buried deep in the wrist. It is hard to find, especially with a knife that is 50 years old and blunt, such as the one found in Kelly’s hand. To sever it would require something like a razor blade.

I have also spoken to another important witness, David Broucher, the British Ambassador to Prague between 1997 and 2001. Broucher was called to give evidence to the Hutton Inquiry after telling Foreign Office colleagues of an extraordinary remark Dr Kelly made to him shortly before he died. Chillingly, Dr Kelly told him he thought he would be ‘found dead in the woods’ if Iraq was ever invaded.

This was in February 2003 – a full three months before Dr Kelly met BBC reporter Andrew Gilligan.

According to Broucher, Kelly rang his Geneva office unexpectedly and asked to see him.

The two men later spoke face- to-face for about an hour, and in the course of their conversation Dr Kelly volunteered his concerns about the British Government’s 45-minute claim because he knew it was not true.

Crucially, Broucher has told me something he had never previously disclosed: that during their meeting Dr Kelly named Blair’s spin doctor Alastair Campbell as one of those exerting pressure to make the dossier on Iraq’s possession of WMD as strong as possible.

Leading Establishment figures of the day, from Tony Blair down, agreed to be questioned at the Hutton Inquiry. There was evidence from Alastair Campbell and from Sir Richard Dearlove, the head of MI6, whose voice had never been heard in public before.

Yet the omissions are glaring. More than 20 key witnesses who might have been expected to give evidence at a coroner’s inquest – including the Thames Valley Police officer who led the search for Dr Kelly – were excluded from the inquiry.

Of the 24 days on which the Hutton Inquiry did sit, less than half a day was spent going through the medical evidence relating to Dr Kelly’s death. A number of suspicious details were simply ignored, even though they were well-known to police.

Take, for example, the fact that there were no fingerprints on the knife Dr Kelly allegedly used to kill himself. And yet when his body was found, he wore no gloves.

Then there is the startling matter of Dr Kelly’s dental records.

On the day he died, but before his body had been officially found, his dentist discovered that his patient records had disappeared. Who took the records? When did they do so? Why did they want them?

Among other urgent questions that remain unaddressed are:

• Why incomplete evidence concerning Dr Kelly’s whereabouts during the last week of his life was given to the Hutton Inquiry.
• Why the forensic pathologist who conducted the post-mortem claimed Dr Kelly was 2st lighter than he actually was.
• lWhy a police search helicopter with thermal imaging equipment, which had flown three hours before over the wood where his body was eventually found, did not detect it – despite the fact that his body temperature would have been warm enough at the time to register on the helicopter’s search system.

The Hutton Inquiry was deeply flawed, raising more questions than answered.

And that is why, along with many others, I believe it is essential that a full coroner’s inquest must now be held. Only then can we start to know the truth about the troubling death of Dr David Kelly.

An Inconvenient Death: How The Establishment Covered Up The David Kelly Affair, by Miles Goslett, is out in paperback.

 See also: https://veaterecosan.blogspot.com/search?q=david+kelly

Share or comment on this article:

 

Damning new evidence that Dr Kelly DIDN'T commit suicide

Of Spies and Fake News

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3913524/The-extraordinary-intimate-Trump-family-photos-THRIFT-SHOP-showing-Donald-s-softer-side.html

The topics of spies and fake stories have been much in the news of late. They have of course been centred on the process to elect a new American President and Donald Trump in particular. 

It is clear that his election to what is described as "the most powerful position in world", has upset a lot of well-made plans of mice and men. Other aphorisms come to mind: 'A bull in a china shop' and 'fox amongst the chickens' seem particularly appropriate to me - on many levels!

A very brief, and therefore admittedly superficial, summary may be in order to try to get a grip on the essentials. It has been said that politics and prostitution are very alike, except that the former is much dirtier. These events appear to prove it true.

http://izquotes.com/quotes-pictures/quote-it-has-been-said-that-politics-is-the-second-oldest-profession-i-have-learned-that-it-bears-a-ronald-reagan-151758.jpg

Across the Western World, Government has lost its shine. Indeed for one reason or another, politicians and the machinery of government itself, is in crisis. Wherever one looks, government and its political leaders have reached a nadir of public confidence and approval. Merkel in Germany, Hollande in France, May in Britain, Obama and Trump in America, to mention but a few. Scepticism and distrust appear to have reached epidemic and endemic proportions throughout the world.

