Author Topic: Is the BBC totally compromised?  (Read 4570 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline maggie

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13533
Re: Is the BBC totally compromised?
« Reply #45 on: April 17, 2018, 07:11:PM »
Through letter box?
Possibly but how do they avoid contaminatioN?   It was in liquid form.

Offline Roch

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10570
Re: Is the BBC totally compromised?
« Reply #46 on: April 17, 2018, 07:37:PM »
Possibly but how do they avoid contaminatioN?   It was in liquid form.

Pity what happened to their pets. Allowed to die in a sealed property.

Offline maggie

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13533
Re: Is the BBC totally compromised?
« Reply #47 on: April 17, 2018, 07:46:PM »
Pity what happened to their pets. Allowed to die in a sealed property.
Did he have pets?  Thought we were supposed to be animal lovers!
« Last Edit: April 17, 2018, 07:47:PM by maggie »

Offline Roch

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10570
Re: Is the BBC totally compromised?
« Reply #48 on: April 17, 2018, 08:51:PM »
Did he have pets?  Thought we were supposed to be animal lovers!

Cat and two guinea pigs.  Dehydration I think.  Must have been immune to the Novichok?

Offline maggie

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13533
Re: Is the BBC totally compromised?
« Reply #49 on: April 17, 2018, 09:39:PM »
Cat and two guinea pigs.  Dehydration I think.  Must have been immune to the Novichok?
Oh how awful. Poor things.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 40043
Re: Is the BBC totally compromised?
« Reply #50 on: April 17, 2018, 10:10:PM »
What about those who live nearby and who have animals ? A bit dodgy if the stuff's carried on the wind.


Offline Roch

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10570
Re: Is the BBC totally compromised?
« Reply #52 on: April 23, 2018, 06:15:PM »
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-04-21/germanys-largest-public-tv-news-broadcaster-syria-chemical-attack-most-likely

Isn't it a strange coincidence that the Skripal incident which so damaged Russia's image and standing, just happened to occur as an immediate precursor to the 'Russian-backed' Assad chemical attack?  And then... just when people's scepticism was beginning to gain a foothold, low and behold, the Windrush story takes over the whole news... to take us through nicely to the royal birth.
« Last Edit: April 23, 2018, 10:05:PM by Roch »

Offline Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10805
Re: Is the BBC totally compromised?
« Reply #53 on: April 23, 2018, 08:47:PM »
Isn't it a strange coincidence that the Skripal incident which so damaged Russia's image and standing, just happened to occur as an immediate precursor to the 'Russian-backed' Assad chemical attack?  And then... just when people's scepticism was beginning to gain a foothold, low and behold, the Windrush story takes over the whole news... to take us through nicely the royal birth.
It's still no excuse if Russia has lost control of the nerve agents it produced in the first place.

Offline Roch

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10570
Re: Is the BBC totally compromised?
« Reply #54 on: April 23, 2018, 10:00:PM »
It's still no excuse if Russia has lost control of the nerve agents it produced in the first place.

You should go and ask your Slavic cousin Steve_RT for their opinion  :))

Offline Roch

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10570
Re: Is the BBC totally compromised?
« Reply #55 on: April 23, 2018, 10:04:PM »
What about those who live nearby and who have animals ? A bit dodgy if the stuff's carried on the wind.

The animals in the house didn't die of Novichok.  They simply wasted away because the authorities sealed the house.

Offline Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10805
Re: Is the BBC totally compromised?
« Reply #56 on: April 23, 2018, 10:17:PM »
You should go and ask your Slavic cousin Steve_RT for their opinion  :))
My transatlantic cousin in Little Rock, Steve_AK might know more..

Offline gringo

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1260
Re: Is the BBC totally compromised?
« Reply #57 on: April 25, 2018, 01:05:PM »
It's still no excuse if Russia has lost control of the nerve agents it produced in the first place.
   
     What there is really no excuse for, Steve, is making such bold statements on a subject about which you have little knowledge, as demonstrated by yourself in one line. There is a well known quote which seems apposite, attributed, but probably erroneously, to Mark Twain.

    "It is easier to fool people, than to convince them that they have been fooled"

    The UK government statements on the affair have been contradictory and their actions, or lack of, seem focused on hiding/avoiding rather than finding the truth. The lack of media curiosity and their readiness to merely repeat the official line is another feature which should alert you to the fact that all is not as it seems.
     Your willingness to believe that, "Russia has lost control of the nerve agents it produced in the first place" betrays gullibility and a lack of intellectual curiosity at the questions raised by the contradictions and outright lies. It is doubtful that the Skripals and DS Nick Bailey were ever in contact with a Novichok agent at all and certainly no-one is claiming this anymore.

