Former Russian double agent seriously ill in Salisbury.

[dowie]

Multiple statements. Two quick examples: Boris Johnson saying only Russia could do this and May stating that the only options are Russia did it or Russia lost control of their nerve agents. Both Johnson and May stating as fact that only Russia could produce this.

OK so what is the problem there?

No. The fact that other countries have produced Novichok nerve agents shows that it can be done. There's nothing uniquely impossible about one specific nerve agent. Your argument is akin to saying just because Germany produced a Mercedes (one type of car) doesn't mean that they could produce a different sort of car. Yes - it's all very similar technological capability. Oh, and to clear up your imprecision, Iran produced five example types for the OPCW, btw. The capability for other countries to produce these agents is demonstrated - this is a fact.

that is fine but you're missing the point - is the specific nerve agent found one of the specific ones that other countries could produce? You don't know... you just know it is of a type and that Iran has supposedly produced some of that type and then you've (incorrectly) concluded that the UK has lied.

CT? Conspiracy Theory? If you think this is conspiracy theory then you have lack understanding of international politics. Maybe read the FT or the Economist sometime. That you refer to this actual and real thing that is being done right now and talked about widely as "conspiracy theory" indicates you don't pay attention. What it has to do with this is that it creates a real economic threat to US financial hegemony. If oil is no longer sold in dollars, that undermines the dollar significantly because the dollar is essentially backed by three things: oil, the ability to pay US debt in it and US military might. And the last one is used primarily to ensure the first, currently.

Again what does this have to do with the Russian being poisoned... yup we're into tin foil hat territory.

Please do link to any FT or Economist article that links the "petroyuan" to this case... you can't.. it is conspiracy nonsense.

 

[NVP]

The problem is that, in your head, evidence is a large banner that says "THEY DONE IT!". The UK govt. points at Russia based on circumstantial evidence which is more powerful than direct evidence, in cases such as this one and contrary to what you may have seen in films and TV shows.

In example, the The Oklahoma City bombing conviction was based on circumstantial evidence:

However, Robert Precht, a defense attorney in the World Trade Center bombing and director of the Office of Public Service at the University's Law School, said the prosecution's use of indirect evidence is no cause for worry.

"The concern McVeigh was convicted on circumstantial evidence is misplaced," Precht said. "Circumstantial evidence can be, and often is much more powerful than direct evidence."

https://web.archive.org/web/1999042...h.edu/daily/1997/jun/06-04-97/news/news3.html

I understand this, however within the contex of my original post I was highlighting the fact that the circumstantial evidence only and lack of definitive proof leaves questions to be asked regarding motives of others.

I never gave a second thought to the Russians being responsible for this. They have a history. It made sense to automatically assume what we are being told is the truth.

However, the lack of provided evidence and the coincidental timing of this (and many other 'propaganda' style articles) with the announcement to, and actual sale of, oil in Yuan instead of USD is, for me, quite telling.

Deny all you want - saying tin foil this and conspiracy nutter that - the outcome of those who have previously attempted to move their oil trade away from the USD was related in any way. It is what happened, under humanitarian guise.

The problem this time is China being the one to instigate. They are now Saudi's biggest purchaser of oil. Iran, Venezuela and Russia are currently under heavy US sanctions and are a prime target for increased oil trade, China has the timing almost perfect. And being China, not so easy to destabilise and overthrow.

So what to do? Go after their potential traders with any means necessary to prevent the USD being subject to potentially catastrophic inflation by the gigantic drop in trade.

How to do that? Well... just read the news and make up your own opinion.

 

[h4rm0ny]

OK so what is the problem there?

I'm not going to bother going over everything again and again. So there's going to be limited indulgence on this. I already explained in my original post, that this is a demonstrable lie.

that is fine but you're missing the point - is the specific nerve agent found one of the specific ones that other countries could produce? You don't know... you just know it is of a type and that Iran has supposedly produced some of that type and then you've (incorrectly) concluded that the UK has lied.

And yet again, already stated my argument clearly: these are not wildly different and unique things. If Iran can produce five different novochoks based on the widely available information then it is silly to suppose that the UK in the forty years since their invention can't produce them either. And if you can produce one, you can produce others. You're arguing out of ignorance supposing that they're wildly separate things.

Again what does this have to do with the Russian being poisoned... yup we're into tin foil hat territory.

And again, it opens the door to economic sanctions which are a valuable tool in economic warfare. An integral tool in fact. ​

Please do link to any FT or Economist article that links the "petroyuan" to this case... you can't.. it is conspiracy nonsense.

I said that discussion of the petroyuan is not conspiracy theory and cited that mainstream publications such as these discuss it. As to suggesting it as a motivation for the poisoning, yes - that is by definition a conspiracy theory. And I am promoting it as plausible for the reasons I have already given. You repeating "conspiracy theory! conspiracy theory!" doesn't detract.

