A Political Thread

[ncurd]

Russian state tv said, in the days after the poisoning, that traitors should not consider living in the UK as it's too dangerous.

It's a show of force from Russia - cross us and we'll get you no matter where you are. They aren't scared of the consequences because they nothing meaningful will come of it.
We literally know who murdered Litvinenko but Russia refuse extradition and don't acknowledge it. They then promoted the guy to a high government office position.

He's an MP according to the BBC....

 

[Which Tyler]

https://twitter.com/chrislhayes/sta...om/chrislhayes/status/973551854981402624?s=21

 

[TRF_Olyy]

He's an MP according to the BBC....

The guy who did Litvinenko?
Ex-kgb, ex-fsb,
Became an MP almost immediately after the poisoning.
They found amounts of the poison in his hotel rooms, on the planes he flew on and when he went back to Russia he was in hospital for several days with radiation poisoning himself.

Not suspicious at all!

 

[ncurd]

The guy who did Litvinenko?

Yup

 

[Which Tyler]

https://twitter.com/BBCBreaking/status/973554768189599744

"As soon as we get the facts straight, if we agree with them, we will condemn Russia or whoever it may be" - President Trump on Salisbury poisoning

 

[McTallshort]

I'd like to find out why Russia would commit this crime, it just doesn't seem logical for the Russians to do it especially in the manner of the poisoning.

Russia are always calculated and cautious when it comes to doing stuff in other countries but the method of the poisoning seems mad and unstructured.

It could very easily have been committed by a country who are anti-Russia to 'frame' Putin so that further sanctions can be imposed which would affect their control in Syria against Western-backed rebels.

*Not that it couldn't have been Russia but everyone is jumping on the bandwagon before looking at the event in context and all variables

I cannot forecast to you the action of Russia. It is a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma; W Churchill 1939.

 

[McTallshort]

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...ikolai-glushkov-found-dead-at-his-london-home

Another one bits the dust

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

I bet Putin is just terrified at the thought of a UK response... FFS we need to stop being so diplomatic in these situations.

 

[ncurd]

I bet Putin is just terrified at the thought of a UK response... FFS we need to stop being so diplomatic in these situations.

What can we do? Seriously I'm at a loss.

 

[McTallshort]

What can we do? Seriously I'm at a loss.

Expel diplomats, seize the funds and property of rich Russians in the UK, expel known Russian agents, send M16 to kill the remaining members of the Cambridge spy ring living a nice life in Russia. The BBC did a whole page on it.

 

[Bada-Bing!]

So assassinating dissidents on non Russian shores, banned from Winter Olympics, Para Olympics Athletes for state sponsored/ systematic drugs cheating, annexing Crimea, deliberately interfering in US elections/probably Brexit/other western democratic elections, helping Assad kill his own people. Anything else? And the Russians/Putin's reactions is that it's they who are the victims of a western conspiracy to frame them? Jeez this could not be made up. Putin really is the Godfather of the world's biggest organised crime syndicate.

This summer's World Cup is going to their biggest Propaganda Coup so far. What a joke!!!

 

[ncurd]

Expel diplomats, seize the funds and property of rich Russians in the UK, expel known Russian agents, send M16 to kill the remaining members of the Cambridge spy ring living a nice life in Russia. The BBC did a whole page on it.

Sorry at a loss to what we could do where Putin would give a flying ****.

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

Sorry at a loss to what we could do where Putin would give a flying ****.

With enough political will, get NATO sanctions on Russian oil and gas. It will hurt us but you can guarantee Putin will give a flying **** if we threaten to tank the entire Russian economy if he tries to play silly buggers. We can't be diplomatic or do half arsed, the response must be completely disproportionate to make Putin believe that the risks far outweigh the rewards of political assassinations. Also maybe have NATO position more forces in the East. Putin only respects force and he thinks the West is soft. Any half arsed response will just invite this again as Russia has been getting bolder and bolder with little to no consequence.

 

[Bada-Bing!]

I'd like to find out why Russia would commit this crime, it just doesn't seem logical for the Russians to do it especially in the manner of the poisoning.

Russia are always calculated and cautious when it comes to doing stuff in other countries but the method of the poisoning seems mad and unstructured.

It could very easily have been committed by a country who are anti-Russia to 'frame' Putin so that further sanctions can be imposed which would affect their control in Syria against Western-backed rebels.

