How to get through customs with sensitive materials (And how this relates to the Daily express and their obsession with Princess Diana and Madelaine McCaan)

As I have stated, there is no true understanding of enhanced perceptual reasoning and its important implications for societies in the west due to the psychiatric establishment’s reliance upon subjective determination of psychiatric conditions. Intelligence agencies would furthermore be liable according to present policy to view such abilities as a problem in that they pose a threat to human systems of surveillance which are being concealed.

Those with enhanced perceptual reasoning are of course more often than not blessed with excellent memory and can see patterns and details. Rather like Nunez in HG Wells novel Country of the Blind, it is not a case of “seeing things which aren’t there” but “seeing things which others cannot see”

This is quite a useful ability should one wish to get through customs with some sensitive materials which one would wish to conceal. Without meaning to sound disrespectful, it is not as if the average customs officer in the west will be able to see the significance of patterns and details in certain situations and in addition, they are not blessed with telepathy which enables them to read someone’s memory. Furthermore their superiors would no doubt regard any such abilities as a threat as I outlined in my first post.

Before coming to Moscow, I was aware that I had been subject to computerised network exploitation (aka hacking) and that the main archive had been deleted and that should I reconstruct it it was likely to occur again even if it were encrypted. I did however have several backups of all the material but felt that it would be best if those backups were to have documents with insignificant names and were to be arranged (with several copies) in a disorganised manner with several backups spread across several disks. I would also have to remember quite a fair bit.

This I felt would lead customs officers who would have average perceptual reasoning upon any potential inspection (as had been the case on the frontier between Belarus and Poland in September 2015 when I was detained by the Polish border guard who proceeded to inspect my computer) to conclude that it was “Junk” and this is indeed what occurred before the reassembly of my archive in Moscow.

For the customs officers, it is a case of seeing “not seeing things which are there” rather than “seeing things which aren’t there” because they cannot see things which those with EPR can see.

In many ways the method which I used is not unlike the one whereby the British Ministry of Defence exported arms to Saddam Hussein in the early nineties except for the fact that that attempt was not all the well concealed.

Of course this does not does not apply to for someone with an excellent memory and EPR and one might conclude that this presents a problem to authorities in the west given that this lack of ability in this respect and fear of such abilities in that it threatens their systems of surveillance presents a challenge. As I have proved, that fear of such abilities threatens one system of surveillance, which is customs.

So at the moment, it’s very easy to get sensitive materials through western customs and there is nothing they can do about it.

I should state that Russia and other non-western countries are not presented with such a problem given the fact that they have no need to ensure that on a general level, the public are unaware of certain systems of surveillance. From what I understand and have witnessed, they are fairly blunt and open about such matters.

As regards how this related to the Daily Express and Princess Diana, I should perhaps explain. The Daily Express along with some extent the Dailymail publishes is renowned for covering conspiracy stories regarding the death of Princess Diana. it is known for this reason as the Di-ly express. This is also mixed in with the Madelaine Mccaan story

One might ask why this is the case. I would imagine that it is not improbable to suggest that the editor of that newspaper is employed by or has links with MI5 and the “Junk” stories concerning Diana are in fact an effort by the intelligence community to promote a situation whereby any real revelation concerning the death of Diana will be associated with the Daily Express and such conspiracy stories. In other words were to state the truth and state “This is what happened to Diana”, the other person would yawn and state “you sound like the daily express”.

For the truth to be concealed, you just hide it in a load of nonsense and junk news although someone with a high level of PR would be able to see this as well as its significance

Why they should go to such efforts would lead one to suggest that there is in fact something to conceal although I would wish to state that the death of Diana is not something I will be covering.

Dailymail 18:16 GMT 24th of April 2017

In a similar manner, the mail (and indeed others unusually) have published a story concerning MI5 and involvement in the Madelaine McCann story.  I would suggest that it is not unlikely that they would wish my suggestion of underhand dealings by that organisation to be associated in the publics mind with these conspiracy theories, thereby leading the allegations to be discounted.

This is rather difficult however given the definitive links between the mail and MI5 and the fact that a member of MI5 is involved in underhand dealings, one Martin Clarke, who is its editor.

If anyone thinks PR can be ignored, then to be quite frank they need their head examined.

UPDATE: Although this might be unrelated, just after publishing this story at 21:00, the story about MI5 and Madeleine McCann has been removed. GCHQ of course read this pass on this to MI5 and thence onto Martin Clarke who publishes stuff on their behalf.

Dailymail 21:02 GMT 24th of April 2017

UPDATE: As of Tuesday the 24th of April, all the newspapers have started covering Maddie even though it is not so significant a story to merit such coverage before the anniversary. This is perhaps an effort in the part of MI5 to cover up the revelation which I made that that story is perhaps used to cover up another story. They are perhaps attempting to achieve this by increasing the ratio of disinfo to info and by pretending the Maddie story which is hardly ever covered in the more serious journals but which strangely now isis, is not used by a tool by MI5 through the express.

The scientific method of leaking


Most sites which are devoted to leaking classified materials such as Wikileaks and The Intercept are of the opinion that for a claim to be accepted as truthful, it must be an original source document from a government employee. In addition, for the most part, the intercept in particular has a tendency to focus upon the United States, something which is perhaps understandable to some extent.

This approach does have its limitations however.  

Governments would naturally regard a reliance by leakers upon original source documents as a weakness which can be exploited (much as the CIA presumably did when wikileaks asked people to apply to that organisation as potential infiltrators).  They will anticipate the fact that there are leakers by providing “official documents” which are either at variance with the truth as was the case with the zinoviev letter or which are “leaked” in order to conceal even worse stories.

It’s called disinformation.

With regard to the latter, one example would be the disinformation with regard to Michael Flynn and the Cambridge Intelligence Seminars. Another example would be a recent story on the intercept (which I shall not discuss for the moment) which pertains to human systems of surveillance. With regard to the former, a classic example is the double-cross system in WWII whereby the Germans relied upon official sources.