Why this should be, is put down to various causes, one of them being the 'alternative media' and rise of the Internet. Certainly 'news' and opinion is now much more difficult to control, and particularly that which reflects badly on those in positions of power.

 http://hoocher.com/Oliver_Cromwell/Oliver_Cromwell_Two.jpg

No wonder there is now so much emphasis placed by them on "Fake News" and the need to control it. Many would see it merely as a thinly veiled attempt to curtail freely expressed opinion and the very opposite of fake news - the truth. Few politicians subscribe to Oliver Cromwell's instruction to "paint me, worts and all" it seems.

There is little doubt that this has had a corrosive effect on the respect and deference in which they are held but it is a process that has a much longer ontology dating back to the satire shows and publications of the 1960's, although the genre is much older still - Punch and the cartoonists of the eighteenth century are British examples.

BMS.6546 (etching) Thomas Rowlandson, Political Affection. London: John Hanyer, 22 April 1784.

https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgOWm09DnMyfngnFcX9Ud5mU2dJfBSxG2ae2s8qNad9chhcy3Q3RDiDujNQlq5TWAFQAk0Jjz7o8fU_AX0lm9FiXlrB7hzkuPb2YymC689jnXbcMHY_kULpQepNdcZMzTXy2w6nH9Wro34/s1600/6546.jpg

"All is fair in love and war" and currently America is at war with itself. Nor is love completely out of the question. Trump rode to victory on being anti-establishment and "draining the Washington swamp". It is therefore hardly surprising that the dirty tricks and opposition have emanated from both Democratic and Republican circles. There are suggestions that State organs such as the CIA and FBI might also be implicated in trying to undermine his position.

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/D8YdSvyp89E/hqdefault.jpg

Central to the current debacle was the story of lewd goings on in Moscow hotels. Note how it played to other promoted themes such as the threat from Russia and his affinity with President Putin. It comes only weeks after highly damaging revelations flowing from Wikileaks publication of hundreds of thousands of private E-mails that implicated Hillary Clinton's Chief of Staff, John Podesta was linked into a child abuse network behind a front of Pizza businesses. 

https://i1.wp.com/www.newnationalist.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/pizzagate-compilation.jpg?resize=600%2C350

This and further evidence of the misuse of a private server for official secret communication, suspicious deaths linked to the Clintons, corrupt payments and laundering through the Clinton Foundation and other disreputable actions, all conspired to interfere with the Clinton supremacy that had been projected and supported by the media machine.

Whatever one might think of Trump, it cannot be denied he won despite all the odds. We may not like all his opinions and rhetoric but we can not help but like the fact that there is a glimmer of hope that international tensions might possibly be reduced by his election and that his unconventional approach may possibly disrupt what has emerged as a malign and dangerous cabal intent on war.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/content/dam/news/2017/01/12/Steele-Trump-large_trans_NvBQzQNjv4BqSFXWNnhoSSUDZbpG8a9LxFe3EUkzYjpuremyrIsmq5I.jpg

It appears that central to what was intended as salacious and highly damaging information on Trump's sexual behaviour in Moscow originated with an ex- British MI6 officer, Chris Steele (52) who had been a Second Secretary at the British Embassy there as part of his twenty years employment and subsequently on leaving in 1999 had started his own (with another ex-British spy Christopher Burrows) his own lucrative private investigation businesses. These were "Orbis Business Intelligence" and "Walsingham Training" located respectively nearby Buckingham Palace and in Eastleigh, Hampshire the Times reports. (See foot notes)

Steele had followed a very traditional spy route from Cambridge - he was president of the debating society - and into the Foreign Office. He therefore presumably has some very useful contacts in high places.

https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjwf34c6SMyuFBjo6wVzWXE0CGizEw7O-zIDbBTkHczSN-_4cTpIHMesVyngva3s4gvFyud66iATES9bm3WXj5PmmX62JJMd7-6_eMJjL5BQApz26tzrkeCwtILjinQkwNtMZptpIvfE3yY/s1600/francis-walsingham.jpg

When Chris Steele's name and identity entered the public domain (and that in itself raises a question) he precipitously with his second wife and children from his previous marriage (his first wife died in 2009 following a brief illness) set off from his Surrey home, reputedly because he was fearful for his health and safety.

