[Atlantis]

Well, that would be the OPCW, which uses independent laboratories. But the Russians rejected the findings before they were even made:

No, the Russians did not reject the findings. They reject the spin put on these findings by the British government and the corporate mass media. Just to spell it out for those with reading deficiencies:

Finding:

- the British scientist cannot determine were the poison was made, much less who used it,

- the OPCW cannot determine were the poison was made, much less who used it.

The British don't want to investigate the poisoning, they want to use it as propaganda tool to trigger a conflict with Russia.

The British know full well that the likes of you are incapable of comprehending a simple text. You, like the corporate mass media, just keep on parroting the lies produced by the British government.

For example, the online edition of the German FAZ (one of the more serious dailies) published an article stating that the OPCW confirmed "the British position" that the nerve toxin was made in Russia. A couple of hours later they had to admit that they made a mistake and that the OPCW did not confirm that the toxin was made in Russia.

Anmerkung der Redaktion: In einer vorherigen Version dieses Artikels wurde fälschlicherweise erklärt, dass das Nervengift Nowitschok nach Ansicht der OPCW aus Russland stamme. Die OPCW hat jedoch lediglich die Ergebnisse britischer Untersuchungen bestätigt, wonach es sich bei dem Gift auf jeden Fall um Nowitschok handelt – was in der ehemaligen Sowjetunion hergestellt wurde. Wir bitten, diesen Fehler zu entschuldigen.

The British play on the ambiguity they themselves have created. Thus, "the British position" is

A) the British scientists who cannot determine the origin of the poison

B) the British government (Boris Johnson, et. al.) who lied by claiming that the scientists had told him that the poison was made in Russia.

The OPCW confirmed the British position A). The corporate mass media (and you) misrepresents the OPCW finding by interpreting it as B).

It's clear Russia has done everything it can to hinder investigation, from the start.

BS! The Russians have offered a joint investigation. The problem is that that Brits don't want an investigation.

It is also, still, the only player with a credible motive for poisoning the Skripals - to intimidate those who might work against the Russian government.

Oh stop this BS! The Russians would never kill an exchanged spy because it would make exchanges impossible in the future. Anyways, Skripal is a minor ex-spy who has no means of doing the Russians any harm in exile.

The only credible motive is to damage Russia. There are numerous parties including, exiled anti-Putin oligarchs, Chechen Mafia, the UK, the US, Vil Mirzayanov (the inventor of the Novichok story and head of the Tatarstan separatist movement), etc. who all have a strong motive. But Russia has absolutely NO motive.

The UK has given asylum to thousands of Russian oligarchs and criminals who want the West to destroy Putin (just like exiled Iraqi dissidents wanted the West to destroy Saddam Hussein). They all have a strong motive.

Russia (the Soviet Union) has never even admitted the existence of these weapons in that last 40 years, why would they send an actual sample of such a weapon to the UK's chemical weapons laboratory at Porton Down for analysis? That degree of self-harm is entirely unheard of in the history of mankind.

[skinster]

Why are you supporting war-mongering, why are you supporting the very same lies that led to the Iraq war? Why are you supporting the escalation of conflict with Russia? Why are you pretending that there is no motive, when the motive is unraveling before your eyes?

Isn't it stunning, how much these people are repeatedly fooled by the same liars.

Shocking, actually.

[Atlantis]

News just in:

Lavrov BOMBSHELL: Swiss Lab confirms “BZ toxin” produced in US or UK used in Salisbury poisoning

Forget the Novichok-Skripal narrative peddled out by Boris “the buffoon” Johnson, Theresa May and the Deep State mainstream media stenographers.

Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has just dropped a bombshell revelation that blows the Salisbury poisoning hoax apart…A Swiss lab says that ‘BZ toxin’ was used in Salisbury.

The toxin was not produced in Russia, but was in service in the US and UK, as well as other NATO member states.

The substance used on Sergei Skripal was an agent called BZ, according to a Swiss lab, the Russian foreign minister said. The toxin was never produced in Russia, but was in service in the US, UK, and other NATO states.

Sergei Skripal, a former Russian double agent, and his daughter Yulia were poisoned with an incapacitating toxin known as 3-Quinuclidinyl benzilate or BZ, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said, citing the results of the examination conducted by a Swiss chemical lab that worked with the samples that London handed over to the Organisation for the Prohibition of the Chemical Weapons (OPCW).

The Swiss center sent the results to the OPCW. However, the UN chemical watchdog limited itself only to confirming the formula of the substance used to poison the Skripals in its final report without mentioning anything about the other facts presented in the Swiss document, the Russian foreign minister added. He went on to say that Moscow would ask the OPCW about its decision to not include any other information provided by the Swiss in its report.

