Former Russian double agent seriously ill in Salisbury.
- Thread starter Malevolence
- Start date
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 4,166
- Location
- London
Other way round - the reason more people aren't chiming in with Dowie's tune is simply that his argument is using sound logic and, frankly, there is no point in pushing forward with an argument that the entire civilised world has accepted.
I assume the reason Dowie and others are bothering is because the topic is amusing to them.
The argument: "err well you cant 1000% say for sure that Russia definitely definitely definitely made the nerve agent and that it's possible someone else did" - whilst ignoring political and state connections, motive and the capacity to manufacture (indeed invent) said nerve agent and previous examples of this behaviour from Russia is some of the most embarrassingly specious reasoning I have read on these forums.
Let's not be silly and parrot ridiculous propaganda word for word without stopping to think. Besides, it's not very civilized to presume guilt until proven innocent, is it.
Ahh yes, don't think please, just believe.
You mention political and state connections, but what about other countries, other agencies, other entities? Other nations have motives, after all, if only to smear Russia and most nations that "dislike, but do not despise" Russia, have the ability if not more so to invent new toxins, we certainly do and the Americans love their black projects so much they accidentally reveal them in missions (Bin Laden).
It's not a question of seriousness when someone wants to probe a situation a bit (Because rather obviously it should be Russia that did this, SHOULD), why would you attack someone for thinking unless you believe people having any sort of disbelief in your/our state is treasonous?
Is that the case? Because that's rather unfortunate. Sometimes i wonder why the UK is such a ****** mess politically and socially...
Unfortunately I'm not sure logic works too well with CT-ers, their world view is shaped by making improbably leaps, questioning/trying to magnify any doubt where there is relatively little and ignoring huge flaws/lots of doubt when it crops up in an interesting alternative
Labour councillors benefited from the Grenfell tower block fire, obviously it was started by them to smear the Tories... wake up sheeple etc..
Honestly if you're mentioning the UK and America int the context of other nations that might have motives to carry out a nerve agent attack on UK soil in order to smear Russia then you're really reaching. Just to clarify, is that what you're suggesting there, that that is a plausibly alternative to be considered?
If the UK is blatantly lying*, then all the other countries who have condemned Russia (and withdrawn diplomats, etc), are doing so because...? It's fun to poke the bear?
*And/or the UK has no solid evidence/ realistic grounds to blame Russia.
*And/or the UK has no solid evidence/ realistic grounds to blame Russia.
It's not really about what's plausible, it's just about asking questions and not being called a traitor like we're living in the bloody 70s where we protected child abusing Ministers from justice because of der COMMIES oer der.
Yeah, enjoy that strawman, ENJOY IT.
Straw man? Bit ironic... Who called you a traitor?
It's not who said what with that, it's the general feeling of living in this country lately, maybe it's just because 90% of the media is owned by a bunch of Russian backed right-wing outlets (funny that, eh), but people are increasingly becoming irritable to me.
Of course there's the usual GD suspects as well that toot the horn of fascists for some reason.
Of course there's the usual GD suspects as well that toot the horn of fascists for some reason.
it kind of is when you're making a dubious shout of "straw man" while ironically chucking in one yourself
For Russia, perhaps. But not, as you yourself note, for Putin. It's politically useful for him, since it suppresses dissent. His enemies die even when they have fled to another country, so don't be his enemy. In addition, the sanctions were not a known outcome of the assassination attempt and military posturing is just posturing and is also politically usable for Putin (and therefore useful for him, since he's very good at politics).
Putin ordered the invasion, conquest and annexation a large part of another country. He's clearly not very concerned about what other countries think or what they might do. Assassinating a few people would generally be expected to come further down the list of international incidents than invading, conquering and annexing a large part of another country.
Which would be equally applicable to either potential motive - Russia or a false flag operation by another state.
Could have, yes. But there's no evidence that they did. There's also no evidence of the UK using toxic substances for assassinations. Russia, on the other hand, has made this particular chemical weapon and has used toxic substances for assassinations.
Murdering a person under the protection of the UK in the UK would be an own goal for the government of the UK since it's an obvious failure to provide the promised protection. This attack is harmful to the UK in the short, medium and long term because it will put people off providing information to the UK intelligence services.
That's true even if it was a false flag operation and was successfully concealed. If it was a false flag operation and not successfully concealed, the repercussions would be severe. Incorrect information about other countries that can be blamed on faulty intelligence gathering is very different to an explicit order to use chemical weapons to murder someone in your own country solely to blame it on another country. Dragging numerous other countries into it would have course make the repercussions much worse.