Furthermore, there has not been a leak of the scale of Snowden since Snowden. What was revealed in Vault 7, without meaning to sound disrespectful to Wikileaks, was bound to exist in that it revealed examples of what Snowden had already revealed. It makes sense to presume at the outset that western intelligence agencies have access to all computer systems (given the hacking of the latest version of my tails-OS and OSX installations) rather than being surprised at any big revelation revelation that they do.

There is a better alternative which exists in certain cases to leaking information. This to use the scientific method and to analyse in a logical manner what already exists, which in the case of human forms of surveillance is mostly governmental disinformation rather than original source documents, and to form a conclusion as to the existence of such systems. Such an approach, although this not with regard to intelligence related matters, seemed to work with Charles Darwin and his discovery of evolution. It also appears to work for Sherlock Holmes and other fictional detectives.

It is possible to conclude that a modern form of COINTELPRO is in operation on the basis of the governmental disinformation (which can be classified as original source documents to some extent) and to leak on that basis. In the absence of anyone being able to point out flaws in the analysis, the conclusion reached would appear to be true.

I’d love it if someone were to say “This is wrong because…” and to be able to debate the matter but strangely no-one seems to be able to

On a general level with regard to analysis of intelligence related matters, it should be taken into consideration that revelations concerning human forms of surveillance are of greater importance than revelations concerning electronic systems of surveillance given that the former would appear to be as extensive as and form the basis of the later.

How not to protect people by MI6

SIS is the correct name for MI6, which I am reticent to use because people appear to think, no doubt due to James Bond that it’s some Special Operations Executive type organisation which hasn’t existed for over half a century. In actual fact the reality is that the life of an intelligence officer is an office job with perhaps some travel mixed in and lots of counselling of agents. Just to remind you, this is the sort of person who works for MI6.


Anyway, the repeated attempts to recruit me to MI6 on the part of that individual in the photo whose name is Dr Philip Oliver and was the head of admissions at St Catharine’s College, Cambridge are interesting in that MI6 promised that they would “look after me in every which way”. I felt I should comment upon this rather strange claim.

Not only is it the case that SIS don’t seem to be particularly capable (or indeed interested) in looking after the Middle East but the previous head of the organisation, Sir John Sawyers doesn’t appear to be able to look after himself or indeed his own family, given that certain pictures of himself and family appeared on the internet through his wife’s Facebook account which were available to everyone.

mi6 27.jpg

Lady Sawyers and Corinne Sawyers

mi6 18.jpg

Sir John Sawyers

The EXIF details were presumably available on this photos, thereby providing details of the locations where they were taken and so on.  Lady Sawers also happened to disclose many personal details on her facebook account, including the location of the London flat used herself and Sir John and other details of their three children and of Sir John’s parents. Security experts even warned that his family might have to be rehoused.

I hope it is understood given this that having being in a Cambridge college where one is invited in the hope of expectation that one will work for GCHQ, it’s really not all that difficult to come across information in relation to those who work for the intelligence agencies, as Jock Kane confirmed.

It’s doesn’t exactly ring true that they would look after me particularly given the photos and given the fact that they murdered Gareth Williams and tried to blamed the Russians and Americans.

Moreover, apart from the general harassment, the death threats in person and online, the threat of torture, the fact that others have reported torture as well as the fact that Sir John appears to think torturing terror suspects produces useful intelligence are all rather off-putting to say the least.

Some comments upon Private eye, Piers Morgan and how he got sacked from the Mirror.

Love him or loathe him (and I am indifferent but think he is perhaps unfairly maligned), Piers Morgan, when editor of the mirror, ran a campaign against the Iraq War during the later period of his reign at the newspaper

He was sacked, you might recall, for publishing a fake report that British troops had tortured some civilians in Iraq.

It might very well be argued that the fake report was deliberately supplied to him by members of British intelligence in the knowledge that when this was revealed, the anti-war lobby’s most prominent campaigner would be sacked.

Private Eye strangely never commented upon this but then, to be fair, I don’t suppose they would

How British satire works or doesn’t

Private Eye

For reference, I peruse the site of the British magazine Private eye because it is not possible to purchase it aboard except through a subscription so I hope that references to the current issue might be regarded as accurate.

Whilst the material on Russian corruption in the current issue of Private Eye is

  1. No doubt far more plausible than the case put forward by the British government that Russia was responsible for the Salisbury attack (How could it not be?)
  2. Not as amusing (How could it be?,

it must be said and I hope I am not being unfair that the publication is rather thin gruel overall in terms of it being the anti-establishment publication which it purports to be and should be given that Britain claims to be a democracy.

This is even taking into consideration the fact that it has debunked the allegation made in other  publications that Michael Foot was a USSR spy. This is not terribly significant given the fact that such accusations have been made against Labour politicians of that era since the 1980s and in any case it is a claim which other newspapers have already debunked.

I deem that it is important to point this out given that, as the largest and indeed only significant anti-establishment magazine, it might be regarded as the standard bearer of such things. It is also important because, as things stand, it might be argued that the magazine ultimately serves the interests of the British government in acting as a “pressure valve” and acting by default, even if not by design as the British equivalent of Krokodil, in that anything deemed too damaging will not be published.

