Alleged Russian assassins on TV

[Rewulf]

1 minute ago, 12gauge82 said:

I completely agree, the west behaves no better, however, the amount of evidence against Russian with the skripals poisoning is overwhelming.

The 'evidence' is compelling, if you believe everything in the government and media reports to be true.
But there are massive holes in it, there are massive holes in Russias excuses too Ill admit.

When you are pretty certain people are lying, I wont be lead where they want you to go, and its very obvious where that is.
I shall keep an open mind, but this story isnt getting any more believable, no matter how many headlines keep screaming that 'This is absolute proof now' to make you believe it.
They said that before there was ANY evidence.

[Rewulf]

6 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

I wont be lead where they want you to go, and its very obvious where that is.

“If anyone had questions in their mind about Russian military involvement in the Salisbury attacks this will put to rest those doubts,”  Hunt said to the BBC.

“Russian government needs to know that if they flout international law in this way there will be consequences, they will be exposed and people will see the Russian government for what they are - which is an organisation that is trying to foster instability throughout the world.”  Jeremy Hunt 

 

[panoma1]

25 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

Seen that, its a rehash of a story posted last month https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/09/14/two-russian-spies-expelled-netherlands-novichok-lab-hack-plot/

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/salisbury-attack-russia-spies-novichok-arrest-switzerland-lab-samples-test-a8537116.html

One story purports them on their way to Spiez lab in Switzerland, notice the previous stories say 2 spies, not 4, and it was in March ?

Irrelevant either way, what were they going to do ? Alter the findings of the OPCW ?

Or perhaps find out what the OPCW had found, and what it was going to put in its report ?

Whatever the outcome of the mission, it failed, and they are now using (reusing)  the story as further ammunition to show how complicit and underhand the Russkies are.

You could look at it this way, If Russia did do it, what would the point of that operation be ?
The west has already accused you of doing it , and the OPCW isnt going to contradict them, why on earth would they ?

But if you hadnt done it, maybe there is something in the lab files that could clear you ?
Just a thought.

Cyber attack may be designed to steal, compromise, spoil, distract and create disruption not neccesarily to change or alter?

Why have the Ruskies not come up with any explanations or evidence to counter the allegations against them? Or pick out the "holes" you say are in the West"s story?......... To just say "not guilty guv" does not really inspire confidence in their innocence!

What other countries do or have done is not the issue here....we are discussing allegations concerning the conduct of the Russian State and their Military Intelligence

[12gauge82]

3 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

The 'evidence' is compelling, if you believe everything in the government and media reports to be true.
But there are massive holes in it, there are massive holes in Russias excuses too Ill admit.

When you are pretty certain people are lying, I wont be lead where they want you to go, and its very obvious where that is.
I shall keep an open mind, but this story isnt getting any more believable, no matter how many headlines keep screaming that 'This is absolute proof now' to make you believe it.
They said that before there was ANY evidence.

Agreed it's not absolute proof, also I'm very weary of our media, that said, as bad as the west behaves in its goal of world domination, Russia wants exactly the same, they've acted terribly during ww2, the rush between us and them to take Germany, the splitting of Korea, Ukraine (although I admit they were provoked with that one), Russia is far from innocent either and what annoys me is the danger they have caused to innocent civilians on our soil, Mr Skiprals daughter, the woman who is now dead and her partner who will also have life changing injurys.

[Rewulf]

Just now, panoma1 said:

Cyber attack may be designed to steal, compromise, spoil, distract and create disruption not neccesarily to change or alter?

Why have the Ruskies not come up with any explanations or evidence to counter the allegations against them? Or pick out the "holes" you say are in the West"s story?......... To just say "not guilty guv" does not really inspire confidence in their innocence!

What other countries do or have done is not the issue here....we are discussing allegations concerning the conduct of the Russian State and their Military Intelligence

My point, you could not alter the findings even if they got 'in'
They could erase the records, wipe the servers, but they could not change the outcome.
So what was the point ?

The allegations against them are just that, allegations.
Skripal was a Russian spy, its the Russians
Novichok was used  (allegedly) its the Russians.
2 Russians went to Salisbury, its the Russians.
One of them looks like a GRU man, Its the Russians.
They tried to hack the OPCW , Ok that was the Russians 😂

We want it to be the Russians , so the evidence will be made to fit.
Look at it objectively, from the point of view that its a possible stitch up.
Its not as cut and dried as you think.

