Yulia wants to go home.

Written By: - Date published: 10:55 am, May 25th, 2018 - 59 comments
Categories: International, Propaganda, Russia, uk politics - Tags: , , , ,

So Yulia Skripal contacted reuters news agency through the Metropolitan Police and issued two written and one video taped statements. I might think reuters to be an odd choice for someone looking to break a story when there are so many other (how to say?) more sensationalist and more widely read publications in the UK. But hey.

Anyway. She has stated she wants to go home to Russia and has publicly thanked the Russian Embassy for their offers of assistance.

Given that we’ve been assured the Russian government lies behind the poisoning of the Skripals, and given there have no doubt been quite in-depth conversations between the Skripals and whatever arm of the British state, it strikes me as somewhat astonishing that she’d state a desire to return to the country whose government tried to “off” her. Unless of course, what the UK Government, and others garnering their information from the UK government, have been spouting tosh all along.

Angus Roxburgh, a former adviser to the Russian government during the Yeltsin years writing for the Guardian has it covered off. Yulia was apparently “delivering a coded message” – according to the headline of his piece. I read it. But it seems he forgot to include the decoding of whatever the coded message was. A small oversight. But whatever, he doesn’t seem to be overly convinced that the UK Government has been batting with a straight bat.

Meanwhile, we have Mary Djevsky writing for “The Independent” articulating some of the many obvious questions that surround the official UK version of events while still nobly trying to salvage some credibility for the UK Government’s line.

So what does a government usually do when its version of a major event starts to come apart at the seams? That’s right. It throws in a new story to divert the focus and fill those headlines (And bang on cue, reports from the Dutch investigation of flight MH17 fingering Russia*).

If that’s why the timing of the MH17 allegations, they needn’t have bothered. It seems the UK’s Liberal media are more than happy to relegate the Skripal story these days and run with North Korea, Brexit and Harvey Weinstein (The Guardian) or Brexit, Weinstein and ministerial aids quitting their positions (The Independent).

That’s to be expected. The job of the media is to generate memes and not to undermine that which they help to create. And yes, I know, we’re only to think it’s the more dubious or nefarious media operating from within countries that our governments aren’t too hot on that do that. My bad.

* It appears that no actual report has been published

 

59 comments on “Yulia wants to go home. ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. lprent 1
    25 May 2018 at 11:22 am

    An interesting spin angle. You really do seem to like repeating the RT spin

    Somehow you seem to have missed a few portions of the statement

    1. She wasn’t interested in talking to the Russian embassy.

    2. She rather explicitly said that she wasn’t interested in other family members like the Russian government’s pet cousin trying to speak for her. I got the impression that she disagreed with them.

    3. Most people would like to go back to the country of origin. Presumably when they are sure that they aren’t going to be poisoned or pressured into being another propaganda tool to parade on RT and state television to support Putin.

    4, She didn’t say when she’d go back. Maybe when the arseholes in charge of Russia aren’t trying to kill her perhaps? Perhaps that is what she meant by the “longer term” when she’d want to go back?

    For instance you seem to assume that the British Government has control over a Netherland’s inquiry over the MH17 report is released.

    Now that really is a case of pathetic propaganda. Does sound like a conspiracy parrot line from RT though. But could you please improve the quality of your lines. This is outright stupid.

    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-russia-skripal-yulia-exclusiv/exclusive-yulia-skripal-attempted-assassination-turned-my-world-upside-down-idUSKCN1IO2LT

    • One Anonymous Bloke 1.1
      25 May 2018 at 11:34 am

      +1

    • Bill 1.2
      25 May 2018 at 11:50 am

      No idea how I can “repeat RT spin” when 1. (and how fucking often am I going to have to repeat this?) I cannot access RT.com and 2. all of the sources I’ve used are well established and (some would say) reputable UK media outlets.

      She thanked the Russian Embassy and did not say she was not interested in talking to them, but that she (quote) at the moment do not wish to avail myself of their services.

      There is absolutely no mention of her family members (bar her father) in her written statements. (Christ! Have you even read the stuff?)

      The rest of your points flow from an assumption on your part – that the Russian government tried to kill her. It might have escaped your notice (it happens when people are all bound up in prejudice) that I’ve never made a definitive statement around who did or didn’t try to kill the Skripals.