Indeed it cannot really be anything other than what I have outlined given the fact that

  1. It comes out once a fortnight and has (from memory) 52 pages, half of which are jokes and it cannot have have much space to publish anything which might be regarded as anti-establishment. It seems a shame and perhaps in addition to a printed edition (rather than a loss making website), there should be extra sources of funding through say some online site which is only available to subscribers. Furthermore my understanding in terms of the libel laws is that Denmark is not subject to British jurisdiction and it could very well publish things which cannot be published in the UK.
  2. It is not possible for anything significant and revelatory to get published because GCHQ, on behalf of themselves and those whose interests they represent, know that the magazine does not have an adequate regard for information security. This is demonstrated by the photos in that it is apparent that they do not understand matters in relation to the intelligence servicesScreenshot from 2018-09-19 16-58-40Screenshot from 2018-09-19 16-57-44As one can see on the bottom left of the second photo, they are using macintosh computers which have inbuilt microphones (which have probably not been disabled) and which can easily be activated by those whom they might wish to investigate such as the intelligence services (or indeed the military). As such their private and journalism related conversations could easily be listened to. The fact that this does occur and that they are  a prime target as journalists is indicated by the latest ECHR judgement which they might wish to read and which concerns GCHQ bugging journlists. It does sadly indicate a general attitude to such matters in that it is no doubt easy for GCHQ to stop anything which might be considered damaging getting through to them by email.
  3. If one looks at the above photo, there isn’t a single ethnic minority there nor indeed is there anyone who is disabled (physically at least) and I would bet and in fact that many of their members come from Oxbridge. Hardly what one would call anti-establishment.
  4. That being said they might wish to avoid companies which might have something untoward to hide, such as the fact that they are into corporate spying by their own admission and who advertise email security whilst I am talking about email security and whose interests GCHQ are keen to defend.
    Screenshot from 2018-09-19 17-52-59

The latest edition also shows that Private eye is somewhat less than questioning of the establishment as would be claimed or are again perhaps not aware of their methods.

  1. The cover shows that it doesn’t, as one would expect, really wish to question the case put forward by the British government particularly given the fact that a little examination will reveal that it is quite obviously a pack of lies. Screenshot from 2018-09-19 16-36-32
  2. With respect to publication of the investigation into dodgy Russian money, it is rather odd that they should publish this on the very day of the claim by the government that they had found the two suspects. No doubt, they were either fed such information in order that the government were able to use them to buttress their case.


I think I was fair and even handed in my last statement and it would appear rather too fair perhaps. And this is a very good example of what happens when you might be minded to contact a resource or organization within Britain which gives the impression of being on the side of being on the side of those who are subject to abuses by the establishment.

As such, I am not at all displeased that the following has occurred because they are making a rather revelatory statement about themselves (rather than about me as they had hoped).

I went out to the shop shortly after accessing the article on Social benefits and Russia at 6:34PM. Here is a copy of my browsing record

Screenshot from 2018-09-19 18-58-09.png

Upon my return at 6:49, I find that the article on the college and GCHQ has been accessed on this blog (For reference, the introduction and homepage article as well as the access from the United States occurred earlier) and accessed the dailymail website

Accesses to the article in relation to the college/GCHQ are usually from the college or GCHQ, something which is indicated in this case by the timing in this case as well as what happened subsequently. The accesses are meant to signify that

  1. They want me to work or study for the college/GCHQ or
  2. They have done something to affect things or otherwise been responsible for passing on misinformation (You know like with the Michael Flynn case)
  3. They have support (or think they do)

Screenshot from 2018-09-19 18-52-35

My access to the dailymail website at 6:49 indicated my presence. Private eye then immediately tweetScreenshot from 2018-09-19 18-57-36.png

It would appear that the college have passed on disinformation to private eye given the timing (just as I accessed the computer), the reference to schizophrenia (and butt plugs perhaps) and were aware they were about to tweet.

The fact that private eye have

  1. Done the above
  2. Not taken the concerns which were confirmed by the ECHR in relation to surveillance.
  3. Decided at the outset that they did not really wish to hear my side of the story in relation to St Catharines, Cambridge and GCHQ.

indicates that

  1. They are very much establishment satire and a pressure valve, are already aware of what I am stating and moreover aren’t minded to care.
  2. The claim by the editor that Julian Assange said some antisemitic things must be called into question and it does tend to call into question other claims.
  3. The claim that its an old boys club and anti-establishment satire for and by the establishment is also true. This is partially indicated by the fact that Cambridge and St Catharine’s follow them on twitter.
  4. Were there ever to be a case involving national security/corruption, they would side against the person reporting it (except in some instances to give the impression that this is not the case).

It also

  1. Does rather call into question, given the nature of the above communication which amounts to surveillance, complaints made against Piers Morgan and indeed puts whatever happened on HIGNFY over a quarter of a century ago in the shade.
  2. Perhaps confirms what the former editor of the guardian stated with respect to other publications (given that this affair involves them, in particular the mail who have the aid of the intelligence services) that members of the private eye have “ammunition” aimed at them.
  3. Does explain something else rather important. I disagree with violence, not just because it’s wrong but because there are certain people within the intelligence services who enjoy turning people to violence. Sadly, however, as pointed out by an ex-head of MI5 during the Iraq inquiry, there are inevitably certain people who, when push comes to shove, will resort to extremism. It will and has been the case that where you have a policy to isolate people (I’m on the spectrum so this obviously doesn’t apply to me!) from potential sources of support (which no doubt include their circles of friends and family), it is inevitable that some people will either seek other sources of support or indeed become violent. This was the experience of Jihadi John something which due to its links to the security service, the mail in particular is keen to overlook by ignoring the matter and  referring to those who have turned to terrorism for other reasons.

It is also ironic given that the editor of that publication is a remainer that they haven’t noticed what I have written in relation to the Skripal case.

It might very well be argued that it represents a feasible way of stopping brexit given the nature of the allegations which have been made and the fact that the principle promoters of the allegations  are Theresa May of the “Chequers wing” of the party and Boris Johnson of the no-deal wing of the party.

Private eye is satire apparently. Well

  1. Such actions on the part of private eye make a good mockery of those who claim to be anti-establishment.
  2. As Private Eye can be said to representing the British press at its most fearless but is keen to reveal that it is in fact nothing of the sort and as free press is claimed to be a cornerstone of a free and democratic country, this to an extent has some bearing upon the attempts by the United Kingdom to lecture others about such matters.
  3. It confirms that perhaps they were aware of the fact that the British state were going to put forth those allegations and decided to work in conjunction with them.
  4. Since they dismissed what I highlighted in relation to security, I should also like to point out a small technical flaw with respect to their decision to rely upon a paid model of publishing rather than one which involves publishing a website which is freely available. It is entirely possible and very easy to scan the magazine each week and put it on a bittorrent/scribd site (not that I personally can be bothered but I’m sure there are others who might be). This isn’t unknown; ripping CDs is how the decline of the music companies began and given that Private Eye doesn’t apparently disapprove of theft, given Amadeus and the college, perhaps there wouldn’t be any objection.

