Sunday, June 17, 2018

Britain's Law and Order Minister Mugged in London


The Home Secretary, Sajid Javid, has revealed that he was mugged by motor scooter thieves who stole his mobile phone, shortly before he was given his latest cabinet role.

Javid, who is now in charge of the nation’s policing and security, said he was targeted by criminals outside Euston station in north London..Source

Sajid Javid, England's colorful
law and order Minister.
So in ethnically cleansed London, the Home Secretary, or law and order minister, in Thereason May's laughable named Conservative government, was mugged.

Good. Let's hope Thereason May, the nerve agent hoaxster, and the war criminal Tony Bliar are next to enjoy the benefits of their having turned the two-thousand-year old English capital into multi-culti, Afro-Asian and East European shithole, to use the current jargon.

Meantime, among today's headlines:

Wild West London: Sixty moped attacks a day, a woman fights for life after mugging and drug crime on the rise as cops hunt for Michael McIntyre gang

Police failure on street robberies in Britain

Teenage boy and woman shot in London amid calls to tackle violent crime wave


Source: London Metropolitan Police

Friday, June 15, 2018

The Skripal Poisonings: How? By Whom? With What? And Where Are The Skripals Now?

A post by Rob Slane of the Blogmire Blog offers some significant details concerning the alleged Russian poisoning of the pardoned Russian traitor and British agent, Sergei Skripal, and his daughter, Yulia, as they sat on a park bench in the quiet English cathedral city of Salisbury on the afternoon of March 4, this year.

Based on video evidence from the scene of the crime, Lane proposes a plausible theory of how, and by whom, the Skripal's were poisoned, a key question intensively obfuscated by the British media.

Lane also explains why the poison could not have been the deadly nerve agent, Novichok, as claimed by UK Prime Minister Theresa May, a claim endlessly repeated by the British media.


Instead, Lane suggests that the poison could have been, as we have also suggested, the widely available and much less deadly nerve agent BZ, which was initially reported to have been found in blood samples from the Skripal's, a fact that was later attributed to it having been added to the blood samples by the analytical laboratory for the purpose, so it was bizarrely claimed, of calibration.

In connection with the question of the identity of the poison,  Lane constructs the following relevant time-line of events:

15:35 – Sergei Skripal and Yulia leave Zizzis. They make their way to The Maltings, presumably along Market Walk (although strangely there is no CCTV footage of this), a walk of about two minutes or so. 

15:37 – When they got to The Maltings, they appear not to have gone straight to the bench, but to the Avon Playground (approximately 50 yards from the bench), where they spent some time feeding ducks. They presumably then went over to the bench, a few minutes after this.

15:47 – The mysterious pair, one of whom is carrying a red bag, are seen on CCTV walking through Market Walk in the direction of The Maltings. 

16:03 – One of the first witnesses to the scene, Freya Church, who was working in the nearby Snap Fitness, leaves work at 16:00 or thereabouts, and sees the Skripals on the bench at approximately 16:03. According to her account, they were already “out of it”, which suggests that they had been poisoned some minutes previously. She noted that there was a red bag on the floor next to Yulia’s feet. 

16:15 – Emergency services are called and the pair are taken to Salisbury District Hospital, Yulia by helicopter and Sergei by ambulance. Upon admittance, the hospital believed that the pair had overdosed on Fentanyl, and treated this as an opioid poisoning for at least 24 hours after the incident. Later that evening – Police remove the red bag, and it has never been heard of or mentioned in connection with the story since.

The last point, that the Skripals were assumed to have overdosed on fentanyl, would explain the letter by Stephen Davies, the Salisbury Hospital Resident in Emergency Medicine, stating that no one was treated at the hospital for nerve agent poisoning.

A question that Lane does not address is the video that was released showing Julia Skripal in an interview with Reuters following her release from hospital. This video is worthy of close examination.


There are at least two remarkable things to note. First, Yulia Skripal appears not only much slimmer, than before her poisoning ordeal, but distinctly younger too, which is an odd consequence of long drawn out struggle for life.

Second, Yulia, wears a dress with a high collar, but open at the front as if intended to focus attention on here deep tracheotomy scar. That seems strange. Would not most women with the misfortune to bear such a disfiguring scar have chosen a garment with a collar that concealed the scar? And if that is conceded, then it seems reasonable to assume that Yulia displayed her scar for a purpose, namely, to leave no doubt in the public mind that she had indeed been close to death and in need of surgical intervention as a result of her alleged Russian poisoning.

But if the video is a piece of theatre to reinforce the British Government narrative on the Skripal poisoning, it would seem wise to consider the possibility that the entire interview is fake. It would surely not be difficult, given the latest methods of film creation and modification, to take an old video of a slightly younger and slimmer Yulia in an unidentifiable location and dub it with a different script. How many British or American viewers would be any the wiser? Surely few indeed: she is after all, speaking Russian, not English. And to such a false presentation, the addition of a tracheotomy scar would surely not have been difficult.

Will we have a chance to learn more from Yulia in the coming months? Unlikely. The story about the Skripals has already caused the British Government enough embarrassment. More than a month ago the CIA offered to "protect" the Skripals by providing them with new identities in America. Presumably, therefore, the Skripals will by now have been taken care of, whether of their own volition or not.

What this story seems to show is that not only is the news fake, but that it is now faked at the direct instigation of the state.

Related Posts:

Thursday, June 14, 2018

The Skripal File (11)

March 18,2018: Skripal Tripal
April 11, 2018: Are the Skripals in Mortal Danger From the British State?
 April12, 2018: Novichok: Russia's Antidote to Seafood Poisoning?

Expansion of Higher Education Drives Declining IQs of the Western Nations

As I have previously argued, the near universal access to higher education in Western countries has resulted in an epidemic of nation-destroying stupidity. Proof of that contention is now available in research showing that the mean IQ of the Brits and other Western nations is declining at the rate of three to four points per decade, which will reduce their acuity of mind to that of the sub-Saharan African nations within a generation.

A pair of researchers with the Ragnar Frisch Centre for Economic Research in Norway has found that IQ test scores have been slowly dropping over the past several decades (full text available here)

Prior studies have shown that people grew smarter over the first part of last century, as measured by the intelligence quotient—a trend that was dubbed the Flynn effect. Various theories have been proposed to explain this apparent brightening of the human mind, such as better nutrition, health care, education, etc, all factors that might help people grow into smarter adults than they would have otherwise. But, now, according to the researchers in Norway, that trend has ended. Instead of getting smarter, humans have started getting dumber.

The study by the team consisted of analyzing IQ test results from young men entering Norway's national service (compulsory military duty) during the years 1970 to 2009. In all, 730,000 test results were accounted for. In studying the data, the researchers found that scores declined by an average of seven points per generation, a clear reversal of test results going back approximately 70 years.