The Swiss center mentioned by Lavrov is the Spiez Laboratory controlled by the Swiss Federal Office for Civil Protection and ultimately by the country’s defense minister. The lab is also an internationally recognized center of excellence in the field of the nuclear, biological, and chemical protection and is one of the five centers permanently authorized by the OPCW.

The Russian foreign minister said that London refused to answer dozens of “very specific” questions asked by Moscow about the Salisbury case, as well as to provide any substantial evidence that could shed light on the incident. Instead, the UK accused Russia of failing to answer its own questions, he said, adding that, in fact, London did not ask any questions but wanted Moscow to admit that it was responsible for the delivery of the chemical agent to the UK.

The British didn't want the Russians to have a sample because they feared that the Russians would find out the truth.

[Atlantis]

The British Spy Skripal hoax

March 18, 2018

In regards to the British government-staged hoax around the persona of retired British spy Sergey Skripal: If TV police dramas told us anything it’s the principle of Corpus delicti, or “no body, no crime.” It’s the principle that a crime must be proved to have occurred before a person can be convicted of committing that crime.

Since February, the British government has been staging a bizarre theater employing dozens of actors dressed in police and firefighters uniforms and colorful hazmat suits, all to make the appearance of a crime being investigated.

Just one fact is enough to understand that an entire “the Skripals poison crime” has never took place. This so called “nerve agent” has never been placed on the OPCW list of banned chemical weapons because it has never existed.

It’s non-existence was confirmed by Dr Robin Black, until recently he was a head of the detection laboratory at the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (Porton Down). He wrote in his review: “… emphasizes that there is no independent confirmation of Mirzayanov’s claims about the chemical properties of these compounds: Information on these compounds has been sparse in the public domain, mostly originating from a dissident Russian military chemist, Vil Mirzayanov. No independent confirmation of the structures or the properties of such compounds has been published. (Black, 2016)

Just like “Novichok” has never existed, no one was poisoned, nothing has happened. It’s a staged provocation and a hoax.

It is a typical war game scenario, in which the game “viruses,” or bits of fake information, were planted years ago, and now being used as “evidence” in a staged “crime.” They tell us that nothing proves today crime as a thirty-year-old newspaper article.

Just accept that everything the British government says is a lie.

For those who want to understand methods and techniques involved in staging these sort of augmented reality war game operations, I refer to my war games illustrated manual, “Pokemon in Ukraine.” The aim of any war game is to engage non-players in it. First step is to con people into accepting that staged events as real, or as Zakharova names this process “a legitimization of previously fabricated information.”

It’s been a month since the hoax around the British spy Skripal started. We still have no hard evidence that an alleged attack ever took place. We don’t have the victims. No third party medical tests, no CC footage of the victims, no official meetings with the victims, no samples of alleged poison; the list goes on and on.

During the briefing by Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Maria Zakharova, Moscow, March 15, 2018, she said: “Britain has not provided any data to anyone,” The truth is obviously being concealed. No one is providing information about the incident to anyone.”

In her interview to the newspaper Argumenti (Arguments), Zakharova said that either the British disclose all the facts, or “it’s all lies, from the beginning to the end.”

This stance of the Minister of Foreign Affairs demonstrates a tectonic shift from a willingness of Russia’s government to play along and accept war games as real, as it was in case of a staged war in Ukraine in 2014.

On Sunday, I received an email from a famous military defense attorney, Christopher Black, which I am posting here with his permission.

Chris wrote to me a few questions from a defense lawyer.

“Questions to the British Prime Minster from a citizen:

You state Skripal and daughter were poisoned – then where are they? Where are photos of them? Where are the medical reports stating what is wrong with them and their present condition?

You state Russians did this – fine then, where are the persons that administered it, how did they do it, where did they do it and when did they do it?

You state Russians are involved – but you have not put out any profile of any suspects nor have you put out a dragnet for any likely suspects who, if you are right and they did do this, are still then roaming around the country doing who knows what.

You state this is a national emergency and have police and army in strange suits on some streets but you have not put police and army elements at the airports and ports to try to catch the culprits to prevent them leaving the country.

Having failed to do these obvious things the only conclusion to be drawn is that you are lying to the British people.

We reject Russia was involved for obvious reasons. Therefore we cannot accept the rest of their claims either without evidence. All we know is that two people are claimed to have been poisoned. that is all we know – a claim.” Chris

He also added: “Where is the evidence that an nerve agent was used at all aside from there say so? Now, they have people chasing their tails arguing whether it is this agent or that agent, the various affects of them etc. etc, when we have no evidence that a nerve agent was used.”

