Alleged Russian assassins on TV

[Rewulf]

3 minutes ago, oowee said:

.

I am laughing every time i see the tourists in action. 

It is comical , what theyre idea was putting them on camera is Ive no idea!

Talk about digging a deeper hole.

3 minutes ago, pinfireman said:

Please quote the "deliberate" lies by Britains side? What would it take for you to blame Russia? 

The lies are theoretical for the most part.
But just for example.
It has to be Russia ,because only Russia knows how to make novichock. An absolute stinker 😁
The guy at Porton Down told me straight it came from Russia- Um No he didnt.
We are looking for a 6 man hit team, we have evidence- Nope, its 2 now.
Its the same container that was used- Nope ,Charlie Rowley says it was sealed.

Theres plenty more, but you get the drift.

[grrclark]

Rewulf, you highlight a very salient issue which is the ability of individuals to discern that which is most likely truthful or otherwise.

There is an interesting battle in higher education just now over whether we should teach a factual curriculum or whether we should emphasise reasoning skills that allow one to arrive at a conclusion in a considered, but challenging manner.

It isn’t a binary choice, there is always (in every single life decision) a degree of subjectivity.

Should we belive that our government or mainstream press tell us the unequivocable truth? No, because they don’t.

Does that mean they are fundamentally untrustworthy? No it doesn’t.

There should be no fixed bias, it should always be reasoning by deduction and a weighted evaluation of plausability, including the veracity and credability of sources of information.

[Rewulf]

9 minutes ago, pinfireman said:

Please quote the "deliberate" lies by Britains side? What would it take for you to blame Russia? 

Excellent post!

What have you "seen & heard" that makes you disbelieve?

Conflicting evidence and a mad rush to pin the blame on Putin, far too hasty, its what set me off in the first place.
Too many contradictions in the stories, and an overwhelming bid to make the culprit fit the crime, rather than vice versa.
The apparent non lethality of the lethal substance, and the strange selective nature of what was contaminated and what was not.
I could go on , but weve already done it before.

[Rewulf]

5 minutes ago, grrclark said:

Rewulf, you highlight a very salient issue which is the ability of individuals to discern that which is most likely truthful or otherwise.

There is an interesting battle in higher education just now over whether we should teach a factual curriculum or whether we should emphasise reasoning skills that allow one to arrive at a conclusion in a considered, but challenging manner.

It isn’t a binary choice, there is always (in every single life decision) a degree of subjectivity.

Should we belive that our government or mainstream press tell us the unequivocable truth? No, because they don’t.

Does that mean they are fundamentally untrustworthy? No it doesn’t.

There should be no fixed bias, it should always be reasoning by deduction and a weighted evaluation of plausability, including the veracity and credability of sources of information.

Thank you Grr, you are quite correct on every point.

I have given this subject considerable thought, only because I find it interesting, nothing more.

Admittedly my research (if you can call it so) only involved some prior knowledge of nerve agents, news reports, wiki and other scientific internet sites, and a visit to Salisbury. 
My viewpoint is a result of this, and involves no love for mother Russia .

Although I will admit, the production of the 'tourists' has thrown me a bit of a curve ball, I shall wait and see what transpires further.

[Gordon R]

Putin is probably visiting the Forum as I write - under an alias - laughing at attempts to clear his guilty country.

[Mungler]

Putin’s strength and approach comes from his total unaccountability - it’s not like there’s an opposition party in waiting looking for a chance to topple him. That’s why we can’t measure him or his activities against traditional democrtic western leaders.

Ignore how much of a hash the assassination plot was or how it should have been better and focus on the evidence. If against what has been produced you believe the uk authorities have falsified cctv and flight information (and within a political structure where there is a higher degree of questioning, and accountability and free press / speech) then give your tin foil hat a polish and be proud you truly are the enlightened.

[Gordon R]

Putin has had far more publicity with the trail of bread crumbs left by seemingly inept agents / tourists, than if it had been done professionally.

I agree with Mungler - Putin is beyond criticism by the West. He really doesn't care what we think, which seems too bitter a pill for some to swallow.

[islandgun]

1 minute ago, Gordon R said:

Putin has had far more publicity with the trail of bread crumbs left by seemingly inept agents / tourists, than if it had been done professionally.

I agree with Mungler - Putin is beyond criticism by the West. He really doesn't care what we think, which seems too bitter a pill for some to swallow.

He revels in not caring, makes him look strong to the electorate

[Rewulf]

6 minutes ago, Gordon R said:

Putin is beyond criticism by the West. He really doesn't care what we think, which seems too bitter a pill for some to swallow.