Since neither could be known, the alleged motive would have to have been the one I stated - to slightly worsen the reputation of a regime that already has a terrible reputation. That would be the only predictable result of this hypothetical false flag operation. I'm surprised that any other country did anything in response.
A false flag operation by a state hostile to both Russia and the UK would be more plausible, but still a big risk for a minor worsening of Russia's reputation and some harm done to the UK's intelligence services. The risk to another country would be higher because the effect on their reputation would be worse and/or the predictable repercussions would be worse. If a powerful country did it and were found out, the loss of reputation would be worse because their reputation would have been much higher than Russia's. China, for example. They probably could have done it, but even if they were willing to use chemical weapons for assassination their motivation to do so is very limited and why would they take the risk of being found out? If a less powerful country did it, they'd be running the risk of military intervention to force regime change.
My comment on the strawman was a joke, as in on myself, it wasn't against anyone else.
still no news from OPCW ?
If you heard R4 today this morning, even they/bbc are loosing the narrative, Nick Robinson reply to the ex Russian general (who alebit re-iterated some of the extreme conspiracy theories) was "if the other EU conuntries had not also joined in, in expulsions, do you think accusation could be false" .... remember Nick, their expulsions relied on our evidence.
Russian guy did comment why had we not managed to convince India (and a few smaller countries) too - good point ?
If you heard R4 today this morning, even they/bbc are loosing the narrative, Nick Robinson reply to the ex Russian general (who alebit re-iterated some of the extreme conspiracy theories) was "if the other EU conuntries had not also joined in, in expulsions, do you think accusation could be false" .... remember Nick, their expulsions relied on our evidence.
Russian guy did comment why had we not managed to convince India (and a few smaller countries) too - good point ?
Poor guy was just enjoying lunch with his daughter in the park when his old KGB "bite down hard if captured comrade" molar broke
NB: Not a serious suggestion
Why? He just had a personal best result and national record result in the Russian presidential elections thanks entirely to this incident (was polling for another lacklustre performance before the west started throwing accusations and expelling diplomats).
This whole situation has been a massive boon for him, improved his legacy, strengthened his position at home, increased his support, and he can now blame the Russian economy continuing its' downwards trend on the west and people will lap it up.
If he's frantic about anything it's probably joy lol.
Last edited:
Yes. They still wont answer an essential question. They prefer to just declare something "conspiracy theory" and dismiss. Given their repeated refusal to engage with my question, it's obvious that the answer is "no - there are no scientific or technical barriers stopping the production of one particular agent". So in conclusion, yes - it is established fact that other countries could make this; and by direct inference it is a lie by the UK government to say no other country could. Dowie proposes that there's something we don't know that the UK government does which isn't a technical or scientific barrier, but has never suggested what this might be. Whatever it is though, it must necessarily come down to taking the government's word for it which is my point. They refuse to answer the question which would disprove the only argument that doesn't depend on taking Boris Johnson's word for something. Meaning their argument is dependent on trusting our government but wont admit that.
The only point I'm unclear on is whether it is deliberate or whether they genuinely don't understand the argument. In any case, most of what they say is "Conspiracy Theory" and "False Premise" without actual reasons. I think they just believe the UK government by default and can't understand contrary viewpoints as being anything other than biased or insane. There's a world of difference between Dowie and, say, Angillion who I'm about to reply to and who understands and engages.
Poor guy was just enjoying lunch with his daughter in the park when his old KGB "bite down hard if captured comrade" molar broke
That theory breaks down unless he then snogged his daughter, though.
The question you keep setting up on a false premise, based on flawed logic and that has already been replied to...
You're not even following then? I won't admit to trusting our government on this one? The whole point is that it is rather more probable that the UK government isn't lying than your convoluted nonsense (based on a flawed argument) about it somehow being probable this was a false flag etc...
I think the problem is that you seem to want to give "alternative" views similar or even greater weight, despite them being either incredibly unlikely or fundamentally flawed. Another poster might be a bit more polite about this but it is ridiculous really. There was an obvious flaw in your Iran argument, you don't get it. Other scenarios are highly implausible.
It's the same old nonsense, some CT types always want to try and question the official narrative for the sake of it even if what they're proposing is significantly less plausible and requires completely ignoring massive holes.(I notice you've gone for the standard approach of changing the font colour too, though thankfully you've avoided writhing a bunch of words in capital letters)
I'm not saying don't question anything I am saying try to apply a bit of logic and common sense instead of blindly lapping up variations on the alternatives of the sort the Putin propaganda machine would love to confuse people with.