“We have no evidence anything ever took place. Litvinenko – photos of him in a hospital bed every week for months. As for these two – we don’t even know if they exist, or were eliminated, or who knows what.”

“Again, I think this line of inquiry is pointless unless and until we see evidence of a nerve agent was used at all.

We should not accept any element of their story. We have to question every element of their story – for once you accept one part of it you will be stuck with the rest.”

I only want to add that at the end of this SITREP you can find a list of articles and research papers conducted by extremely smart and knowledgeable people and directed to the government of the UK, all telling them what they did and said wrong. I have to say with my deepest regret that what all these wonderful people have done is to provide the British government with free research and resources to stage another chemical attack hoax, only on much larger scale.

It’s nothing new for the British government to make similar accusations against Russia. Actually the United Kingdom has a long history of using its chemical weapons against Russians, while there is NO evidence that Russians had even used chemical weapons against the British Crown subjects.

Boris Johnson walks in Churchill’s footsteps by accusing Russia in using and stockpiling chemical weapons.


The British Chemical Warfare against the Russians

One of the earliest used chemical weapon in human history was cacodyl oxide. It was proposed as a chemical weapon by the British Empire during the Crimean War against Russia, along with the significantly more potent blood agent, cacodyl cyanide.

During the invasion of Russia by the British Empire and its allies, France, Sardinia and the Ottoman Empire, in 1853-1856 known as the Crimean war, the British army used sulfur dioxide during the siege of Sevastopol in August 1855. In May 1854 the British and French fleets bombarded Odessa with some “stinky bombs” containing some kind of poisonous substances.

During the invasion of Russia in 1918-1922, the Allied troops of the British, American, Canadian and French armies under the British command used the chemical weapons in Archangelsk in February 1919, and in August 27, 1919, near the village of Yemtsa, 120 miles South of Arkhangelsk, British artillery opened fire on the positions of the Red Army fighting with the foreign invaders. After the explosions green cloud covered the position of the Russian troops, Russian soldiers trapped in a cloud vomited blood and then fell unconscious and died. The British forces used CW called adamsite (dihydrophenarsazine).

“The strongest case for Churchill as chemical warfare enthusiast involves Russia, and was made by Giles Milton in The Guardian on 1 September 2013. Milton wrote that in 1919, scientists at the governmental laboratories at Porton in Wiltshire developed a far more devastating weapon: the top secret “M Device,” an exploding shell containing a highly toxic gas called diphenylaminechloroarsine [DM]. The man in charge of developing it, Major General Charles Foulkes, called it “the most effective chemical weapon ever devised.” Trials at Porton suggested that it was indeed a terrible new weapon. Uncontrollable vomiting, coughing up blood and instant, crippling fatigue were the most common reactions. The overall head of chemical warfare production, Sir Keith Price, was convinced its use would lead to the rapid collapse of the Bolshevik regime. “If you got home only once with the gas you would find no more Bolshies this side of Vologda.”

According to Giles Milton, the author of Russian Roulette: How British Spies Thwarted Lenin’s Global Plot (2013): “Trials at Porton suggested that the M Device was indeed a terrible new weapon. The active ingredient in the M Device was diphenylaminechloroarsine, a highly toxic chemical. A thermogenerator was used to convert this chemical into a dense smoke that would incapacitate any soldier unfortunate enough to inhale it… The symptoms were violent and deeply unpleasant. Uncontrollable vomiting, coughing up blood and instant and crippling fatigue were the most common features…. Victims who were not killed outright were struck down by lassitude and left depressed for long periods.”

The use of chemical weapons against Russians was supported in this by Sir Keith Price, the head of the chemical warfare, at Porton Down.

A staggering 50,000 M Devices were shipped to Russia: British aerial attacks using them began on 27 August 1919. Bolshevik soldiers were seen fleeing in panic as the green chemical gas drifted towards them. Those caught in the cloud vomited blood, then collapsed unconscious. The attacks continued throughout September on many Bolshevik-held villages. But the weapons proved less effective than Churchill had hoped, partly because of the damp autumn weather. By September, the attacks were halted then stopped.“

“Because an enemy who has perpetrated every conceivable barbarity is at present unable, through his ignorance, to manufacture poisoned gas, is that any reason why our troops should be prevented from taking full advantage of their weapons? The use of these gas shell[s] having become universal during the great war, I consider that we are fully entitled to use them against anyone pending the general review of the laws of war which no doubt will follow the Peace Conference.”

