Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
LV-426

Critically ill man is former Russian spy

716 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Ozymandias
36 minutes ago, Vlad the Mighty said:

Just one final thought:

 

Never mind the peanuts advertised on the side of a bus, you must keep Trident no matter what the cost, and it is considerable compared to what you send to the EU. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Phaeton80
Quote

Why has the British Government named Russia as the culprit?

Briefing the UN Security Council on Wednesday, British ambassador Jonathan Allen said Novichok was “not a weapon which can be manufactured by non-state actors”. 

“It is so dangerous that it requires the highest-grade state laboratories and expertise,” he added. 

Ok, sounds logical.. given the production, storage and methods of application is sure to require specialized knowledge and equipment. I wouldnt immediately exclude any non state player, but it is indeed to be expected were dealing with a state sponsored event. Then again; the nature of the chemical agent has to be proven, given its toxicity / effectiveness generally does not leave the victims alive several days after exposure.

“Based on the knowledge that Russia has previously produced this agent and combined with Russia’s record of conducting state sponsored assassinations – including against former intelligence officers whom they regard as legitimate targets – the UK Government concluded that it was highly likely that Russia was responsible for this reckless act.”

Ok, this could be a pre investigation internal position awaiting a formal international communique to be send out based on the findings of such an official enquiry. 'Highly likely' seems a bit premature at this time though, even for such an internal pre investiation suspicion. Whatever the words chosen, it is indeed 'a plausible' scenario. But then..

The Prime Minister gave Russia 24 hours to provide an explanation of how Novichok was used on the streets of Wiltshire, initially raising the possibility that Vladimir Putin’s government might have “lost control of this potentially catastrophically damaging nerve agent and allowed it to get into the hands of others”.

Erm.. what?! From entertaining a 'highly likely' scenario, we are demanding an explanation - within 24 hours - from Russia how Novichok was used on the streets of Wiltshire.

But the Russian government refused the demand, instead calling on Britain to hand over a sample of the nerve agent and accusing it of unacceptable “provocations”.

Having not provided any evidence besides the highly likely statement, in combination with the rather definitive accusations against Russia, this is not an unexpected nor irrational response. Id imagine England would have reacted in a similar way if the tables were turned, and such a British response would be just as logical. Just like any courtcase, where one party declares an unfounded accusation based on similarly flimsy deductions.

“They have provided no credible explanation that could suggest they lost control of their nerve agent,” Ms May told MPs on Wednesday.

Burden of proof lies with the accused, suddenly using an unsubstantiated 'highly likely scenario' as evident, clearcut proof? Strange.. Wonder how a court of law would regard this rather magical string of logic.

“No explanation as to how this agent came to be used in the United Kingdom; no explanation as to why Russia has an undeclared chemical weapons programme in contravention of international law.

“Instead they have treated the use of a military grade nerve agent in Europe with sarcasm, contempt and defiance.

One could summize such a 'contemptuous and defiant', even sarcastic response at such a, lets call it wondrous method of investiation (or lack thereof) and subsequent 'wild accusation' (which accusations without due evidence are often called), to not be unwarranted.

There is no alternative conclusion other than that the Russian state was culpable for the attempted murder of Mr Skripal and his daughter - and for threatening the lives of other British citizens in Salisbury.”

Whoops! Suddenly, with no additional evidence forwarded mind you, 'there is no alternative conclusion other than that the Russian state was culpable for the attempted murder or mr Skripal and his daughter - AND for threatening the lives of British citizens in general'. Wow, just wow.

As stipulated earlier; not only that, but dear friend Boris even went sofar as to claim Putin himself ordered the hit, without any reference to any supporting evidence; thus completely unfounded. Something odd is going on here, surely. No court would accept any lawyer trying to prove anything based on this unsubstantiated 'logic', if anything it would warrant libel, defamation
court action.

Additionally, anyone that dares to question the lacking body of proof (which anyone with a semblance of rational can attest), or unwillingness to share the samples of the chemical agent raged about, a massive character assassination effort is employed. The most childish, ridiculing quotes can be read all over the media; Corbyn the Russian Stooge, and what not.

Source: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/uk-russia-nerve-agent-attack-spy-poisoning-sergei-skripal-salisbury-accusations-evidence-explanation-a8258911.html


The aforementioned not even touching upon the straight irrational in the motives of the Russians, perpetrating this crime against this man, at this particular time, with this particular method, at that location.. (and failing).