Have I got news for you

A PrM for reference is my term for a coded message, instances which I have described in this very article and which I have outlined was the case, for instance as part of an attempt to recruit me to MI6 by claiming that Michael Flynn was subject to Russian influence.

PrM is short for proxy or parallel message whereby a message in a newspaper or broadcast is aimed both at the general public and at a particular individual who either is working for an intelligence service or who the intelligence services wish nonetheless to communicate with in what they consider to be a plausibly deniable fashion to for example attempt to recruit them.

Such methods of communication have existed since at least the Second World War and have recently been employed by the NSA, thus proving the fact that they still exist.

It’s no great secret and it is foolish to claim such things do not exist. Furthermore, it should be stated that this it is a flawed method of relaying information in that should the intended recipient reveal their existence and meaning, it would not be possible nor beneficial in many cases to falsely claim that this is indicative of mental illness as part of an attempt to guarantee plausible deniability. It is quite likely that they and more importantly others who may pick up such messages are likely to have a high level of perceptual reasoning something which discounts the possibility.

Anyway, I wrote the following on the 3rd of April on another account

Screenshot from 2018-09-19 21-29-06

The first episode of HIGNFY (Have I got news for you) was on April the 6th and sure enough starred Jeremy Paxman who like myself is from St Catharines College. This, on its own means nothing, although

  1. Perhaps given my prediction, they felt they couldn’t resort to sending PrMS in this episode and his mere presence can be said to be a message.
  2. For reference, he did describe the allegation that anyone who came up with alternative theories in relation to the Salisbury incident was a “conspiracy theorist” and Mr Hislop went along with this.
  3. It is nonetheless slightly odd that I should talk about coded messages from the intelligence agencies and someone who went to a college which is part of an intelligence agency presents the episodes.

It is very odd indeed that this occurs again in the seventh episode which is presented by someone from the college who works in the entertainment industry called Richard Ayoade (I’ve never met any famous from St Catharine’s by the way nor have any familiarity with any of their work apart from Jeremy Paxman perhaps)

Look at the following screenshot which was taken just after midnight on youtube (where I watched the program), the day after the episode was broadcast. Screenshot from 2018-09-19 22-55-01

  1. It is is commented upon by someone with the name danmar007 (a reference to James Bond) and James Pants. These accounts  might be people from JTRIG who knew I was going to watch it or indeed people who like James Bond or work for MI6 and who were attracted to the episode. My view is that on the balance of probabilities, it is more likely to be the former given that the derogatory nature of the comment on James Bond (which neither I nor SIS think much of, something which they are aware of).
  2. The missing words round mentions “inventions”. Tang who is Chinese and a warrior is a coded reference to Kang Tchou who is Chinese, who works for the CIA and who was harassing me into handing over my work at the behest of members of the intelligence services within the college. The mention of Roger Moore can be taken as directed toward me so that I work for SIS as has repeatedly occurred.

Given that this it is presented by someone from a recruitment centre for the intelligence services, one in which i was a student and where there have been repeated attempts to recruit me to those bodies and given the attempts to steal/make me hand over my work, this can be interpreted as saying that should work for SIS and be allowed to say that I invented a version of my project but that it was Kang who invented the thing.

Which is daft but par for the course when it comes to British intelligence (an oxymoron if ever I saw one). I should perhaps explain.

  1. A small part of what I have invented is in relation to this equation, namely the fact that enhanced perceptual reasoning discounts psychosis.. As I explain, this is not something which can be ignored lest a country ends up in “the Country of the Blind” by H G wells (2nd edition) or another country takes advantage of a situation.
  2. The fact that this is already the case with respect to the British is proved by such actions. Kang and others are unable to understand that they are attempting to steal something part of which proves the fact that an enhanced level of perceptual reasoning discounts psychosis. They are doing so with methods which involve claiming that someone with an enhanced level of perceptual reasoning has psychosis. This is manifestly contradictory and doesn’t make sense.
  3. Apart from that, the fact that they were attempting to recruit someone means that they have a lax attitude to security and are thus likely subject to infiltration.
  4. Such stupidity is unintentionally funny particularly when in acting in this way, they reveal their weaknesses to others
  5. It is especially stupid when they try and inject false certificates or perform Ddos attacks. If it was, at this end, then I suspect things would just not work.Screenshot from 2018-09-19 23-49-00


At the time of writing this section 00:41, September the 20th, the contacts from St Catharines/GCHQ keep coming apparently in response to those from America. The fact that this is the intelligence services is indicated by the fact that in the section on the bottom right which shows which links were accessed from my website, the following article which is not linked to on my website is listed.

The article on fake news as a method of recruitment has most likely been accessed from America. This indicates that they are aware of what the British are up to and are pointing to previous and indeed current instances of this, particularly given the fact that I just updated another article in order to show that the fact that an INTERPOL notice has not been issued rather discounts their claims.

The article on St Catharines  being a recruitment center of GCHQ is most likely in response to this and proof of the fact, given what I have stated that they are infiltrated, don’t give a damn and are in fact averse to the special relationship which is OK I suppose but it’s silly to claim otherwise and at least China or Venezuela doesn’t pretend to have a special relationship.


Screenshot from 2018-09-20 00-32-53

Here are the stats at the end of yesterday which is an update of the stats in the screenshot below which was taken at 6:50.

Screenshot from 2018-09-20 00-41-17

Screenshot from 2018-09-19 18-52-35

As you can see there have been three accesses from America which refer to GCHQ and Steele (who how can I put this got his facts rather wrong), so perhaps the accesses from the UK are in response to this.

In short the UK is keen to show that it has much to conceal.

British satire? No thanks I’ll read Plato’s Apology because it’s much more pertinent and funny.