This was how Churchill justified the use of the chemical weapons during the Atlanta invasion of Russia in 1919, claiming that it was Russians, who “perpetrated every conceivable barbarity,” despite the fact that it was Russia who was invaded by the Allied armies and Russian people who were killed in millions.
How is the invasion of 1919 similar to what the British government is doing today? How did the British government justify its use of the chemical weapons against Russian villages? What exactly Russians did to deserve this?

Churchill ordered General Ironside, in command of the Allied forces, to make “fullest use” of the chemical weapon because: “Bolsheviks have been using gas shells against Allied troops at Archangel.”

But where would Russians get those weapons?

John Simkin in Winston Churchill and Chemical Weapons writes:

“Someone leaked this information and Churchill was forced to answer questions on the subject in the House of Commons on 29th May 1919. Churchill insisted that it was the Red Army who was using chemical warfare: “I do not understand why, if they use poison gas, they should object to having it used against them. It is a very right and proper thing to employ poison gas against them.” His statement was untrue. There is no evidence of Bolshevik forces using gas against British troops and it was Churchill himself who had authorised its initial use some six weeks earlier.”

The British repeated their use of chemical weapons against Russians on 27th August, 1919. when British Airco DH.9 bombers dropped gas bombs on the Russian village of Emtsa. According to one source: “Bolsheviks soldiers fled as the green gas spread. Those who could not escape, vomited blood before losing consciousness.” Other villages targeted included Chunova, Vikhtova, Pocha, Chorga, Tavoigor and Zapolki. During this period 506 gas bombs were dropped on the Russians. [John Simkin ]

But that wasn’t the end of the war crimes of the British Crown against Russia. After withdrawal of the British troops in October 1919, the remaining chemical weapons were considered to be too dangerous to be sent back to Britain and therefore they were dumped into the White Sea. The last time someone in Russia came across the British chemical weapons was in 2017 a man from Archangelsk found several British shells with iprit, which remains potent after one hundred years.

So, the British government has a proven historical record of laying false accusations on Russia accusing Russia in using chemical weapons anagst the British subjects, while using it against Russians. .

How was the 1919 false flag operation organized?

Excerpt from a book Churchill’s Crusade: The British Invasion of Russia, 1918-1920 By Clifford Kinvig, page 128

“On January 27, major Gilmore, a forward commander there, reported that “the enemy used a certain percentage of gas shells with no effect.” Ironside realized that this was a significant development, if only small in scale, and immediately notified the War Office: “Reports that 3 gas shells fired by enemy; my 1 gas officer has gone up to investigate. This is first suggestion of enemy using gas in any form, but if it is verified I shall ask for some gas officers and means of repair for masks. There is a plentiful supply of latter here.”

Three gas shells were hardly a major event, and Ironside’s reaction, it will noted, was entirely defensive. Not so the response from Churchill. The same day, without waiting for confirmation, he made this “first use” clear to the nation at large in a formal press statement and at the same time notified Ironside that the ship would be sailing in the middle of the month, loaded with gas shells for his various artillery pieces. Ironside still demurred, asking for instructions, since he had not yet verified the report that the Bolsheviks had indeed used the weapon. Plainly, the general had residual inhibitions. The clearest of directives from the War Office, however, soon followed. On 7 February the COGs at Archangel, Murmansk and Constantinople received a message in cipher from the Director of Military Operations: “Fullest use is now to be made of gas shell with your forces, or supply by us to Russian forces, as Bolsheviks have been using gas shells against Allied troops in Archangel.” The Secretary of State had wasted no time.

“Some critics have claimed that Churchill, in his keenness to use gas, falsely charged the Bolsheviks with using it first.”

The false flag attack was very simple. There were two unconfirmed reports that poisonous gas shells were used against the British forces. The press carried the reports, prompted by the War Office. Same day, the Director of Military Operations issued the order to use the chemical weapons.
When it became known, and people started accusing Churchill and the Allied forces command in using chemical weapons against Russians under false pretence, Churchill issued a memorandum

Churchill’s 1919 War Office Memorandum May 12, 1919

“I do not understand this squeamishness about the use of gas. We have definitely adopted the position at the Peace Conference of arguing in favour of the retention of gas as a permanent method of warfare. It is sheer affectation to lacerate a man with the poisonous fragment of a bursting shell and to boggle at making his eyes water by means of lachrymatory gas.

I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes. The moral effect should be so good that the loss of life should be reduced to a minimum. It is not necessary to use only the most deadly gasses: gasses can be used which cause great inconvenience and would spread a lively terror and yet would leave no serious permanent effects on most of those affected.”

Before the WWII the Britain also used chemical weapons in Afghanistan, India, and Mesopotamia.

The Empire never changes. The UK "has past form" to put it in Theresa May's words.

It is well known that the British war hero Churchill, still admired by the foreign secretary and the majority of Brits today, also wanted to use chemical weapons against unarmed demonstrators in Ireland.