I rest my case. A fine day to everyone (from your local Russian 'Conspiracy Nutter' Stooge).

 

Edited by Phaeton80

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Space Commander Travis

Well, Prime Minister May has got more than she could surely have possibly dreamed of; all the Leaders of Europe (well, the important ones anyway) have given her their Full and Wholehearted Support at this time when her nation is under a Ruthless and Indiscriminate Chemical Weapons Attack by a Hostile Foreign Power. (Hilarious picture of Ms.May with M. Macaroon and Frau Merkel looking as if they're taking part in a particularly embarrassing chat show, their body language just crying out how Unified and Solid they all are.) 

The full statement by the European Leaders indicting Russia's Leader Sauron - sorry, I mean Putin, editors please rectify - is as follows:

(a) Well, it must've been him, mustn't it.

(b) being Evil, and Vile, and that.

(c) Stands to reason don't it. 

:yes: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Phaeton80

 

Quote

Skripal, Salisbury And The Propaganda Story

Fifteen years ago this month, the US-led ‘Shock and Awe’ offensive began against Iraq, supposedly to disarm the country of its ‘weapons of mass destruction’. The illegal invasion and subsequent brutal occupation led to the loss of around one million lives, created millions of refugees, destroyed the infrastructure of a country already ravaged by over a decade of cruel UN sanctions, and contributed significantly to the rise of Islamic State. All of this might never have happened were it not for an intense campaign of propaganda and deception in which the so-called ‘mainstream’ media, including ‘impartial’ BBC News, were enthusiastic participants.

Screen-Shot-2018-03-25-at-06.20.35.png

In the Guardian, Martin Woollacott had declared of Saddam’s supposed ‘WMD’:

‘Among those knowledgeable about Iraq there are few, if any, who believe he is not hiding such weapons. It is a given.’

This conformity throughout the corporate media was remarkable. Ardent armchair war supporter David Aaronovitch, also writing in the Guardian, confidently asserted:

‘If nothing is eventually found, I – as a supporter of the war – will never believe another thing that I am told by our government, or that of the US ever again.’

As the Downing Street Memo showed, intelligence and facts were ‘fixed around’ the pre-existing policy of invasion. The Chilcot Report, finally released in 2016, was damning of the way Tony Blair’s government took the UK into war. Analysis of the report published last year by Sheffield University’s Piers Robinson, emphasised the fundamental deception at the heart of the ‘war on terror’:

‘9/11 was exploited in order to pursue a regime-change policy against countries unconnected with Al Qaeda and Islamic fundamentalist terrorism.’

Iraq was not a one-off. As we have documented, an onslaught of media propaganda facilitated the 2011 devastation of Libya, the deaths of up to 25,000 Libyans, including the brutal murder of Gaddafi, and a refugee crisis that has seen thousands drown trying to make the perilous sea crossing to Europe. The rationale for ‘intervention’ was the alleged threat of a massacre by Gaddafi’s forces in Benghazi.

The Guardian’s Jonathan Freedland had declared:

‘If those nations with the power to stop these pre-announced killings had stood aside, they would have been morally culpable. Benghazi was set to become another Srebrenica – and those that did nothing would share the same shame.’

After ‘something’ had been done, the BBC’s Nick Robinson observed that Downing Street:

‘will see this, I’m sure, as a triumphant end.

‘Libya was David Cameron’s first war. Col. Gaddafi his first foe. Today, his first real taste of military victory.’

(BBC, News at Six, October 20, 2011)

In September 2016, a report into the Libyan war was published by the Foreign Affairs Committee of the House of Commons. In contrast to the near-total uniformity in media coverage at the time, the parliamentary report concluded that:

‘the proposition that Muammar Gaddafi would have ordered the massacre of civilians in Benghazi was not supported by the available evidence.’

As with Iraq, virtually an entire country’s infrastructure had been destroyed by the West’s ‘intervention’:

‘The result was political and economic collapse, inter-militia and inter-tribal warfare, humanitarian and migrant crises, widespread human rights violations, the spread of Gaddafi regime weapons across the region and the growth of ISIL [Islamic State] in North Africa.’

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Phaeton80

 

Quote

Instant Certainty?

Prime Minister Theresa May’s response was to declare it ‘highly likely’ that Russia was responsible for the Salisbury attack. Russia’s ambassador to the UK was summoned to the Foreign Office on March 13 ‘to provide an explanation’. May said that if there was no ‘credible response’ by the end of that day, the UK would conclude that there had been an ‘unlawful use of force’ by Russia.

