Official Novichok Dissent Thread

Unclebaldrick

Unclebaldrick

Well-Known Member
More info on Tty's new "homework". Pretty well written with some nice links that will help @ttystikk find some new nut-balls to spend his nights reading while furiously touching himself.

https://thedailybanter.com/2017/06/caitlin-johnstone-anatomy-of-an-alt-left-conspiracy-nut/

Unclebaldrick said:
I would enjoy laughing more if this were not so fucking sad.
Click to expand...
a quote from the above article commenting on Johnstone's unhinged threatening emails to the author of the above article... "a threat that would be funny if it wasn't so sad."

Good job Tty and Schuy. Hey @Padawanbater2, wanna chime in on the topic? What do you think about Caitlin's "journalism"?
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Unclebaldrick said:
Idiots.

Exactly what fact?

He found a third rate website that claims that the Skripal story is not being reported while actually referencing a BBC story about it. I saw several stories reporting on his release from the hospital which utterly refutes the "fact" that you think is a good find.

You people are not smart.
Click to expand...
Go on believing what the government tells you.

I'm sure they're totally credible.
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Unclebaldrick said:
More info on Tty's new "homework". Pretty well written with some nice links that will help @ttystikk find some new nut-balls to spend his nights reading while furiously touching himself.

https://thedailybanter.com/2017/06/caitlin-johnstone-anatomy-of-an-alt-left-conspiracy-nut/

a quote from the above article commenting on Johnstone's unhinged threatening emails to the author of the above article... "a threat that would be funny if it wasn't so sad."

Good job Tty and Schuy. Hey @Padawanbater2, wanna chime in on the topic? What do you think about Caitlin's "journalism"?
Click to expand...
Three posts into a meltdown and you've yet to actually provide one single link that refutes any assertion I've made about the whole Novichok scandal being anything other than a great big stinking pile of bullshit manufactured to smear Russia and justify more conflict.

And you call me pathetic?

How long did you believe the GW Bush administration's accusations of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, issued moments before we went in to destroy that country in yet another war (crime) of aggression, killing hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and destabilizing the region for going on two decades?

Who came out of that with money to burn? Anyone with stock in Boeing, Raytheon, Lockheed Martin...

Go on. Keep calling me stupid. History will be the judge.
 
Unclebaldrick

Unclebaldrick

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
Three posts into a meltdown and you've yet to actually provide one single link that refutes any assertion I've made about the whole Novichok scandal being anything other than a great big stinking pile of bullshit manufactured to smear Russia and justify more conflict.

And you call me pathetic?

How long did you believe the GW Bush administration's accusations of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, issued moments before we went in to destroy that country in yet another war (crime) of aggression, killing hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and destabilizing the region for going on two decades?

Who came out of that with money to burn? Anyone with stock in Boeing, Raytheon, Lockheed Martin...

Go on. Keep calling me stupid. History will be the judge.
Click to expand...
You are pathetic. But please keep posting.

Are you ready to tell us what really happened on 9/11 yet?
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Unclebaldrick said:
You are pathetic. But please keep posting.

Are you ready to tell us what really happened on 9/11 yet?
Click to expand...
Ah, yet another evidence free attempt at a smear.

I don't see conspiracies everywhere and I'm sure I miss plenty.

Chemical weapons attacks by the Assad regime and the Novichok scandal are just too obvious.

But you go on sucking what the government feeds you.
 
Unclebaldrick

Unclebaldrick

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
Ah, yet another evidence free attempt at a smear.

I don't see conspiracies everywhere and I'm sure I miss plenty.

Chemical weapons attacks by the Assad regime and the Novichok scandal are just too obvious.

But you go on sucking what the government feeds you.
Click to expand...
You and your ilk are far more valuable to Trump than those poor white dumbasses that voted for him.
 
Unclebaldrick

Unclebaldrick

Well-Known Member
Hey @ttystikk , care to expose the truth about MH-17?

The Russians swear they are innocent so it must be true, right?

Was it the Israelis? Neo-libs? The DCCC?

Why haven't we heard from the scientists??? WHY???
 
Last edited:
Unclebaldrick

Unclebaldrick

Well-Known Member
SneekyNinja said:
It is a bit weird that the "incredibly dangerous nerve agent" didn't kill either of them, and the daughter wants to go back to Russia in the near future.
Click to expand...
Your statement is a reasonable one. It is a little weird, but far from damning evidence. There are quite a few possible scenarios where their death might not have been the goal.


Edit: I have some more time now so I will expand on this.

Again, I think your questions are entirely reasonable. The attack on the Skripal's does not make sense in a number of ways. I think that this was likely part of the reasoning behind it. The incongruities give Putin plausible deniability and this was likely factored in on his choice of targets. Why Skripal? Why now? This was probably the critical factor to masking the real goal. It's fucking clever.

My guess, as I no longer have anything to do with "Russian studies" or intelligence, is that this was a way to send a message to a large number of people all of which doubtless got the message loud and clear. Russian foreign intel operations are at an all time high level these days and Putin very much wants to ensure that the number of leaks are at a bare minimum. If I am right, the message was, "if you cross us, no matter where, no matter when, no matter how, we can reach you - and/or your family". I promise that this attack has made the task of Western counter-intelligence much, much harder. Any conceivable gains in public opinion that the West would have for "framing" Russia would be dramatically offset by the message this attack (or false flag) would send to possible defectors or informants.