Now I'm going to from this point on, assume a reasonable level of intelligence on the part of GD readership (I know, I know - but some of us are) and if your questions are just demands to repeat something I've already said two posts earlier I'll just ignore them on the basis that everyone else actually read what I wrote. Actual points, I may respond to.

 

[dowie]

I'm not going to bother going over everything again and again. So there's going to be limited indulgence on this. I already explained in my original post, that this is a demonstrable lie.

you gave a flawed explanation as pointed out

And yet again, already stated my argument clearly: these are not wildly different and unique things. If Iran can produce five different novochoks based on the widely available information then it is silly to suppose that the UK in the forty years since their invention can't produce them either. And if you can produce one, you can produce others. You're arguing out of ignorance supposing that they're wildly separate things.

speculation... you don't know the specific agent used and the reasons for the statement, you've made an incorrect conclusion from the fact that Iran has (allegedly) produced some of the same type/class but not necessarily the exact same agent... that is the flaw. Note I'm just stating you can't know either way ergo you can't climb the UK has lied, I'm not claiming that it is impossible for the UK to have lied or made a misleading statement here. You're also arguing out of ignorance... everyone is - that is part of the point, you can't make the conclusion you made.

And again, it opens the door to economic sanctions which are a valuable tool in economic warfare. An integral tool in fact.

​

Right so it was all some "false flag" op so we could find an excuse to put more sanctions on Russia? OK and you're not into these conspiracy theories at all...

I said that discussion of the petroyuan is not conspiracy theory and cited that mainstream publications such as these discuss it. As to suggesting it as a motivation for the poisoning, yes - that is by definition a conspiracy theory. And I am promoting it as plausible for the reasons I have already given. You repeating "conspiracy theory! conspiracy theory!" doesn't detract.

Now I'm going to from this point on, assume a reasonable level of intelligence on the part of GD readership (I know, I know - but some of us are) and if your questions are just demands to repeat something I've already said two posts earlier I'll just ignore them on the basis that everyone else actually read what I wrote. Actual points, I may respond to.

I'm not demanding you repeat anything... just citing the FT and the economist with regards to this nonsense is nonsense and I'll call it out as such, I'm calling out trying to link this incident to the introduction of the "petroyuan" as a conspiracy because it simply is... I'd question the intelligence of people grasping at rather implausible things like that so whatever...

 

[SexyGreyFox]

It's possible. The thing is, espionage is so messy that all sorts of things are possible right down to personal vendettas. You just can't tell from an isolated incident anything for certain. But I would be surprised by this scenario because it would imply Britain had re-activated this asset (remember, he was a spy for us, not for Russia). And as he's an entirely busted asset, I just don't see the value in that.

I don't know the life-expectancy of these nerve agents. If your suggesting he had some old stuff lying around, I don't know why or how he would or what would motivate him to get it out. Unless his daughter brought it over to kill him with and accidentally dosed herself. But then we're back to why would Russia want to do this vs. the more probable reasons why the UK/USA would, imo.

Ta

 

[Hagar]

I would expect or propose that our security service does know what it is doing 99% of the time and that they have been working on this to establish within reasonable doubt who the actors were in this play. They have produced credible data (I will stop short of evidence at this time) to other governments upon which they have also acted. A significant number of accredited diplomats engaged in suspicious activity have been removed. I think that we should consider it successful so far unless or until proven otherwise later.

 

[Sankari]

'Behind the Smokescreen: Who are the Actors Spreading Disinformation on Ex-Spy Poisoning?'

“Russia doesn’t have Novichok, it came from the UK/Czech republic/Sweden/Baltic countries”. First, Russia’s Permanent Representative to the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) claimed in Sputnik that the nerve-agent could have come from the UK, Czech Republic, Sweden and the Baltic countries. The same disinformation was later repeated by the Russian Foreign Ministry, and in the end, the Russian ambassador to Sweden had to back away and said it was just “a guess”.

“It was a false-flag operation by the UK to discredit Russia”. This disinformation has been one of the most repeated messages on all the levels. It was used by the Russian envoy at the UN security council and variations of it were constantly broadcast by three main anchors and TV hosts of state-controlled TV channels.

“Ukraine poisoned Skripal”. At first, accusing Ukraine not only for being governed by Nazis and conducting a genocide in Donbas, but also for poisoning Skripal sounded so ridiculous that it was mentioned only with many reservations. But a few days later it had strengthened into a serious part of the disinforming narrative distributed both by the chief propagandists on TV, and Russian governmental news websites like Ukraina.ru.