The following day, the very first line read out by presenter Sophie Raworth on BBC News at Ten was a propaganda bullet point:

‘Britain expels 23 Russian diplomats after Moscow fails to explain the chemical attack in Salisbury.’

The loaded phrase, ‘after Moscow fails to explain’, was the UK government-approved framing: the alleged perpetrator of the crime was required to ‘explain’ its actions. The conformity to this state script was widespread across the ‘free press’.

A Telegraph editorial demanded total consensus for the government’s agenda:

‘Theresa May needs the whole country’s support to see Britain through this crisis with Russia’.

A Sunday Times editorial stated:

‘Mrs May must show Russia that she is an Iron Lady too’.

A Guardian editorial declared that the Prime Minister had made:

‘a compelling case for Kremlin culpability in the Salisbury incident and is right that such a reckless, hostile act by another state requires a robust response.’

In the Commons, Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn had very reasonably challenged the government by asking for evidence for its claims, and by insisting that international law and conventions be upheld. The Guardian, however, found Corbyn’s response ‘dispiriting’:

‘He sounded too keen to find another explanation for the use of the nerve agent novichok in the attack.’

And:

‘his reluctance to share Mrs May’s basic analysis of the Salisbury incident made him look eager to exonerate a hostile power.’

This was the editorial response by supposedly one of the world’s leading liberal newspapers.

A Telegraph leading article hinted at an underlying truth: that the incident was being exploited for the benefit of ‘defence’ and intelligence services:

‘To protect itself, this country has to give its intelligence services the tools they need and invest properly in its defence forces. This week’s spring statement must guarantee better funding.’

‘Mainstream’ media coverage has been instrumental in presenting a misleading image of May as the ‘strong, stable’ leader she has long tried to claim for herself. John Pienaar, deputy political editor for BBC News, noted:

‘Among senior ministers and officials, there’s quiet satisfaction that the Russia crisis seems to be going according to plan. Maybe even better.’

All the better if you have a compliant corporate media onboard.

The headline to a ‘politics sketch’ by the Guardian’s John Crace, whom we are supposed to find amusing, was comical for the wrong reasons:

‘Theresa May transforms into cold war colossus by not being Jeremy Corbyn’

Under the cover of ‘comedy’, Crace slipped in this smear:

‘Jeremy had never met a Russian he didn’t like or trust – especially one that had been head of the KGB’.

The portrayal of Corbyn as some kind of Putin stooge was continued on BBC Newsnight on March 15. Reporter David Grossman posed the leading question, ‘Does Labour have a Russia problem?’. The Labour leader was then depicted in a huge studio backdrop using an image that seemed to be deliberately manipulated to make him look embedded in the Kremlin. Even Corbyn’s cap appeared to have been altered to look like a Russian fur hat.
[..]
http://truepublica.org.uk/united-kingdom/skripal-salisbury-and-bbc-propaganda/


..Of a type developed by (proven) liars, consumed by (proven) blindsided droves of dimwitted lemmings.

You know, the sheer level of irony at play here seems almost too much to bear for a normal human being; where unequivocal evidence - more than sufficient proof, which would actually stand up in court any day of the week - of blatant crimes against humanity.. helped by our championed 'free media'.. is freely available, for years now. Yet, nothing has been or is done. Not - a - thing. Not only that, but we seem to find ourselves in a position to actually fully deny those evident proofs, only to simply turn 'round and accept a completely lacking body of proof as the opposite, and commence to rage about it. Helped ofcourse, once again, by thesame trusty mainstream media landscape who braught us complete mayhem and destruction, the most vile crimes against humanity (million+ civilian deaths) incurred from a war of agression based on sheer lies, deceit. Now commencing a witchhunt, character assassination - of anyone that dares to question the official narrative.

Some food for thought; if we allow, nay even cheer on this sort of nonsensical rhetoric, such blatant bully tactics against those who dare to ask rational questions.. we shalln't need to concern ourselves with any of those foreign boogeymen; be it Russia, Iran, China, NK or even ISIS. If we are dim enough for this sort of crazy, we ourselves constitute the gravest threat to our own, and other's wellbeing. Now, but especially in the future. Please recognize, or at least consider that.

Some say 'what was done in the dark will come to light'. I say when the public at large & fourth estate is in the condition it is now, it does not even matter.

