(This was originally written as a reply on Booman’s recent post “How Russia Can Ease the Tensions.” [<http://www.boomantribune.com/story/2018/3/30/121131/081#12>] It grew. Now a standalone. Read on.)
##################################################################################################
We must apply the cui bono test to this poisoning.
Really.
Who profits from its media dissemination?
The first thing that occurred to me when this whole story went down was “Why was this particular spook poisoned?” If it was a simple punishment or attempted deletion of a functioning and dangerous enemy of Russia, why use a nerve agent that has been widely identified as a Russian weapon? Really. I mean…as far as the real spook pros are concerned, how many ways are there to kill somebody? An apparently bungled burglary or mugging, a car bomb or tampered steering/brakes? The list is endless. This guy wasn’t living some some sequestered, heavily guarded life, he was walking around the suburbs of London going to shopping centers and restaurants. In a heavy crowd, an ice pick in the back will do the trick and no one will even see the act.
Are the Russians that dumb? I mean…these are the same “Russians” who apparently fooled the entire U.S. security system and helped get Trump elected, right? If it was them, it was meant as a serious message. To whom? Who knows? Other double/triple/quadruple agents, probably. “Keep your mouths shut. We can take you out too.”
Or…it was performed by other agencies that are trying to brand Russia as the world villain of the moment. I wonder who that might be?
Again…the use of the Novichok nerve agent is a curious one. If it was non-Russian agencies that wanted Skirpal out of the way (for whatever spooky-spook-spook reasons), why use an identifiably Russian tool? I suppose it might be the “kill two birds with one stone and not get caught” angle…get rid of Skirpal and simultaneously harm the Russians or at least provide yet another excuse to place more blame on them…but given the apparently endless, international media shitstorm over Russian influence on the Trump regime, it sounds to me like just another attempt to play “Blame The Russians.”
Is Putin a dictator?
Certainly.
In the normal course of state business, do he and his little helpers routinely kill or imprison opponents?
Also certainly.
And the same thing…minus the fairly simple “elected dictator” idea, because we/they have another form of governmental hustle going on…goes for his western opponents. If you think not, you are living in a dream world. The moment the leader of a major power leader is elected, he or she has blood on their hands. That’s the way it works. Innocent blood? Often. Bet on it.
It’s part of the job description.
It’s part of the control mechanism.
Any attempt to deny it this is laughable.
So…where’s the beef in this little Skirpal poisoning shit sandwich?
Damned if I know, and damned if I care. Skirpal chose to be part of the spook world, and his luck ran out. SO sorry!!!
Only one thing is certain.
It was spook work.
Bet on that as well.
Which spooks?
Does it really make much of a difference?
In a sense, all spooks are more allied with each other than they they are with their supposed employers. They play a dangerous game with huge rewards. Look at Putin for all you need to know on that account. He is a world champion spook….the world champion, for now at least…with riches and power beyond belief.
Like mobsters, in the end, they are all allied against the “law-abiding” world.
Like classic gangster organizations, they claim to be “Making the neighborhood safe for ‘us.’ “…whomever that particular “us”might be. What they always eventually seem to be really doing is making that neighborhood a source for their own power and profit.
As above, so below.
Bet on that as well.
AG
Russia has 14 questions.
Yes. They do. And they are all:
1-Valid
and
2-Written in self-interest, most likely by skilled diplomatic/intelligence experts. Also known as professional liars.(And in some situations simply called “lawyers.”)
Thus?
Ignore them.
The spook professionals on the other side will either not answer them or they will prevaricate. It’s what liars do.
Lawyers, too.
Do two wrongs make a right?
No.
How about two sets of falsehoods? Do they in any way constitute a truth?
Only if you ignore them both.
The “truth” so discovered?
Sure.
They’re both sets of lies.
AG
P.S. Isn’t it wonderful how much alike these two words sound?
Lawyer: A professional liar, protected by the law itself.
As in:
Riiiight…
No one believes them. Everyone knows that they are just doing their job.
Of course…so were the Nuremburg defendants.
Only they lost the war.
Hmmmmmm…
I completely agree with applying the cui bono test, and also suggest Occam’s Razor. Neither of these constitutes evidence, but they are useful guides. And both of these guides point straight at Moscow.
It’s easy to say the US did it, or the UK, or Israel, or “spooks”. But after that it’s like the underpants gnome joke — there’s no plausible path between “blame the Russians” and “profit!”
You write:
Oh really?
I can think of several:
1-Profit for the Permanent War cabal. You know…the nice folks we laughingly used to call the Military Industrial Complex? Yeah. them. Gin up tensions with Russia? Make and sell more arms. Get more money for the overt and covert military forces, too.
2-Profit for the Government Media Complex. Who do you think is profiting from the daily millions and millions of clicks, tweets and other kneejerk twitches the proles are using to follow this hottest-thing-ever-EVER!!! story about them dirty Russkies and that shitheel Trump?
3-The Republican Party…at the very least!!! (The Dems are in on it, too. The “loyal opposition” and alla that crap.) Once again…”Them dirty Russkies!!! We gotta get our (collective) shit together or next thing we know, we’ll be under the thumb of a foreign power!!! Send us MONEY!!!
C’mon…
AG
Just quiet your brain somehow. Eat a chicklet. Practice your scales. Have a grape soda or something.
I had chicken instead. I hate eating them chicklets…all yellow and fuzzy.
Oh…you must have meant chiclets!!!
Nevermind…
Yore freind…
Emily mLitella
P.S. Practiced all day. Had some wine, too. With the chicken. (Grape soda without the chemicals.) And I still think that what I wrote above was not only “plausible” but actually quite likely.
You should too.
AG
we clearly aren’t agreeing on the definition of “plausible”.
Clearly.
I thought that Trump’s ascension to the presidency was…while totally regrettable…also plausible.
Early and often.
You?
Rebut my positions above.
Go ahead.
I dare ya.
AG