*Not that it couldn't have been Russia but everyone is jumping on the bandwagon before looking at the event in context and all variables

This might provide some insight.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...tin-may-have-engineered-gruesome-calling-card

"There are many theories. The most obvious answer is Sunday's presidential election. True, Putin is guaranteed to win. He has scarcely bothered campaigning. But the Kremlin remains worried about turnout, amid widespread voter apathy and calls from Alexei Navalny, Russia's most prominent opposition politician, to boycott the vote. The authorities want to the poll to look authentic, even if it isn't.

Over the next few days, state TV channels will pump out this message: Moscow is again the victim of a western conspiracy. Russia under siege is a favourite Kremlin theme. Conflicts with the west can bear some fruit: Putin has maintained the bump in his nominal popularity rating after his annexation of Crimea, despite western condemnation and sanctions. The wave of patriotism that followed also split the Russian opposition.

So a row with London can do Putin no harm, especially among voters who share his uncompromising nationalist worldview and his smouldering sense of victimhood.

One former senior Foreign Office adviser said it was a mistake to assume that Skripal's spy work for MI6 triggered the decision to poison him in Salisbury. Skripal was merely the "instrument". The real target was the UK, he said. "I don't think it was about Skripal. It was a geo-political intervention."

The adviser added: "Moscow's goal is to demonstrate the UK's weakness and isolation and to drive a wedge between us and other countries. The Kremlin understands how to make these sorts of interventions at just below the level that will trigger a serious collective reaction against them."

If May fails to react adequately, she would appear weak. If she tries to fight back against Russia, she would discover the limits of collective solidarity, the adviser suggested.

There are other theories. Grigol Chkhartishvili, best known for writing detective novels under the pen name Boris Akunin, suggested Putin was betting on a British retaliation that would drive wealthy and prominent Russians out of London. The community of Russian émigrés (and families of wealthy businessmen and officials) was "one of the weak points of the regime", he wrote, and forcing them out would be "useful and beneficial" for Putin.......

The Skripal attack also appears to have been calculated for its domestic impact. It sends a chilling message to anyone from inside Russia's spy agencies and bureaucracy thinking of cooperating with western intelligence. The message: that the state can mete out punishment at its own pleasure and in the most barbaric way. Oh, and your family might suffer too."

 

[ncurd]

About ******* Time

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-43398417

 

[McTallshort]

About ******* Time

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-43398417

Blocked them all ages ago. There are plenty more still about.

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

About ******* Time

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-43398417

I love the people crying about freedom of speech being curtailed. This is from a group who would routinely delete comments and block people who disagreed with them. It seems many people don't understand freedom of speech doesn't mean you can force facebook to let you use it, it just means the government can't prevent you. Even then in many countries there are still limits on what you can say.

 

[ncurd]

Blocked them all ages ago. There are plenty more still about.

I'm sure there are the ubiquitous and insidious nature of their posts were far more worrying than other groups.

 

[ncurd]

I love the people crying about freedom of speech being curtailed. This is from a group who would routinely delete comments and block people who disagreed with them. It seems many people don't understand freedom of speech doesn't mean you can force facebook to let you use it, it just means the government can't prevent you. Even then in many countries there are still limits on what you can say.

I don't think most societies believe in complete Freedom of Speech.

Freedom of Speech is also not Freedom to a Platform. You have right to say what you want to say but I don't have to give you the megaphone if I don't want to.

That said there are certain thing that must be done for instance when the BBC allowed Nick Griffin on Question Time. His party had won European Parliment seats and they absolutely deserved the right to have equal political platforming to parties of a similar size and be shown up on TV.

In this country there are laws against inciting hatred and we very desperately need to make those laws more applicable to the internet (note the Britain First leaders had to convicted of physical harassment and abuse). Its why you can't have full Freedom of Speech its just doesn't work in reality.

 

[McTallshort]

I love the people crying about freedom of speech being curtailed. This is from a group who would routinely delete comments and block people who disagreed with them. It seems many people don't understand freedom of speech doesn't mean you can force facebook to let you use it, it just means the government can't prevent you. Even then in many countries there are still limits on what you can say.

Freedom of speech is a right. Rights come with responsibilities. If you dont use the rights you have been given responsibly then you risk losing them.