*Disclaimer: I do not ignore the theoretical plausibility of Russia being behind such scenario's, at all. I do take issue with the ridiculously lacking body of proof at hand and subsequent instant certainty, the disproportionate political statements and actions that ensued, and the massive character assassination tactics wielded against those who dare to ask rational and extremely relevant questions. Which are all redflags of dishonesty.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LV-426

Update:

Spy poisoning: Russian diplomats expelled across US and Europe

"The United States and its European allies are expelling dozens of Russian diplomats in a co-ordinated response to the poisoning of a former Russian spy in the UK.

President Donald Trump's move is the largest expulsion of Russian intelligence officers in US history.

Germany, France, Ukraine, Canada and various European countries have also expelled envoys."

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bee

 

so frustrating to witness the warmongering propaganda as Russia is slowly but surely isolated and demonized -

in preparation for what..?

It's chilling to see UK, EU and US politicians behaving like medieval war lords ---- 
 

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bee

 

gosh this is handy advice for anyone who thinks they might have been contaminated by the worlds most deadly nerve agent...

baby wipes..... :rolleyes:

 

On Friday Public Health England

 gave further advice to people who were in the Mill pub and the Zizzi restaurant on Sunday 4 March and Monday 5 March – the two places the Skripals visited before they fell ill.

PHE told them to wash the clothes they wore, and wipe down any personal items they handled with baby wipes. It said anyone with items that are dry-clean only could contact the council to arrange for them to be picked up.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Space Commander Travis

Good lord is this absurd farce still going? It's giving Russiagate a run for its money 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bee

 

Yes - and two to three weeks until the results of the ''''investigation'''

does anyone in their wildest dreams think that the Result will be anything but more of the same..

highly likely this...highly likely that - 

they might then try and take it up a notch and start pulling football teams out of the World Cup -

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LV-426

Update:

Spy poisoning: Australian PM condemns Russian 'recklessness' in UK

"Australia has become the latest country to expel Russian diplomats as part of a global response to the poisoning of a Russian spy in the UK.

PM Malcolm Turnbull said "the brazen attack in Salisbury was an attack on all of us".

More than 100 Russian diplomats from more than 20 countries were expelled in a co-ordinated response by the US and EU nations on Monday."

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stevewinn
25 minutes ago, LV-426 said:

Update:

Spy poisoning: Australian PM condemns Russian 'recklessness' in UK

"Australia has become the latest country to expel Russian diplomats as part of a global response to the poisoning of a Russian spy in the UK.

PM Malcolm Turnbull said "the brazen attack in Salisbury was an attack on all of us".

More than 100 Russian diplomats from more than 20 countries were expelled in a co-ordinated response by the US and EU nations on Monday."

over a 100+ diplomats from 20 countries should highlight to people who question Russian involvement and the seriousness of what's taken place. Those at the UN and allied countries will be privy to information not released for public consumption. the expelling of diplomats doesn't happen on this scale just on a whim.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GlitterRose

You're either with your own country, or...well...

you're a traitor. 

It's really that simple.

And there are waaaaaayyyy too many people at least giving voice to believing Putin over their own country.

Why? Why are they so willing to do that?

What makes Putin so credible to them?

Edited by ChaosRose
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RAyMO
17 minutes ago, ChaosRose said:

You're either with your own country, or...well...

you're a traitor. 

While I do believe that Russia is behind these attacks I would also say that someone going against the opinions and actions of their government does not equate to going against ones country

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GlitterRose
Just now, RAyMO said:

While I do believe that Russia is behind these attacks I would also say that someone going against the opinions and actions of their government does not equate to going against ones country

People might not agree with everything their government does, sure.

But...usually, they don't believe the propaganda of a hostile foreign power over their own government.

That reaches a new level. 

If people don't stand with their own country when it is being attacked, then they're traitors.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stevewinn
51 minutes ago, ChaosRose said:

People might not agree with everything their government does, sure.

But...usually, they don't believe the propaganda of a hostile foreign power over their own government.

That reaches a new level. 

If people don't stand with their own country when it is being attacked, then they're traitors.

I don't think people equate what's happened to an attack on the UK. they fail to see the seriousness, join the dots, a foreign state openly carrying out state sponsored assassinations on the streets of the UK, with no regard to the risk of collateral damage to our citizens.