[skinster]

Well then...

All those who were claiming Russia was responsible / parroting Tory government claims, owe us apologies.

[Atlantis]

RT shows a video of a scientific facility in Barzeh, north of Damascus, which was destroyed by the missile attack. In the video, there are people walking right in front of the destroyed building. If the building contained stockpiles of chemical weapons, as claimed by the allies, how is it that these people are not poisoned?

EXCLUSIVE: View of science center in Syria targeted by US-led strikes (VIDEO)

It remains unclear whether the facility was, in fact, operational in the first place, however. Despite this, the Pentagon claimed that the attack on this facility “crippled” what they referred to as a Syrian chemical weapons program.

[Atlantis]

Regarding the sample from Salisbury examined in the Swiss lab,

Lavrov said the document indicated that the samples from Salisbury contained BZ nerve agent and its precursor. He said BZ was part of chemical arsenals of the U.S., Britain and other NATO countries, while the Soviet Union and Russia never developed the agent.

Lavrov added that the Swiss lab also pointed at the presence of the nerve agent A234 in the samples, but added that the lab noted that its presence in the samples appeared strange, given the substance's high volatility and the relatively long period between the poisoning and the sample-taking.

He noted that OPCW's report didn't contain any mention of BZ, adding that Russia will ask the chemical weapons watchdog for an explanation.

U.S. News

Regarding the properties of Novichoks, the Russian dissident who made these nerve agents known in the West has the following to say:

But even if poison were successfully smuggled into the UK, there are other barriers to it being used in an attack. Its application would, for example, likely require making a suspension with oil, and the substance would be very volatile. This, at the very least, would suggest expert involvement.

“These suspensions are so dangerous that even the smallest mistake will result in tragedy,” says Mr Mirzayanov. “You’re bound to have a mistake if you have no experience. And it’s here that we’re clearly talking about a state or military level of expertise.”

Concurrently, poor handling would also affect the potency of any nerve agent.

“One of the biggest drawbacks of novichok is that it is hydrolysed immediately,” said Mr Mirzayanov. “In retrospect, only an idiot would choose to use it for a murder in England with its 100 per cent humidity.”

The Independent

This suggests that:

- the Skripals were poisoned by a BZ nerve agent and not by a Novichok

- if they had been poisoned by Novichok, they would be dead

- the presence of "highly pure" Novichok (A-234) in the sample taken 2 weeks after the poisoning is suspicious because it is very volatile and should have hydrolised in humid weather

- somebody must have added the Novichok illegally produced at the UK's chemical weapons lab at Porton Down to the samples

I guess the foreign office didn't mean any harm, they just wanted to help the OPCW to come to the right conclusion.

[skinster]

So they lied?

[layman]

The Duran and rt are Russian sponsored fake news.

Any decent sources to confirm this lab who’s results you guys prefer to the leading international one?

Quick google suggests this is just one of many claims the Russian ambassador has made. It may be true but I’m curious why it is so easily taken as fact by certain posters .....

[ingliz]

Any decent sources to confirm this lab...

Will this do?

Spiez Laboratory, the Swiss Federal Institute for NBC-Protection, a division of the Federal Office for Civil Protection, provides services relating to arms control, protection measures, health and incident management for international organisations, authorities and the general population.

[skinster]

Will this do?

I guess it will.

[Atlantis]

@layman, I quoted The Duran because it had the best technical description, but the story was run by all Western MSM. RT and The Duran are no more nor less "fake news" than BBC or Reuters.

I don't know if the report is true. But at this stage, Lavrov is clearly more credible than Boris Johnson.

Anyways, the Swiss lab hasn't contradicted Lavrov.

I think what happened is that the British asked the OPCW to confirm the presence of a "toxic chemical" similar to those known in the West as Novichok in the sample from Salisbury. The Swiss lab and the OPCW dutifully found the presence of a toxic chemical similar to the one detected by Porton Down. The Swiss lab also found BZ, but since that wasn't part of the task commissioned by the British government, the OPCW didn't include that in the report. The Russians apparently obtained a copy of the original report from the Swiss lab via their intelligence services.

I guess some civil servants at No. 10 and Whitehall will be doing overtime to figure out what spin to put on the story by Monday morning.

If what Lavrov said is confirmed, then it is impossible that the Skripals were poisoned by Novichok (A-234) because the high concentration of the "very pure" toxin would have been lethal. Also, the A-234 must have been added later because, due to its volatility, it could not have been present in such a pure state nearly 3 weeks after use. Poisoning by BZ is consistent with what we know of the patients. It would also explain why Yulia's email account was accessed 3 days after the poisoning because the effect of BZ tends to wear off after 3 to 4 days.