      And you don’t think the UK government is able to suggest that an inquiry release a pre-report statement around some detail of their “progress to date”?! Especially when both countries share the same desire to vilify the same target. ffs Lynn!

      • One Anonymous Bloke 1.2.1
        25 May 2018 at 12:32 pm

        re: that “assumption”.

        Boris Johnson: ““we’re almost 100% sure”.

        Even Johnson retains an element of doubt.

        By comparison, your assertion that the UK and Netherlands possess a desire to “vilify” the Russian Foundation reveals no doubt whatsoever. Do you have a scrap, a skerrik, a shred, of evidence to support this nasty slur on Dutch investigators?

        • Bill 1.2.1.1
          25 May 2018 at 12:39 pm

          I made no comment whatsoever on motivations of those directly involved in the Dutch investigation into flight MH17 OAB. So how you get from that fact to “nasty slur” escapes me.

          • One Anonymous Bloke 1.2.1.1.1
            25 May 2018 at 12:43 pm

            “both countries share the same desire to vilify the same target”

            So you’re saying the MH17 investigators aren’t involved? OK. What’s your evidence that the Netherlands harbours such malicious intent?

            • Bill 1.2.1.1.1.1
              25 May 2018 at 12:49 pm

              Can you read Dutch OAB?

              If you can, then go and read their newspapers or view their news bulletins on topics “Russian”. You’ll find it’s in the same ballpark as the British stuff, the NZ stuff, the US stuff, the French stuff….

              • One Anonymous Bloke …
                25 May 2018 at 12:56 pm

                That only indicates a desire to vilify if they’re lying. Otherwise it’s called reporting the facts.

        • reason 1.2.1.2
          25 May 2018 at 7:58 pm

          Boris Johnson should have been sacked for bullshitting harder than Wayne Mapp …

          Outright liar

      • Gosman 1.2.2
        25 May 2018 at 1:03 pm

        Why doesn’t she want to leave the UK immediately if she entertained ANY thought the UK was behind the poisoning of her father and her?

        • Bill 1.2.2.1
          25 May 2018 at 1:59 pm

          Where’s that one coming from Gos?

          And what is it with people, apparently only able to orbit around two possible scenarios?

          It may have been neither Russia, nor the UK. It may not even have been directed by a state.

      • Gabby 1.2.3
        25 May 2018 at 9:35 pm

        I’m sure the emigres wanted to go back to France too billy. But they weren’t stoopid.

      • esoteric pineapples 1.2.4
        26 May 2018 at 12:45 am

        I’m with you Bill in not automatically ruling out US or British involvement. I watched a very good interview with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov by Stephen Sackur of the BBC’s Hard Talk. Sackur specifically grilled him about the poisoning and asked if Lavrov was joking when he said the British might have done it Lavrov answered why not and pointed out that the argument by the British that the Russians were the only ones who could have done it because they are the only ones with access to the nerve agent is totally untrue. Lavrov appears to be 100 percent correct.
        Russian chemist Vil Mirzayanov had moved to the US and published his book ‘State Secrets: An Insider’s Chronicle of the Russian Chemical Weapons Program.’
        A later edition of the book, printed after the scientist had cooperated with the Edgewood Chemical Biological Center of the US army in 2008 contains the formula and you can buy the book on Amazon.

        Here’s the Lavrov interview:

        Here’s a story on Lavrov explaining why the nerve agent may be in the arsenal of the British and US military

        https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-russia-skripal-lavrov/russias-lavrov-says-skripals-may-have-been-poisoned-by-substance-russia-never-made-idUSKBN1HL17K

        This story gives more background detail on the chemist and formula

        https://www.rt.com/news/424597-russia-opcw-a234-novichok-convention/

    • One Two 1.3
      25 May 2018 at 12:31 pm

      But could you please improve the quality of your lines. This is outright stupid.

      Is Bill a KGB agent then…Russian troll army member perhaps?…

      Site admin ‘attacking’ an author…

      • Bill 1.3.1
        25 May 2018 at 12:46 pm

        🙂 I just took the final sentence to a be a self reflecting comment on the straw men and false bullshit contained in the comment itself. You thinking I was meant to be taking it as a comment on the general thrust of the post that the comment didn’t manage to address?

        (Daft armwaving and fulminating doesn’t cut it when it comes to engaging with an opinion piece – not in my book anyway.)

