Russia and its “Special Operation” in Ukraine

[villakram]

17 hours ago, LondonLax said:

Are we sure it was a Russian military ship and not a Russian tourist boat?

There's a vid doing the rounds of the Russians ramming the Ukrainians online, not much ambiguity unfortunately.

Happily the Ukrainian dear leader with abysmal approval ratings and horrid polling numbers has now declared martial law to protect the homeland. Oh, and there's an election coming right up, how fortunate.

[peterms]

29 minutes ago, villakram said:

There's a vid doing the rounds of the Russians ramming the Ukrainians online, not much ambiguity unfortunately.

Happily the Ukrainian dear leader with abysmal approval ratings and horrid polling numbers has now declared martial law to protect the homeland. Oh, and there's an election coming right up, how fortunate.

The Guardian was saying the declaration of martial law could cause postponement of the elections that he was set to lose, with his 8% approval rating, and that it has been suggested the incident was staged for this reason.

It's certainly hard to see why this incident would require martial law being imposed, when all that's happened in recent years hasn't done.

[bickster]

Thread

 

[peterms]

So the Skripal house is being "dismantled".  Because novichok was supposedly smeared on the doorhandle 10 months ago,  the government is now having the roof taken off and the house "dismantled" ( not a term typically used to describe building operations, but that's what the press release apparently says).

The media seem to have reported the press release, but not asked about why on earth this would be required, what they are looking for, what transmission mechanism there might be between a soluble substance on a doorhandle on a damp winter morning and roof timbers 10 months later, why the hotel where novichok was apparently found is not being "dismantled", nor the house where a whole bottle of the stuff was found and someone died, nor anything else.

How lucky we are to have a free press which applies critical thought and constructive criticism to what they are told by officials.

What on earth is going on here?  Is no-one at least curious?

 

[chrisp65]

It is strange that this chemical has potentially absorbed in to the timbers of the roof but not in to the plaster on the walls or the plasterboard of the bedroom ceilings. I guess the stairs must be made of something other than timber? Or perhaps special non-absorbent stair timber they don't use on roofs. 

Hopefully we've been lucky here, and the poison that has got from the door handle to the roof timbers can only travel vertically and not diagonally or horizontally. What with the house being semi detached that'll be a relief to the neighbours.

[peterms]

9 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

It is strange that this chemical has potentially absorbed in to the timbers of the roof but not in to the plaster on the walls or the plasterboard of the bedroom ceilings. I guess the stairs must be made of something other than timber? Or perhaps special non-absorbent stair timber they don't use on roofs. 

Hopefully we've been lucky here, and the poison that has got from the door handle to the roof timbers can only travel vertically and not diagonally or horizontally. What with the house being semi detached that'll be a relief to the neighbours.

I gather it can also be transmitted by reading things from the RT website, or by doubting what we are told by the Government, or Integrity Initiative, or Bellingcat.  It is in such lacunae of cynicism that Satan spawns his deadly seed.

[Genie]

27 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

It is strange that this chemical has potentially absorbed in to the timbers of the roof but not in to the plaster on the walls or the plasterboard of the bedroom ceilings. I guess the stairs must be made of something other than timber? Or perhaps special non-absorbent stair timber they don't use on roofs. 

Hopefully we've been lucky here, and the poison that has got from the door handle to the roof timbers can only travel vertically and not diagonally or horizontally. What with the house being semi detached that'll be a relief to the neighbours.

Neighbours are probably delighted, their semi becomes detached which must add about £50k to its value.

[chrisp65]

The Skripal's roof timbers are not considered dangerous other than they are potentially so dangerous as to need on site isolation and wrapping by the military before removal. The first of the neighbour's timbers will be 300mm away so it will be interesting to see who's nominally decided which timber is safe and which is a hazard. So if they remove all the neighbour's timbers some of them will be further away than the ones of the neighbour the other side.

Genuinely, why would the whole of the two roofs of Skripals house require removal but not the ceiling joists, floor joists or stairs.

Where's it going once removed? Chopped up and incinerated I guess? 

All 10 months after the event. Something is very wrong with this whole story.

I haven't got a clue or a theory. I suspect a total lack of joined up thinking and a fear of saying 'no' once somebody has thought up a new potential risk. Remember, this is a government that couldn't even organise a traffic jam two days ago.

But the whole thing is a wrong 'un and I feel I would be complicit in 'something' to accept the official bollocks being offered up.

[peterms]

42 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

The Skripal's roof timbers are not considered dangerous other than they are potentially so dangerous as to need on site isolation and wrapping by the military before removal. The first of the neighbour's timbers will be 300mm away so it will be interesting to see who's nominally decided which timber is safe and which is a hazard. So if they remove all the neighbour's timbers some of them will be further away than the ones of the neighbour the other side.

