All of these supposed assassinations by Putin reek of a CIA false flag to me. Naturally there were a lot of shady dealings that Putin must have been involved in during the nineties, as otherwise his rise to power in that cutthroat environment would not have been possible, usually in opposition to the (((ruling power))) in Russia during the Yeltsin years.polar said:The political back-and-forth is amusing to watch - from a distance. Regardless of the truth, it's the job of the Russian ambassadors, foreign affairs ministers, etc. to go ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ and point fingers every which way. Admitting guilt only invites more consequences.Hang the bankers said:Speaking of which, the Russian ambassador to UK just came out and said what everyone else has been thinking: that the British intel agencies are responsible for this false flag.PharaohRa said:If that Skripal story isn't a false flag, then I don't know what is! Why the elite keep on pushing the Russia spiel, I have no idea!nomadbrah said:No one believes the Skripal story. Among the ordinary people.
I've been doing some light research on British newspapers and each of them has people calling it false flag etc on Facebook. No one believes it. Only the media elites.
Of course such a Facebook sample isn't scientific but it is telling that you can't find support anywhere.
The people simply don't believe it and the elites might miscalculate their ability to propagandize. If they do want to push onwards with their agenda, then they do so against the will of the people, making them show their colors as tyrannical government.
Some Kremlin-watchers are reading this assassination as a signal from Putin to the elites, particularly in the security services, i.e., "you'll never be safe if you defect". From that POV, this is simply realpolitik at work, but not a sign of strength.
Opposition media claim that a number of those killed under suspicious circumstances were directly involved in investigating Putin's rise to power and alleged corrupt schemes in the 90s - for instance, Berezovsky was playing against criminals and affiliates of Putin in various corrupt schemes, from skimming off contracts, to "protection" rackets at various ports and laundering money for drug imports by the Cali cartel. Litvinenko was investigating Putin's ties to organized crime. Scot Young allegedly helped Berezovsky launder money from his ill-gotten gains, and learned too much. etc. From this POV, Russia is a state run by criminals - literally - who'll stop at nothing in efforts to keep their reputations clean.
Buzzfeed has a fascinating seven-part series on this, involving the dizzying rise to success of various players, fast cars, Dubai whores, competing interests, mafia, etc. Probably a better read than whatever's on the NYT bestseller list these days:
Perhaps the most surprising of these is the murder of Mikhail Lesin, who was "in" with Putin, created a TV advertising monopolist in Russia, and founded RT, then was found murdered in a DC hotel, possibly just before he was supposed to meet with US government investigators. In other words, his past close relations with Putin didn't help him.
But for the vast majority of the deaths of these people that have occurred since 2000 I have a suspicion that someone else was responsible, especially as these (((Bill Browder))), (((Mikhail Khodorkovsky))), and (((Boris Berezovsky))) types go on the MSM in the West and cry out in pain as they strike you, i.e. complain about Putin kicking out a lot of these asset-strippers that had reigned during the 1990s. True, you could say that he kicked them out to replace them with his own cronies, but the point still stands. In that light it seems the rootless transnational elites benefit more from these killings than Putin does, as it's already common knowledge to most people that treason is traditionally punished by death, so "making an example of them" in this way, especially given the obvious international consequences, seems too stupid of a move for someone like Putin to make.
Now this has become a boringly predictable cycle, some former oligarch or agent dies and this is used as an excuse for more sanctions, demonization of Russia, and agitation for NATO and US military (ZOG global empire) spending increases. I mean Putin would have to be blind and stupid not to see that, which I do not believe he is. Is this vague notion of "making an example" or "show of strength" worth such complications? It sounds to me more like a weak attempt for people to rationalize these actions that Putin has no real motive for, not one that would override the obvious problems.
Besides the CIA/Mossad involvement angle, there is also the disputes between these oligarchs that have to be taken in account, and some deaths may be attributed to that. The point is I find this latest round of nonsense surrounding the Skripal poisoning (apparently he's doing fine now? So much for "military grade chemical weapons") and trying to blame this on the Russian government appearing to be completely coordinated and suspicious. It just doesn't add up.