But it was not all bad news. The researchers also found some differences between family groups, suggesting that some of the decline might be due to environmental factors. But they also suggest that lifestyle changes could account for some of the decline, as well, such as changes in the education system and children reading less and playing video games more.
Source

And it's not just a Norwegian problem. As the Telegraph reports:

Tests carried out in 1980 and again in 2008 show that the IQ score of an average 14-year-old dropped by more than two points over the period.

Among those in the upper half of the intelligence scale, a group that is typically dominated by children from middle class families, performance was even worse, with an average IQ score six points below what it was 28 years ago.

Some people will no doubt say that the decline in Europe's population mean IQ is due to the mass immigration to Europe of people from sub-Saharan Africa, Syria, and other low IQ lands. But obviously the causality runs the other way. It is liberal-elite-directed higher education with its mandatory component of PC indoctrination that is destroying the intelligence of the people thus making them vulnerable to mass replacement immigration. Specifically, the elite-directed destruction of the Western nations in the name of the liberal religion of anti-racism and diversity, the outcome being the genocide of the European peoples through compelled homogenization with immigrants of alien race and culture.

Wednesday, June 13, 2018

Why Canadians Hate Donald Trump

Canadians so hate Donald Trump that when, following last week's $600-million-dollar G7 meeting in Canada, Trump called Justin Trudeau "Very dishonest  and weak," the Canadian Parliament passed, unanimously, a motion introduced by the opposition New Democrats, deploring “ad hominem statements by U.S. officials which do a disservice to bilateral relations.”

Why did the opposition come to the defense of Justin Trudeau? 

Because Trump is so hated and despised in Canada that the opposition parties cannot allow Trudeau to stand alone against Trump, since that would assure him near universal public support. 

And why is Trump so hated and despised in Canada?

Because the Government of Canada itself, its agent the Canadian state broadcaster, the CBC, and the liberals and leftists who comprise the vast majority of Canada's journalists and the employees of Canada's educational institutions and government bureaucracies despise and deride Trump. 

And why do the liberals and the left and the corporate media despise and deride Trump?

Because he threatens to destroy their racket. 

Here' the difference between Trudeau's Canada and Trump's America: Trudeau is a globalist, Trump is a nationalist. 

Trudeau holds that the Canadian nation does not exist. Canada, so Trudeau has declared, is "the world's first post-national state." What that means for Trudeau is that Canada is a place he is free to rule not in the interests of the native-born, who he considers less worthy than immigrants, but of whomever he pleases — ISIS terrorists, Chinese real estate investors, lobbyists for oil, Cannabis, whatever or whoever.

In his capacity as ruler, he talks with the billionaire class, the Aga Khan, the late billionaire drug manufacturer, Barry Sherman, Chinese RE investors, and then he, maybe, facilitates their plans and they, maybe, donate to the Trudeau Foundation, you know, like Hillary and the Clinton foundation.

Trump, is a nationalist (or so he wishes to be known), who aims to maximize American prosperity. That means retaining capital accumulated in America through the sweat of past generations, and imposing tariffs to insure that Americans mostly make stuff for one another rather than buying the products of off-shore sweatshop labor (and brains). By rebuilding American manufacturing, Trump can generating millions of decent jobs while restoring the incentives for clever students to study hard subjects like math, engineering, computer science, fields in which America once excelled, but is now rapidly being overtaken by the rest of the world.

So the difference between Trump and Trudeau revolves around the question of whether Canada and America are sovereign nation ruled in the interests of the voters, or merely places where a ruling elite arrange matters in their own interest and the Hell with the people. 

Clearly, then, the Trump doctrine has deadly implications for the Trudeau system of post-national governance without reference to the Canadian nation. But fortunately for Trudeau, Canada is a massively bureaucratic country and the institutions of education and government, not to mention the scribes of the corporate-owned and globalist media, can be relied upon to fight relentlessly against those who advocate for anything other than the existing corruptionist regime, after all, their jobs for life and index-linked pensions depend upon it. 

Tuesday, June 12, 2018

Finally, Brits Have Proof that Putin Poisoned the Skripals

Source: Russia InsiderGerman Officials Admit 'Still No Evidence' From UK That Russia Poisoned Skripals

Trump's Trouble With Trudeau

By Patrick J. Buchanan

Buchanan.org, June 12, 2018: At the G-7 summit in Canada, President Donald Trump described America as “the piggy bank that everybody is robbing.”

After he left Quebec, his director of Trade and Industrial Policy, Peter Navarro, added a few parting words for Prime Minister Justin Trudeau:

“There’s a special place in hell for any foreign leader that engages in bad faith diplomacy with President Donald J. Trump and then tries to stab him in the back on the way out the door. … And that’s … what weak, dishonest Justin Trudeau did. And that comes right from Air Force One.”

In Singapore, Trump tweeted more about that piggy bank.

“Why should I, as President of the United States, allow countries to continue to make Massive Trade Surpluses, as they have for decades … (while) the U.S. pays close to the entire cost of NATO-protecting many of these same countries that rip us off on Trade?”

To understand what drives Trump, and explains his exasperation and anger, these remarks are a good place to begin.

Our elites see America as an “indispensable nation,” the premier world power whose ordained duty it is to defend democracy, stand up to dictators and aggressors, and uphold a liberal world order.

They see U.S. wealth and power as splendid tools that fate has given them to shape the future of the planet.

Trump sees America as a nation being milked by allies who free ride on our defense effort, as they engage in trade practices that prosper their own peoples at America’s expense.

Where our elites live to play masters of the universe, Trump sees a world laughing behind America’s back, while allies exploit our magnanimity and idealism for their own national ends.

The numbers are impossible to refute and hard to explain.

Last year, the EU had a $151 billion trade surplus with the U.S. China ran a $376 billion trade surplus with the U.S., the largest in history. The world sold us $796 billion more in goods than we sold to the world.

A nation that spends more than it takes in from taxes, and consumes more of the world’s goods than it produces itself for export, year in and year out, is a nation on the way down.

We are emulating our British cousins of the 19th century.

Trump understands that this situation is not sustainable. His strength is that the people are still with him on putting America first.

Yet he faces some serious obstacles.

What is his strategy for turning a $796 billion trade deficit into a surplus? Is he prepared to impose the tariffs and import restrictions that would be required to turn America from the greatest trade-deficit nation in history to a trade-surplus nation, as we were up until the mid-1970s?

Americans are indeed carrying the lion’s share of the load of the defense of the West, and of fighting the terrorists and radical Islamists of the Middle East, and of protecting South Korea and Japan.

But if our NATO and Asian allies refuse to make the increases in defense he demands, is Trump really willing to cancel our treaty commitments, walk away from our war guarantees, and let these nations face Russia and China on their own? Could he cut that umbilical cord?