Regarding BZ, to use Theresa May's wording the UK "has past form."

MOD’s PORTON DOWN AND SECRET EXPERIMENTS

Eye Spy Magazine | 10.02.2002 20:41

Priest Claims Top Secret Base Injected Dying Patients With Killer Viruses

The police are to investigate gruesome allegations that military scientists at a top secret Ministry of Defence research facility used old and sick people as guinea pigs in germ warfare experiments. Porton Downis already at the centre of another police investigation - Operation Antler - which concerns the duping of servicemen with the deadly sarin and tabun nerve gas, mustard gas, CS and CR riot gas, LSD and another mind-binding drug believed to be known as BZ. According to intelligence sources, more than 400 complaints and allegations have been made from surviving servicemen and women covering a period of time from the 1950’s right up to 1989.

The new allegations may strengthen the belief that there has been a major cover-up by the British Government and intelligence services.

Catholic priest Monsignor John Barry raised the matter almost 30 years ago with ministers. He said that it was his belief that unlawful killings were taking place. Indeed, journalists from the Daily Express who have single-handedly championed the cause of many of the victims, believe that they now have new evidence of the experiments which allegedly took place between 1964 and 1966. According to their sources, scientists tested a secret killer virus known more commonly today as a ‘biological warfare agent’ on dying leukemia patients in an NHS hospital. Dolores McMahon, a microbiologist and a junior member of the team who was not involved in decision making, denied there was anything unethical or irregular about the lengthy experiment with Kyasanur Forest Monkey Disease on 33 patients at St. Thomas’ Hospital, London. She said that ethics had now changed and added: “Of course, you have to remember in those days everyone with leukemia died anyway.”

The allegations are not that easily dismissed however, and tough detectives from Operation Antler are determined to get to the truth. Faced with a huge catalogue of “illegal” experiments, they have now learned of the new evidence. The information implies that the dying patients - many suffering from dementia - were without relatives who could and almost certainly would have protected them from MOD scientists.

What is clear is that a major breakdown of communication happened, for the Monsignor’s claims were passed to the then Liberal Party leader, Sir David Steel. The material referred to as “official documents” was originally handed to the priest in 1970 by conscience-stricken members of his congregation in Scotland. He then chose to reveal the information in a speech to the Edinburgh Business Club in January of that year. “I have seen the evidence which I think is genuine,” he said. “There is a certain section of the Ministry of Defence which uses elderly people as guinea pigs for experiments and quietly puts them to death afterwards. It is all carefully hidden by the Official Secrets Act.”

Such an allegation if made today would have serious implications, but Monsignor simply gave the papers to Mr Steel. He then apparently held a meeting with Dennis Healey, who was then Defence Minister for Harold Wilson’s Labour Government. The file was given to Healey.

The short-lived scandal fizzled-out following a speech by Prime Minister Wilson. He said the matter had been “fully investigated,” though he didn’t say who by. Furthermore, he never mentioned what if any conclusions had been reached by “this authority.”

One campaigner who has tried for many years to uncover the truth regarding the service personnel experiments is Liz Sigmund. When she learned of Barry’s claims, she believed there had indeed been a cover-up. Interestingly, she gave journalists from the Express two letters from the Monsignor in which he writes: “I believed and still believe the reports I received.” He wouldn’t divulge the source of his information however, because he thought they would suffer “personal repercussions.”

Sigmund also has in her possession a letter from David Steel’s personal assistant who says she will look for a copy of the documents he supposedly was handed in 1970.

David Steel, now Lord Steel, is Speaker of the newly founded Scottish Parliament. His assistant told journalists: “He has no recollection whatsoever of this case and his records do not go back that far.” Lord Healey’s secretary said something similar: “He doesn’t know about it. He can’t remember it.”

Ms Sigmund had several conversations with Monsignor Barry in the 1970’s. She recalls how he told her one patient was suffering from dementia and had no relatives. She says: “There was a statement from Harold Wilson in the House which virtually dismissed the allegations out of hand but we live in different times now.

“We now know that some 20,000 servicemen were duped into volunteering for research into the common cold and then used in the most horrendous experiments with nerve gas and all sorts of things.

“We know that 40 people were injected with the biological warfare agent Kyasanur Forest Monkey (KFM) disease in 1968. That was apparently done to see if it was of any therapeutic value to leukemia patients. KFM disease has a 28 per cent fatality rate and causes horribly painful encephalitis in humans.

“Why was Porton Down involved in this search for a leukemia therapy in a NHS cancer ward? It is a coincidence that just three years later KFM became a recognised biological warfare agent? Did Porton Down want to examine the pathology of a biological warfare bug as it acts on humans?