     As an aside it is worth noting that non of the "victims" of this attack have made any public utterance or appearance since the attack. Eerily similar statements asking for privacy to be respected have been given on behalf of DS Bailey and Yulia Skripal through the Metropolitan Police which in both cases raise more issues than they quash. The first "statement on Yulia's behalf?" came on the 5th April at precisely 2pm and is linked below. The timing appears relevant.
      http://news.met.police.uk/news/statement-issued-on-behalf-of-yulia-skripal-301372
      Prior to this statement we, and the courts, had been told that both the Skripal's were in a coma and unlikely to ever recover.
      By massive coincidence, and not at all suspiciously :o, less than one hour before this statement was given, Rossiya 1, a Russian news channel, aired a recorded telephone call between Yulia and her cousin Viktoria. How and whose phone is a mystery but it clearly wasn't in the script. Call can be heard here:
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=naiq1b-SemE
      I'm sure that the phone call between Yulia and Viktoria being made and publicised didn't prompt the statement from Yulia, albeit using the novel medium of the Metropolitan Police, at all and had no bearing on the decision to release this entirely plausible statement ::)
      On the 11th April a further statement was released, again supposedly and entirely believably, on Yulia Skripals behalf. Yulia, we are led to believe, again "chose ?" the Met as the conduit for her public utterances. Rather than avail herself of the services of the Russian Embassy, a solicitor or her cousin we are to take on trust that she "chose" the Met to make a statement, on her behalf and that now she doesn't want contact with anyone including her family. The statement below:
     http://news.met.police.uk/news/statement-issued-on-behalf-of-yulia-skripal-302508
     
     All sounds very sinister and more as if the Skripals are being held incommunicado against their will. The level of unquestioning gullibility required to even believe that someone in Yulia's situation would issue a statement through the Met is off the scale.
     No information is coming from any medical staff, no witnesses and non of the people supposedly affected by this 8 x more deadly than VX nerve agent. What has become of the three main players? No attempt by our free and truth seeking media to find the phone's owner unwittingly at the centre of a huge international incident for an interview. There are many people involved in this saga who an inquisitive and honest media would be duty bound to track down and interview but for some reason no-one in the Main Stream Media seems to have thought of this. It is surely self evident that some form of media blackout has been imposed.

      But back to question of the deadly "nerve agent" which has thus far killed no-one. The Russians should have perhaps tried the British developed "neglect" which has proven way more deadly, so far accounting for two guinea pigs and one cat. One cat is apparently still "on the run" somewhere.
      Immediately the UK government blamed the Russians and the media stayed obediently to the script.
One of the first problems that arose was that the scientists at Porton Down would not and could not confirm it's alleged Russian origin. The scientist's honesty and credibility eventually led to this weaselly worded Porton Down statement discussed here:
     http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/49003.htm   
     and here:
     https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2018/03/of-a-type-developed-by-liars/
     
     So no confirmation of novichok or Russian manufacture just the meaningless "of a type developed by Russia". Surely we will discover more from the application to the "Court of Protection". How Orwellian does that sound? Ministry Of Peace promotes war, Ministry of Truth disseminates lies. Wonder what Orwell's Court of Protection would do? Fuck we're already in an Orwellian dystopia :o
     The judgement is here and makes for interesting reading:
     https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/sshd-v-skripal-and-another-20180322.pdf

     Of particular note is para 17 from which I quote directly below:
"Blood samples from Sergei Skripal and Yulia Skripal were analysed and the findings indicated exposure to a nerve agent or related compound The samples tested positive for the presence of a novichok class nerve agent or closely related agent."
      It is surely apparent now that nobody was poisoned with a Novichok. "Related compound" and "closely related agent" are so vague as to be meaningless. These caveats are used in order to obfuscate the fact that the nerve agent is neither Novichok nor Russian and quite likely not even a nerve agent.
      The full judgement is well worth a read as it raises many troubling questions even to my layman's understanding. NGB would have greater insight into some of the legal machinations being engineered but that is a whole other discussion.
      The UK government belatedly brought in the OPCW to investigate after at first refusing. When the OPCW were called in it was on limited terms. Rather than a full Fact Finding Mission the OPCW team were given the limited remit of confirming the UK scientists findings that confirmed the presence of a particular agent. The name and structure of the agent are in section 12 of the report which is, for some reason, classified.
      Unfortunately for the UK government it seems another one of pesky honest scientists threw a spanner in the works by exposing an inconvenient truth. A scientist from the Spiez Lab in Switzerland apparently leaked the "confidential" part of the report to the Russians and the presence of BZ a US/NATO produced incapacitating agent was present in the samples.
     A pathetic non-denial denial was issued but the discerning had by now long figured that what we have all witnessed over the previous weeks was quite possibly the most incompetent and transparent attempt at a False Flag attack ever.
    It is worth comparing the symptoms of these two agents and then referring back to the initial reports of eye witnesses to the behaviour of the Skripals. In a nutshell, the Skripals displayed behaviour consistent with exposure to BZ not a Novichok nerve agent. The fact that both they and DS Bailey are still alive also indicates exposure to BZ, an incapacitating agent rather than a nerve agent 8 x more deadly than VX. This letter from Dr. Stephen Davies, Consultant in emergency medicine at Salisbury NHS trust published in the Times the day after the same publication had reported dozens of affected people is also illuminating:

https://off-guardian.org/2018/03/21/what-did-the-salisbury-physician-mean-by-no-patients-have-experienced-symptoms-of-nerve-agent-poisoning/

     Again you would imagine our intrepid journalists tripping over each other to delve further into the Doctor's claims and his refutation of the use of a nerve agent. Well, you would imagine this if you believed our media weren't compromised but our intrepid journos reacted with a collective disinterested shrug confirming that the answer to Roch's thread question is Yes and that the question could be further extended to include most Mainstream Media.

     This story is being followed and reported on at any number of credible non mainstream sites. The previously mentioned and excellent Craig Murray, OffGuardian, Moon of Alabama plus many many others doing what reporters are meant to do. Roch linked previously to  ZeroHedge who have also reported on the whole fiasco. Fisk, Galloway, Hitchens etc. all more questioning and sceptical than most of our supine media.
     Dare to convince yourself that you have been fooled, Steve.
     And for anyone interested the cat is still believed to be "on the run" hopefully having been taken by a kindly local in order to protect it from death by neglect at the hands of MI6 ???

     
     
     

Offline Roch

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10570
Re: Is the BBC totally compromised?
« Reply #58 on: April 25, 2018, 10:07:PM »
   
     What there is really no excuse for, Steve, is making such bold statements on a subject about which you have little knowledge, as demonstrated by yourself in one line. There is a well known quote which seems apposite, attributed, but probably erroneously, to Mark Twain.

    "It is easier to fool people, than to convince them that they have been fooled"

    The UK government statements on the affair have been contradictory and their actions, or lack of, seem focused on hiding/avoiding rather than finding the truth. The lack of media curiosity and their readiness to merely repeat the official line is another feature which should alert you to the fact that all is not as it seems.
     Your willingness to believe that, "Russia has lost control of the nerve agents it produced in the first place" betrays gullibility and a lack of intellectual curiosity at the questions raised by the contradictions and outright lies. It is doubtful that the Skripals and DS Nick Bailey were ever in contact with a Novichok agent at all and certainly no-one is claiming this anymore.

     As an aside it is worth noting that non of the "victims" of this attack have made any public utterance or appearance since the attack. Eerily similar statements asking for privacy to be respected have been given on behalf of DS Bailey and Yulia Skripal through the Metropolitan Police which in both cases raise more issues than they quash. The first "statement on Yulia's behalf?" came on the 5th April at precisely 2pm and is linked below. The timing appears relevant.
      http://news.met.police.uk/news/statement-issued-on-behalf-of-yulia-skripal-301372
      Prior to this statement we, and the courts, had been told that both the Skripal's were in a coma and unlikely to ever recover.
      By massive coincidence, and not at all suspiciously :o, less than one hour before this statement was given, Rossiya 1, a Russian news channel, aired a recorded telephone call between Yulia and her cousin Viktoria. How and whose phone is a mystery but it clearly wasn't in the script. Call can be heard here:
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=naiq1b-SemE
      I'm sure that the phone call between Yulia and Viktoria being made and publicised didn't prompt the statement from Yulia, albeit using the novel medium of the Metropolitan Police, at all and had no bearing on the decision to release this entirely plausible statement ::)
      On the 11th April a further statement was released, again supposedly and entirely believably, on Yulia Skripals behalf. Yulia, we are led to believe, again "chose ?" the Met as the conduit for her public utterances. Rather than avail herself of the services of the Russian Embassy, a solicitor or her cousin we are to take on trust that she "chose" the Met to make a statement, on her behalf and that now she doesn't want contact with anyone including her family. The statement below:
     http://news.met.police.uk/news/statement-issued-on-behalf-of-yulia-skripal-302508
     
     All sounds very sinister and more as if the Skripals are being held incommunicado against their will. The level of unquestioning gullibility required to even believe that someone in Yulia's situation would issue a statement through the Met is off the scale.
     No information is coming from any medical staff, no witnesses and non of the people supposedly affected by this 8 x more deadly than VX nerve agent. What has become of the three main players? No attempt by our free and truth seeking media to find the phone's owner unwittingly at the centre of a huge international incident for an interview. There are many people involved in this saga who an inquisitive and honest media would be duty bound to track down and interview but for some reason no-one in the Main Stream Media seems to have thought of this. It is surely self evident that some form of media blackout has been imposed.