I think if Russia fired a cruise missile hitting Sergei Skripal's house killing him and his daughter people would view it differently. it would be instantly seen to be an attack on the UK without question the fact the Russians have used a different method of attack in the form of an assassin in the delivery of a chemical/nerve agent attack to an individual(s) should NOT alter the fact an attack as taken place, maybe its such a shock? that its beyond comprehension that such a thing could happen - so the default position is only those who can protect us are the only ones who can harm us, so it must be the UK Govt.

Edited by stevewinn
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cookie Monster

If a Russian spy seeks asylum here in the UK, if he then goes on to work for our intelligence agency where he passes on secrets to us, and if the Russians get wind of this, then I can understand them assassinating the said spy. Obviously if we cannot protect ex-spies they will stop coming here meaning we lose out on valuable intelligence sources.

But a nerve gas attack? Come on Russia get a grip, that puts 100s of English people at risk. After a good hour searching I have found articles saying the guy and his daughter both have heavy brain damage from oxygen starvation and that their lungs dont work so they are keeping unconscious in intensive care on breathing machines.

Russian state owned news channel behaviour implies guilt? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-43330498

 

Edited by RabidMongoose
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr.United_Nations

So why would our government try to kill someone who hates Russia and was about to give information about Russia to the British government? It doesn't make sense

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cookie Monster
20 minutes ago, Mr.United_Nations said:

So why would our government try to kill someone who hates Russia and was about to give information about Russia to the British government? It doesn't make sense

What a conspiracy theory that the UK government would engage in such Machiavellian manoeuvres. With nothing to gain from it either I might add. Its obvious its Russia, they are the ones with something to lose if the spy talked.

 

Edited by RabidMongoose

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LV-426
3 hours ago, RabidMongoose said:

If a Russian spy seeks asylum here in the UK, if he then goes on to work for our intelligence agency where he passes on secrets to us, and if the Russians get wind of this, then I can understand them assassinating the said spy. Obviously if we cannot protect ex-spies they will stop coming here meaning we lose out on valuable intelligence sources.

But a nerve gas attack? Come on Russia get a grip, that puts 100s of English people at risk. After a good hour searching I have found articles saying the guy and his daughter both have heavy brain damage from oxygen starvation and that their lungs dont work so they are keeping unconscious in intensive care on breathing machines.

Russian state owned news channel behaviour implies guilt? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-43330498

It has echoes of the Litvinenko case. They could have killed him outright, but they chose to use a radiological agent that left him suffering for three weeks before he died.

Seems to me that it's more about sending a message than outright assassination.

As you say though, using an agent that puts civilians at risk is a dangerous change of direction.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Phaeton80
6 hours ago, ChaosRose said:

You're either with your own country, or...well...

you're a traitor. 

It's really that simple.

And there are waaaaaayyyy too many people at least giving voice to believing Putin over their own country.

Why? Why are they so willing to do that?

What makes Putin so credible to them?


Let me reiterate my position..

There is no evidence declared, while definitive accusations were made based on that lacking premise. Those that forward this non evidence ('of a type developed by Russia, so there is no alternative conclusion other than..') as a concrete basis for all sorts of political penalties and demonization have been proven to be blatant liars in the not so distant past. There has been no word concerning evidence withheld, besides the evidence withheld for Russia while one of their citizens was murdered, and they - by law - should receive a sample of the toxin).

In the civilized world, accusions against any other party should be backed up by facts, ample evidence to prove the case - before penalties are issued. If you have such evidence, but will not make it public, yet commence to slander any given party based said evidence you withhold; you will find yourself on the receiving end of court action for libel before you can say ´Russian Stooge´. And rightly so, especially regarding international State Vs State cases like these, which could have exponentially more impact compared to a civil case. If youre saying your government is somehow exempt from this very fundament of English Common Law, I guess youre setting yourself up for a bad time. Given it is to be expected such policies will not be limited to Russia, but other nations as well as the British population itself. A nice precedent to cheer on, Im sure.

Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat..

Furthermore, based on this theory strongly rooted in assumptions regarding the nature and origin of the toxin - not proof, and largely false assumptions at that - the accused is actually demanded to carry the burdain of proof, which is fine & dandy in Bizarro world, but last time I checked I was still on a little blue planet called Earth (which, coincidentally, I am starting to increasingly doubt, given all things are starting to go 'up side down'). 

Also, for anyone to approve or even support the absolute bullish, childish hatched job exemplified against one of the few if only that dares to question the official narrative with extremely relevant and rational questions, should really take some time and self reflect. Seriously. Character assassination is nothing to be proud of, it only underwrites a weak position - dishonest intent - whenever it is used.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LV-426
12 minutes ago, Phaeton80 said:

Let me reiterate my position..