Genuinely, why would the whole of the two roofs of Skripals house require removal but not the ceiling joists, floor joists or stairs.

Where's it going once removed? Chopped up and incinerated I guess? 

All 10 months after the event. Something is very wrong with this whole story.

I haven't got a clue or a theory. I suspect a total lack of joined up thinking and a fear of saying 'no' once somebody has thought up a new potential risk. Remember, this is a government that couldn't even organise a traffic jam two days ago.

But the whole thing is a wrong 'un and I feel I would be complicit in 'something' to accept the official bollocks being offered up.

Yes, you'd have to be a complete numpty to buy this story.

Anyone who believes it, please see me later for your winning lottery tickets, only £1000 each.

It will be about either removal of electronics, or destruction of evidence, at a guess. 

But the utter lack of interest of the entire media in even asking the most obvious questions is startling to behold.

[tonyh29]

there may be a bit more to the whole story but those 2 Russians agents were guiltier than me when someone ate Mrs H’s Christmas chocolates and a note was found inside the box in my handwriting saying “it was the cat “

[peterms]

3 minutes ago, tonyh29 said:

there may be a bit more to the whole story but those 2 Russians agents were guiltier than me when someone ate Mrs H’s Christmas chocolates and a note was found inside the box in my handwriting saying “it was the cat “

Facial recognition software says otherwise.

This is not to absolve you of your chocolate-related crimes, nor to say that the two Russians were innocent bystanders.

[OutByEaster?]

26 minutes ago, tonyh29 said:

there may be a bit more to the whole story but those 2 Russians agents were guiltier than me when someone ate Mrs H’s Christmas chocolates and a note was found inside the box in my handwriting saying “it was the cat “

[blandy]

14 hours ago, peterms said:

So the Skripal house is being "dismantled".  Because novichok was supposedly smeared on the doorhandle 10 months ago,  the government is now having the roof taken off and the house "dismantled" ( not a term typically used to describe building operations, but that's what the press release apparently says).

The media seem to have reported the press release, but not asked about why on earth this would be required, what they are looking for, what transmission mechanism there might be between a soluble substance on a doorhandle on a damp winter morning and roof timbers 10 months later, why the hotel where novichok was apparently found is not being "dismantled", nor the house where a whole bottle of the stuff was found and someone died, nor anything else.

How lucky we are to have a free press which applies critical thought and constructive criticism to what they are told by officials.

What on earth is going on here?  Is no-one at least curious?

It is curious. Though I'm not sure that the context you describe is quite correct. I don't think there was a "press release" - I thought it was a internal letter, or letter to residents directly affected? But that's an aside really.

Perhaps another thing to consider is that neighbours of the house will (rightly or wrongly) be worried that toxic material was found at their neighbour's house and that they don't want to be affected by anything toxic. So the letter wording, you would expect, would be re-assuring in tone to those neighbours. This might explain the part about the house (roof) being sealed and covered and material being wrapped and removed by trained personnel from the army. and returning things to normal asap.

Then there's 'elf un safety' - the house internals have been being painstakingly cleaned, but it's not really feasible to "clean" loft insulation, wooden beams etc. especially in-situ. If they are going to be cleaned, then they'd realistically need removing/replacing. Is it an over-reaction, or is it following advice from DSTL?  along the lines of "just clean, remove, replace anything where even a remote possibility of contamination exists" 

Yet even so, there's still, the curiosity as to why other locations where the toxin was detected (though maybe at much lower levels) don't seem to have been treated quite so diligently. Or maybe they have been or are being, but it's just not been in the media? 

Then there's thinking along the lines of "well if it's not actually related to toxic chemical, what else could it be related to?, what other reason would there be to replace the roof on the house?"

It would seem reasonable to suppose that the house was provided for Skripal by the UK authorites when he came here. I strongly doubt he was left to find and buy a hosue with his own money, given the circs of his arrival here. The house may therefore ultimately be one ultimately "managed" by intelligence services on crown inventory , regardless of who is said to be the owner in the land registry. Perhaps now it will be repurposed, or refitted, or particular equipment or items fitted or removed - though if that was the case, it's doubtful removing the roof, and getting blokes in full noddy suits and breathing apparatus to do so would be the best way of doing so, or would be remotely necessary. Also given the now well known location of the house, there seems little point in even contemplating doing anything sureptitious like that. It might be more likely that if Sergei Skripal is going to return there at some point, if /when well enough he may need things like a stairlift, and other facilities that allow a debilitated person to live there. Is it easier to fit all that stuff, given the resources of the state, by effectively rebuilding the house and dropping stuff in through a removed roof, rather than through the front door? I dunno?

Another alternative is that if Skripal is not going to return there, the house will probably be sold and no-one will buy it unless there is convincing reason to do so, given the nature of what happened there. A basically totally cleaned and gutted and largely rebuilt house might sell. Any taint of "it might still be contaminated" would be unlikely to see it sell?