      But back to question of the deadly "nerve agent" which has thus far killed no-one. The Russians should have perhaps tried the British developed "neglect" which has proven way more deadly, so far accounting for two guinea pigs and one cat. One cat is apparently still "on the run" somewhere.
      Immediately the UK government blamed the Russians and the media stayed obediently to the script.
One of the first problems that arose was that the scientists at Porton Down would not and could not confirm it's alleged Russian origin. The scientist's honesty and credibility eventually led to this weaselly worded Porton Down statement discussed here:
     http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/49003.htm   
     and here:
     https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2018/03/of-a-type-developed-by-liars/
     
     So no confirmation of novichok or Russian manufacture just the meaningless "of a type developed by Russia". Surely we will discover more from the application to the "Court of Protection". How Orwellian does that sound? Ministry Of Peace promotes war, Ministry of Truth disseminates lies. Wonder what Orwell's Court of Protection would do? Fuck we're already in an Orwellian dystopia :o
     The judgement is here and makes for interesting reading:
     https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/sshd-v-skripal-and-another-20180322.pdf

     Of particular note is para 17 from which I quote directly below:
"Blood samples from Sergei Skripal and Yulia Skripal were analysed and the findings indicated exposure to a nerve agent or related compound The samples tested positive for the presence of a novichok class nerve agent or closely related agent."
      It is surely apparent now that nobody was poisoned with a Novichok. "Related compound" and "closely related agent" are so vague as to be meaningless. These caveats are used in order to obfuscate the fact that the nerve agent is neither Novichok nor Russian and quite likely not even a nerve agent.
      The full judgement is well worth a read as it raises many troubling questions even to my layman's understanding. NGB would have greater insight into some of the legal machinations being engineered but that is a whole other discussion.
      The UK government belatedly brought in the OPCW to investigate after at first refusing. When the OPCW were called in it was on limited terms. Rather than a full Fact Finding Mission the OPCW team were given the limited remit of confirming the UK scientists findings that confirmed the presence of a particular agent. The name and structure of the agent are in section 12 of the report which is, for some reason, classified.
      Unfortunately for the UK government it seems another one of pesky honest scientists threw a spanner in the works by exposing an inconvenient truth. A scientist from the Spiez Lab in Switzerland apparently leaked the "confidential" part of the report to the Russians and the presence of BZ a US/NATO produced incapacitating agent was present in the samples.
     A pathetic non-denial denial was issued but the discerning had by now long figured that what we have all witnessed over the previous weeks was quite possibly the most incompetent and transparent attempt at a False Flag attack ever.
    It is worth comparing the symptoms of these two agents and then referring back to the initial reports of eye witnesses to the behaviour of the Skripals. In a nutshell, the Skripals displayed behaviour consistent with exposure to BZ not a Novichok nerve agent. The fact that both they and DS Bailey are still alive also indicates exposure to BZ, an incapacitating agent rather than a nerve agent 8 x more deadly than VX. This letter from Dr. Stephen Davies, Consultant in emergency medicine at Salisbury NHS trust published in the Times the day after the same publication had reported dozens of affected people is also illuminating:

https://off-guardian.org/2018/03/21/what-did-the-salisbury-physician-mean-by-no-patients-have-experienced-symptoms-of-nerve-agent-poisoning/

     Again you would imagine our intrepid journalists tripping over each other to delve further into the Doctor's claims and his refutation of the use of a nerve agent. Well, you would imagine this if you believed our media weren't compromised but our intrepid journos reacted with a collective disinterested shrug confirming that the answer to Roch's thread question is Yes and that the question could be further extended to include most Mainstream Media.

     This story is being followed and reported on at any number of credible non mainstream sites. The previously mentioned and excellent Craig Murray, OffGuardian, Moon of Alabama plus many many others doing what reporters are meant to do. Roch linked previously to  ZeroHedge who have also reported on the whole fiasco. Fisk, Galloway, Hitchens etc. all more questioning and sceptical than most of our supine media.
     Dare to convince yourself that you have been fooled, Steve.
     And for anyone interested the cat is still believed to be "on the run" hopefully having been taken by a kindly local in order to protect it from death by neglect at the hands of MI6 ???

     
     
   

A thoroughly good read.

Offline gringo

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1260
Re: Is the BBC totally compromised?
« Reply #59 on: April 25, 2018, 11:03:PM »
A thoroughly good read.
    We live in an interesting and eventful point of history, Roch, as you seem well aware.