“UK is manipulating OPCW”. Discrediting international investigation is one of the basic tactics used by pro-Kremlin disinformation and has been earlier utilised intensively in denigrating the Dutch-led investigation on the downing of MH17. This time, it was the Russian deputy foreign minister who claimed that the UK is manipulating the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) experts.

Some of the wildest examples of disinformation spread online suggested that Skripal was poisoned by the mother-in-law to be or by Theresa May herself – because she is friends with the appointed director of CIA.

Putin must be frantic by now.

 

[Skunkworks]

'Behind the Smokescreen: Who are the Actors Spreading Disinformation on Ex-Spy Poisoning?'



Putin must be frantic by now.

"The EU are the good guys."

-The EU

 

[dowie]

Putin must be frantic by now.

the thing is... even though Russia has previous for this (see the polonium poisoning of Litvinenko or the poisoning with dioxin of Viktor Yushchenko ... the poison chosen being quite likely deliberate as a result of its link to to Agent Orange and the victim using orange as his campaign colour culminating in the Orange Revolution) there are plenty of people out there who seem to get swayed/influenced by the rather obvious propaganda and conflicting messages put out by Russia deliberately to get people questioning the attack, or even just some constant desire to always want to believe some 'alternative' narrative no matter how implausibly silly - leading to ludicrous claims that it is more likely the West did it or that it is related to some nonsense about trading oil in yuan etc..

Lets completely ignore the fairly regular killing of Putin's political rivals and critics, ignore the fact they've made specific threats to 'traitors' and ignore the fact that they even alluded to some threats after this event, ignore the fact they're not cooperating and have sent out so many conflicting messages. The fact that this guy left Russia with their consent after being freed as part of a spy swap doesn't really change anything other than indicate that Russia can be trusted even less now... clearly he was useful to be used as a bargaining chip back then and once that use had gone he was apparently seen as expendable

 

[itchy]

Why would you want to discredit Russia?

The is no point so something very fishy is going on, and no you don't make nerve agents in your back bedroom.

It could be a psychological war of attrition but who knows?

 

[Jono8]

the thing is... even though Russia has previous for this (see the polonium poisoning of Litvinenko or the poisoning with dioxin of Viktor Yushchenko ... the poison chosen being quite likely deliberate as a result of its link to to Agent Orange and the victim using orange as his campaign colour culminating in the Orange Revolution) there are plenty of people out there who seem to get swayed/influenced by the rather obvious propaganda and conflicting messages put out by Russia deliberately to get people questioning the attack, or even just some constant desire to always want to believe some 'alternative' narrative no matter how implausibly silly - leading to ludicrous claims that it is more likely the West did it or that it is related to some nonsense about trading oil in yuan etc..

Lets completely ignore the fairly regular killing of Putin's political rivals and critics, ignore the fact they've made specific threats to 'traitors' and ignore the fact that they even alluded to some threats after this event, ignore the fact they're not cooperating and have sent out so many conflicting messages. The fact that this guy left Russia with their consent after being freed as part of a spy swap doesn't really change anything other than indicate that Russia can be trusted even less now... clearly he was useful to be used as a bargaining chip back then and once that use had gone he was apparently seen as expendable

Exactly. The simplest explanation is almost always the correct one. This is extremely likely to be just another Russian assassination. The only real question is whether it was botched and they didn't mean for it to end up so public, or whether they intentionally used the nerve agent in the way they did to send a very clear message to other people they consider traitors.

 

[dowie]

Exactly. The simplest explanation is almost always the correct one. This is extremely likely to be just another Russian assassination. The only real question is whether it was botched and they didn't mean for it to end up so public, or whether they intentionally used the nerve agent in the way they did to send a very clear message to other people they consider traitors.

Occam's razor, innit

I think it is quite plausible it wasn't intended to work out this way/was botched though there has certainly been another death of a Putin opponent in the UK (Boris Berezovsky) where an open verdict has been given by the coroner, though with things like the poisoning of the former Viktor Yushchenko they were very likely trying to send a message. I guess we don't really know either way, yet.

Would be interesting to read about this case in say 20-30 years time when perhaps more information is available.

 

[LOAM]

Exactly. The simplest explanation is almost always the correct one. This is extremely likely to be just another Russian assassination. The only real question is whether it was botched and they didn't mean for it to end up so public, or whether they intentionally used the nerve agent in the way they did to send a very clear message to other people they consider traitors.

I agree to an extent, but I think the issue is that our government is so poorly though of (and trusted even less) that people are obviously happy to entertain alternative notions.

I simply no longer believe a word they say but that doesn't mean I think we did it.

I find it a strange standpoint to say that because russia discovered it, they are by default culpable. It's akin to saying Henry Ford and therefore America is responsible for every death by a car.

That said though I've not really followed the thread / news that closely so I might be oblivious to released evidence that clearly points the finger.