[panoma1]

1 minute ago, Rewulf said:

My point, you could not alter the findings even if they got 'in'
They could erase the records, wipe the servers, but they could not change the outcome.
So what was the point ?

The allegations against them are just that, allegations.
Skripal was a Russian spy, its the Russians
Novichok was used  (allegedly) its the Russians.
2 Russians went to Salisbury, its the Russians.
One of them looks like a GRU man, Its the Russians.
They tried to hack the OPCW , Ok that was the Russians 😂

We want it to be the Russians , so the evidence will be made to fit.
Look at it objectively, from the point of view that its a possible stitch up.
Its not as cut and dried as you think.

The point would be to steal, compromise, distract and disrupt!.... "muddy the water"

But it was the Russians!

Novichok is a nerve agent developed in Russia by the Russians

The 2 Russians are Russians and they were in Salisbury at the relevant time/date

Four Russians were expelled from the Netherlands for "beyond reasonable doubt" attempting to hack into OPCW computer

Both Russians are (not look like!) beyond reasonable doubt GRU officers

If the Wests evidence is disputed by the Russian State, why are they not countering this evidence?

 

[Rewulf]

7 minutes ago, 12gauge82 said:

Agreed it's not absolute proof, also I'm very weary of our media, that said, as bad as the west behaves in its goal of world domination, Russia wants exactly the same, they've acted terribly during ww2, the rush between us and them to take Germany, the splitting of Korea, Ukraine (although I admit they were provoked with that one), Russia is far from innocent either and what annoys me is the danger they have caused to innocent civilians on our soil, Mr Skiprals daughter, the woman who is now dead and her partner who will also have life changing injurys.

Youre not wrong, although the dividing up of Europe wasnt a land grab, as much as a deal done before the war was even won.

Like you say though ,what happened in Ukraine was a direct result of Western (mostly US ) meddling which spectacularly blew up in their face.
But some might call that a nutty conspiracy theory..
Look at everything thats happened since then though, civilian aircraft shot down, nerve gas attacks in Syria, Salisbury, various provocations and sabre rattling , all trying to paint a picture of the Russia bear threatening the peace of the world.
Whilst the US , with the support of NATO fuel and arm ISIS terrorism , and Israeli expansion/murder. (The US have just pledged 35 bn in military 'aid to Israel, why ?)
A continuing ,totally pointless war against goat herders in Afghanistan, and continued meddling in the stability of various nations including Libya  Iraq.

But its the Russians who are the bad people .

[oowee]

1 hour ago, panoma1 said:

They didn't, four Russian men were caught red handed by the Dutch, parked outside the International Chemical Weapons Research Organisation building in The Hague (which was investigating the Salisbury Novichok attack) with electronic equipment, attempting to tap into the buildings Wifi!

The Dutch also seized papers and travel tickets discarded in their hotel room, and from their car,  a paper trail which linked them to known military intelegence/GRU buildings in Russia.......

Said Russians were expelled from the country.

Interesting that they were not detained and put on trial. 

[Rewulf]

5 minutes ago, oowee said:

Interesting that they were not detained and put on trial. 

The way I read it, they hadnt actually done anything before they were picked up, going equipped to hack, probably isnt the sort of offence worthy of causing diplomatic waves over.
Sitting outside a government building looking suspicious isnt the best advert for Russias finest is it?  they could have at least dressed up as maintenance or something 
The main thing I find funny is , it was never reported at the time, surely it wasnt prejudicial to the inquiry? and would have been in the publics interest.
That and the fact that when it was reported a month ago, no one seemed particularly interested, so the story 'died' only to be resurrected and cleaned up yesterday.

[12gauge82]

5 hours ago, Rewulf said:

Youre not wrong, although the dividing up of Europe wasnt a land grab, as much as a deal done before the war was even won.

Like you say though ,what happened in Ukraine was a direct result of Western (mostly US ) meddling which spectacularly blew up in their face.
But some might call that a nutty conspiracy theory..
Look at everything thats happened since then though, civilian aircraft shot down, nerve gas attacks in Syria, Salisbury, various provocations and sabre rattling , all trying to paint a picture of the Russia bear threatening the peace of the world.
Whilst the US , with the support of NATO fuel and arm ISIS terrorism , and Israeli expansion/murder. (The US have just pledged 35 bn in military 'aid to Israel, why ?)
A continuing ,totally pointless war against goat herders in Afghanistan, and continued meddling in the stability of various nations including Libya  Iraq.