Ike’s Secretary of State John Foster Dulles spoke of conducting an “agonizing reappraisal” of U.S. commitments to defend NATO allies, if they did not contribute more money and troops.

Dulles died in 1959, and that reappraisal, threatened 60 years ago, never happened. Indeed, when the Cold War ended, out NATO allies cut defense spending again. Yet we are still subsidizing NATO in Europe and have taken on new allies since the Soviet Empire fell.

If Europe refuses to invest the money in defense Trump demands, or accept the tariffs America needs to reduce and erase its trade deficits, what does he do? Is he prepared to shut U.S. bases and pull U.S. troops out of the Baltic republics, Poland and Germany, and let the Europeans face Vladimir Putin and Russia themselves?

This is not an academic question. For the crunch that was inevitable when Trump was elected seems at hand.

He promised to negotiate with Putin and improve relations with Russia. He promised to force our NATO allies to undertake more of their own defense. He pledged to get out and stay out of Mideast wars, and begin to slash the trade deficits that we have run with the world.

And that’s what America voted for.

Now, after 500 days, he faces formidable opposition to these defining goals of his campaign, even within his own party.

Putin remains a pariah on Capitol Hill. Our allies are rejecting the tariffs Trump has imposed and threatening retaliation. Free trade Republicans reject tariffs that might raise the cost of the items U.S. companies makes abroad and then ships back to the United States.

The decisive battles between Trumpian nationalism and globalism remain ahead of us. Trump’s critical tests have yet to come.

And our exasperated president senses this.

Saturday, June 9, 2018

Jordan Peterson's hysterical rant about people of low IQ

Jordan Peterson is the University of Toronto psychology professor rightly applauded for his opposition to Canada's recently enacted law "to amend the Canadian Human Rights Act and the Criminal Code" (Bill C16) in such ways as to compel, among other things, the use of self-selected pronouns demanded by transgender and other minorities from the mundane Zie and Zim to such loony extremes as His Majesty and It's Serene Highness.

 Less well known are Peterson's ideas about intelligence. In the short video below, Peterson reveals his thinking on this topic as he describes what he calls a "horrifying thing", namely what he says is the finding of US Army psychologists who were "motivated to find an accurate predictor [of the competence of recruits], so they used IQ."

One of the most terrifying statistics I ever came across [related to] the rationale of the US armed forces for not inducting anyone with an IQ of less than 83.

Lets just take that apart, because it's a horrifying thing.

After 100 years, essentially, of careful statistical anaylsis, the armed forces concluded that if you had an IQ of 83 or less there wasn't anything you could be trained to do in the military at any level of the organization that wasn't positively counterproductive.

OK, so what, 83, OK, yeah, one in ten, one in ten, that's one in ten people, and what that really means, as far as I can tell, if you imagine that the military is approximately as complex as the broader society, then there is no place in our cognitively complex society for one in ten people.

So what are we going to do about that? The answer is, no one knows. It's a vicious problem.
At that point, the interviewer interjects:
It's hard to train people to become creative, adaptive, problem solvers.
To which Peterson responds:
It's impossible. You can't do it. It doesn't work. Sorry, it doesn't work.

So here is expressed a basic mistake underlying the IQ-ist creed: it is to assume what has to be demonstrated. Specifically, that IQ test scores are an accurate predictor of competence in the military or, as Peterson makes clear, any other sphere of human activity.

But everything else Peterson has to say on the subject is more or less obvious bunk. If, for example, ten percent of the US population is totally incompetent, then one should expect a floor to the unemployment rate of no less than 10%, whereas in fact, US unemployment is currently under four percent, while the unemployment rate for African Americans with an average IQ of 85, or barely above Peterson's threshold for total uselessness, is under 6%.

As for the claim that there is no place in "our cognitively complex society for one in ten people," what exactly is he suggesting? The thinking of those prewar Hitler admirers in the Anglo-American eugenics movement come to mind. That Peterson concludes that the existence of so many incompetent people is a "vicious problem," certainly suggests a willingness to consider extreme solutions.

But in any case, what did he mean by "our cognitively complex society"? Can a society even have cognitive features? Perhaps what he meant was our cognitively demanding society. But is it really? Is it harder to stay alive in a world of 24/7 shopping, homeless shelters, and food stamps than in prehistoric times? And even for those productively employed, how many have cognitively challenging jobs — store clerks? coffee-shop employees? gas station attendants? hospital orderlies? Or the lower ranks of academia, say 90% of college professors?

And what about the Africans? With a mean IQ 84, half the Nigerian population is close to, or below Peterson's competence threshold, yet their population is booming. So who's gonna win the evolutionary race: IQ 98 Americans with their below replacement fertility, or Nigerians doubling their population every 30 years? Then there's the Mozambiquans, with a mean IQ of 64 despite a significant Euro-African population component and, like Nigerians, a fertility two and half times the replacement rate.


Saturday, June 2, 2018

Donald Trump Stumps the Justin Trudeau Chump

Canadian Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, a post-nationalist for global governance, wants unrestricted access to the US market for Canadian steel, aluminum, cars, and everything else, just as he believes in free access to the cheapest products from the sweatiest of sweaty Asian sweat shops to the Canadian market.

Donald Trump, an American nation-state democrat, wants to restore America's manufacturing base and restore working class prosperity by all necessary means including trade protectionism. In particular, Trump wants to restore prosperity to the rust-belt states of America upon whose defection from the Democratic Party his election depended. Hence Trump's imposition of tariffs on imported steel and aluminum from, among other places, Canada.

Faced by this departure from the liberal gospel of global integration and the abandonment of nation-state democracy and sovereignty, Trudeau appears to be at a loss. He talks of the inevitable return of logic and common sense to US policy, as if Trump were the moron and he the political genius in the equation.

But the more Trudeau and Canada's state broadcaster the CBC disses Trump, the more cheerfully will Trump be inclined to trounce Canada's fantasist trade minister, Chrystia Freeland, with next, perhaps, a duty on imported cars and car parts. And why not a tax on imported energy including Canadian oil, as long ago advocated by the American nationalist and speech writer to several US Presidents, Patrick J. Buchanan.

So Trudeau is stumped. Canada's chief trade partner doesn't give a damn about Canada's sappy globalist ideals. Trump simply aims to make America richer and stronger, a project that seems well on its way to accomplishment by a combination of four policies.

First, to cut corporate taxes, thereby promoting the patriation of profits of US-based international companies and investment in American manufacturing.

Second, to lift restrictions on US oil and gas extraction, thereby sharply raising US GDP.

Third, to use import tariffs to boost the profitability and hence growth of American industry.

Fourth, to impose control and selectivity on US immigration, thereby increasing the productivity of America's immigrant human capital.