Now when someone as deeply embedded in covert activities runs for cover from what he sees as real risk, you had better take it seriously. It begs the question from what direction it might come? The FSB is one obvious source but previous experience would suggest it tends to target Russian emigres it perceives as traitors. Would it go for an Englishman living in England who arguably has only damaged the reputation of an American?

Alexander Litvinenko

http://ichef-1.bbci.co.uk/news/660/cpsprodpb/169CA/production/_84581629_84581628.jpg

If as is suggested he wrote the report at the request of first disaffected Republicans and later Democrats, to damage Trumps chances in respectively the Primaries and then General Election, why might a threat come from that quarter? Would it be to prevent further details emerging as to who (the CIA or Military?) that was behind it?

Or might it even be that he saw a threat coming from British based organisations for reasons of treachery or because it might embarrass HM Government? Steele would still be subject to the Official Secrets Act. If the information (or unsubstantiated rumours) he passed on were gained whilst employed by MI6, or arguably because of it, he may have committed a criminal offence. 

The last thing MI6 would want would be a public trial for that. The cases of Stephen Milligan, Lady Diana, Gareth Williams and David Kelly are all too fresh in the memory to rule out the potential for assassination from a domestic quarter.

DR. DAVID KELLY: "MANY DARK ACTORS"

https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/800/1*vQPmm_XLoqpjhg_scvM7uA.jpeg

How strange it is, that whenever this sort of story breaks, Jewish individuals, organisations or the Israeli State appears to get in on the act. The Israel-based newspaper Haaritz (see below) makes the claim that reservations have been made as to the intelligence implications of a Trump Presidency. Apparently it has warned that if Trump and Putin get on, this might mean it is unable to share secret information with the CIA as it might get back to its enemy, Iran.

Clearly Israel wanted Clinton in the White House and is trying to undermine Trumps position, no doubt in consort with its political and departmental lackeys in Washington. The people that actually paid for the Steele disinformation has not be revealed but it might be interesting to know. Is it feasible that Israel was behind this whole thing? In view of the recent disclosures by Aljazeera of such specific proposals to get rid of British politician Alan Duncan and others - with incidentally little in the way of consequences - it is far from impossible. Both in assassination and dirty tricks, Israel has proved itself more than competent.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/nintchdbpict000292902961.jpg?strip=all&w=960

Now before we leave the subject altogether, sadly and co-incidentally, a day after Mr Steele went into hiding from the press, a notable critic of it - particularly in Germany - died. Udo Ulfkotte who was fifty-seven succumbed to a heart attack on Friday 13th January, 2017. He had, it is said, survived earlier such health scares. He appears to have been critical of Merkel's policy of allowing Muslim refugees to enter the country in such numbers, although having in the past converted to Islam but later returning to Christianity. He memorably claimed that all German journalism was in hock to the USA and the CIA. (See Foot Notes below)

FOOT NOTES

From: https://orbisbi.com/about-orbis/

Orbis Business Intelligence Ltd. was founded in 2009 by former British intelligence professionals. The team now draws on extensive experience at boardroom level in government, multilateral diplomacy and international business to develop bespoke solutions for clients.

Our tailored approach means the Directors are closely involved in the execution and detail of every project, supported by an in–house team of experienced investigators and professional intelligence analysts.

Our global network of senior associates is made up of regional, industry and academic experts, as well as prominent business figures. We call upon their expertise and closed network of contacts to help our clients frame business decisions, protect our clients’ reputations, and problem–solve for companies facing complex issues worldwide.

Ethical business practice is a fundamental value for the Orbis Business Intelligence team. Our documented procedures, developed in conjunction with external legal counsel, ensure compliance with relevant UK, US and EU legislation.