But its the Russians who are the bad people .

I couldn't agree more, the west is far from innocent.

[Mungler]

So it transpires today that the 3 Russian agents picked up outside the chemical weopans testing lab weren’t that bright.

In an operation between the British, Dutch and Americans they have published the faces and passports and contents of the car of the 3 agents.

IIRC the mainstay of the ‘tin foil hatters’ was that the Russian agents wouldn’t be that sloppy. Whilst that is speculative opinion and not fact, it transpires that one of the 3 had a taxi receipt in his pocket detailing a trip from the GRU to the airport.

Now, I’ve no doubt the tin foil hatters will throw suggestion that the receipt has been fabricated (etc) but again they have gone super public on this and there’s plenty of foreign agencies involved collaboratively too.

So in short I know the tin foil hatters can just never accept what they wilfully refuse to accept. However, it’s now like having to listen to someone argue orange juice is blue (and that they’re continuing to keep an open mind about the colour of orange juice in the meantime 😝😝😝).

Yeah, it’s still orange.

[Rewulf]

9 minutes ago, Mungler said:

Yeah, it’s still orange

I don't believe I've disputed the fact of the 2, 3 or were there 4 GRU hackers? Outside the Hague.

If a foreign power accuses you of a serious crime ,yet refuses to let you test the evidence, surely you would attempt to discover what they have on you, rather than just take their word for it ?

[Bobba]

54 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

If a foreign power accuses you of a serious crime ,yet refuses to let you test the evidence, surely you would attempt to discover what they have on you, rather than just take their word for it ?

Are you suggesting that you condone their actions?

[Mungler]

1 hour ago, Rewulf said:

I don't believe I've disputed the fact of the 2, 3 or were there 4 GRU hackers? Outside the Hague.

If a foreign power accuses you of a serious crime ,yet refuses to let you test the evidence, surely you would attempt to discover what they have on you, rather than just take their word for it ?

That’s the best you’ve got?

[Rewulf]

50 minutes ago, Mungler said:

That’s the best you’ve got?

Yes ,why, is that beyond your reasoning ?

If someone accuses you of something, they need to provide some evidence, some PROOF.
You, because youve read about it in the papers and seen it on TV , have all the proof you need to make your very educated decision 😃

But if it was you being accused, and (lets say for argument) you really hadnt done it, might want to examine the evidence, the 'burden of proof' as it were.
When the accuser refuses to share the evidence, but merely supplies various titbits of information to the media, a so called trial by media ensues.
YOU have based your assumption of guilt on what has been shown in the media, and soundbites of various politicians hoping for their spot in the limelight.
You completely ignore the accusers agenda, because you dont want to believe they are telling you lies, and you are swallowing them.

The bizarre nature of the plot, its ensuing failure, and the rush to accuse a state that the west is diametrically opposed to, doesnt ring any alarm bells ?
A supposedly independent, open sourced, unpaid and unbiased organisation like Bellingcat has to do the work of British state intelligence with a billion £ budget, and that doesnt sound odd ?
I couldnt give a monkeys whether Russia did it or not, but the way this whole matter has been handled stinks of lies.

You can call me what you like, I have very thick skin, but to believe the British media or politicians, without taking an objective look at the evidence, and more importantly , their 'performance' is not something I can do.

[Rewulf]

1 hour ago, Bobba said:

Are you suggesting that you condone their actions?

The Hague hackers ?
I dont think its the crime of the century TBH no.
If you think I want Russia to get ahead, definitely not.
But to use the fact that they have tried to illegally obtain information from the OPCW , of which they are members, shows that perhaps they are not exactly trusting of the supposed unbiased position of the OPCW ?

Again, if they had done Salisbury, what on earth would the point of a broad daylight hack, sat outside in the car 'attack' on a high security  building achieve ?
The results are the results are they not ?
Unless they believed the  published results were not the 'real' results ?

 

[panoma1]

If evidence exists that points to someone being accused of a criminal act, they are interviewed and given the every opportunity to explain, that explanation is either believable or unbelievable and dependant on which, the criminal investigation will either progress to a point where charges will be laid, or enquiries will head elsewhere! The Authorities are at that point already, but the Russian State refuse to cooperate! This refusal/failure to address the allegations or give a contra explanation will result in the investigation (and if possible, trial) going ahead without benefit of comment from the accused and conclusions from that failure will inevitably be drawn......and if a trial ensues, a verdict will be reached?