Further nonsense in the mail

The mail apparently think it’s a good idea to publish a story by some blonde claiming that Putin wished to poison her in advance of any evidence of the fact for which there is none.

  1. The poisoning of food is the same pattern of events as occurred to me at the behest of British intelligence with a similar substance.
  2. The story is meant to attract attention because she’s a leggy blonde with some pictures of her modelling.
  3. She doesn’t like Putin but she’s literally a nobody and lots of people don’t like Putin anyway.
  4. She is not significant enough to warrant attention but does not like Putin or indeed Russia. As such she is useful in that she is likely to be biased in terms of any potential attribution something demonstrated by the fact that she does so in advance of any evidence.
  5. It is odd that the article provides lots of quotes by her but does not provide a quote for the claim that “she has received death threats from someone claiming to be her father”. She does not state this, only the mail does.
  6. As to her giving up her Russian citizenship and becoming an Israeli citizen. Russia has in fact close relations with Israel. As such if she was a, er, threat, they would either know or some action would be taken. Some proof of the close relationship can be seen in following extracts from the wikipedia article on Russo-Israeli relations
    1. Israel is part Russophone and considered to be the world’s only part Russophone country outside the former Soviet Union. Russian is the third most widely spoken first language in Israel, after Hebrew and Arabic, and has the third largest number of Russian speakers outside former Soviet countries, and the highest as a proportion of the total population. Over 100,000 Israeli citizens live in Russia,[3] with 80,000 Israelis living in Moscow,[4] while hundreds of thousands of Russian citizens reside in Israel, from around 1.5 million native Russian-speaking Israelis.[5]
    2. Russia and Israel have agreed to install a direct encrypted communication network, to facilitate communications between the Russian President and Israeli Prime Minister. One analyst says: “Russia feels very close to the Israeli leadership… The Russians want to speak to Israel without anyone eavesdropping.”

The FCO claims they are unable to determine whether it is in the public interest to provide examples of the Russia disinformation which they have complained about.

This relates to a FOIA request which I submitted just under 6 months ago now whereby I asked the FCO to provide examples of Russian disinformation in relation to the Skripal case.

Jeremy Hunt, the new foreign secretary, has claimed that a Russian government organ is spreading disinformation because of the interview with the two Russians whom they have accused but who rather amusingly turned out to have visited East London for a hooker and some drugs.

His department is however unable to provide any examples of this supposed phenomenon via an FOIA request today.

Screenshot from 2018-09-18 17-28-38.png

I was just in the shop now and someone walked in with a top with the words “Imperfect Sanity” written on it which reminded me of them because such behaviour is hardly rational. Did they think noone would notice.

FCO; Russia is spreading disinformation

Me: Have you got any examples

FCO: Oh look a biscuit.

So given the fact that they are unable to provide examples of the disinformation which they complain about, this is a form of projection whereby the FCO is spreading disinformation about Russian disinformation.

On a personal note, another example of disinformation would be a claim on their part that I am a threat. This is obvious nonsense used to justify the criminal nature of their actions, given the fact that, amongst other things,

  1. I have sent letters to the authorities in France asking amongst other things if they had any quarms with regards to me and have not received a reply.
  2. I have been in and out of France and have never been stopped or questioned once.

Why the accusations that Russia along with Ruslan Boshirov and Alexander Petrov are responsible for the nerve agent attack in Salisbury is nonsense on stilts [UPDATED]

I should wish to update the article which disproves  the latest set of “evidence” which is provided by a reliable source of disinformation known as mailonline which was reported by others.

Additionally, I would wish to show why neither they nor Russia are responsible.


General points about the two individuals

The claim that nervousness is indicative of guilt

The idea that nervousness in indicative of guilt is not worth taking seriously to anyone with a half a braincell, given, amongst other things, the fact that the person who was nervous

  1. Was probably reserved, introvert which is indicated by his interest in coin collecting. He might even have been on the autistic spectrum.
  2. Had never been on TV before.
  3. They were apparently dope smokers who had an orgy and such things are with some exceptions, not favorably looked upon in most of Russia. This would I would imagine render both of them nervous and unable to defend themselves by discussing what they had been up to and where they had been in full.
  4. Moreover, the fact that they smoked cannabis explains why their movements were shall we say somewhat erratic and might mean they can’t remember in detail lending further ammunition to the FCO who think they can claim this and that.

They are dope smokers

  1. The idea that a couple of dope smokers who were probably smoking skunk (It apparently usually is that form of cannabis now and this is indicated by the strong smell) and whose mental and motor function was deleteriously affected by THC as can be seen could by the interview, who had been partying all night with a prostitute and had very little sleep and no doubt energy, put “novichok” on a door-handle in a city miles away and moreover did so without risk to their life is comical. In this sense, it is rather like to concept of a cannabis legalisation march, with people bumping into lampposts.
  2. The idea that they risked an op by causing problems and getting into a fight whereby they could be questioned and potentially searched by police (given that they are Russian) doesn’t make sense.
  3. Such people were employed by the GRU  who would have no doubt sacked two drug takers, particularly given the harsh drugs laws in Russia, should be laughed at.
  4. The GRU employed people who they know would subject to potential blackmail through the use of prostitutes and drugs is obviously incredibly silly. It is more likely a form of projection on the part of the British Intelligence agencies.
  5. Under such circumstances, the GRU would opted to risk their reputation and/or careers to get personal authorization from the Kremlin or indeed Vladimir Putin to use these two as part of an op whereby nerve agents are employed should also be laughed at which I can’t help but do as I image is the case with most people.

The claim that tourists who come to the UK on a business visa is suspicious

This is to perhaps cover for the fact that they were there for the aforementioned activities. It’s a very good cover.

Why were these two named?

  1. They are Russian and that fits the cognitive bias/needs of the British deep state
  2. The British state were aware that they are dope smokers and had had an orgy and were hoping that they would not come into the limelight potentially fearing reprisals on the basis of their activities. In effect, the British state in naming these two was attempting to blackmail them into keeping silent because they would not wish to have any focus upon them given the potential for the press and especially the British press to be intrusive.