From:

http://www.bizdb.co.uk/company/walsingham-training-limited-09558344/

General Information

 Name:

Walsingham Training Ltd

 Office Address:

Highland House Mayflower Close Chandler's Ford SO53 4AR Eastleigh

 Number: 09558344

 Incorporation date: 2015-04-23

 End of financial year: 31 March

 Category: Private Limited Company

 Status: Active

This company named Walsingham Training has been founded on 2015/04/23 as a PLC. This company registered office could be gotten hold of Eastleigh on Highland House Mayflower Close, Chandler's Ford. When you have to reach the firm by mail, its postal code is SO53 4AR. The reg. no. for Walsingham Training Limited is 09558344. This company principal business activity number is 70229 and has the NACE code: Management consultancy activities other than financial management. 2016-03-31 is the last time account status updates were reported. Right from the moment it was started 2 years ago, it has been a reference point for others in this line of business, achieving great success.

From the data we have, the company was founded two years ago and has been governed by two directors.

On January 13, Udo Ulfkotte died, reportedly of a heart attack.

Ulfkotte had been an editor at the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitzung.

He published a courageous book in which he said that the CIA had a hand on every significant journalist in Europe, which gave Washington control over European opinion and reduced knowledge of and opposition to Washington’s control over European heads of state. Essentially, there are no European governments independent of Washington.

From WIKI: According to Ulfkotte, the CIA and German intelligence (BND) bribe journalists in Germany to write pro-NATO propaganda articles, and it is well understood that one may lose their media job if they fail to comply with the pro-Western agenda.^[8][9][10] In 2014, Ulfkotte published Bought Journalists ("Gekaufte Journalisten"), in which he claims that the CIA and other secret services pay money to journalists to report a particular story in a certain light.^[11][12]

• Bought Journalists. How Politicians, Intelligence and High Finance Control German's Mass Media. Kopp, Rottenburg am Neckar 2014, ISBN 978-3-8644-5143-0
• Holy War in Europe. Eichborn, Frankfurt/Main, 2007, ISBN 3-8218-5577-0
• The War in the Dark. The True Power of the Secret Services. Eichborn, Frankfurt/Main, 2006, ISBN 3-8218-5578-9
• The War in our Cities. As Radical Islamics Infiltrate Germany. Eichborn, Frankfurt/Main 2003, ISBN 3-596-16340-4

See: http://www.spiegel.de/kultur/literatur/udo-ulfkotte-umstrittener-publizist-und-ehemaliger-faz-journalist-ist-tot-a-1130008.html

When it comes to these matters, strangely Israel seems to crop up somewhere.

From: https://theuglytruth.wordpress.com/2017/01/13/u-s-intelligence-officials-warning-israeli-counterparts-against-sharing-info-with-trump-administration/

Shared information could be leaked to Russia and onward to Iran, American officials implied to Israelis in closed meeting, saying Kremlin has ‘leverages of pressure’ over Trump, Ronen Bergman reports.

Haaretz

Israeli intelligence officials are concerned that the exposure of classified information to their American counterparts under a Trump administration could lead to their being leaked to Russia and onward to Iran, investigative journalist Ronen Bergman reported by Israeli daily Yediot Ahronot on Thursday.

The intelligence concerns, which have been discussed in closed forums recently, are based on suspicions of unreported ties between President-elect Donald Trump, or his associates, and the government of Vladimir Putin in Moscow.

As Russian intelligence is associated with intelligence officials in Tehran, highly classified information, such as Israel’s clandestine methods of operation and intelligence sources, could potentially reach Iran. Such information has been shared with the United States in the past.

American intelligence officials expressed despair at the election of Trump during a recent meeting with their Israeli counterparts, Bergman reported. They said that they believed that Putin had “leverages of pressure” over Trump, though they did not elaborate. The American media reported on Wednesday that Russia has embarrassing intelligence about the president-elect.

According to Bergman, the American intelligence officials implied that Israel should “be careful” when transferring intelligence information to the White House and the National Security Council (NSC) following Trump’s inauguration – at least until it is clear that Trump does not have inappropriate connections with Russia.

