Putin playing hard-ball

Dilandu wrote:The most likely suspect of Navalny's poisoning is the Tomsk's "city baron", which criminal actions he revealed. The unprofessional character of poisoning and the fact, that Navalny was soon send to Berlin rather clearly demonstrated that it is not the "hand of Moscow" (if he was poisoned by GRU or FSB, he would clearly be send into Moscow first, to make sure, that poison is untraceable). On the other hands, our Mafia was never well-known for particularly cunning assassinations...

A Russian “mafia” lord in Tomsk?
Now that’s original Dilandau!
Well since we are entering the land of fairy tales, let’s look at the Novichok poisoning of the Russian double-agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia, in Salisbury back in 2018.
I’m sure that the Russian FSB, has by now discovered that perpetrator was none other than: Baba Yaga!!!
She might be a one legged old crone, but she is a patriotic Russian one legged old crone.
She used her occult powers to obtain a quantity of Novichok. Flew on her stealth magic mortar to England, and once there it was a simple matter; using her arcane powers to locate her victims and administer the poison.
Unfortunately she is getting on in years, and therefore unintentionally spilled some of the poison causing the collateral injuries in Amesbury.
The one fairy tale is as believable as the other!

Arol wrote:A Russian “mafia” lord in Tomsk?

Well, hello, ignoramus! The Navalny last investigation (after which he was poisoned) was about Tomsk mafia exactly! He find out that Tomsk is basically under total control of a tight ring of extremely corrupt high-ranking bureaucrats, which essentially have their peoples over all city services, all major business. His documental movie about that matters - "Tomsk v plenu u deputatskoy mafii" ("Tomsk captured by mafia of deputats") - was released by his Anti-Corruption Foundation just two days ago!

Seriously, you do not know THAT? You never bothered even to check what exactly Navalny was doing before he was poisoned? You either extremely ignorant, or plainly stupid. Or both.

Hi Dilandu, great to have a real discussion instead of the mutual admiration society we have tended to have since fly, smr and others have fled the field.
I personally don't believe that Putin directly ordered this poisoning.
While I'm an Australian I know history tolerably well, and remember the story of Thomas a Beckett.
In England, King Henry II, appointed a friend of his to be the Archbishop Of Canterbury, the senior christian cleric in the country in 1170. Unfortunately his friend, Thomas a Becket, turned out to be secretly religious (not good in a political appointee), and was critical of the king.
Henry II declared rhetorically "Who will rid me of this turbulent priest?". Two knights then went to Canterbury and cut the top off Thomas's head.
Henry was "heartbroken", hence the first example of plausible deniability.
It's likely that history is repeating itself.

Well, I have two thoughts on it.

I doubt Putin did it to kill the guy, if at all, and I doubt anything like that could happen without Putin knowing about it first if it was someone else.

Like Vince McMahon, everything that happens becomes part of Putin's plan if it wasn't already.

Annachie wrote:Well, I have two thoughts on it.

I doubt Putin did it to kill the guy, if at all, and I doubt anything like that could happen without Putin knowing about it first if it was someone else.

Like Vince McMahon, everything that happens becomes part of Putin's plan if it wasn't already.

Condoning it is just as bad. Someone tell Trump that too.

Let's not forget about Russia's plan for the Arctic.

cthia wrote:Let's not forget about Russia's plan for the Arctic.

Given how close to Russian territory the Artic is, what they are doing is understandable and not sinister. Canada and USA will have to bear all this in mind and come up with some counters, of course. It becomes another frontier region and, unfortunately, source of potential conflict.

Don

-

Dilandu wrote:

Arol wrote:A Russian “mafia” lord in Tomsk?

Well, hello, ignoramus! The Navalny last investigation (after which he was poisoned) was about Tomsk mafia exactly! He find out that Tomsk is basically under total control of a tight ring of extremely corrupt high-ranking bureaucrats, which essentially have their peoples over all city services, all major business. His documental movie about that matters - "Tomsk v plenu u deputatskoy mafii" ("Tomsk captured by mafia of deputats") - was released by his Anti-Corruption Foundation just two days ago!

Seriously, you do not know THAT? You never bothered even to check what exactly Navalny was doing before he was poisoned? You either extremely ignorant, or plainly stupid. Or both.

A couple of points:

1. Do you really believe that Putin would allow the "mafia" in Tomsk to do whatever they please? He has the capacity to squash them like bugs if they don't play ball with him.
2. The Russian authorities have basically said this incident isn't worth investigating and there is no proof of poisoning, which means whether Putin was involved or not he has given his tacit approval.
3. Why is it always people who Putin dislikes that get poisoned?

Daryl wrote:Hi Dilandu, great to have a real discussion instead of the mutual admiration society we have tended to have since fly, smr and others have fled the field.
I personally don't believe that Putin directly ordered this poisoning.
While I'm an Australian I know history tolerably well, and remember the story of Thomas a Beckett.
In England, King Henry II, appointed a friend of his to be the Archbishop Of Canterbury, the senior christian cleric in the country in 1170. Unfortunately his friend, Thomas a Becket, turned out to be secretly religious (not good in a political appointee), and was critical of the king.
Henry II declared rhetorically "Who will rid me of this turbulent priest?". Two knights then went to Canterbury and cut the top off Thomas's head.
Henry was "heartbroken", hence the first example of plausible deniability.
It's likely that history is repeating itself.

I must say that I like the Henry II, analogy.
There’s even the fact that, there (purely coincidental of course!) were two GRU agents who flew into GB; on vacation, just prior to the Skripal assassination, and who flew out just after, who can stand in for the two knights.
As for the flagellation that Henry submitted to?
Well (again purely coincidental!), there is the report that the head of GRU at that time, passed away shortly thereafter, “after a longtime illness!”
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/ ... er-illness
Conjecture and coincidence is a funny thing.

Dilandu wrote:

Arol wrote:A Russian “mafia” lord in Tomsk?

Well, hello, ignoramus! The Navalny last investigation (after which he was poisoned) was about Tomsk mafia exactly! He find out that Tomsk is basically under total control of a tight ring of extremely corrupt high-ranking bureaucrats, which essentially have their peoples over all city services, all major business. His documental movie about that matters - "Tomsk v plenu u deputatskoy mafii" ("Tomsk captured by mafia of deputats") - was released by his Anti-Corruption Foundation just two days ago!

Seriously, you do not know THAT? You never bothered even to check what exactly Navalny was doing before he was poisoned? You either extremely ignorant, or plainly stupid. Or both.

Since you can’t engage in a dialog without stooping to inane and childish invectives, I’ll take it down to a level even you might be capable of understanding:
“Buhhuu…Sticks and Stones…”
“Ahh screw it… and screw you and the poor benighted nag you rode in on!!!”