So why do we bother ?
If we really cant faze him, he can do whatever he wants, whenever he wants.
Any dissident at home and abroad can be shot down or poisoned on the street, and he can just say 'It wasnt me'

But we seem happy to buy his gas, and accept Russian 'tourists'' to the country.
If we are so positive he has used chemical weapons on our streets, where is the response?
Syria does it and they get a swarm of tomahawks.

Edited September 14, 2018 by Rewulf

[12gauge82]

16 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

So why do we bother ?
If we really cant faze him, he can do whatever he wants, whenever he wants.
Any dissident at home and abroad can be shot down or poisoned on the street, and he can just say 'It wasnt me'

But we seem happy to buy his gas, and accept Russian 'tourists'' to the country.
If we are so positive he has used chemical weapons on our streets, where is the response?
Syria does it and they get a swarm of tomahawks.

And that in my opinion is the real problem, it's the biggesy problem the western world is facing at the moment, "money talks", morals and democracy go out the window when money's at stake for the rich and powerful, it's why Brexit is being stifled at every turn and it's why our government grumbles but doesn't hit Russia where it would really hurt.

[grrclark]

1 hour ago, Rewulf said:

So why do we bother ?
If we really cant faze him, he can do whatever he wants, whenever he wants.
Any dissident at home and abroad can be shot down or poisoned on the street, and he can just say 'It wasnt me'

But we seem happy to buy his gas, and accept Russian 'tourists'' to the country.
If we are so positive he has used chemical weapons on our streets, where is the response?
Syria does it and they get a swarm of tomahawks.

Commercial reality and necessity trumps all.

The Donald was prescient when he challenged Merkel about the deal between Germany and Russia in respect to gas supplies, you cannot, with any sense of credibility and reasonableness, decry and demonise Russia as a destabilising threat to western democracy and with the other hand be signing a cheque worth billions for them to supply you with essential energy supplies.  Yet Germany and many of our European allies do with no sense of hypocrisy at all.

The sanctions imposed on Russia by the west are all a bit toothless really, an inconvenience for some ultra high worth individuals such as Abramovich, and a little bit of a bureaucratic headache for some enterprise scale businesses, but beyond that it is fundamentally token gestures of diplomatic expulsions (meh) and superficial soundbites.

The Indians have a great phrase, "might is right", i.e. the bigger you are the righter you are.  All the massive players on the global stage can misbehave in a multitude of ways and pretty much sail on regardless; Russia with annexing other sovereign territories and poisoning ex agents on foreign soil, China militarising neutral and disputed maritime territories with utter ambivalence, USA imposing unilateral trade rules (and "democracy") on the rest of the world and generally acting as the world police.

Even good old Blighty, despite the contrary proclamations of the doom merchants and naysayers on PW, is still a massive global player and influencer and also misbehaves in a grand manner and sails on by rather nonchalantly.

Like in every walk of life, if you are a bit naff and puny then don't make too many waves otherwise you get pummelled.

[Rewulf]

3 minutes ago, grrclark said:

Commercial reality and necessity trumps all.

The Donald was prescient when he challenged Merkel about the deal between Germany and Russia in respect to gas supplies, you cannot, with any sense of credibility and reasonableness, decry and demonise Russia as a destabilising threat to western democracy and with the other hand be signing a cheque worth billions for them to supply you with essential energy supplies.  Yet Germany and many of our European allies do with no sense of hypocrisy at all.

The sanctions imposed on Russia by the west are all a bit toothless really, an inconvenience for some ultra high worth individuals such as Abramovich, and a little bit of a bureaucratic headache for some enterprise scale businesses, but beyond that it is fundamentally token gestures of diplomatic expulsions (meh) and superficial soundbites.

The Indians have a great phrase, "might is right", i.e. the bigger you are the righter you are.  All the massive players on the global stage can misbehave in a multitude of ways and pretty much sail on regardless; Russia with annexing other sovereign territories and poisoning ex agents on foreign soil, China militarising neutral and disputed maritime territories with utter ambivalence, USA imposing unilateral trade rules (and "democracy") on the rest of the world and generally acting as the world police.

Even good old Blighty, despite the contrary proclamations of the doom merchants and naysayers on PW, is still a massive global player and influencer and also misbehaves in a grand manner and sails on by rather nonchalantly.

Like in every walk of life, if you are a bit naff and puny then don't make too many waves otherwise you get pummelled.

Spot on.
Yet its believed to be a step too far for these big players to stage an event that can be used as an excuse to do something, which may seem a little 'harsh' without the event ?
Although we havnt 'done' anything..yet, could it be a little something to put in the bank for future use ?

[Gordon R]

We will send them a stiff warning written on cardboard.

Trump - despite his many critics, imposed real sanctions on Russia for this very act, whilst the EU (and we are still part of it) looks the other way.