Cooperation between the Israeli and U.S. intelligence communities has intensified over the past two decades, with most of the joint operations directed, according to reports, against Iran. Hezbollah and Hamas were also intelligence targets. An official agreement in 2008 for comprehensive cooperation, including the exposure of sources and methods of action, reportedly led to impressive results, including the disruption of the Iranian nuclear program.
President Barack Obama put an end to offensive activity against Iran in 2013, at the start of secret talks between the U.S, and Iran over a nuclear agreement. However, the exposure of Israeli intelligence to the U.S. continued.
American officials are convinced that whistleblower Edward Snowden handed over intelligence to Moscow – in return for which he received political asylum – and that some of it was handed over to Tehran, in the context of Putin’s policy of increasing Iranian dependence on Moscow.

What does BREXIT really stand for?


Euronews: Body-language expert on Macron, Merkel and May's hushed EU Summit conversation

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=macron+may+images&rlz=1C1ARAB_enGB463GB464&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiK04Th0tveAhUBWCwKHf4mC3wQ7Al6BAgGEBs&biw=1280&bih=882#imgrc=jtMUXvDQJ2VMOM:

When you look up the meaning of 'BREXIT' you get this, "a blend of the words 'British' or 'Britain' and 'exit". People now realise, thanks to Mrs May and her Government, with a little help from the European Union, it really means a disastrous and chaotic state of affairs. After two years of negotiations, 585 pages of a document and three hours in the House of Commons answering MP's questions, no one is really satisfied and we the public, are hardly any the wiser. In fact there is surely an opportunity for Cornish confectioners here for a 'Brexit Fudge'?

Some may even think that history is repeating itself and this is a re-run of Neville Chamberlain's 'piece of paper', which at least had the benefit of brevity going for it, if not integrity. For make no mistake the economic consequences of a disruption to forty percent of our foreign trade could be as threatening to Britain, as was the attempted military blockade in the the Second World War. 

It would appear that European memories are short and goodwill for past deeds cannot be relied upon when it comes to negotiations to untangle the Gordian Knot; to break free of the Quantum Entanglement! The twenty-seven insist that if Britain truly wishes to be out, it cannot enjoy the economic advantages of the club and it knows it holds the ace hand, so indebted and interdependent have we become.

Whatever the pros or cons of the putative deal Mrs May has negotiated, and to which she has indelibly attached her own reputation, it appears to satisfy no one - not her own party, the opposition, the composite nations or the people - but no one can be surprised. Mrs May and the Conservatives particularly find themselves between a rock and a hard place but the other parties equally so. From the beginning this was a divisive issue with a divisive referendum solution. How could it be otherwise? That is what a bipolar 'yes' or 'no' answer does.

What is clear is that responsibility for it rests with the Conservative Government. The fact that David Cameron never revisited the Arctic, whilst deciding to create a new and irrelevant railway, should have been warning signs of superficiality and rash decision making. It is one thing to deliver a referendum, quite another to deal with the enormous consequences. Did he do the honourable thing and fall on his sword like Brutus, or was it more akin to Napoleon after Waterloo, running away from the sound of battle? 

Either or neither, he clearly left it to others to clear up the mess and with the aid of the dark arts and unprincipled behaviour, Mrs May was passed the poisoned chalice that she appeared to accept with alacrity. So we ended up with a pro-EU PM leading the retreat,  who subsequently reneged on every one of her own 'red lines' - hardly a recipe for success. Some might even suggest darkly that it was designed to fail, and Mrs May who proved herself a safe pair of hands for the deep state at the Home Office - if such a thing exists - was chosen for that very purpose.

The suggestion that those in real control in both Britain and Europe never intended a real separation and that a hidden agenda has steered events, is hinted at from a number of directions. 

Once the decision to leave was stated publicly, Her Majesty's Principal Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union or informally, 'Brexit Secretary', was appointed in the person of the smiling, jocular David Davis, hardly setting an appropriate tone for such serious negotiations. This did not bode well, indeed may have been intended to suggest such. 