The GPS evidence:

GPS record can easily be faked, as proved by the fact that GCHQ has a department for faking such things as emails and by my own discoveries with respect to this technology. We are apparently meant to rely upon their say so.

On that score, it is fairly odd given that

  1. There are two of them
  2. Most people have mobile phones
  3. There is only one route given according to the map of their route which is based upon GPS signals
  4. They must have been separate at one point or another (toilet) something which isn’t indicated.

The fact that it was in broad daylight:

They certainly wouldn’t do what they did in broad daylight nor would orders be given for this to be done.

The CCTV evidence

They have not shown any in the vicinity of the Skripal’s house and we are meant to rely upon their word. They have also not shown any on the day of their visit on the Sunday from what I understand. The Police have not said that they were seen near the Skripal’s house.

Screenshot from 2018-09-14 18-57-13.png

The general attitude on the part of the British establishment

The general attitude from the press and the government is one where they act as judge and prosecutor and whereby the trial is done by media. Any rational person and indeed an impartial judicial system would easily conclude that the likelihood of a fair trial is unlikely.

Overall, it really does remind me of the way in which the college, GCHQ and so on treated me with regards to their accusations against me when I complained about their treatment of me with regards to amongst other things intrusions into my room in college by members of British intelligence.

Why the fairly muted response from Russia?

They have indeed complained but it does seem fairly muted when compared with the attitude of Britain or indeed what I would presume to be a normal reaction which is one of outrage, as they have demonstrated in the past with regards to things which the UK has done and which affects them less. They are perhaps partly aware that this whole affair is to cover for the fact that GCHQ is infiltrated by members from their government as I outline elsewhere.

Why hasn’t the hotel room been decontaminated?

Apparently they found traces of a deadly nerve agent in the hotel where the two stayed back in May but have taken no steps to decontaminate it and indeed have not notified the owner who no doubt rented out the room to others.

Why did the British police apparently claim they identified these people back in May?

According to mailonline, they called in two superrecognisers to trawl through 1000s of hours of footage in just over a week, which would not be humanly possible

And yet it is claimed that the British authorities identified the two individuals concerned back in May which clearly is not true

The timing indicates that they were clearly not responsible

I’ve borrowed this from Jon Gaunt. The men arrived in Salisbury at 11.48 on the second day and therefore the poison couldn’t have been put on the door before noon.

We know from previous statements and CCTV that the Skripals left their house in the cul-de-sac at 9.15 on the Sunday morning. There has never been any mention of them coming back, until now and the Police have or cannot provide any CCTV of them driving back past the garage etc although they were caught by three separate cameras when they left home.

The behaviour indicates that they were clearly not responsible

I’ve also borrowed this from Jon Gaunt. Why, after administering the deadly nerve agent on to the door handle, did they go window shopping after walking straight past the train station? Why did they seem more interested in looking at old coins in a shop window than hot footing it out of town and making their escape? And just how did the perfume/nerve gas get back in the sealed container that Junkie Charlie said, in a TV interview he found and gave to his girlfriend?

The fact that an interpol notice has not been issued indicates they are not responsible

The British government has claimed that they have strong enough evidence and have issued an INTERPOL warrant to arrest them the minute they leave Russia

Here is a list of people who have been placed on the INTERPOL red notice list which is the list used for warrants which are issued by governments

Screenshot from 2018-09-20 00-22-32

As one can see there is no Interpol warrant for the two Russians and it has been some time since the announcement so either

  1. Interpol has not issued an arrest warrant because it knows the evidence is lacking.
  2. The UK has not issued a warrant because it knows the evidence is lacking.


The claims in the article

1) What about the Novichok found in hotel room?
The nerve agent was found in their hotel room for two other potential reasons than the one given

  1. Because it is a persistent substance which was spread by emergency service workers including police who did not wear protective clothing. If it had been the case that the container somehow leaked in the baggage then they would have become ill by touching the clothing. If it had been the case that the container had been opened, prepared or even sprayed by them in enclosed space of a hotel room, where was their protective clothing?
  2. Given the poisoning or both myself and Gareth Williams and no doubt others, it cannot be ruled out that it was the British who planted it there.
    1. On a related note,  if it is claimed that I am spreading Russian propaganda, I have given notification that the murder of Gareth Williams along with the Salisbury incident were both intended to conceal Russian infiltration within GCHQ. The later occurred within 48 hours of my complaint to the IPT concerning British intelligence attempting to interfere in the writing of that dossier, the timing of which should not regarded as coincidental given the fact that the smears against Michael Flynn concerning the Cambridge Intelligence Seminars at Corpus Christ College occurred shortly after I pointed out harassment which were taking place at the instigation of members of British Intelligence within St Catharines.
    2. This culture of lax security has changed little since the days of Jock Kane. Proof that GCHQ has a problem in that respect and a lack of concern except in so far as it affects their status and reputation (most notably with regards to the potential for British Intelligence to sell its services as part of brexit) and causes its individual members embarrassment, is proved by the fact that they have attempted and will no doubt continue to attempt, as I have related here and elsewhere, to recruit someone who leaks, namely myself.
    3. It is also proved by the  fact that they used the announcement as to who was guilty to bury the buzzfeed report, a report which does indicate Russian involvement within British intelligence in several more important respects.
    4. More importantly, the buzzfeed dossier shows that they have a policy to silence such people by using, amongst other things, psychiatry which can be said, under the circumstances whereby someone is deliberately misdiagnosed, to amount to a form of poisoning. As someone who went to St Catharines which is a center of recruitment for GCHQ, I can attest to the fact that this does happen and the audio in relation to what happened as well as related material quite clearly shows the involvement of SIS in my stay.

It would be quite clear to most people that is clearly nonsense, given the fact that the hotel had not been decontaminated after the visit of the police, the hotel owner was not notified and guests were allowed to stay. Moreover as pointed out by Russia insider, tthe guests who had been in that room beforehand were not contacted.