The Russian State have failed to counter the allegations, or give any, let alone a believable explanation......on the "balance of probabilities" they are guilty.....and it's getting towards "beyond reasonable doubt" too!..... but of course they are aware that unless found guilty in a court of law that will never be fully established....that, we can only conclude is the major reason why they refuse to send the men concerned to the West to answer the allegations, and why they will never cooperate!

 

 

[timps]

2 hours ago, Rewulf said:

Yes ,why, is that beyond your reasoning ?

If someone accuses you of something, they need to provide some evidence, some PROOF.
You, because youve read about it in the papers and seen it on TV , have all the proof you need to make your very educated decision 😃

But if it was you being accused, and (lets say for argument) you really hadnt done it, might want to examine the evidence, the 'burden of proof' as it were.
When the accuser refuses to share the evidence, but merely supplies various titbits of information to the media, a so called trial by media ensues.
YOU have based your assumption of guilt on what has been shown in the media, and soundbites of various politicians hoping for their spot in the limelight.
You completely ignore the accusers agenda, because you dont want to believe they are telling you lies, and you are swallowing them.

The bizarre nature of the plot, its ensuing failure, and the rush to accuse a state that the west is diametrically opposed to, doesnt ring any alarm bells ?
A supposedly independent, open sourced, unpaid and unbiased organisation like Bellingcat has to do the work of British state intelligence with a billion £ budget, and that doesnt sound odd ?
I couldnt give a monkeys whether Russia did it or not, but the way this whole matter has been handled stinks of lies.

Unfortunately, where your rational falls down is the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons at The Hague is meant to be an independent body which Russia singed up to. If you are accused of something you would expect an independent body to assess which is what has happened.

If I was accused of a crime based on DNA   yes I would want the evidence looked over by an independent body which is what has happened.

If I am not given the samples your argument is the fact I try and hack the police national computer somehow proves my innocence as a guilty man would never do that.

However, if what you are suggesting was to happened and I was given samples of DNA so I can test them myself then what if I come back with I’ve tested them myself and it’s not me gov, what then?

Maybe an independent testing laboratory in a foreign country, maybe the Hauge, that we have both singed up too ? Just a thought.

I don’t believe everything I read but then again I don’t disbelieve everything I read either.

[Gordon R]

I genuinely think we are missing the point. With Salisbury and the attempted hacking incident, they have left a trail of clues for the respective countries to find. There seems no evidence of trying to do it in secret - they just do as they please and stick two fingers up.

They seem to be giving us notice of what they could do, in a non subtle way.

[Rewulf]

8 minutes ago, timps said:

Unfortunately, where your rational falls down is the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons at The Hague is meant to be an independent body which Russia singed up to.

 

10 minutes ago, timps said:

you would expect an independent body to assess which is what has happened.

The Russkies obviously dont believe that to be the case do they ?

 

11 minutes ago, timps said:

However, if what you are suggesting was to happened and I was given samples of DNA so I can test them myself then what if I come back with I’ve tested them myself and it’s not me gov, what then?

Then they get given to someone both parties trust to be impartial ?

 

2 minutes ago, Gordon R said:

I genuinely think we are missing the point. With Salisbury and the attempted hacking incident, they have left a trail of clues for the respective countries to find. There seems no evidence of trying to do it in secret - they just do as they please and stick two fingers up.

They seem to be giving us notice of what they could do, in a non subtle way.

That is an excellent line of thought, it makes far more sense than the 'accidental' bungling GRU men messing up a straight forward assassination does it not ?

Where it falls down though is if they are giving us notice of what they can do, for example sending their best soldiery over on public transport to botch a simple killing of an unsuspecting old man, but managing only to kill an innocent bystander (months later)
Its not a very good example of Russian efficiency.
Maybe trying to hoodwink us into believing they are all clumsy oafs, and I dont mean that disrespectfully.

[panoma1]

15 minutes ago, timps said:

Unfortunately, where your rational falls down is the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons at The Hague is meant to be an independent body which Russia singed up to. If you are accused of something you would expect an independent body to assess which is what has happened.

If I was accused of a crime based on DNA   yes I would want the evidence looked over by an independent body which is what has happened.

If I am not given the samples your argument is the fact I try and hack the police national computer somehow proves my innocence as a guilty man would never do that.