Of course he didn't last long and was replaced by the aspiring Dominic Raab who lasted an even briefer period, not able 'in good conscience' to promote the agreed terms. Now a veritable unknown, Stephen Barclay MP, fills the role but for how long and at what cost to his political career?

"To lose one Brexit secretary might be regarded as misfortune, to lose two carelessness" in Wilde's famous phrase, but the real reason is that neither could stomach the deceit that the agreed terms entailed. In David Davis' words, the proposed deal "has taken away all the benefits of Brexit" in addition to suggesting that the EU has intentionally prevaricated to make a clean break impossible.

One of the fundamental problems for the Brexit Secretary was that control of the negotiations was actually controlled somewhere else, namely in the Cabinet Office, and this is where the suggestion that the process was deeply influenced by the Security Services and perhaps a NATO orientated agenda that precludes separation, gains credence. 

On the 24th October 2018, the crucial position of Cabinet Secretary and Head of the Civil Service, was filled by Sir Mark Sedwill when Baron Heywood of Whitehall (Jeremy Heywood) retired on health grounds. He died from lung cancer diagnosed in June 2017, on the 4th November, 2018. aged 56. Heywood was closely associated with Tony Blair in a number of contentious issues around the Iraq policy, failure to keep notes on the death of David Kelly, refusal to release notes of conversations between Blair and Bush and other matters of importance.

His replacement, Mark Sedwill has been deeply embedded in NATO-related security roles throughout his career. He was Mrs May's Permanent Secretary at the Home Office 2013 to 2017 when Mrs May was Home Secretary. Sedwill joined the Foreign and Commonwealth Office in 1989, and immediately operated in the Security Coordination Department and Gulf War Emergency Unit. His career was then closely connected to Iraq and Afghanistan war zones and from 2003 to 2005 was Deputy High Commissioner to Pakistan. From 2009 to 2010, Ambassador to Afghanistan. It is well known that such positions are  frequently those of MI6 Officers. From 2017 he has been the National Security Adviser.

So I believe perhaps for the first time, the roles of Cabinet Secretary, Head of the Civil Service and National Security Adviser have been combined in one person who in effect is, or has been, in effective control of the Brexit negotiations. In this context it is not hard to discern the the hidden but powerful hand of MI5/MI6.

One further important suggestion that separation from the European 'Leviathan' (in Thomas Hobbes' visualisation) is the entrenched military position both through NATO and by other agreements never properly discussed or examined by Parliament. 

The scene was set in 2010 with the Lancaster House Agreement between British Prime Minister David Cameron - yes the same bloke that got us into the Brexit mess - and French President Nicholas Sarkozy for closer military ties with France for defence and security co-operation. 

This continues largely under the radar so to speak. In January 2018 Mrs May announced a joint French/British 'expeditionary force' of 20,000 men to quickly and effectively face any threat by 2020. This must mean it is already in formation. 

This runs alongside the largely unreported naval cooperation between the two. Also by 2020 an 'integrated carrier strike group', allowing British and French aircraft carrier interdependence and control. 

Note how all this comes together around 2020 - a perfect vision for the future, although largely out of sight of the electorate that might otherwise not approve of this fundamental loss of sovereignty? 

Britain's nuclear defence capability has always been subject to American veto, but now it would appear a fundamental realignment is taking place with Britain and France pooling their development and control systems, and this against the background music of Trump withdrawing from NATO and Macron suggesting Europe may need to defend itself against America as much as from Russia.

Where is all this going? Certainly Britain and France showed it was able to bomb a joint policy in Libya and Syria - with largely disastrous results, not to mention the claimed  'ISIS' inspired terrorist attacks rather conveniently and suspiciously targeted principally on France and Britain at points of political significance. 

Mr Macron said France's defence and security co-operation with the UK had not been "challenged or revisited or impacted" by the vote for Brexit. Perhaps they both knew something the British public didn't: that leaving the EU was never really a viable option and would not be permitted?

If nothing else the debacle proves that Britain developed a system of representative government and eschewed referendums for a reason. How can the public decide a fiendishly difficult issue with a simple yes/no vote, particularly if it is not afforded adequate information of the consequences? Leaving aside the truism that 'minorities are always right', simple majorities are just that, simple, and leave behind them inevitable division. That is why most votes on constitutional issues require a larger majority to carry.