2) Why stay in East London anyway?
They misjudged the distance on a map as I am not unknown to do (hence why I commonly chose a place some kilometers from the city center of the place where I am staying). They come from Russia and England looks small no doubt on a map (as several places do to me) and they did not prepare in advance (as indicated by the interview). They probably thought it would be nipping out to a local town.

East London might also have to do with the fact that they are came for the aforementioned activities.

3) Their complaints about the snowy weather:
It had been snowing the past couple of days and they might have walked in some snow. Snow does not melt in 24 hours usually especially at 9 degrees.

This tweet

Along with this video

proves there was snow and slush in that area.

The claim that there was snow up to their knees can be explained potentially by the fact that  they went through some snow/slush in an attempt to get to Old Sarum. Indications of the fact that this may be the case are as follows:

  1. They walked quite a distance anyway.
  2. They saw no notification of bus services or became aware of the fact that there were none.
  3. Old Sarum is within walking distance through fields of Salisbury (2 miles)
  4. The GPS logs are unreliable given the fact that they can be faked by GCHQ.

in any case, the splatter from the slush would come up to their knees, something which is perhaps not reflected in the translation of the interview and the interpretation has been twisted to suit.

4) Wrong direction:
Where does it say which direction to visit it in and why should this matter. It’s irrelevant. They were in fact stoned.

5) No pictures of them visiting cathedral.
The police and authorities are acting as judge and prosecutor and given the usage of the DSMA notice as indicated by a) Craig Murray and b) the lack of response to the FOIA request in relation to Russian disinformation, we have no way of knowing whether they have released the information. And they have a record in respect of withholding information. I have emails to prove

  1. There was a similar withholding of CCTV evidence in 2013 by British Intelligence/the college in relation to the thefts which they arranged from my room, in complete breach of the Data Protection Act(1998)
  2. During this period when there was a burglary in the college bar and they did arrange for the CCTV to be looked at.

On a related note, the archbishop of Salisbury claims he did not see the two Russians which is an impossible claim according the GDPR, whereby CCTV has to be destroyed after, I think from recollection, 3 months.

6) Bus tours to Stonehenge were NOT cancelled.
There’s more than tour to Stonehenge one and they probably checked the wrong one being foreign (and not speaking English very well)

7) Airport Entry Photo
Russia indeed got this wrong

8) Fake photos proved real
Where does Russia say they faked the images? The British have not provided an answer to the FOI request about such matters so this is itself disinformation.

9) Bad timing

10) Two return flights
Perhaps they were undecided as to whether decided to stay and (rather wastefully in my view) booked two lots of tickets.

A general comment about the allegation that it was Russia

The location of the application of the nerve agent was the park (or nearby) and not the house

  1. Why would an assassin spray a door-handle and not apply it with something more suitable?
  2. It is not logical to state that the Skripals left the house at noon or so (and there’s no evidence for this been provided anyway), after touching the nerve agent on the door handle, drove around town, went to a restaurant and to a pub, whereupon the father who appears to have a heart condition, drank alcohol, walked to the park with no apparent problem and were both suddenly affected at the same time. The only time a substance of that precision has ever been witnessed is in Blackadder.
  3. In the Amesbury incident, Dawn Sturgess fell ill within fifteen minutes according to Charlie Rowley, who was the other victim. As it is the same substance, so must have the Skripals

4. The fact that they continue to point to the door handle which is so obviously wrong on the basis of the evidence speaks of someone trying to conceal the obvious. In other words, a cover up.

The claim that Russia is spreading disinformation in relation to the case

The United Kingdom claims that Russia is spreading disinformation about the case but is unable to provide examples in relation to this via a Freedom of Information request. under the guise of it coming under “international relations”. This is whilst they are keen to claim that Russia is spreading disinformation even though they cannot provide examples.

The allegation that Russia is spreading disinformation is therefore itself disinformation

This is proven amongst other things by the fact that the former foreign secretary Boris Johnson claimed that the DSTL said the nerve agent from Russia when they were unable to derive the source.

The claim that only Russia had the means and motive

This is certainly nonsense as, given

  1. Even given what I revealed in relation to Russia on here today, Russia has only ever attempted to use “red sparrows”. I am a greater target than….
  2. …..Mr Skirpal who as an FSB officer was put in prison for spying for the British, let out early, deported to the United Kingdom but nonetheless asked to come back. It is fanciful to suggest that several years later after having had the opportunity of doing so, they decided to come all the way to the United Kingdom and to kill him with a nerve agent, given the above and especially given the fact that he had nothing new to divulge. On that score, after the attack, Julia Skripal expressed a desire to go back to Russia which is fairly strange behaviour if it were indeed Russia.
  3. The chemical formula is openly available on amazon to anyone with the resources to fabricate it.
  4. A former Kremlin official, Valery Morozov, who was an associate of Sergei Skripal after he was exiled to the UK stated that Mr Skripal was in regular contact with the Russian embassy.
    1. The response from the Russian embassy to this claim is nuanced in that they state that “They are not aware of any contacts” rather than denying the fact by saying that “He was not in contact with the Russian embassy”. It is suspicious that the investigatory bodies have not commented on this nor denied that this was the case by calling it disinformation especially given the fact that I have asked for examples of this.
    2. He apparently according to reports received anonymous encrypted threatening emails “telling him not to meddle” but given that the emails were anonymous, it cannot be said for certain that they came from Russia.
    3. What discounts such a conclusion is the fact that
      1. The emails are anonymous and encrypted but the message is clear stating that “Russia is coming to get you”. In which case, given the message, why bother with the anonymity and encryption? It’s like me saying that “I would like to kill my neighbour and doing so in code which can be decrypted. The reason its anonymous and encrypted is someone trying to give the impression that the source is Russia whilst coming their tracks. Such misattribution is something the CIA apparently carried out as revealed by wikileaks in vault 7.
      2. It is inconsistent behavior to be brazen in its attempt to kill the Skripals (even though the facts do not support this) but feeble and anonymous with an ex-Kremlin official.

