*** The Official MAGAposting thread ***

[Poopadoop]

It's important that the general public continue to see Russia as a direct threat.

Better ways to do this than kill one of their ex-agents imo. All that shows is that they're a threat to Russian traitors.

[OngBonga]

Better ways to do this than kill one of their ex-agents imo. All that shows is that they're a threat to Russian traitors.

Not when it involes radioactive materials and nerve agents.
There's a cop who's seriously ill, around 500 people were told to wash belongings with detailed advice, the city of Salisbury is swarming with police and hazmat suited agents... the whole point is to make people think "whoa this is dangerous, we need to let them know this isn't acceptable".

When their traitors find themselves impaled on spikes after falling from windows, or hanging in their bedroom, then perhaps that's Russia. But when it involves issues of national security... there's more than one motive, and more than one potential perpetrator.

I very much doubt it's a thrid party trying to stir trouble. For that to be the case, Russia would need to be closely involved in the investigation, because it's their nerve agent, and we're not allowing them to analyse it. We know it's not a third party.

[Poopadoop]

Not when it involes radioactive materials and nerve agents.
There's a cop who's seriously ill, around 500 people were told to wash belongings with detailed advice, the city of Salisbury is swarming with police and hazmat suited agents... the whole point is to make people think "whoa this is dangerous, we need to let them know this isn't acceptable".

So the Litmitov (sp?) thing was a dry run? I don't remember any type of reaction like this to that incident.

Also, apart from the seriously ill cop who was directly exposed, is there any evidence any of those 500 people are getting sick? Maybe that's just part of the game to make it look much more of a threat than it was (in which case I guess it is a good way to scare people). Or maybe they're just being extra-cautious.

When their traitors find themselves impaled on spikes after falling from windows, or hanging in their bedroom, then perhaps that's Russia. But when it involves issues of national security... there's more than one motive, and more than one potential perpetrator.

You can theorize all you want about how Russia kills defectors, truth is we have no way of knowing who did it or why.

Maybe they used this poison specifically to send a message to defectors that they're not to be fucked with. Maybe the UK did to make it look like Russia did it. Maybe the Ukraine or another one of Russia's neighbors did it so we'd be more likely to support them against Russia.

I very much doubt it's a thrid party trying to stir trouble. For that to be the case, Russia would need to be closely involved in the investigation, because it's their nerve agent, and we're not allowing them to analyse it. We know it's not a third party.

Why would Russia need to be involved in the investigation if it was a third party? Say the UK doesn't know who it is, but suspects/blames Russia. Why let them be involved in the investigation? 'Hey come over here and check out this poison we think you used on our soil. Don't worry, we trust you.'

Blaming Russia and then letting them come in on the investigation would make no sense at all. It would be like asking the Mafia to help investigate a suspected mob hit.

[OngBonga]

Blaming Russia and then letting them come in on the investigation would make no sense at all. It would be like asking the Mafia to help investigate a suspected mob hit.

We're blaming them without proof. All we're claiming is it's a Russian nerve agent, so we should prove that to them if we want a serious response from them.

[Poopadoop]

We're blaming them without proof. All we're claiming is it's a Russian nerve agent, so we should prove that to them if we want a serious response from them.

On what planet are we interested in giving them a chance to dispute our claim it was them? Either we say 'we know it's you and no fuck off you can't come see the agent - you already know what it is you cunts', or we say 'hmm, not sure who this was - Russia wanna help us figure it out?' We've already chosen option 1, and so not letting them come in on the investigation is completely consistent with that.

In other words, denying Russia access to the evidence is completely undiagnostic as to whether or who did it. It's only diagnostic to who we claim did it.

[OngBonga]

The Mafia are not a state.

[Poopadoop]

The Mafia are not a state.

The analogy was to make the point that if you blame a crime on some entity you don't then go and ask that entity to assist your investigation.

[OngBonga]

The analogy was to make the point that if you blame a crime on some entity you don't then go and ask that entity to assist your investigation.

We haven't blamed them yet, we're pointing fingers while leaving the door open for other options.

We're not taking those other options seriously.

We should want them to investigate, because if they have lost control of their nerve agents, both UK and Russia need to know.

[Poopadoop]

We haven't blamed them yet, we're pointing fingers while leaving the door open for other options.

We're not taking those other options seriously.

We should want them to investigate, because if they have lost control of their nerve agents, both UK and Russia need to know.

So you see a murder; looks like a mob hit but could be someone else. You still don't ask the mafia to help.