If as some, including leading figures in the Labour Party, are advocating a second referendum, this would obviously please the 'remainers' and the EU as the chaos and adverse consequences now apparent, would probably shift the balance back to 'remain'. However it would solve little and may even create greater unrest from those who felt cheated. Nor would it solve the fundamental issues with membership. 

In trying to placate both sides of the argument, Mrs May has satisfied neither. She still has to get the plan through Parliament but it is clear she can only do so with the support of the opposition which seems on the present terms to be unlikely. 

We should also have to go back to Pitt the Younger to find a parallel. Unless it is intended to impose an unelected dictatorship, parliamentary protocol requires resignation if the Prime Minister loses the confidence of the House. She says she is determined to stay on - under what conditions? Perhaps it is only the undesirability of the Leader of the Opposition and his team that is keeping her there? 

Meanwhile Jacob Ree-Mogg has sent his letter to Sir Graham Brady, Chairman of the 1922 Committee, and published it, calling for a vote of no confidence in Mrs May. (1) 

If nothing else, we certainly live in interesting times.


1.  https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/political-parties/news/99881/read-full-jacob-rees-mogg-letter-calling-no-confidence-vote

Sergei Skripal, the Nerve Agent Novichok, and the Proximity of Porton Down

From: https://gumshoenews.com/2018/03/13/sergei-skripal-the-nerve-agent-novichok-and-the-proximity-of-porton-downs/#more-17152

March 13, 2018 

27

The Defence Science and Technology Laboratory in Porton Down (photo – BT)

by Dee McLachlan

Thank goodness Teresa May won’t be joining Scotland Yard to become a detective. In the attempted murders of former spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter — allegedly with the nerve agent, Novichok — she has outlined only two possible options:

1. Russian did it, or
2. The Russians lost control of “their” nerve agent.

May gave a stirring address at the House of Commons, saying, “It is now clear that Mr Skripal and his daughter were poisoned with a military-grade nerve agent of a type developed by Russia… This is part of a group of nerve agents known as Novichok.” She seems confident that the production of this nerve agent has stayed in Russia since it was developed. Now, that’s a laugh!

Why would Russia attempt to kill Skripal with an agent that leads directly back to them?

This is sounding more and more like a false flag.

And where did they find out what chemical was used? At the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory at Porton Down — only 7 miles from where Skripal was found. Amazing!

Novichok

Let us assume it is Novichok, and not some other imitation nerve agent. Novichok is more powerful than VX and sarin, and allegedly the most deadly nerve agent ever made. It was first developed in Russia in the 1970s — and became known, publicly, to the West in the early 1990s. That was over twenty years ago.

Can we honestly believe the West has not experimented with the production of Novichok?

Nerve agents work by overriding neurotransmitters, and shutting down the body — causing a slowing of the heart and restriction of the airways, leading to death by asphyxiation. Professor Gary Stephens, University of Reading, says, “One of the main reasons these agents are developed is because their component parts are not on the banned list. It means the chemicals that are mixed to create it are much easier to deliver with no risk to the health of the courier.”

Even though only a drop is required to kill a person, the MSM is pondering how the Novichok was transported into the country from Russia.

Maybe this nerve agent did not come from Russia, but from somewhere else.

Porton Down

Porton Down in Wiltshire, England, is situated on about 7,000 acres and is the UK’s CBRN (chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear) facility. The highly secretive work that goes on there is protected from oversight, and monkeys, and even people, were in past routinely tested upon. Around 2009, it emerged that hundreds of ex-servicemen were used as chemical warfare guinea pigs there between 1939 and 1989.

What is interesting is that Porton Down is a mere 16 minute drive from the center of Salisbury, where Skripal was found.

And Skripal lands up to settle in Salisbury of all places.

Skripal nearly joined a long list of fatalities in the area. They were trialing sarin B at the Porton Down centre back in the 1950s, and though an inquiry initially focused on the death of Ronald Maddison (in 1953), the Wiltshire Police are believed to be looking at another 45 cases where relatives claimed a death had been caused by the tests.