However, if what you are suggesting was to happened and I was given samples of DNA so I can test them myself then what if I come back with I’ve tested them myself and it’s not me gov, what then?

Maybe an independent testing laboratory in a foreign country, maybe the Hauge, that we have both singed up too ? Just a thought.

I don’t believe everything I read but then again I don’t disbelieve everything I read either.

Just read the list of Worldwide organisations the Russians have hacked or attempted to hack into! It ain't just the OPCW....that list leads a reasonable person to conclude the Russian State has something to hide!

I think whatever evidence the West provided to the Russian State for analysis,  it would come up as "nah! Not us guv"......that is their modus operandi.....ignore the weight of evidence, no matter what, just deny everything!

[Rewulf]

1 minute ago, panoma1 said:

Just read the list of Worldwide organisations the Russians have hacked or attempted to hack into! It ain't just the OPCW....that list leads a reasonable person to conclude the Russian State has something to hide!

I think whatever evidence the West provided to the Russian State for analysis,  it would come up as "nah! Not us guv"......that is their modus operandi.....ignore the weight of evidence, no matter what, just deny everything!

At least you have covered the excuse of not being given access, they then have no excuses.
All it did by not giving them the samples, was to give them a possible collusion excuse between the west and the OPCW ?
A foolish move in my opinion, and a suspicious one in someone sceptical .

[panoma1]

18 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

At least you have covered the excuse of not being given access, they then have no excuses.
All it did by not giving them the samples, was to give them a possible collusion excuse between the west and the OPCW ?
A foolish move in my opinion, and a suspicious one in someone sceptical .

I'm sure if the Russian State cooperated and released (allowed) the men to stand trial in the West, they would be given full disclosure! That is their entitlement!.........They won't! So what would be the benefit to the West, of giving them or the Russian State sight of or access to the evidence? 

Edited October 5, 2018 by panoma1

[timps]

18 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

 

The Russkies obviously dont believe that to be the case do they ?

 

Then they get given to someone both parties trust to be impartial ?

 

That is an excellent line of thought, it makes far more sense than the 'accidental' bungling GRU men messing up a straight forward assassination does it not ?

Where it falls down though is if they are giving us notice of what they can do, for example sending their best soldiery over on public transport to botch a simple killing of an unsuspecting old man, but managing only to kill an innocent bystander (months later)
Its not a very good example of Russian efficiency.
Maybe trying to hoodwink us into believing they are all clumsy oafs, and I dont mean that disrespectfully.

OK let me rephrase with bold highlights 😉

The Hauge IS an independent body the Russians HAVE and STILL HAVE signed up to and IS the place you HAVE to send chemical weapons to be tested so the REST of the WORLD CAN act on the evidence found.

The UK is only interested in convincing the rest of the world not Russia, the UK and Russian governments already know the truth and there is NOWHERE else available that would be acceptable to both parties. If the Russians did not think it was now impartial why haven't they just left the OPCW? 

Could it be a possibility that the truth will come out that is believable to other countries  so they had something to try and cover up with a hack.

[Rewulf]

1 minute ago, panoma1 said:

So what would be the benefit to the West, of giving them or the Russian State sight of or access to the evidence? 

Dotting the i' s and crossing the t' s, we have covered ourselves.
We are supposed to be better than them, freer , more civilised , give them the bleeding samples !
Show them all the evidence, and not via the Guardian and Bellingcat, through official channels, do the job properly, instead of through conjecture and soundbites, its totally unprofessional .

 

3 minutes ago, timps said:

OK let me rephrase with bold highlights 😉

The Hauge IS an independent body the Russians HAVE and STILL HAVE signed up to and IS the place you HAVE to send chemical weapons to be tested so the REST of the WORLD CAN act on the evidence found.

The UK is only interested in convincing the rest of the world not Russia, the UK and Russian governments already know the truth and there is NOWHERE else available that would be acceptable to both parties. If the Russians did not think it was now impartial why haven't they just left the OPCW? 

Could it be a possibility that the truth will come out that is believable to other countries  so they had something to try and cover up with a hack.

Like what ?! The results of a physical lab investigation ?
Just cover/erase it off the system so it never happened , alter the results to show it was actually Marmite that was smeared on his knob 😄

I believe they were looking for the cover up, nothing more or less, because they dont trust the OPCW .
As far as leaving the convention ? That would only make it look worse wouldnt it ?