There is no evidence declared, while definitive accusations were made based on that lacking premise. Those that forward this non evidence ('of a type developed by Russia, so there is no alternative conclusion other than..') as a concrete basis for all sorts of political penalties and demonization have been proven to be blatant liars in the not so distant past. There has been no word concerning evidence withheld, besides the evidence withheld for Russia while one of their citizens was murdered, and they - by law - should receive a sample of the toxin).

In the civilized world, accusions against any other party should be backed up by facts, ample evidence to prove the case - before penalties are issued. If you have such evidence, but will not make it public, yet commence to slander any given party based said evidence you withhold; you will find yourself on the receiving end of court action for libel before you can say ´Russian Stooge´. And rightly so, especially regarding international State Vs State cases like these, which could have exponentially more impact compared to a civil case. If youre saying your government is somehow exempt from this very fundament of English Common Law, I guess youre setting yourself up for a bad time. Given it is to be expected such policies will not be limited to Russia, but other nations as well as the British population itself. A nice precedent to cheer on, Im sure.

Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat..

Furthermore, based on this theory strongly rooted in assumptions regarding the nature and origin of the toxin - not proof, and largely false assumptions at that - the accused is actually demanded to carry the burdain of proof, which is fine & dandy in Bizarro world, but last time I checked I was still on a little blue planet called Earth (which, coincidentally, I am starting to increasingly doubt, given all things are starting to go 'up side down'). 

Also, for anyone to approve or even support the absolute bullish, childish hatched job exemplified against one of the few if only that dares to question the official narrative with extremely relevant and rational questions, should really take some time and self reflect. Seriously. Character assassination is nothing to be proud of, it only underwrites a weak position - dishonest intent - whenever it is used.

The thing is Phaeton, you're basing all your assumptions on the same level of evidence presented publicly as the rest of us.

Your position on this evidence, be it 100% or not, is to assume your own government, along with that of close allies, is to lie, while viewing Putin - someone with a proven track record - to be the innocent victim in all this. I just don't get it.

The British government, the governments of many other nations, and now NATO...

Spy poisoning: Nato expels Russian diplomats

...are all convinced by the level of evidence they've seen - which is far more than we see - that Russia is to blame.

All this talk of "warmongering" in this thread is also pretty absurd. You'd have to assume that the leaders of our nations are dumb as rocks to push for a war with a nuclear power on the level of Russia. This isn't a tinpot dictatorship in Iraq, or even a potentially more dangerous North Korea.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bee
2 hours ago, LV-426 said:

It has echoes of the Litvinenko case. They could have killed him outright, but they chose to use a radiological agent that left him suffering for three weeks before he died.

Seems to me that it's more about sending a message than outright assassination.

As you say though, using an agent that puts civilians at risk is a dangerous change of direction.

 

the Litvinenko case was as inconclusive as this latest one will turn out to be ---

the most they could come up with after a public inquiry was... (link)

"A public inquiry into the killing of former Russian spy Alexander Litvinenko has concluded that President Putin probably approved his assassination."

Probably... maybe....perhaps

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CountMystery

These days I find the russian government more trustworthy than any west-european government. How can any person in a clear state of mind trust those warmongering puppets of ... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bee
14 minutes ago, LV-426 said:

All this talk of "warmongering" in this thread is also pretty absurd. You'd have to assume that the leaders of our nations are dumb as rocks to push for a war with a nuclear power on the level of Russia. This isn't a tinpot dictatorship in Iraq, or even a potentially more dangerous North Korea.

 

The powers pulling the strings behind the scenes probably (there's that word again) like 'dumb as rocks' politicians...

You might have thought politicians who aided and abetted ISIS - via so called (al Qaeda affiliated) 'rebel' groups must
have been Dumb as Rocks to do so - but .......... 

There are obviously some major geopolitical maneuverings going on in the world that have been ramped up since the Iraq war / invasion...  
Russia spoiled the West's plans for Syria when it stepped in to support the Syrian Army and stop the country turning into another Libya...

That's when the Media etc did the Enemy Switch.... all the bad press about ISIS and the Islamic State virtually stopped over night and it
was Russia Russia Russia --

IMO this latest Salisbury anti Russia propaganda operation is connected with what's going on in the Middle East and another
'''punishment''' for Russia who dared to support Assad and helped rid Syria of the Islamic State - 

    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.