        But enough of this. About the UK Government’s narrative falling apart in the eyes of the British press as per the links provided….

        • One Anonymous Bloke 1.3.1.1
          25 May 2018 at 12:57 pm

          Let’s also talk about how “Yulia wants to go home” and “Yulia wants to go home one day” are not the same thing, and see if any other narratives are thereby undermined.

      • Brigid 1.3.2
        25 May 2018 at 1:13 pm

        “Site admin ‘attacking’ an author…”
        What does ethics matter when you ‘own’ a thing?

    • adam 1.4
      25 May 2018 at 3:57 pm

      Lprent why are you using red scear tactics on a left wing site? The “RT spin” line is straight out of the CIA/NSA/FBI hand book.

      https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf

      Please note, this is my opinion, and not a objective truth – just in case people think I write with any God given authority – which by the way, I do not.

      • McFlock 1.4.1
        25 May 2018 at 4:14 pm

        Which page?

        • adam 1.4.1.1
          25 May 2018 at 4:15 pm

          Should that not be pages?

          • McFlock 1.4.1.1.1
            25 May 2018 at 4:25 pm

            Nah, just wanting to know which page of the “handbook” has the list of lines that includes “RT spin”.

            Of course, the other point is that if there’s a difference between your “opinion” and “objective truth”, then you’re wrong.

            • adam 1.4.1.1.1.1
              25 May 2018 at 4:42 pm

              In the meantime it is my opinion, nothing more.

              Sorry if my opinion offends you, but hey that’s life, not everyone’s going to worship you.

              • McFlock …
                25 May 2018 at 4:55 pm

                Doesn’t offend me. It just seems funny to me that you think a report into another issue is a handbook related to this issue.

                But then obviously I’m too hung up about the actuality of things: I reckon objective truth overrules opinion.

                • adam …
                  26 May 2018 at 1:45 am

                  “Doesn’t offend me.”

                  Really, OK. I’ll take your word for it.

                  And it’s not the play book – sheesh your attempts at literalist idiocy sometimes generate much laughs. Do you not remember the above report? Seems you don’t, oh well thanks for the shits and giggles.

                  • McFlock …
                    26 May 2018 at 4:05 pm

                    Silly me, reading what you actually wrote, again…

                    • adam …
                      26 May 2018 at 8:40 pm

                      No, you taking things how you think best suits your agenda. Which I must say you done a few times with my comments. But then again spot, leopards ect, ect, ect….

                    • McFlock …
                      26 May 2018 at 11:27 pm

                      So you made a comment about a handbook, and attached without any other context a random link. Silly me believed you felt the comment and link were connected.

                      Good for you. A mighty victory against the forces of disinformation.

                    • adam …
                      27 May 2018 at 12:49 am

                      Is the whole lets miss the context of the report deliberate, or to give me more shits and giggles?

                      Because if you’d like me to spoon feed you, I’d like to know you read the report. Or at the very least seen or read any of the criticism that went around the report.

                      Or you going to keep running with it being a manual? Because if you are, then pot, kettle, black, ect, ect, ect…

                    • McFlock …
                      27 May 2018 at 6:10 pm

                      So the fact that another report says the Russians did something else suggests a handbook of some sort?

                      Of course, it could just point to the idea that the report writers genuinely concluded that the Russians actually did the thing described in the report.

        • Bill 1.4.1.2
          25 May 2018 at 4:17 pm

          Which page? It’s a 25 leaf wadge of (not very absorbent) bog paper. Start anywhere you like, but just be aware it smears and spreads rather than clean. 😉

          • McFlock 1.4.1.2.1
            25 May 2018 at 4:27 pm

            Yup. When multiple fingers across multiple countries point at Russia for multiple offences, they all must be wrong…

            • Bill 1.4.1.2.1.1
              25 May 2018 at 4:39 pm

              Well no. When multiple fingers that share an ideological mind set are always pointing in the one direction, it pays to look back up the direction the pointing’s coming from.

              Or there’s running along and bellowing approval with the herd. That’s always an option.

              • McFlock …
                25 May 2018 at 4:52 pm

                lol interesting thought – if you’re looking back up the direction of people pointing fingers, they’re pointing at you. Even if you think you’re above it all.