[12gauge82]

4 hours ago, Gordon R said:

We will send them a stiff warning written on cardboard.

Trump - despite his many critics, imposed real sanctions on Russia for this very act, whilst the EU (and we are still part of it) looks the other way.

Yep bang on, and yet all you get from our politicians is them poking trump with a stick who has done nothing but tried to be a friend to the UK, while sucking up to our supposed EU allies who seem hell bent on harming us, go figure!

[pinfireman]

8 hours ago, Rewulf said:

Conflicting evidence and a mad rush to pin the blame on Putin, far too hasty, its what set me off in the first place.
Too many contradictions in the stories, and an overwhelming bid to make the culprit fit the crime, rather than vice versa.
The apparent non lethality of the lethal substance, and the strange selective nature of what was contaminated and what was not.
I could go on , but weve already done it before.

No we have not. The first request was for the "deliberate lies"...........I,m waiting to hear them......

8 hours ago, Rewulf said:

It is comical , what theyre idea was putting them on camera is Ive no idea!

Talk about digging a deeper hole.

The lies are theoretical for the most part.
But just for example.
It has to be Russia ,because only Russia knows how to make novichock. An absolute stinker 😁
The guy at Porton Down told me straight it came from Russia- Um No he didnt.
We are looking for a 6 man hit team, we have evidence- Nope, its 2 now.
Its the same container that was used- Nope ,Charlie Rowley says it was sealed.

Theres plenty more, but you get the drift.

So really the only one that isn,t a possible misquote is the  only Russia  one? Bit of an exaggeration then on your part?

8 hours ago, Rewulf said:

So why do we bother ?
If we really cant faze him, he can do whatever he wants, whenever he wants.
Any dissident at home and abroad can be shot down or poisoned on the street, and he can just say 'It wasnt me'

But we seem happy to buy his gas, and accept Russian 'tourists'' to the country.
If we are so positive he has used chemical weapons on our streets, where is the response?
Syria does it and they get a swarm of tomahawks.

So now you think there should be an armed response? A bit risky?

[pinfireman]

6 hours ago, Gordon R said:

We will send them a stiff warning written on cardboard.

Trump - despite his many critics, imposed real sanctions on Russia for this very act, whilst the EU (and we are still part of it) looks the other way.

Correct!

[SpringDon]

14 hours ago, grrclark said:

Commercial reality and necessity trumps all.

The Donald was prescient when he challenged Merkel about the deal between Germany and Russia in respect to gas supplies, you cannot, with any sense of credibility and reasonableness, decry and demonise Russia as a destabilising threat to western democracy and with the other hand be signing a cheque worth billions for them to supply you with essential energy supplies.  Yet Germany and many of our European allies do with no sense of hypocrisy at all.

The sanctions imposed on Russia by the west are all a bit toothless really, an inconvenience for some ultra high worth individuals such as Abramovich, and a little bit of a bureaucratic headache for some enterprise scale businesses, but beyond that it is fundamentally token gestures of diplomatic expulsions (meh) and superficial soundbites.

<snip>

That’s so true that it almost hurts. It’s almost pathetic that the robust response to an alleged chemical attack involves buying less caviar from them and not selling them so much yogurt. But our politicians never seemed seem to be called out on it in the media (at least in the media I peruse but I do avoid the parts that involve being shouted at by a halfwit with a beard on YouTube).

I would go even further and say that the trouble in Ukraine is a direct result of eu expansionism, which seemed so predictable that it almost seemed deliberate. 

 

[islandgun]

11 hours ago, 12gauge82 said:

Yep bang on, and yet all you get from our politicians is them poking trump with a stick who has done nothing but tried to be a friend to the UK, while sucking up to our supposed EU allies who seem hell bent on harming us, go figure!

I find it hard to believe that trump had any motive other than sticking the boot in the old enemy 

35 minutes ago, SpringDon said:

That’s so true that it almost hurts. It’s almost pathetic that the robust response to an alleged chemical attack involves buying less caviar from them and not selling them so much yogurt. But our politicians never seemed seem to be called out on it in the media (at least in the media I peruse but I do avoid the parts that involve being shouted at by a halfwit with a beard on YouTube).

I would go even further and say that the trouble in Ukraine is a direct result of eu expansionism, which seemed so predictable that it almost seemed deliberate. 

 

[12gauge82]

40 minutes ago, islandgun said:

I find it hard to believe that trump had any motive other than sticking the boot in the old enemy 

Trump likes the UK, his mother is Scottish and he has on many occasions since he took office stuck up for the UK despite the majority of our politicians taking digs at him. And don't forget Obama who said we'd be at the back of the que for a trade deal, while trump said we'd be at the front.