For Trudeau and the CBC to express their disdain for Trump's intellect and common sense only ensures that whatever damage US policies cause Canada will be applied more relentlessly. Indeed, Trudeau's adherence to the Obaman policy of dismantling the sovereign democratic Western nation state, flooding the West with however many people from the Third World can reach Western shores, and undermining Western workers living standards by opening markets to the products of sweatshop labor abroad is now a sure-fire loser.

Trudeau's short and foolish reign is thus surely near its end. Who will succeed him? Who knows, but it is interesting to note that former Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chr├ętien, aged 84, who said on his departure from Parliament that like England's William Ewart Gladstone, he would return in his eighties, has recently made a public reappearance. Dino, as George Dubya Bush named Chr├ętien, would be a match for Trump, and would surely be able to clinch a deal on trade.

But then the Tories may perhaps be wondering about Brian Mulroney, undoubtedly the most able Conservative politician of recent decades, a friend of Trump's, an expert on trade who presided over the negotiation of the Free Trade Agreement.

Could we be about to see North America return to the Mesozoic, an age of the gerontocrats*.

____

*Mohamad Mahathir, the newly elected Prime Minister of Malaysia is 91 years old, just a little younger than the blind Venetian Doge, Enrico Dandolo, who personally led the naval force that trashed Constantinople, the capital of the Western Roman Empire, on November 24, 1202.

Wednesday, May 30, 2018

Steve Bannon Puts the BBC Straight on What Trump Stands For

Why Did British Police Ignore Pakistani Gangs Abusing 1,400 Rotherham Children?

By Sir Roger Scruton:

Ethics and Public Policy Center: A story of rampant child abuse—ignored and abetted by the police—is emerging out of the British town of Rotherham. Until now, its scale and scope would have been inconceivable in a civilized country. Its origins, however, lie in something quite ordinary: what one Labour MP called “not wanting to rock the multicultural community boat.”

Imagine the following case. A fourteen-year old girl is taken into care by the social services unit of the town where she lives, because her parents are drug-addicted, and she has been neglected and is not turning up in school. She is one of many, for that is the way in Britain today. And local government entities—Councils—can be ordered by the courts to stand in for parents of neglected children. The Council places the girl in a home, where she is kept with others under supervision from the social services department. The home is regularly visited by young men who try to entice the girls into their cars, so as to give them drugs and alcohol, and then coerce them into sex.

The girl, who is lonely and uncared for, meets a man outside the home, who promises a trip to the cinema and a party with children of her age. She falls into the trap. After she has been raped by a group of five men she is told that, if she says a word to anyone, she will be taken from the home and beaten. When, after the episode is repeated, she threatens to go to the police, she is taken into the countryside, doused in petrol, and told that she is going to be set alight, unless she promises to tell no one of the ordeal.

Social workers tell girls they cannot help them

Meanwhile she must accept weekly abuse, in return for drugs and alcohol. Soon she finds herself being taken to other towns in the area, and hired out for sexual purposes to other men. She is distraught and depressed, and at the point when she can stand it no longer, she goes to the police. She can only stutter a few words, and cannot bring herself to accuse anyone in particular. Her complaint is dismissed on the grounds that any sex involved must have been consensual. The social worker in charge of her case listens to her complaint, but tells her that she cannot act unless the girl identifies her abusers. But when the girl describes them the social worker switches off with a shrug and says that she can do nothing. Her father, his drug habit notwithstanding, has tried to keep contact with his daughter and suspects what is happening. But when he goes to the police, he is arrested for obstruction and charged with wasting police time.

Over the two years of her ordeal the girl makes several attempts on her own life, and eventually ends up abandoned and homeless, without an education and with no prospect of a normal life.

Impossible, you will say, that such a thing could happen in Britain. In fact it is only one of over 1,400 cases,

Read more

Monday, May 28, 2018

A Fast Route to French Citizenship



This story is amazing, extraordinary, so astonishing, in fact, that one has to wonder whether it is exactly true. It is, after all, from the land of Charlie Hebdo, and it is being promoted by, among others, the BBC, an organization without a conspiracy theoretical thought at any level in its very expensive and multi-layered managerial mind.

Thus one ventures to ask, could the video be the record of a stunt: a stunt to glorify the immigrant hoards that have now become the majority in London, Paris and other great European cities?

Certainly the hero of the piece, Mamoudou Massama, is an extraordinary athlete, or should one say stuntman. Certainly his performance in apparently saving the life of a child hanging from a fourth floor balcony demonstrated an astounding combination of nerve, speed, strength and agility. Which raises one of many odd points about the video.

He was, we are told, granted French citizenship for his feat of humanitarian gymnastics and given a job as a fireman. But it seems to me that a man of such nerve, strength and gymnastic ability would be wasting his talents as a mere fireman, however, excellent his performance in that capacity might prove to be.

Rather, surely, he should be headed for Hollywood and training as a professional stuntman, capable surely, of even more extraordinary feats than the late, great Douglas Fairbanks, who as a co-founder of United Artists Studios was one of the dominating figures in the Hollywood of his day.

Also odd is what one might call, "the set-up" for Mamadou's heroic feat. The child hanging from the fourth-floor balcony who is rescued by our hero, is accompanied by an adult who seems to be holding the child by the hand and is placed where they might readily have hauled what was in fact a very small child, onto the balcony, something that Mamadou did one handed the moment he had scaled the outside of the building.

But whatever may be the case, Mamoudou Massama is a man of extraordinary physical fitness, strength and courage. We applaud his achievement, staged or not. When France is peopled almost exclusively by people from Mali and other places to the south of the Sahara, as now seems inevitable under its perpetual regime of cucks, the French people will be a force to be reckoned with.

Tommy Robinson Arrested Outside UK Court, Jailed For 13 Months As Judge Orders Orwellian Media Blackout

UK activist and English Defence Leage founder Tommy Robinson was arrested on Friday outside of Leeds Crown Court for reporting on a pedophile grooming trial. Within six hours of his arrest, Robinson was handed a 13 month prison term for violating a prior suspended sentence for a similar offense, while media outlets were banned from covering the incident by the court - with several removing reports which had already been published.

Sunday, May 27, 2018

US Energy Sources and Uses

Double click to see at full size image. Source: the Visual Capitalist.

Friday, May 25, 2018

Trikipedia: Craig Murray on Wikipedia's Dark Side

CraigMurray.org.uk: UPDATE “Philip Cross” has not had one single day off from editing Wikipedia in almost five years. “He” has edited every single day from 29 August 2013 to 14 May 2018. Including five Christmas Days. That’s 1,721 consecutive days of editing.

133,612 edits to Wikpedia have been made in the name of “Philip Cross” over 14 years. That’s over 30 edits per day, seven days a week. And I do not use that figuratively: Wikipedia edits are timed, and if you plot them, the timecard for “Philip Cross’s” Wikipedia activity is astonishing is astonishing if it is one individual.