                • Bill …
                  25 May 2018 at 4:59 pm

                  heh – well, given the amount of bullshit that’s lobbed in my general direction off the back of posts like this one, you might be right enough in saying fingers are pointing at me. I’m an RT stooge, a friend of my enemy’s enemy etc. Apparently. 😉

    • Richard 1.5
      28 May 2018 at 4:34 pm

      I don’t think this is repeating RT spin. RT’s smart enough to know there are people like Bill whose prejudices they can feed and amplify.

  2. Stunned mullet 2
    25 May 2018 at 11:37 am

    I don’t quite follow your reasoning Bill.

    There have been uncounted Syrians, Iraqis etc etc who have been treated appalling by those in charge of their countries and invaders from the outside and been subjected to the most appalling deprivations many of whom have expressed the wish to return to the homes. That this young woman has expressed a desire to return home at some stage can hardly be surprising.

    Also regarding the attack on the Malaysian airline the weight of evidence does seem to point towards a criminally negligent rock of Russian origin – whether it was fired by the breakaway faction in the ukraine still remains to be confirmed but the many absurd alternate scenarios offered by Russia on this incident did Russias reputation no favours.

    • Bill 2.1
      25 May 2018 at 11:52 am

      Does she mean when she’s convalesced, or does she mean when she’s old and Putin’s dead and everything’s roses? That’s an open question we can only surmise the answer to.

      • Stunned Mullet 2.1.1
        25 May 2018 at 12:53 pm

        I would expect she’ll be staying in the UK for sometime yet – the after effects of nerve agent poisoning can no doubt last some time and the medical team in the UK that pulled her and her father through are probably best placed to provide some ongoing treatment or a treatment plan for them once they are back under the care of other doctors.

  3. One Two 3
    25 May 2018 at 12:15 pm

    MH17 right on cue was the follow up to MH370 a few weeks ago..

    The Dutch report is a rehash from previous years where the dutch ‘findings’ were published…

    With the FIFA world cup in a few weeks time it will be of interest to see how the rhetoric and actions play out..

    World Cups are often a ‘news’ dead month where all else goes on in the background while the WC host basks in ‘glory’…

    Russia should not reasonably expect SOP from the global western imperialist media…

  4. Stuart Munro 4
    25 May 2018 at 12:27 pm

    Why Reuters? Because since Murdoch degraded a number of papers, it is the most professional remaining international agency.

    • Bill 4.1
      25 May 2018 at 12:35 pm

      What I’m saying is that if you want to make a splash, then reuters isn’t the way to go. They only feed the sources that would run with stories. I take the point about Murdoch, but none of the links in the piece are from the Murdoch stable.

      That said, and I’m repeating a tad from the post, I can appreciate why none of them would want to go all banner headline on a story that undermines what they’ve been banner headlining up til now.

      • Stuart Munro 4.1.1
        25 May 2018 at 12:48 pm

        Yulia probably doesn’t want to make a splash – from her perspective she’s pretty much an injured bystander, not having been part of the intelligence side of things, and not wishing to be part of the PR war.

        • Bill 4.1.1.1
          25 May 2018 at 12:53 pm

          According to the Independent piece I linked, Yulia might not be such a bystander on the intelligence side of things. And whether or not Yulia wanted to make a splash, she had to go through the Met. And I think it’s fair to say they’d want to dampen things somewhat. Again, the Independent piece sign-posts some possible stuff around that.

          • Stuart Munro 4.1.1.1.1
            25 May 2018 at 1:09 pm

            The Independent piece is almost entirely speculation – few to no sources.

            Never mind the Met – Yulia needs to make very plain statements to avoid becoming the subject of a media feeding frenzy. If she misspeaks and endorses Putin she’ll face travel difficulties in Europe, if she claims the authority to blame Russia she paints a target on her head when she returns home.

            • Bill 4.1.1.1.1.1
              25 May 2018 at 1:17 pm

              Are you being any less speculative than the Independent piece (or the Guardian piece for that matter)? Or any other piece that’s been written since 4th March?

            • mauī 4.1.1.1.1.2
              25 May 2018 at 11:25 pm

              The funny thing is the entire case is based on speculation. From how they were poisoned, to what with, to who did it, to motives.

              And noone’s allowed to ask any questions apparently we’re just to believe what we’re told in the press.

  5. Stuart Munro 5
    25 May 2018 at 1:22 pm

    No.

    If Yulia had wished to endorse either side she would have done so – and plenty of hack reporters would cheerfully have beaten it up into as big a “splash” as you might wish.