In 2012, Dr Richard Holmes, 48, resigned from the government’s secret chemical warfare laboratory — then a few weeks later, he is found dead in a field. As reported in Truthfall, Dr Holmes, like Dr Kelly, also told his wife that he was ‘going out for a walk’  before later being found dead. Dr David Kelly, was another weapons scientist (UK weapons inspector to Iraq) that “suicided” back in 2003.

All this a stone’s throw from Salisbury.

Vil Mirzayanov

Now Vil Mirzayanov, a Russian chemist, is best known for revealing the illegal chemical weapons experimentation in Russia – a whistle blower soon after the Communist Party collapsed.  He was arrested on October 22, 1992, on charges of treason. But the existence of Novichok was then openly admitted by Russian authorities, and so Mirzayanov was eventually released because, “not one of the formulas or names of poisonous substances in the Moscow News article was new to the Soviet press…” He has been living in the US for quite some time.

Interestingly, I looked him up on Facebook, and his latest post (a few hours ago) claims that he has published the formula of Novichok in his book.

Some interesting points in Vil Mirzayanov blog:

“…some people from Washington persistently advised me not to include the formulas of the chemical agents of the Novichok series in my book. I reminded these people that the formulas of VX gas, sarin and soman have already been published. In some books it is even possible to find the basics of the production technologies of these agents.

“In GOSNIIOKhT, the Russian center for developing chemical weapons where I worked for 26 years, all scientists and engineers, including the departmental and laboratory chiefs, had to pass safety exams every year… Only special military personnel can operate them with minimal risk of poisoning or death.

“The volatility of both Novichok and VX-gas are hundreds of times less than that of sarin. For that reason, it is impossible to the same kind of methods Aum Shinrikyo did [in the Tokyo subway], and release them, exposing targets… All of the advice people gave me not to publish formulas of the Novichok chemical agents, based on the argument that terrorists would use them, does not ring true.

“These agents should be acknowledged and immediately put under the control of the OPCW, the organization that administers the Chemical Weapons Convention. We need to stop mystifying chemical weapons and the non-existent biological weapons. It is time to stop scaring the American people with imaginary problems, in order to blindly extract as much money as possible from them for protection.”

Mirzayanov seems to think that only professional scientists and special military personnel can operate sophisticated toxins like this.

Possible Scenarios

• Russia wanted to kill a washed-up double agent with a nerve agent that leads directly back to them
• some rogue Russian got hold of Novichok to try kill Skripal
• Skripal was working for the FSB, as a condition of his being allowed to live in the West?
• a Porton Down accident, or
• a classic False Flag by the CIA or UK agencies designed to blame Russia.

One has to ask: Who will benefit? And who needs increased tensions?

I fail to see how the Russian government could benefit from this incident. But President Putin has less than 24 hours to respond to Teresa May’s claims.

Australia’s ABC headline:

“Skripal attack: Why the use of a Novichok nerve agent suggests Russia was involved”

Consider this: Novichok is designed to override neurotransmitters and shut down vital organs. The MSM, including the ABC, is designed override neurotransmitters, and shut down critical and logical thinking.

---

Addendum.

Having just read a piece in The Guardian, I think it should be included in this article. It seems the attempt to poison Skirpal could be, possibly, a more significant false flag distraction than I had originally thought.

10 Possible Responses

The ten possible British responses to Russia over the Sergei Skripal affair — as presented in The Guardian (In ascending order):

1) Expulsion of diplomats

2) Ask Ofcom to declare that Russian media outlets such as RT are not fit to hold a broadcasting licence

3) Seek support in the EU for sports officials not to attend the World Cup

4) Introduce amendments to the sanctions and anti-money laundering bill

5) Freeze assets of Russian oligarchs unable to explain sources of London property wealth
This would be legally risky and might hit as many Putin opponents as allies.

6) Seek further EU-wide sanctions on Russia

7) Step up Nato presence on the Russian border

8) Designate Russia as a state sponsor of terrorism

9) Cut Russian banks off from Swift

10) Leak or publish classified material on the scale of alleged money laundering by Putin and his allies