It's all mildly curious, but most of the conceivable "theories" are improbable - moving out secret kit - you'd do that unannounced, at night (and it would have already happened). You wouldn't do it in noddy suits, in daylight, while telling all the neighbours and removing the roof, for example.

While it's a loose end, for sure, the least unlikely explanation for me is that it's typical official over the top reaction where there's the possibility of future media attention - a future resident falling ill there or whatever and the media would be all over it.....

More interesting is the way other locations where the stuff was found have been ttreated. We know the park bench area has been treated with similar attention, but know little about the restaurant and the other house where the discarded (we're told) perfume bottle turned up. That would be the area I'd expect or hope the media to follow.

 

[villakram]

4 hours ago, blandy said:

It is curious. Though I'm not sure that the context you describe is quite correct. I don't think there was a "press release" - I thought it was a internal letter, or letter to residents directly affected? But that's an aside really.

Perhaps another thing to consider is that neighbours of the house will (rightly or wrongly) be worried that toxic material was found at their neighbour's house and that they don't want to be affected by anything toxic. So the letter wording, you would expect, would be re-assuring in tone to those neighbours. This might explain the part about the house (roof) being sealed and covered and material being wrapped and removed by trained personnel from the army. and returning things to normal asap.

Then there's 'elf un safety' - the house internals have been being painstakingly cleaned, but it's not really feasible to "clean" loft insulation, wooden beams etc. especially in-situ. If they are going to be cleaned, then they'd realistically need removing/replacing. Is it an over-reaction, or is it following advice from DSTL?  along the lines of "just clean, remove, replace anything where even a remote possibility of contamination exists" 

Yet even so, there's still, the curiosity as to why other locations where the toxin was detected (though maybe at much lower levels) don't seem to have been treated quite so diligently. Or maybe they have been or are being, but it's just not been in the media? 

Then there's thinking along the lines of "well if it's not actually related to toxic chemical, what else could it be related to?, what other reason would there be to replace the roof on the house?"

It would seem reasonable to suppose that the house was provided for Skripal by the UK authorites when he came here. I strongly doubt he was left to find and buy a hosue with his own money, given the circs of his arrival here. The house may therefore ultimately be one ultimately "managed" by intelligence services on crown inventory , regardless of who is said to be the owner in the land registry. Perhaps now it will be repurposed, or refitted, or particular equipment or items fitted or removed - though if that was the case, it's doubtful removing the roof, and getting blokes in full noddy suits and breathing apparatus to do so would be the best way of doing so, or would be remotely necessary. Also given the now well known location of the house, there seems little point in even contemplating doing anything sureptitious like that. It might be more likely that if Sergei Skripal is going to return there at some point, if /when well enough he may need things like a stairlift, and other facilities that allow a debilitated person to live there. Is it easier to fit all that stuff, given the resources of the state, by effectively rebuilding the house and dropping stuff in through a removed roof, rather than through the front door? I dunno?

Another alternative is that if Skripal is not going to return there, the house will probably be sold and no-one will buy it unless there is convincing reason to do so, given the nature of what happened there. A basically totally cleaned and gutted and largely rebuilt house might sell. Any taint of "it might still be contaminated" would be unlikely to see it sell?

It's all mildly curious, but most of the conceivable "theories" are improbable - moving out secret kit - you'd do that unannounced, at night (and it would have already happened). You wouldn't do it in noddy suits, in daylight, while telling all the neighbours and removing the roof, for example.

While it's a loose end, for sure, the least unlikely explanation for me is that it's typical official over the top reaction where there's the possibility of future media attention - a future resident falling ill there or whatever and the media would be all over it.....

More interesting is the way other locations where the stuff was found have been ttreated. We know the park bench area has been treated with similar attention, but know little about the restaurant and the other house where the discarded (we're told) perfume bottle turned up. That would be the area I'd expect or hope the media to follow.

 

Bingo, various pieces of infrastructure had to be removed. I don't have it at hand but I remember a great report on the efforts the cubans went to in infiltrating the US embassy before Obama sorta re-opened it. Right down to the brass tacks so to speak!

 

[peterms]

On 10/01/2019 at 10:50, blandy said:

More interesting is the way other locations where the stuff was found have been ttreated. We know the park bench area has been treated with similar attention, but know little about the restaurant and the other house where the discarded (we're told) perfume bottle turned up. That would be the area I'd expect or hope the media to follow. 

Yes, some attention to those things would be interesting.  With the restaurant, I think I read that the table where they ate has been destroyed.  I don't know about the pub where they went on to afterwards. 