Related Articles by Craig Murray:


Emma Barnett: A Classic “Philip Cross” Wikipedia Operation

The “Philip Cross” MSM Promotion Operation Part 3

Philip Cross Madness Part IV

Friday, May 11, 2018

Political Correctness: State-Directed Intolerance

Paul Gottfried, writing at the Unz Review, argues that U. of T.'s Professor, Jordan Peterson, is wrong in his contention  that political correctness derives from post-modernist theory, beneath which banner  Communism has been imported to the West.

Rather, Gottfried argues, political correctness in the West is the manifestation of "a post-Marxist leftist ideology stressing universalism, equality, and the social guilt of white Christians, and more particularly heterosexual, male white Christians."

But neither Peterson nor Gottfried has it right. Political correctness is no more nor less than a new term for old fashioned intolerance, and specifically the intolerance promoted by the state.

In Europe’s 16th and 17th Century Christian world, political correctness (had the term then been coined) meant burning people alive for being a Catholic in a protestant jurisdiction, or for being protestant in a Catholic jurisdiction.

Thursday, May 10, 2018

UK Academics Demolish Theresa May's Skripal Poisoning Lies

All politicians use words as instruments for the control of those they govern. and, in general, they do so with little regard for the truth. Credibility, however, is vital to the effectiveness of a politician's words, and thus politicians however mendacious must, if they are to retain any influence, ensure that their public utterances have a degree of plausibility.

Plausibility, however, the British Government, and in particular the Prime Minister, Theresa May, and Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson, have utterly failed to achieve in their statements about the alleged poisoning earlier this year of former Russian spy, Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia in the quiet English cathedral town of Salisbury.

On the contrary, virtually everything they have said concerning the incident is self-evidently false. So blatantly so that one can take Theresa May's continued role as UK Prime Minister as proof of the flaccid feeble-mindedness of the UK Tory Party as a whole that it tolerates such appallingly incompetent and dishonest leadership.

Confirming this view is a report by three British academics, Professors Paul McKeigue, Professor David Miller and Professor Piers Robinson, who have placed the future of their university careers in jeopardy by publicly stating that the British Government's claims of Russian responsibility for the Skripal poisonings are nothing but a farrago of nonsense, and are indeed lies of the crudest and most blatant kind having no apparent purpose other than to stoke hatred of Russia, a nuclear super power, with no evident ill-intent toward the United Kingdom. 

Theresa May and the Cultivation of Crime in England's Capital City

Wednesday, May 9, 2018

Netanyahu Claims 'Iran Lied' About Its Nuclear Program, but Israel Has Been Lying for Decades

By Gideon Levy

Haaretz, May 3, 2018: Let’s leave aside our discomfort at the sight of the prime minister’s Office Depot performance. That’s a matter of style and taste. But it’s impossible to ignore the new records Israel keeps setting, again and again, for lack of self-awareness, or one might say double standards and hypocrisy.
Israelis really and truly believe it’s shocking to discover how Iran brazenly lied to the world, just as they really and truly believe it’s terrible when dictatorships shoot live bullets at demonstrators, when tyrannical regimes imprison political opponents without trial, when apartheid states maintain two penal systems, when residents of dictatorships are kept in their own country as if in a cage, when people are persecuted for their religion or nationality, when societies close their doors to refugees, when countries scoff at international law. The nation of morality can’t remain indifferent to such shocking developments.

Tuesday, May 1, 2018

After Weeks of Condemning Russia for the Salisbury Horror (but amazingly non-lethal), Nerve Agent Attack on former Russian Spy, Sergei Skripal, and His Daughter, Yulia, UK Authorities Now Claim Total Ignorance About Who Was Responsible

The alleged WMD attack in the quiet cathedral city of Salisbury, England, on the former Russian spy, Sergei Skripal, and his daughter, Yulia, by means of a hyper-deadly nerve agent smeared on a door knob, or sprayed by a drone, or added to the ventilation system of Skripal's car, or possible added to the Skripal's breakfast porridge, has revealed the British Government to be comprised of nothing but a bunch of fakes, frauds, feebletons, and fabulists intent on the promotion of Russophobia.

After claiming the horror chemical weapon attack, on "British soil," was the personal responsibility of Russian President Vladimir Putin, and after expelling Russian diplomats from the UK in punishment, the British state now says that they have no idea who was responsible for the attack.

Moreover, it is open to question whether the British Government ever had evidence of a nerve agent attack on "British soil." Not only has the Resident in Emergency Medicine at the Salisbury Trust Hospital where the Skripals were allegedly taken for treatment denied that anyone was treated at the hospital for nerve agent poisoning, but the Skripals, the alleged victims who were supposed to be at the point of death, are apparently now fully recovered, but held incommunicado but the British authorities, for reasons not given.

Thus, in the present absence of public information about the investigation relating to the incident, and the gagging of the alleged victims by the British authorities, it is entirely consistent with what is known to assert that the business is totally fake: either a complete non-event, or a staged, non-deadly pseudo attack in which the alleged victims, from whom the public are not allowed to hear, could have been willing participants. Indeed, the Skripal saga looks very much like a staged event designed to stoke hatred of Russia.

Time for Mrs. May to offer President Putin an apology, but don't hold your breath.

Related: 
SCF: Theresa May is dangerous crackpot and a liar
The whole Salisbury/Skripal affair was made up, plotted, stage managed and produced by British, American and German intelligence services. Everything the UK Government under Theresa May said about the Salisbury affair was pure lies, scripted and made up as talking points sent from Washington DC and Brussels. Everything May said, and Boris Johnson, and Amber Rudd and Philip Hammond with regards to Russia and the Salisbury affair was pure lies. The entire story the English put forward regarding the Salisbury affair kept changing and there were terrible inconsistencies. The whole episode from start to finish was a classic English Monty Python circus act. The Salisbury-Skripal affair was pure English Tory lies. Besides Theresa May who ran the Home Office when all these terrible things [apparently] were going on, knew all about it, did not lift a finger to stop it, did not put up a fight or even resign and lead a rebellion from the backbenches. Theresa May authorised everything she now claims is a terrible threat to UK National Security. The woman must go.
CanSpeccy: British Intelligence: An Oxymoron
CanSpeccy: WMD Attack in Salisbury, England: Nerve Agent, Russian Agent, Double Agent, Triple Agent, Spiked Blood Sample, Silent Witnesses, and Propaganda
CanSpeccy: Novichok: Russia's Antidote to Seafood Poisoning?
Zero Hedge: From The Skripals To Douma, The Globalist Pravda Network Reveals Its True Face

Saturday, April 28, 2018

Why the Truth About the Skripal Terror, WMD Poisoning Attack Will Never Be Revealed

Former UK Ambassador Craig Murray has a post on the Skripal Poisonings in which he quotes Clive Ponting, a former senior UK civil servant and whistle blower of the Thatcher era:
It seems to me that the reason none of the MSM are doing any investigating/reporting of the Salisbury affair, apart from official handouts, is that the government have slapped a D-Notice over the whole incident and it is not possible to report that a notice has been issued.
To those not familiar with British Officialese, a D-Notice is an order issued by the Government to the media prohibiting publication of certain information. So a D-Notice covering the Skripal poisonings or some aspects of the case would mean that the truth will never be publicly known.