    • Bill 5.1
      25 May 2018 at 2:06 pm

      So you don’t think those who mediated her contact with media would have had, or would have wished to have had, any input that in would in any way moderate her message or the impact it was likely to have?

      That’s possible if we assume the Met are merely acting as benevolent body guards, and they are in no way serving any larger British state interests besides those served by simply keeping Yulia Skripal safe.

      • Stunned mullet 5.1.1
        25 May 2018 at 2:18 pm

        Why don’t you come out with what you think happened and is going on Bill rather than speaking in riddles.

        From where I sit the most likely explanation is a failed attempt on the life of the Skripals has been made by a foreign player via the use of of very toxic substance and the british police and security services are keeping the Skripals out of the public eye until they are want to and are physically able to go back into public life.

        • Bill 5.1.1.1
          25 May 2018 at 2:28 pm

          I’ve got nothing to state on that front. I don’t know what happened.

          I don’t think the UK government bold announcements about Russia are anything other than speculative. I haven’t been made aware of any evidence for that to be the case, and it seems all the circumstantial stuff doesn’t hold water (eg – only Russia has the particular nerve agent that was used)

          As an aside, I was amused/bemused a few weeks back when I spun a deliberately ridiculous “movie script” by way of illustrating how ridiculous the official announcements were and some seemed to take it seriously though.

          Some people were poisoned and treated. That’s about as far as anything I know goes.

          • Stunned mullet 5.1.1.1.1
            25 May 2018 at 2:38 pm

            “Some people were poisoned and treated. That’s about as far as anything I know goes.”

            Well then what’s with all the emotive language in your various posts and comments supportive of Russia and disparaging of the UK and the press ?

            From where i’m sitting reading your thoughts on this site you’re very much entrenched in who you view as the innocent and guilty parties.

            • cleangreen 5.1.1.1.1.1
              25 May 2018 at 3:30 pm

              Bill,

              I believe that this is all a stickup to pressure Russia to give something up.
              All the right wingers that are bagging your post have no love for Russia nor any good words to say so that inseft says it all now doesnt it?

              I believe Russia can add stability to the troubled world and we hope the global powers see this as Gemany does, as they have several partnership development programs withbv Russia so UK should think about that.

            • Bill 5.1.1.1.1.2
              25 May 2018 at 3:34 pm

              Care you show any comments or posts of mine that are supportive of Russia at an ideological level?

              Not being supportive towards western liberalism is just the natural position of “left” (always has been), but that doesn’t imply support for political economies that might sit in opposition to western liberalism…well, maybe it does for the more simple minded amongst us, but that’s their problem, not mine.

              • Stunned Mullet …
                25 May 2018 at 4:27 pm

                “Not being supportive towards western liberalism is just the natural position of “left” (always has been),”

                Yes I quite agree, however, in my opinion the not being supportive of western liberalism has veered into my enemy’s enemy is my friend territory with your musings on the Skripals, the Malaysian airliner that was shot down and the general farcical murderous goings on in through the Middle East.

                Then again it could just be grumpy old cnutiness which we’re all guilty of as the years go by.

                • Bill …
                  25 May 2018 at 4:49 pm

                  Don’t think I’ve ever offered up any opinion on flight MH17 and the UK government’s line on the Skripals (even if it transpires that Russia’s involved) has been bloody ridiculous from the get go.

                  As for the ME. As I pointed out in a post just recently, no state actor gives a flying fuck about any of the people living there, and that merely puts them all even more off-side with me than they always were.

      • Stuart Munro 5.1.2
        26 May 2018 at 12:46 am

        If you can show that she has lost agency, and that the Met is controlling her, by all means do. I rather think you can’t.

        • Bill 5.1.2.1
          26 May 2018 at 9:39 am

          Having to live in a safe house is a loss of agency right there. Where did I say the Met were “controlling her”? (You think I reckon she’s an automaton or something?) Influencing a message and controlling people are vastly different things.

          Why do so many people always go to extremes on their positioning around stuff like this? (Rhetorical)

  6. Philg 6
    25 May 2018 at 9:48 pm

    Good work Bill,
    I get as far as ‘Russian double agent’ and my BS detector goes off, and I don’t believe anything mainstream. Even so called ‘proof’ is hard to believe. Trust is becoming a problem.