John Helmer — The Blood Libel Of The British Government (Sic)

Prime Minister Theresa May committed a blood libel against Russians in the House of Commons last week. This was the allegation that the Russian state and all Russians are murderers.

May has subsequently asked the Foreign Secretary and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) to correct the record by charging that only one Russian, President Vladimir Putin, is a murderer.

The Canadian Government was also requested by the British to urgently correct the record May has been making in refusing to allow the international rules of the Chemical Weapons Convention to decide what happened in the poison attack in Salisbury on March 4. 

According to the new Canadian statement, coordinated with the British, the international convention can be suspended by Prime Minister May in order to make her blood libel stick.

If this is reminding you of Adolph Hitler’s blood libel against the Jews, followed by Austrian support after the Anschluss (union) with Germany of 1938, it should.

A blood libel is an allegation of murder against a race of people. Its history is ancient; it’s most familiar today as the charge of ritual murder against Jews. Hitler and the Nazis followed many others over a thousand years of European history....

Russophobia gone mad (sociopathic).

The UK has a long history of this and Winston Churchill was a poster child for it.

Blood libel has indeed a long history and the US has not escaped it in its history either, beginning with Native American, resulting in genocide, and continuing with non-whites to the present. It would not be exaggeration to say that many of the most serious issues that the US faces today result from this sociopathy.

Dances with Bears
The Blood Libel Of The British Government (Sic)
John Helmer

See also

"Last" means "final," not "previous."

Defend Democracy Press

The Last World War

Sergei Glazyev

See also

I met Anastasia Barannikova this last December when I visited the Far Eastern Federal University in Vladivostok, Russia. I was there to participate in discussions with eight of the university’s regional security experts about the situation in Korea, only a few hundred kilometers distant from where we sat. In my notes I circled Anastasia Barannikova’s name. Her colleagues mentioned that she had the best set of contacts with North Koreans.

After I returned to my home in Boston, I contacted Barannikova and was able to arrange an interview. She is Russian, but her perspective should not be equated with that of the Kremlin. Rather it is an assessment from an informed young academic living 9,000 kilometers east of Moscow, active in international non-proliferation circles, and benefiting as a researcher from her hard-won independent relationships with North Koreans as primary sources.

We conducted the interview on February 18, and since then there have been many new and important developments in Korea. Nonetheless, what she has to say remains highly relevant to understanding and assessing the statements of officials and the reporting by the press regarding both diplomacy and war posturing in the coming months....

LobeLog
A Russian Perspective On Korean Denuclearization

Charles Knight, senior fellow at the Center for International Policy interviews Anastasia Barannikova, research fellow and doctoral candidate at the Center for Maritime International Studies, Admiral Nevelskoy Maritime State University, Vladivostok, Russia

See also

Handwaving.

Craig Murray Blog
Boris Johnson Attempt to Refute My Sources on Porton Down the Most Hilarious Fail

Craig Murray, formerly British ambassador to Uzbekistan and Rector of the University of Dundee

Also

With the kind of post-imperial arrogance befitting of a nation state that lacks an independent foreign policy, Theresa May demanded that Russia explain the deaths of Mr Skripal and his daughter to her satisfaction. But amid all of the media hyperbole over the last week, what the corporate media omitted to report to the public was the fact that under the terms of the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) to which the UK is a signatory, the UK government was obliged to provide Russia with a sample of the nerve agent used, along with all related evidence uncovered in the course of the investigation.…

Suspicions that the UK’s role in the crisis is not that of the honest broker were further heightened after it was revealed that on March 14, the country blocked a Russia-drafted UN Security Council statement calling for an urgent inquiry into the incident....

A significant Middle East ally and regional player is, of course, Israel which has major undeclared stocks of chemical weapons but has refused to ratify the CWC. It is perfectly reasonable under these circumstances to point the finger for the poisoning of Mr Skripal and his daughter at either Mossad, the CIA or M15....

Renegade, Inc.

Is the ‘Novichok’ story the UKs latest WMD scam?
Daniel Margrain

also

In short, we should be extremely sceptical of this sudden new information that Boris Johnson has produced out of a hat. If the UK was in possession of intelligence about a secret Russian chemical weapons programme, it was not under a legal obligation to tell Andrew Marr, but it was under a legal obligation to tell the OPCW. Not only did the UK fail to do that, the UK Ambassador Sir Geoffrey Adams was last year fulsomely congratulating the OPCW on the completion of the destruction of Russia’s chemical weapons stocks, without a single hint or reservation entered that Russia may have undeclared or secret stocks.

On the Andrew Marr programme, Boris Johnson appeared to say for the first time that the nerve agent in Salisbury was actually made in Russia. But this is a major divergence from the published FCO statement, which very markedly does not say this. Boris Johnson was therefore almost certainly reverting to his reflex lying.…

It does not need me to point out, that if Porton Down had identified the nerve agent as made in Russia, the FCO would not have added that paragraph. Plainly they cannot say it was made in Russia.

The Soviet Chemical Weapons programme was based in Nukus in Uzbekistan. It was the Americans who dismantled and studied it and destroyed and removed the equipment. I visited it as Ambassador to Uzbekistan shortly after they had finished – I recall it as desolate, tiled and very cold, nothing to look at really. The above paragraph seeks to hold the Russians responsible for anything that came out of Nukus, when it was the Americans who actually took it....

Either the UK leadership is lying or violating it's treaty obligation. Take your pick. I would bet on lying given past behavior.

Craig Murray Blog
Boris Johnson Issues Completely New Story on “Russian Novichoks”Craig Murray, formerly British ambassador to Uzbekistan and Rector of the University of Dundee

Also

European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker had a moment of clarity once. He famously said, “When things get serious, you have to lie.”

Given the state of affairs in his beloved European Union right now Mr. Juncker and company are doing a lot of lying....

Russia Insider
Things Must Be Serious, Everyone’s Lying
Tom Luongo