And if the Government does not wish the public to know the truth of the matter, then they must clearly intend that the public believe something that is not true, and in particular, it seems almost certain that the untruth that Her Majesty's Britannic Government wants the public to believe is that the Skripals were poisoned by the Russians.

And if the Russians didn't do it, then it must surely have been the Brits themselves, unless it was one of their special friends, Israel or the United States.

What is not entirely clear from Clive Ponting's comment is whether a D-Notice in the case of the Skripal poisonings has been issued, or whether that is merely a presumption. However, Murray quotes Channel 4 journalist, Alex Thomson, in a direct assertion that a D-Notice has been issued, so it seems pretty certain that the Brits are lying, which is not really surprising since Boris Johnson, UK Foreign Secretary, has already been caught in a direct lie about the origin of the poison allegedly used on the Skripals.

Related: 

M.J. Carley: The Skripal Affair: A Lie Too Far?
Craig Murray: Where They Tell You Not to Look
The Blogmire: The UK Government’s Skripal Conspiracy Theory – or The Art of Holding a Mass of Contradictory Thoughts in Your Head
Valeri Suchov: This is the kind of reflections that contribute to prove the UK gov staged attack on the Skripals
Off Guardian: The farcical reality behind Theresa May’s “novichok” story
CanSpeccy: WMD Attack in Salisbury, England: Nerve Agent, Russian Agent, Double Agent, Triple Agent, Spiked Blood Sample, Silent Witnesses, and Propaganda
CanSpeccy: Novichok: Russia's Antidote to Seafood Poisoning
CanSpeccy: NoviJoke: To Russia With Hate

Friday, April 27, 2018

Justin Trudeau and the Hypocrisy of Liberals

Calgary Herald, April 27, 2018:  The B.C. advocacy group Dogwood got federal funding to hire an organizing assistant to help the not-for-profit “stop the Kinder Morgan pipeline and tanker project.”

The feds are creating a $15-an-hour job designed to stop thousands of high-paying jobs — not to mention huge royalty revenues and property taxes — that would be created if the federally approved twinning of the already-existing 65-year-old Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain pipeline is allowed to proceed.

Meanwhile, The Mustard Seed Street Ministry — and thousands of other faith-based organizations like it — got zero Canada Summer Jobs funding from the federal government to help feed, house, clothe, train and love Alberta’s most vulnerable and poor citizens experiencing homelessness.

Many faith-based organizations were denied funding from the federal program owing to them refusing to sell their souls for a few pieces of silver. Trudeau and his government insisted that to qualify for a grant to hire university students, the applying organization had to sign an attestation stating that the organization’s core mandate respects “reproductive rights.”

As Steve Wile, CEO of The Mustard Seed, says, the Christian aid organization has never had to take a stand on abortion before because its core mandate is to minister to tens of thousands of poor and addicted people in Calgary, Red Deer and Edmonton. Nevertheless, the wording of the attestation made it impossible to sign, since it required applicants to essentially agree with the federal Liberal party platform on abortion.

Thursday, April 26, 2018

Diamond and Silk Testify Before Congress on Face-Book Censorship

Opening Statements:


Response to Questions:

Diamond and Silk Slam Rep Sheila Jackson Lee: Don't Try To Mix My Words:

Monday, April 23, 2018

British Intelligence: An Oxymoron

Daily Mail April 23, 2018: "British intelligence investigating the Salisbury poisonings have identified a Russian assassin who could be behind the attack."

Could be behind the attack, eh?


LOL


"Codenamed 'Gordon', the 54-year-old former FSB spy is thought to use the cover name Mihails Savickis and two other aliases."


Codenamed "Gordon", but using a bunch of different names, 
eh?

LOL

"However, police fear the suspect has already traveled back to Russia and may never be brought to justice."


So the bugger's already skidaddled, eh?


LOL


Well done British Intelligence. 

Related:
Consortium News: Another Dodgy British Dossier: the Skripal Case

The British government shared what was supposedly a dossier containing sensitive intelligence to convince allies and EU member states to support its accusation of Russian culpability in the poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal in Salisbury, England on March 4.

But like the infamous 2003 “dodgy dossier” prepared at the direction of Prime Minister Tony Blair to justify British involvement in the U.S. invasion of Iraq, the intelligence dossier on the Salisbury poisoning turns out to have been based on politically-motivated speculation rather than actual intelligence

British officials used the hastily assembled “intelligence” briefing to brief the North Atlantic Council on March 15, the European Foreign Affairs Council on March 19 and the European summit meeting in Brussels on March 23.

The Need for Dramatic Claims

When Prime Minister Theresa May and Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson ordered the production of an intelligence dossier to be used to convince allies and EU member states to join Britain in expelling Russian diplomats, they had a problem: they were unable to declare that nerve agent from a Russian military laboratory had been verified as the poison administered to the Skripals. As the well-informed former Ambassador Craig Murray learned from a Foreign and Commonwealth Office source, the British government military laboratory at Porton Down had been put under strong pressure by Johnson to agree that they had confirmed that the poison found in Salisbury had come from a specific Russian laboratory. Instead Porton Down would only agree to the much more ambiguous formula that it was nerve agent “of a type developed in Russia.”



May and Johnson: Needed dramatic claims.

So May and Johnson needed some dramatic claims to buttress their argument to allies and EU member states that the Salisbury poisoning must have been a Russian government assassination attempt.

Saturday, April 21, 2018

WMD Attack in Salisbury, England: Nerve Agent, Russian Agent, Double Agent, Triple Agent, Spiked Blood Sample, Silent Witnesses, and Propaganda

According to former UK Ambassador, Craig Murray, Jeremy Heywood, Britain's Cabinet Secretary and Head of the UK Civil Service, does not believe that Russia attempted to assassinate Russian traitor, double agent, triple agent, whatever, and his daughter, Yulia, in Salisbury, England with the nerve agent, Novichok. As evidence, Murray cites a message to civil servants by Jeremy Heywood which reads, in part:
... after the nerve agent attack in Salisbury just over a month ago, I also want to take this opportunity to renew my gratitude to the hundreds of public servants – at home and abroad – involved in the response to that attack and the ongoing investigation. Their work was instrumental in ensuring widespread international support for the Government’s position on Russian responsibility for the Salisbury attack and the participation of many nations in the diplomatic sanctions that followed.
There is a seeming weirdness in the head of the civil service expressing gratitude, and indeed renewing his expression of gratitude, to public servants for doing the jobs they are presumably quite adequately paid to do. It may have been Murray's point, however, or one of several points, that Jeremy Heywood was expressing gratitude not for the readiness of civil servants to perform their duty with the integrity that employment in the public service should surely demand, but for participating in a charade designed to deceive the public both at home and abroad with the object of stoking Russophobia.