Edited September 15, 2018 by 12gauge82

[islandgun]

46 minutes ago, 12gauge82 said:

Trump likes the UK, his mother is Scottish and he has on many occasions since he took office stuck up for the UK despite the majority of our politicians taking digs at him. And don't forget Obama who said we'd be at the back of the que for a trade deal, while trump said we'd be at the front.

I hope your right mate

[Rewulf]

2 hours ago, SpringDon said:

 

I would go even further and say that the trouble in Ukraine is a direct result of eu expansionism, which seemed so predictable that it almost seemed deliberate. 

 

You could say that most of these events that seem to cause a favourable outcome for Western powers could be deliberate.
Ukraines move away from Russian influence toward EU/Western influence was favoured most in the western part of the country, but was deeply unpopular in the ethnic Russian East and Crimea.
Many believe the Euromaidan movement was directly fueled by EU and US backers and strategists, and there is evidence to support this.
However ,we tend to believe it to have been a popular vote to cast off Russian hegemony, and the people in the 'occupied' areas are under the Russian jackboot.
The problem with this, most of those people ARE Russian, at least ethnically, they speak Russian and identify as such.

Many times in fairly recent history, this type of regime change strategy has been carried out, by both Eastern and Western powers, but the king of all regime change influencers has been the US.
Usually the premise has been 'national security' and has ,for the most part, enjoyed the support of the population.
But if anyone here seriously believes that, then they need to do a bit more research.
Ill leave the ME out of these examples for now , but consider Vietnam.

JFK didnt want to get mired in SE Asia, he saw the cost, in lives and treasure, and didnt believe it worthwhile.
The US wasnt that involved in 1963, but there was clamour to upgrade the war, JFK wanted a downgrade and ultimate withdrawal.
After his improbably accomplished assassination, his VP, Johnson, who you would think would have shared Kennedys vision of less war, immediately sent more troops and equipment, even staging a landing craft style invasion.
When the war lost momentum , events like the Gulf of Tonkin incident and plenty of others, put some fire back into it.
The end result of 10 years of war= ecological and humanitarian disaster, a totally destabilised SE Asia, millions of deaths, and multi billions spent on arms and reparations.
Those billions BTW mostly ended up in the coffers of the arms companies.
The people of America who paid for it received sweet FA, except mentally and physically  damaged people, and a suicide rate that cant be quantified yet.

We often look at conspiracy theories and scoff at the improbability of the event.
But try looking at it from the opposite end.
EVENT = REACTION = RESOLUTION is the usual way of examining the timeline of events.

9/11  = US HORROR AND ANGER = AFGHAN AND IRAQ INVASION/OCCUPATION

Spin it round and think of it back to front.
An occupation of 2 resource rich countries, control of their governments, and a military occupation.
Now ,the US couldnt just say, oh by the way Afghan and Iraq , we are coming for your oil and minerals, can they?

So they need a reason, they need the American people, and to a lesser extent the world, behind them.

So you need the EVENT, duly delivered by an improbable terrorist act, that again we wont delve into too much here.
But wait, that only incriminates Afghanistan, no problem, lets invent a story about saddam being able to destroy the world in 45 mins, mission accomplished.

How does that compare to JFK and Vietnam?
Lets take a look, spin it round again.
American interests want a war, a war with Russia or China might get a bit nukey, so lets not.
SE Asia and the spread of communism there, perfect.
President doesnt want to play ball = problem.
Kill president using ex Russian defector scapegoat = Outrage at the death of much loved JFK at the hands of Commie scum.

JFK = US HORROR AND ANGER = VIETNAM WAR/WAR ON COMMUNISM IN SE ASIA
 

[AVB]

So Rewulf who do you think is pulling the strings? 

[Mungler]

That ‘theory’ doesn’t stand up to George Bush senior having the opportunity to occupy these oil rich lands in Gulf War 1. 

Indeed these ‘theries’ involve stringing together and connecting the most statistically improbably, unlikely and implausible events but with the benefit of hindsight. Indeed no one could know with any degree of accuracy how the world would change at the moment the planes struck the twin towers - at that moment nuclear retaliation was on the table. 

Rather than dark handedly steer a disparate group of jihadists via Osama Bin Laden into flying planes into the already explosive laden structure of the twin towers (apparently 🤪) they could have just kept on truckin with Gulf War 1. Indeed at that time the world and locals on the ground were expecting and hoping it in equal measures. 

Bonkerooney. Again.

Edited September 15, 2018 by Mungler

[Hamster]

Follow the money, the bankers, the media moguls (war is big business for them), the arms manufacturers biggest shareholders, they would be just the start. 

[Mungler]

4 minutes ago, Hamster said:

Follow the money, the bankers, the media moguls (war is big business for them), the arms manufacturers biggest shareholders, they would be just the start. 

That’s just meaningless rhetoric