It is reasonable to me to think that Skripal's daughter believes (correctly) that she is not in further danger and the same is probably true for Skripal himself. She probably has a life in Russia that she does not want to abandon and therefore wants to get back to it.

If this line of thinking seems overly convoluted or Machiavellian to you I ask you to consider the other alternative; that of this being a false flag operation of some Western power.

Based on my experience, this is very much in keeping with a Putin operation. It is ingenious, I tip my fur hat to him. He got his message across and has thousands of Western useful idiots defending him and accusing their own governments.

@ttystikk says history will judge. No it won't, Tty is a first rate naive fool. "The past is uncertain" as the saying goes. History will likely never reveal a clear answer any more that it did in the Kennedy assassination despite the rather obvious truth of it. If a film of Lee Harvey himself laying out his plan and admitting fully to acting alone were unearthed it would not change the minds of more than a few conspiracy buffs.
 
Last edited:
SneekyNinja

SneekyNinja

Well-Known Member
Unclebaldrick said:
Your statement is a reasonable one. It is a little weird, but far from damning evidence. There are quite a few possible scenarios where their death might not have been the goal.


Edit: I have some more time now so I will expand on this.

Again, I think your questions are entirely reasonable. The attack on the Skripal's does not make sense in a number of ways. I think that this was likely part of the reasoning behind it. The incongruities give Putin plausible deniability and this was likely factored in on his choice of targets. Why Skripal? Why now? This was probably the critical factor to masking the real goal. It's fucking clever.

My guess, as I no longer have anything to do with "Russian studies" or intelligence, is that this was a way to send a message to a large number of people all of which doubtless got the message loud and clear. Russian foreign intel operations are at an all time high level these days and Putin very much wants to ensure that the number of leaks are at a bare minimum. If I am right, the message was, "if you cross us, no matter where, no matter when, no matter how, we can reach you - and/or your family". I promise that this attack has made the task of Western counter-intelligence much, much harder. Any conceivable gains in public opinion that the West would have for "framing" Russia would be dramatically offset by the message this attack (or false flag) would send to possible defectors or informants.

It is reasonable to me to think that Skripal's daughter believes (correctly) that she is not in further danger and the same is probably true for Skripal himself. She probably has a life in Russia that she does not want to abandon and therefore wants to get back to it.

If this line of thinking seems overly convoluted or Machiavellian to you I ask you to consider the other alternative; that of this being a false flag operation of some Western power.

Based on my experience, this is very much in keeping with a Putin operation. It is ingenious, I tip my fur hat to him. He got his message across and has thousands of Western useful idiots defending him and accusing their own governments.

@ttystikk says history will judge. No it won't, Tty is a first rate naive fool. "The past is uncertain" as the saying goes. History will likely never reveal a clear answer any more that it did in the Kennedy assassination despite the rather obvious truth of it. If a film of Lee Harvey himself laying out his plan and admitting fully to acting alone were unearthed it would not change the minds of more than a few conspiracy buffs.
Click to expand...
Bay of Pigs...do I need to go on?

The attack happened only a few miles from the UK's main chemical weapon production facility and a hazmat team were there in literally seconds.

I think it was more likely a fuck up that they wanted to cover up instead of being something directly nefarious.
 
Unclebaldrick

Unclebaldrick

Well-Known Member
SneekyNinja said:
Bay of Pigs...do I need to go on?

The attack happened only a few miles from the UK's main chemical weapon production facility and a hazmat team were there in literally seconds.

I think it was more likely a fuck up that they wanted to cover up instead of being something directly nefarious.
Click to expand...
With the information we don't have I certainly can't disprove your theory. That is likely the way it will stay - but I stand by my opinion. I am well aware of the history of deception by our government but they usually have a point or goal in doing it. The Gulf of Tonkin "incident" was a pretense to a war, etc. I don't see the point here. The PR gains certainly don't outweigh the intel loses or the risk of getting outted in the current day (which would have dire consequences) - which is very, very different than the 1960s. I am not feeling it though I have considered the line of thought.
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
SneekyNinja said:
Bay of Pigs...do I need to go on?

The attack happened only a few miles from the UK's main chemical weapon production facility and a hazmat team were there in literally seconds.

I think it was more likely a fuck up that they wanted to cover up instead of being something directly nefarious.
Click to expand...
Wouldn't a random fuck up affect random people? Does your conspiracy theory of a fuck up and cover up also include deliberately contaminating the door to their house? This seems a pretty flimsy hypothesis.

I sense that you are skeptical about the government story rather than cynical about it. I'm skeptical too. I'm skeptical that the British government is covering something up. I think we both can agree that we simply don't have the enough facts to conclusively claim anything.

As with the Bay of Pigs, we will know more later. Right now, I consider the sources claiming British cover up: moonofalabama, rt, sputnik, Putin, infowars, @ttystikk and my level of skepticism about this being a British cover up shoots way up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top