 In any case, as Craig Murray points out, applauding the work of public servants as "being instrumental in ensuring widespread international support for the Government's position" is rather different from, applauding the work of public servants in "establishing the truth of the government's position." This indicates, so Murray suggests, at the very least, skepticism among senior officials concerning the Government's claim that Russia committed an atrocity with a WMD midst England's green and pleasant land.

Monday, April 16, 2018

The UK's Novichok Poisoning Cover-up

On March 4, 2018, Sergei Skripal, a former Russian spy, and his daughter, Yulia, were reported to have been poisoned with the nerve agent A-234, aka, Novichok, in Salisbury, England, where Sergei Skripal now resides.

On March 22, the UK Court of Protection gave permission for blood samples to be obtained from the allegedly still unconscious Yulia and Sergei Skripal for analysis to be arranged by the Organization for the Prevention of Chemical Warfare (OPCW).

Those blood samples were sent for analysis by the OPCW to several laboratories, among which was the Swiss Federal Institute for NBC-protection in Spiez. The Spiez lab. completed its analysis on  March 27. The OPCW has not publicly disclosed what the Spiez lab. found. However, the Russian Embassy in London reports that:
The experts of the [Spiez] Institute discovered traces of toxic chemical called “BZ” and its precursors. It is a Schedule 2 substance under the Chemical Weapons Convention.

“BZ” is a chemical agent, which is used to temporary incapacitate people. The desired psychotoxic effect is reached in 30-60 minutes after application of the agent and lasts up to four days. According to the information the Russian Federation possesses, this agent was used in the armed forces of the USA, United Kingdom and several others NATO member states. No stocks of such substance ever existed either in the Soviet Union or in the Russian Federation.

In addition, the Swiss specialists discovered strong concentration of traces of the nerve agent of A-234 type in its initial states as well as its decomposition products.

In view of the experts, such concentration of the A-234 agent would result in inevitable fatal outcome of its administration. Moreover, considering its high volatility, the detection of this substance in its initial state (pure form and high concentration) is extremely suspicious as the samples have been taken several weeks since the poisoning.

It looks highly likely that the “BZ” nerve agent was used in Salisbury. The fact that Yulia Skripal and Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey have already been discharged from hospital, and Sergei Skripal is on his way to recovery, only supports such conclusion.
It remains to be seen whether the OPCW will release the data to which the Russian Embassy refers, and thus either confirm or refute the Russian Embassy's claims. But that blood samples from the Skripals contained two nerve agents is not surprising given the mode of action of A-234, with which, so the British authorities claim, the Skripals were poisoned.

A-234 is a convulsant, which acts by preventing the breakdown of the neurotransmitter acetylcholine at the neuromuscular junction, with the result that muscles go into full contraction, hence the symptoms of convulsions, vomiting, etc.. One can assume, therefore, that if they were victims of A-234 poisoning, the Skripals would have been treated with an agent having effects antagonistic to those of A-234. BZ, a paralytic drug, is such an agent, which acts by binding to acetylcholine receptors at the neuromuscular junction without activating them, thereby preventing muscle contraction, voluntary or otherwise.
Thus, whereas BZ would be an effective antidote to A-234 poisoning, A-234 would serve as an antidote to BZ poisoning, which if severe can lead to fatal paralysis and hence asphyxiation. So the presence of A-234 in the Skipal blood samples is not conclusive evidence that it was the poison, rather than the antidote.

That the powerful nerve agent A-234 would have been prescribed as an antidote to the rather less potent nerve agent BZ may seem improbable, but it must be remembered that the Salisbury Trust Hospital where the Skripals were treated is within seven miles of Britain's Chemical and Biological Weapons Research establishment at Porton Down, where doctors at the Salisbury hospital might well have sought advice on treatment for apparent nerve agent poisoning.

Certainly, the Porton Down lab must have a supply of A-234 on hand, since it was able to identify Novichok in samples provided by the police or Salisbury hospital, and for that they would have required a sample of authentic A-234 for comparison.

That BZ was the poison and A-234 the antidote, is consistent with the letter to the Times newspaper in which the Salisbury Trust Hospital's Resident in Emergency Medicine, Dr. Stephen Davies, stated that no one had been treated at the hospital for nerve agent poisoning. That would make sense if BZ, which is a readily available pharmacological agent, was considered to be just that, a pharmacological agent — not a WMD or nerve agent. Then Dr. Davies letter can be interpreted to mean that the Skripals were treated not for nerve agent exposure, but by nerve agent exposure.

The truth of what happened to the Skripals in Salisbury the day they were admitted to hospital for treatment of poisoning is unlikely ever to be known with any certainty unless the physicians and others who attended on the Skripals are allowed to come forward and provide evidence. So far, it appears they have been effectively gagged.

Specifically, one would like to know from the hospital staff whether they can confirm the claim of the "doctor," who attended on the Skripals in the park where they were stricken (and who requested that her identity not be disclosed) that the Skripals were vomiting and convulsing when admitted to hospital, i.e., showing symptoms of A-234 poisoning.

In addition, one would like to know (a) what treatments, including drugs, were applied to these patients, and (b) what analyses of blood and vomit or stomache contents were ordered by the attending physicians a the time the Skripals were admitted to the Salisbury Trust Hospital, and (c) what did those tests show?

As we wait for answers to such questions from the Government of Theresa May, we will not hold our breath.

Related: 
Tass: Russia proves Novichok agent patented in US as a chemical weapon — OPCW envoy
Tass: Yulia Skripal ‘held hostage by British authorities’ — Russia's OPCW ambassador
CanSpeccy: 3-Quinuclidinyl Benzilate: The Antidote to Novichok
CanSpeccy: Novichok: Russia’s Antidote to Seafood Poisoning.

Saturday, April 14, 2018

3-Quinuclidinyl Benzilate: The Antidote to Novichok

Buzz. Source
Revised April 15, 2018: Russian Foreign Minister, Sergei Lavrov, is reported to have stated that:
...the substance used on Sergei Skripal was an agent called BZ, according to Swiss state Spiez lab.... The toxin was never produced in Russia, but was in service in the US, UK, and other NATO states.
BZ, or Buzz, is a common name for 3-Quinuclidinyl Benzilate, a white, odorless, water soluble, crystalline solid, with a molecular mass of  337.419 and a melting point of 164 C.

