Russian Spies

[Lxxx]

37 minutes ago, Chinahand said:

My view of Russia is that it is a thug-ocracy.  Big thugs have littler thugs behind their backs to knife them and littler thugs have lesser thugs and so on ad infinitum.

If you are a business man or small trader you could be shaken down by the bureaucracy for fees, back-taxes or a donation for that certificate you haven't applied in triplicate for, but also some bigger thug might turn up and take over your business with menaces, and even oligarchs aren't free of this risk; if Putin decides you are out, a billionaire can easily be stripped of 90% of his wealth and exiled.

Putin is the biggest meat grinder in this machine, but out of his line of sight there are multiple other actors all grinding away.  Most, if the Siloviki turn up, profess loyalty to Mother Russia, but they are basically out for themselves and theft, blackmail, murder and appropriation are standard parts of their toolkit, learnt in part from emulating Putin.

This is the environment where murderous power is proudly and openly used, all the while getting a blessing from the Patriach and adding a bit of anti-semitism or xenophobia into the mix.

It is poisonous, and uses poisons, radiological and neurologic, to make their point.

It isn't that surprising many get out, taking what they've got to London and else where, nor is it surprising that Putin is culpable for bringing murder onto British streets.  Personally I think he sanctioned it, but maybe some patriot in the grubby Siloviki/mafia world decided to take his revenge on a turbulent priest to please his unknowing boss.

Yes, it could be the Ukrainians out for revenge for Putin invading them and bringing his war and corruption and little green thugs into their land, personally I doubt it, but again the spider at the centre of that nasty little web is still Putin pulling thuggish strings.

We can't be hasty say the useful idiots, we're just as bad as them parrot pundits on RT.

No.  They are different, and beware of them, they kill quickly to get what they want and see hesitancy as weakness.  Ask Georgia, Ukraine, and see worried looks in the Baltics.  Putin wants them back and treats them just as he would an oligarch who gets out of line.

Everything you write is correct, but it doesn't automatically make them responsible for very public poisoning of an MI6 agent.

[Mr. Sausages]

If the gloves don't fit you must acquit.

[quilp]

So this situation has reached a point where the same state, which under Tony Blair's 'leadership' reassured the world that Saddam Hussein had Weapons of mass destruction which could be used in as little as 45 minutes, is now telling the world the same thing about Russia and Putin.

That nerve-agent was distributed to other states within what was the USSR during the Cold War as a 'last-resort' weapon so it has proliferation.

Good old Jezza standing his ground... 

[Chinahand]

 

22 minutes ago, quilp said:

1 hour ago, P.K. said:

Bleat all you like but Aunty Beeb remains the most trusted media outlet on the planet. 

This is what you said, "... on the planet."

That survey you posted looks like an IPSOS result, which the BBC commissioned.

The most trusted global news brands among those tested include the BBC (with 48% across the 10 countries saying they have a lot or some trust) and CNN (44%).

Survey result of 10,230 adults questioned by GlobeScan in the UK, USA, Brazil, Egypt, Germany, India, Indonesia, Nigeria, Russia, and South Korea in March and April.

[P.K.]

34 minutes ago, quilp said:

This is what you said, "... on the planet."

That survey you posted looks like an IPSOS result, which the BBC commissioned.

Correct.

You're surely not suggesting that the BBC "massaged" the results in some way. Which would be foolish.

[quilp]

@Chinahand That pdf you posted is a long shot. It's indicating how much trust people across those countries have in their media as opposed to their comparable trust in their governments. 

[Chinahand]

The statement by the UK representative to the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons makes interesting reading.

 

[Chinahand]

4 minutes ago, quilp said:

@Chinahand That pdf you posted is a long shot. It's indicating how much trust people across those countries have in their media as opposed to their comparable trust in their governments. 

... and it asks them about the international media and the BBC were the most trusted as I directly quoted.

[quilp]

I must be reading a different pdf... 

[Chinahand]

Click the link in my post, press control F and paste in this: The most trusted global news brands.  Simples.

[woolley]

11 minutes ago, Chinahand said:

The statement by the UK representative to the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons makes interesting reading.

 

Why? It only says in a long-winded manner what they have released publicly. It talks of only two plausible explanations which is clearly ludicrous. There are any number of plausible explanations.

[the stinking enigma]

1 hour ago, pongo said:

I don't think he wants them back as such. It's more that he believes in the old Soviet idea of "spheres of influence". Russia, since Napoleon, at least, has feared its long border with the west - the width of the continent. It objects to the idea of genuinely independent nations on its border.

In reality there is no reason why NATO and the EU should not border Russia directly. There is no reason why countries which border Russia should lean towards Moscow or even be neutral. The issue is Russia not being a modern democracy.

Should these "democracies" have missile shields and american nuclear warheads right on russias border too? If so, it should be ok for russia to have them in cuba or china in mexico. 

[the stinking enigma]

31 minutes ago, Chinahand said:

 

The most trusted global news brands among those tested include the BBC (with 48% across the 10 countries saying they have a lot or some trust) and CNN (44%).

Survey result of 10,230 adults questioned by GlobeScan in the UK, USA, Brazil, Egypt, Germany, India, Indonesia, Nigeria, Russia, and South Korea in March and April.

They never asked me. Did they ask you? 

[Chinahand]

49 minutes ago, Lxxx said:

Everything you write is correct, but it doesn't automatically make them responsible for very public poisoning of an MI6 agent.

Responsible no. Culpable on the other hand.  And I didn't automatically say he was responsible.  I added:

51 minutes ago, Lxxx said:

but maybe some patriot in the grubby Siloviki/mafia world decided to take his revenge on a turbulent priest to please his unknowing boss.

Yes, it could [also] be the Ukrainians out for revenge

Nuance matters.

Putin deserves to have his treaty commitments under the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons scrutinised.  Treaties etc rely on Trust, but Verify.

[Lxxx]

In the complicated, inter-connected world of statecraft, espionage and the criminal underworld with double and probably triple agents, to be so sure of the culprit and embark on a diplomatic shitstorm seems silly to say the least.

It all smacks of deciding on where you need to get to no matter how you get there to me. The Russian state is again the bogey man and everything from Trump to Brexit to chemical weapons is being used to develop a narrative. What next? The same chemical weapon showing up in Syria maybe, justifying more formal military action there?