The fact that Porton Down was ruled out as a source at the outset.

Reasonably in any police investigation, for the sake of objectivity and impartiality, all potential suspects are interviewed, even if just to rule things out.

The fact that the authorities who act as judge and prosecutor in this instance, instantly without the slightest investigation, dismissed any suggestion that it may have come from Porton Down is under such circumstances suspicious.

It is also suspicious that they pushed hard for the OPCW to have a mandate to determine the source of the nerve agent after that body had determined the type of nerve agent which was employed.

Other comments

Why I can work this out and others including the police can’t

Given how obvious this is, it is evidence of a large scale conspiracy, stupidity, gullibility or a combination of all three and as such there are people concealing something within the British state, something which is not unknown given the Gareth Williams case.

I gave notification of the fact that there were spies in the Russian embassy first

I remarked upon the fact that Russia had spies in its embassy on March the 9th on my facebook page (is there an embassy that doesn’t given that’s what diplomats do, especially American ones who had 750 in Moscow alone last year)

Here is a copy of that statement.

Screenshot from 2018-09-18 20-05-37.png

Five days later, the British decide to expel some “spies” and to use this as a pretext to claim some credit for spurring others to action presumably

  1. in order to conceal their embarrassment and fear of my complaint which concerned their interference into the writing of my dossier.
  2. Because it is low hanging fruit, as it were..

Now given everything else and the nature of the surveillance of facebook and indeed myself by GCHQ and others, it is implausible to suggest that there is no relation between such statements by myself and actions on their part.

Some speculation as to where they potentially got the idea from

This is mere speculation but it has been the case in the past that the intelligence services, most notably MI6, have based the evidence which they use to justify certain actions upon films and television. This is because they lack imagination something which is partially indicated by the fact that they don’t like mavericks.

There are a few examples of this

  1. As was reported in the Chilcott enquiry, this was the case with the dossier which was used to justify the decision to invade Iraq in that the evidence in that dossier was inspired by the the Rock starring Nicholas Cage.
  2. When trying to recruit me in 2014, I showed fake evidence that there was an FBI investigation into what turned out to be the intelligence services, as well as the company whose interest they nominally protect. I took inspiration from a Doctor Who story by Douglas Adams called City of Death and used a tampered email with the words THISISAFAKE in the header. This was not remarked upon by the person who was attempting to recruit me in that she took fright and badgered me..
  3. In turn as part of their attempt to stop brexit, the civil service got inspiration from a sitcom called “The Rise and Fall of Reginald Perrin  which is in part based upon the SpyCatcher novel as well as another doctor who story.  For reference, it is no longer possible for them to derail brexit in the aforesaid fashion given that such an attempt on their part is in the public domain.

In the case of the Salisbury incident, they will have certainly noted the fact that whilst I was in Russia I developed a fixed interest in the television series Sherlock most notably because this in turn appears to have had an effect upon work such as is seen here (I did however start the blog before any such interest developed).

It is not beyond the realms of the imagination therefore given the usage of film and tv as sources of inspiration by the intelligence services, that they will have done the same in this instance, especially given the fact that they only will have had 2 days to plot and plan the event. According to this theory,they will have

  1. Remembered the fact that I am on the autistic spectrum and my interest in Sherlock.
  2. As a consequence of this, first looked at the episode where Holmes mentions/speculates that Sherlock is on the autistic spectrum.
  3. Noticed that it was the Baskerville episode involving a civil servant who poisoned individuals with a nerve agent near the Sherlock equivalent of Porton Down.
  4. Used this as inspiration.

This is mere speculation however.


I note that the following article has appeared which proves my point that Britain has some beef against Russia because of its need to have a bogey man to sell the services, such as they are, of its intelligence agencies as part of any security deal rather than letting others have the benefit any objective assessment.

The allegation might well be true but bearing in mind the way in which the secretive and underhand way in which British have conducted themselves with regards to this whole incident and the information in relation to the case, it is I feel understandable if regrettable.

Although there have been allegations that Russia has hacked elections, it has never been claimed by the United States that they have altered any results.  And it would hardly make sense for a) the analysis to take place, which would no doubt occur offline, b) the lab to have the results and c) the russians to alter them. The lab would be aware of the correct result and the fact that it would have been altered.

The Russians were after information.

A sane attitude in this case and similar cases involving international disputes with regards to chemical or nerve agents would be to leave it to an impartial body such as the OPCW rather than in the hands of an obviously biased country such as the United Kingdom which feels it has the right and reflects well on the case to act as prosecutor and judge.

I would also like to comment upon St Catharine’s to whom this article relates and upon whom I have been commenting. They form part of British Intelligence, have read the article and have elected to do some PR in that the subtext of the tweet is  “We don’t care about stuff for which we have some responsibility, lots of people are interested in St catharines and we’re fully booked”. This essentially proves my point about the fact that their priorities are ones of position, reputation and status and speaks volumes about their priorities and about the fact that British Intelligence doesn’t fundamentally give two hoots about such matters.

Screenshot from 2018-09-15 00-37-53

Screenshot from 2018-09-15 11-35-25

As indeed has Sir Cupboard who was embroiled in the Iraq war or indeed whoever is managing his twitter feed.

Screenshot from 2018-09-15 01-39-10.png


An ex-GRU officer (from Cambridge?) speaks

This is amusing. A

former GRU officer (was he from Cambridge perchance 😉 ) claims that it is nonsense to suggest that two dope smokers who came for an orgy and got doped up in London would have been response for the nerve agent attack.

He suggests however they might have been watchers.

This is also nonsense because

  1. They were pretty mobile by all accounts and could not have been watching anything.
  2. They is no record of them calling anyone to keep in touch with potential operatives.
  3. Had it been the case that they were watchers, the operation would have been aborted because they were a) incommunicado and b)doped up. So it would need at least 3 incompetent people.

On a related note, it seems unlikely that two individuals would have smeared a doorknob with a nerve agent in daylight.