An MOD spokeswoman said: “These are not things we could respond to quickly because it would take some time to research records from that period.”

The police meanwhile will not be put off so easily. Officers working on Operation Antler are believed to be drawing up plans that will undoubtedly cause ripples in the MOD. According to security sources, they are preparing to arrest and question MOD scientists on charges of assault, wounding and the administration of poison. The move could yet see many senior players in Government and Whitehall running for cover. And there may also be further trouble ahead for Porton Down regarding the death of a soldier in 1954.If the police move to re-open the inquest into the strange death of Private Ronald Maddison, 20, who died when Sarin nerve gas was ridiculously administered to him at Porton Down. The police are examining evidence that the Coroner was lied to. If this is the case, pressure on the research facility to open its files will become enormous.

The moves to reopen the Maddison file implies the Wiltshire-based police team believe the “misadventure verdict” of the original inquest, held in secret in 1953 was wrong. Alan Care of the solicitors Russel Jones and Walker acting on behalf of the Maddison family said: “The only reason I can see to reopen this inquest is for the coroner and jury to consider an unlawful killing verdict. I cannot envisage anything more serious for the MOD who ran Porton Down for many years.”

Maddison was part of a series of tests involving some 400 other men. Scientists tried to establish the amount of nerve gas which when applied to clothes or the bare skin would cause incapacitation or death. The experiment went badly wrong after the liquid was deliberately dripped on to Mr Maddison’s arm by a Porton Down scientist in a gas chamber. He died 40 minutes later.
What followed is now regarded as a major cover-up by the MOD. Ten days after the soldier’s death, an inquest was held behind closed doors “in the interests of national security.” Only MOD officials and Mr Maddison’s father were allowed to attend. Incredibly, he too was sworn to secrecy and for years never told anyone what he had heard. Porton Down have admitted the government “hushed up” details because it wanted to hide from the public the extent of human experiments and work on nerve gas during the cold war.

Furthermore, there are fresh calls to find out just who the authority was that investigated the original 1970’s claims. Harold Wilson confidently explained that all the allegations were nonsense and “had been investigated.” Journalists and pressure groups are demanding to know: Did Porton Down actually investigate itself, or was it a government agency? Some analysts believe Harold Wilson was given inaccurate information, whilst others believe a cover-up of some magnitude has occurred.

Liz Sigmund said: “The question is who investigated them and what did they find? I think it is fair to say that there is no faith in the Ministry of Defence investigating their own misdeeds if that is what actually happened.

“We don’t even know where these terrible allegations took place. I spoke to John Barry on the telephone in the seventies and asked him where it had happened. I asked ‘Was it at Porton or at the base in Nancekuke in Cornwall? He said that it wasn’t either of those places but another establishment somewhere in the South East. He intimated that it had happened to people suffering from dementia who had no families. If that is true, then it is too horrible to contemplate.”

Another twist to the Porton Down affair is contained in the recently released book Inside Outside by controversial MP Tam Dalyell. The autobiography contains an entire chapter on the base. He was admonished by the Speaker of the House of Commons for wearing a black tricorn hat, for events surrounding his campaign which exposed the work of Porton Down. The MP who has long believed in a Freedom of Information Act said: “For years I believed the MOD stitched me up over Porton Down in revenge for other issues I had embarrassed them about. But now it’s dawning on me that they did it because they were desperate to keep me away from the subject of Porton Down. They wanted to make the subject a no-go zone.”

Fearing the outcome of the Operation Antler, the MOD announced on 21 November that they will launch clinical trials on the volunteers to see if their health was damaged. The Government is also on the backfoot. A minister has finally acknowledged that victims of the secret experiments it carried out on over 20,000 human “guinea pigs” will be offered “full examinations” to see if the experiments are responsible for an array of illnesses. The MOD has also admitted that up to 4,000 servicemen were subjected to nerve agent experiments, almost a third more than previously claimed. But an MOD official has reiterated that they have seen “no scientific or medical evidence” linking the health of veterans to their participation in nuclear tests or the Gulf War.

Some analysts believe that it will take years to establish the truth, but that is all that matters to the relatives, who simply want justice. Alan Care, lawyer for the Porton Down volunteers, said the MOD’s new assessment programme was “insufficient.” He demanded a “full independent inquiry.”

According to sources, the tests will by conducted by doctors at St. Thomas’ Hospital in London. The same facility who checked Gulf War veterans. It is also our understanding that meetings between Porton Down management, defence ministers and the security services have taken place on a regular basis to discuss the implementation of a damage limitation programme.