Like botulinum toxin, BZ can kill through paralysis, and hence asphyxiation, although the modes of action of the substances differ.

Botulinum toxin inhibits the release of acetylcholine at the neuromuscular junction, whereas BZ binds to the acetylcholine receptors at the neuromuscular junction without activating them. In either case, the result of a sufficiently large dose is paralysis, and in either case, the effect is countered by any agent that inhibits the enzymic breakdown of acetyl choline at the neuromuscular junction (for example the "as developed in Russia" nerve agent, Novichok).

The toxicity of BZ is quite low, with an estimated LD50 (dose required to create a 50% chance of death) of about one tenth of a gram, or about one millionth the toxicity of botulinum toxin. Symptoms of BZ toxicity include delirium, hallucination and general mental incapacity.

BZ is a recognized antimuscarinic pharmacological agent available for purchase from Sigma-Aldrich and more than a dozen other commercial sources. So if BZ was the only chemical to which the Skripals were exposed, it indicates that the decision to tear-down Sergei Skripal's house, and the restaurant and pub where Sergei Skripal and his daughter obtained refreshment the day they were poisoned is either totally insane, or part of a theatrical production entitled: THE SKRIPALS: A Russian, Horror, WMD Terror-Attack Midst England's Green and Pleasant Land.

The Spiez Laboratory of the Swiss Federal Office for Civil Protection
If the Spiez Laboratory of the Swiss Federal Office for Civil Protection are correct in their analysis of the samples supplied to them, either by the UK or the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (which organization is too coy to reveal what it found through multiple analyses by independent laboratories of the blood samples supplied to them by the UK Government), it could explain several features of the Skripal poisoning narrative.

First, if BZ was the agent that caused the Skripals to be hospitalized, it would explain the long delay between the time of ingestion of the poison, whether at home in the buckwheat cereal that Yulia Skripals friend had brought for the Skripals from Moscow, or at lunch with their seafood salad. Second, it would explain Sergei Skipal's loud and angry Russian-language rant about the slow service at the restaurant where they lunched as the result of BZ-induced delirium or hallucination.

What the finding of BZ poisoning refutes, if BZ was indeed the poison and not the therapeutically administered antidote to a different poison, is the evidence of a woman reported to be a doctor who attended on the Skripals in the park where they were said to have been found incapacitated. As we have already suggested, that hearsay evidence of an alleged doctor, who requested that her identity not be revealed, is highly questionable.

Furthermore, if the poisoning of the Skripals was due to BZ, then the "doctor" of undisclosed identity was surely a plant whose job it was to provide false circumstantial evidence of Novichok poisoning: specifically, her claim to reporters that the Skipals were vomiting and convulsing — symptoms quite the opposite of the physical paralysis induced by severe BZ poisoning.

Previously, we argued that Novichok might have been administered to the Skripals as an antidote to botulinum toxin in their seafood lunch.  The revelation that the Skripals may have been poisoned with BZ, not botulinum toxin, does not negate our original hypothesis, since Novichok is a choline esterase inhibitor and, therefore, a recognized antidote to any anticholinergic poison such as BZ. The use of Novichok as an antidote to BZ poisoning would have been a surprising medical choice, but highly effective in creating false evidence of an assassination attempt with Novichok. 

Questions that remain for the British Government include the following:
Why did Dr. Davies, the Resident for Emergency Medicine at the Salisbury Trust Hospital, say that no one had been treated for nerve agent poisoning?

If as claimed the Skripals were admitted to the Salisbury Trust Hospital with symptoms of nerve agent poisoning, what analyses of  blood and vomit were conducted on the orders of the attending physicians and with what results?
Unless, at this late stage, the government of Theresa May produces convincing evidence to the contrary, it must  be concluded that the Skripal poisoning saga is simply a ridiculous charade written and carried out by buffoons with little relevant knowledge other than of how to so shape the lips, tongue and larynx as to emit a cloud of lies potentially culminating in a nuclear conflagration.

Postscript

An anonymous commenter has kindly drawns our attention to the following statement on Russia's UK Embassy website:

Embassy Press Officer comments on the findings of the Swiss experts regarding the Salisbury incident

According to information from the Swiss Federal Institute for NBC-protection in Spiez, its experts received samples collected in Salisbury by the OPCW specialists and finished testing them on 27 March.

The experts of the Institute discovered traces of toxic chemical called “BZ” and its precursors. It is a Schedule 2 substance under the Chemical Weapons Convention.

“BZ” is a chemical agent, which is used to temporary incapacitate people. The desired psychotoxic effect is reached in 30-60 minutes after application of the agent and lasts up to four days. According to the information the Russian Federation possesses, this agent was used in the armed forces of the USA, United Kingdom and several others NATO member states. No stocks of such substance ever existed either in the Soviet Union or in the Russian Federation.

In addition, the Swiss specialists discovered strong concentration of traces of the nerve agent of A-234 type in its initial states as well as its decomposition products.

In view of the experts, such concentration of the A-234 agent would result in inevitable fatal outcome of its administration. Moreover, considering its high volatility, the detection of this substance in its initial state (pure form and high concentration) is extremely suspicious as the samples have been taken several weeks since the poisoning.

It looks highly likely that the “BZ” nerve agent was used in Salisbury. The fact that Yulia Skripal and Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey have already been discharged from hospital, and Sergei Skripal is on his way to recovery, only supports such conclusion.

All this information was not mentioned in the final OPCW report at all.

Considering the above, we have numerous serious questions to all interested parties, including the OPCW.
So the Russians are suggesting that the blood samples supplied to the OPCW were spiked with Novichok, aka A234. 

The presence of both a choline esterase inhibitor (the Novichok A234) and a paralytic agent (BZ) confirms our prediction that the blood samples would contain both: one the poison; the other the antidote. 

Ignoring the suspiciously high concentration of Novichok, which raises the possibility of the samples being spiked, the question then is which of the two nerve agents discovered was the poison and which the antidote. If the Novichok was the antidote, that might explain its suspiciously high concentration, since it would have been given in small doses for some time after the initial poisoning.

It now appears that the debate about what happened will end without definite conclusion unless witnesses in the UK come forward, e.g., medical staff at the Salisbury Trust Hospital. Presumably such witnesses are currently under great pressure to keep their mouths shut.

Related: 
CanSpeccy: The UK's Novichok Poisoning Cover-up
Moon of Alabama: Were the Skripals 'Buzzed', 'Novi-shocked' Or Neither? - May Has Some 'Splaining' To Do
Craig Murray: The British Government’s Legal Justification for Bombing is Entirely False and Without Merit
CanSpeccy: Novichok: Russia's Antidote to Seafood Poisoning
CanSpeccy: Novijoke: To Russia With Hate