Perhaps more interesting is what happened after leaving home and before entering the restaurant, when Skripal with his heavily contaminated hands gave bread to three boys to feed the ducks, and one boy ate some of the bread.  Boys and ducks seemed fine.  Perhaps he used tongs to pass over the bread.  And perhaps some attention to the perfume bottles - we have Luke Harding in the Guardian telling us the police "had found the weapon: a fake Nina Ricci perfume bottle converted into a dispenser. It was specially made to apply the poison, gunked out on to the handle of Skripal’s door".   But the bottle found by Charlie Rowley was apparently disassembled and packaged in cellophane, meaning either that the assassins, without benefit of hazmat suits, disassembled a bottle of the world's deadliest substance and packaged it to look like new before throwing it in a skip (quite a risk for no obvious purpose), or else what was found isn't actually the weapon after all.

I think a few years ago, Guardian journos would be enquiring a little more actively, and making more use of their critical faculties, than seems to be the case with Mr Harding and his colleagues.

[blandy]

2 hours ago, peterms said:

I think a few years ago, Guardian journos would be enquiring a little more actively, and making more use of their critical faculties, than seems to be the case with Mr Harding and his colleagues

I agree (though not just the Guardian, but many organisations. There are big gaps in the "narrative/explanation and timeline" which we aren't going to get resolved. I can imagine there are D notices to the media on the whole thing. The two Russians and the whole Russian "angle" on it - guilty looking as hell. The UK and the whole Gov't angle on it, full of holes and inconsistencies. As @tonyh29 said earlier, the two Russian cathedral visitors thing - very guilty of something. their explanation, their sudden appearance on RT when prompted by Putin and all the rest - if it was meant to show innocence, it did the opposite, even within Russian public opinion.

There are very likely large parts of what actually happened which the UK knows but does not wish to reveal, either for security reasons - we don't want to show Russia/whoever what we actually know and how and why we know it, for example, or for typical OTT "management" reasons, or for not scaring the public reasons.

We basically know the people (an ex-Russian spy and his daughter and 3 others) were poisoned by a Chemical weapon of a type developed by Russia, and that 2 Russians from their forces came over here, to Salisbury via London for the window of the "attack" and were seen on CCTV very close to the Skripal's house, and that their sudden appearance on RT and their explanation as to what they were up to was wholly ludicrous. We know that the treatment of the house, and other locations has been inconsistent and that no explanation or investigation of those inconsistencies has been forthcoming. Oh, and the victims have been largely chosen to or been kept out of the media.

All very curious, and no doubt great sport for conspiracy theorists and bloggers etc. Most people, both in Russia and the UK will as with most news events just move on. It's a shame more isn't going to come out, giving us a credible supportable narrative.

[peterms]

19 minutes ago, blandy said:

Oh, and the victims have been largely chosen to or been kept out of the media.

Keeping out of the media is one thing, but what is inexplicable is Skripal's failure to communicate with his mother even once.  She's 95, they used to speak more or less weekly, and apparently she's had no contact from him whatever.  There is no credible explanation for this in terms of keeping his whereabouts secret or anything else that I can see, and I suppose she must believe him to be dead.

[blandy]

1 hour ago, peterms said:

apparently

When you factor in the level of obvious deception from the UK, Russia and also the lack of knowledge of various, er, bloggers who basically know little or no more or less than even you or I, I don't take any notice of this kind of "apparently". It might or might not be right.

Further, whoever we might think "dun it", he's a primary target for being finished off if still alive, perhaps - that seems a "credible" reason to me.

[bickster]

On 11/01/2019 at 16:32, peterms said:

Keeping out of the media is one thing, but what is inexplicable is Skripal's failure to communicate with his mother even once.  She's 95, they used to speak more or less weekly, and apparently she's had no contact from him whatever.  There is no credible explanation for this in terms of keeping his whereabouts secret or anything else that I can see, and I suppose she must believe him to be dead.

I wouldn't believe anything I read on TASS or RT which is where that story originated

[peterms]

11 minutes ago, bickster said:

I wouldn't believe anything I read on TASS or RT which is where that story originated

It's been reported in many places that the family have said they have had no contact from him, nor seen any picture.  If that's false, it could very easily be disproved.  I imagine any calls would be from a controlled place under the supervision of the security services, and taped.

RT carrying the story that the family have said this doesn't make it false, any more than the Mail also reporting it (they called it a "choreographed" press conference, presumably to insinuate that she had been manipulated into saying it).

In other news, Hamish de Bretton Gordon has said that the house is being taken apart because

Quote

in areas where the Novichok has sunk into material, as in the roof, tiles and timbers, the safest way to ensure that it’s a 100% clean is actually to take it away, incinerate it or bury it.

So we were told that the stuff was applied to the door handle, and now we hear that it has somehow sunk into the roof, tiles and timbers.  What?  How could that be possible?  Our media don't seem to have asked how such a thing could possibly have happened.  If the stuff acts like some kind of dry rot on steroids, the rest of the street must be shitting themselves.  A little explanation would be in order.