Each time the "world-renowned experts at Porton Down" are mentioned with gravity, the public bows in awe at the high ethical standards of these gentlemen who are so obviously above all doubt and suspicion.

The raw facts of life teach otherwise. The little Hitlers at such closed institutions tend to have a bag full of dirty tricks and covering up when things go wrong is second nature to them. And nobody will be the wiser since all of this is of course to be sealed as state secrete for the next 90 years.

[layman]

I don't know if the report is true. But at this stage, Lavrov is clearly more credible than Boris Johnson.

Well it’s a close one. I’ll give you that. Still, I think you are way off saying rt bias is the same as the bbc or cnn. Both are bias just like every news source in the world. Rt takes direct orders from the Kremlin though. It’s news is Taylored propane’s used to push state sponsored themes and undermine rival states.

As for porton down, they seem to have the integrity to contradict the foreign secretary and this historical allegations are not proven.

Finally, I’ll be waiting for confirmation on what the Swiss lab result were. Either it is Russian disinformation or a real bombshell!!

[Atlantis]

Regarding the presence of BZ in the Salisbury sample, the Swiss daily NZZ offers the explanation that the OPCW sends different samples to each lab, some samples containing the toxin to be analysed, and other control samples containing a different toxin or no toxin at all:

Russland greift die Skripal-Untersuchung frontal an und zieht die Schweiz in die Kontroverse hinein

If this is correct and if the Russians are familiar with this procedure, as can be assumed, then Lavrov has pulled a stunt that can easily be exposed.

It would be a different story if both BZ and A-234 were found in the same sample, but we don’t know this at present.

But even if the NZZ is correct, it would still beg the question as to why such a great amount of the volatile A-234 was present in the sample nearly 3 weeks after the poisoning. From other sources, it appears that the Swiss lab was one of two labs to analyse the environmental samples (ie. not the blood samples).

Regarding the chain of custody, there is of course a gap of nearly 3 weeks in which either British secrete services or third parties could have contaminated the sites before the OPCW took the samples. The British authorities kept of changing their story about where the poisoning was to have taken place.

[skinster]

[Atlantis]

British policeman guarding the most poisonous door handle in history without protective clothing. The NoviJoke story is as toxic as it can get.

[Negotiator]

RT shows a video of a scientific facility in Barzeh, north of Damascus, which was destroyed by the missile attack. In the video, there are people walking right in front of the destroyed building. If the building contained stockpiles of chemical weapons, as claimed by the allies, how is it that these people are not poisoned?

Thats the problem with ALL attacks ever done on chemical weapon plants.

If these plants would actually produce chemical weapons, why on earth would you want to bomb them ? That would release these chemicals, wouldnt it ?

[Atlantis]

Thats the problem with ALL attacks ever done on chemical weapon plants.

If these plants would actually produce chemical weapons, why on earth would you want to bomb them ? That would release these chemicals, wouldnt it ?

Exactly. Before the invasion of Iraq I wondered what would happen to the alleged WMDs in the chaos of war:

- would dangerous substances be released into the environment?

- would Saddam use WMDs against the invaders?

- would Saddam pass the WMDs to terrorists?

I found it strange that the US/UK and the MSM didn't seem to be worried about this. In hindsight it is clear that they knew that there wasn't any danger of these things happening for the simple reason that the WMDs didn't exist. They were lying all along.

[skinster]

Any updates on the Skripals and whether they've been released from UK custody?

I don't seem to be hearing much at all about this now, so many on this board were all chatty about it at the beginning, and now it seems it may as well be forgotten. It's almost as if some people just yammer on about what their TV tells them to yammer on about.

[Prosthetic Conscience]

The head of the global chemical watchdog agency has rejected Russian claims that traces of a second nerve agent were discovered in the English city where former Russian spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter were poisoned.
...
OPCW Director-General Ahmet Uzumcu told a meeting Wednesday of the organization's Executive Council that a BZ precursor known as 3Q, "was contained in the control sample prepared by the OPCW Lab in accordance with the existing quality control procedures."

He added "it has nothing to do with the samples collected by the OPCW team in Salisbury."

https://www.usnews.com/news/world/artic ... erve-agent

So, yes, Lavrov is full of shit, or "Lavrov has pulled a stunt that can easily be exposed", as Atlantis suggested. This is no surprise. It's also no surprise that a couple of posters here fell for it.

@noemon, pointing out that Russia has both motive and form in killing Russians that oppose the Putin government is not "supporting warmongering", and you deeply disappoint me in your slavish support of Putin. You really seem to think his shit doesn't stink, despite his long record of killing people and interfering in other countries. Is this some automatic support of an Orthodox country or something?