 

[Freakbro]

Exactly. The simplest explanation is almost always the correct one. This is extremely likely to be just another Russian assassination. The only real question is whether it was botched and they didn't mean for it to end up so public, or whether they intentionally used the nerve agent in the way they did to send a very clear message to other people they consider traitors.

My money is on a botched job and it wasn't meant to be so public. Look at all the Russians "dying" in London already, I think the people who are possibly on the list are fully aware of what's going on and don't need such a public message.

 

[Blackjack Davy]

Exactly. The simplest explanation is almost always the correct one. This is extremely likely to be just another Russian assassination. The only real question is whether it was botched and they didn't mean for it to end up so public, or whether they intentionally used the nerve agent in the way they did to send a very clear message to other people they consider traitors.

At the end of the day it probably doesn't really matter. Whats important to Putin and how it plays to the audience in Russia. Most of the details aren't made public from what I understand and and it allows Putin to play the victim card i.e. the West is picking on Russia again and produce profuse amounts of disinformation to smother the facts - they even put out the story that the downed Plane in Ukraine was shot down by a Ukrainian pilot - even though investigators in the West concluded it was a missile attack by Buk missiles (and there was even footage of the launchers being hurriedly driven across the border back to Russia afterwards) - its the story propagated in Russia that matters.

The actual message to any people in the russian special services that if you ever dare cross Putin look what will happen to you and we won't forgive or forget - couldn't be any clearer.

 

[dowie]

The actual message to any people in the russian special services that if you ever dare cross Putin look what will happen to you and we won't forgive or forget - couldn't be any clearer.

Problem is that posts of those people in the Russian "special services", at least the ones with diplomatic cover and some level of seniority, have been sent packing and had their operations disrupted quite severely in the UK and US + to a lesser extent in other countries too.

Perhaps some of Putin's opponents might occasionally still see some emotionless goon at the corner of their street munching sunflower seeds, but they'll likely be a less common sight in London these days.

The UK on the other hand doesn't need concern itself allocating large amounts of manpower to keep tabs on anyone overseas who is particularly influential and critical of the government since we're a much freer country... tit for tat expulsions hurt the Russians far more.

 

[chrcoluk]

Evidence please.

If you want to play that game I could simple say Evidence please for the other way round.

Or do you think all false flag events are nonsense?

Obviously the government can keep things out the (UK) news if they want, they have done many times.

Look at the amount of stuff reported about the UK on foreign news channels that stays off the air over here. Also the fiasco we had from the terrorist attacks recently when the UK press kept stuff out the news but the USA press then published it.

Also I never even said its a false flag event, I just said we should be open to the possibility. You are a bit naive if you think its simply impossible.

So let me put it this way.

Why was there press surrounding the area?
Why wasnt it just reported the guy had a heart attack or something?
Why was specific details provided it was war time stuff used?

Usually details like this are omitted from press reports for the respect of the dead and their family. I find it very odd this kind of information is public. MI5 wouldnt want it known for national security reasons.

 

[chrcoluk]

If anyone wants a brief primer on just how catastrophic a move away from the dollar being the international currency is, I'm not an economist but can probably give an adequate summary.

What we have at the end of all this, is the following:

• UK and USA - with an established history of lying - are insisting we take their word for it.
• UK and USA have established reason to want to sanction and vilify Russia.
• The murder was done in a deliberately provocative, dramatic way with a clear PR reason to point it at Russia.

Proof? We're unlikely to get any definitive proof for years if at all. But you can make educated guesses as to which is most likely. At present it's the above or "Russia wanted to send a (somewhat weird) message".

Good points. The first 2 are also established facts.

 

[Angilion]

[..]
I find it a strange standpoint to say that because russia discovered it, they are by default culpable. It's akin to saying Henry Ford and therefore America is responsible for every death by a car. [..]

It's somewhat more than that;

We know that other countries routinely make cars. There is no evidence that other countries make or have ever made this particular chemical weapon.
We know that Putin (and probably other people in Russia, perhaps other people with enough power) considers assassination a useful political tool.
We know that Russian agents have used chemical weapons (of various types) for assassinations, including outside of Russia.
We know that the target in this case was considered a target by Putin/Russia.

The alternative explanation is an elaborate and very risky false flag operation. False flag operations have occured, but they're rare because of the risk and generally used for very high stakes. To start a war, suppress a revolt, that sort of thing. To slightly worsen the reputation of a regime that already has a terrible reputation doesn't seem like enough of a motive to me. The idea that the UK might have done it is particular strained because it has a long term adverse effect on the UK's intelligence services - why risk passing information to the UK when they can't protect you even if you succeed in getting to the UK?

 

[Freakbro]

I think people forget the term is 'Reasonable doubt' not 'Any doubt from the most convoluted and tenuous scenarios imagined'