I love this last sentence of the New York Times editorial titled “A Colder War with Russia?” for the unconscious racist privilege and the prissy, carefully-selective moral outrage.
The former K.G.B. agent in Mr. Putin may find it intolerable that a turncoat is living comfortably in Britain, but it must be made clear to him that the West will unite in fury — yes, including Mr. Trump’s America — when Russia’s most fearsome weapons are deployed in a peaceful English town.
I am agnostic about who did the poisoning (if our Western governments say it was Russia then there is a middling chance it was Russia); and if the Russian government did it then we should respond in some fashion.
But of course the rules are different for quiet English towns. We can do drone assassinations anywhere we want, we can flatten Mosul, Israel can shoot protesters in Gaza– and the West shouldn’t unite in fury about that. We can unite in fury about peaceful English towns. Should other people be uniting in fury about our little escapades?
> ” (if our Western governments say it was Russia then there is a middling chance it was Russia)”
.. you have to be kidding. It should be assumed that the Government (regardless of who’s government) is lying unless there is solid, independent, material evidence to support Government assertions.
Russia had no motive to assassinate the Skripals. Sergey Skripal was in Russian custody serving a prison term for being a double agent with Britain. He was later returned to England on a spy swap deal. If Russia wanted him dead, they would have passed a death sentence on him while he was in Russia. If they feared him, they never would have sent him back to England as a free man.
The British have not identified a single suspect or witness in this case and their story of how the poisoning happened keeps changing. According to the first story, the Skripals were poisoned while sitting on a bench in a public park. Later this story was changed to the Skripals were poisoned at home but were found slumped on a bench in a park. Putin, if the official story goes, would have wanted wanted his victims moved to a public place.
Certainly Russia as a scientific country can produce nerve gas, but so can America and so can Porton Down. Neocons in America and NATO who want to break the Iran deal or revive the Cold War have a propaganda motive to attack the Skripals. Russia doesn’t have a motive.
DONALD JOHNSON- “I am agnostic about who did the poisoning….”
Really? Fourteen years ago Skripal was convicted of spying for the West and was sentenced to 13 years jail time, later released in a prisoner swap. If Russia wanted him dead, why not legally execute him 14 years ago? Why now? Why use a nerve agent superficially linked to Russia? On the other hand, there go those Russian natural gas sales to Europe. I mean Jeez, the stench is overpowering. The scary thing is how the media aggressively promotes the official line even though it is ludicrous.
Russians are guilty until proven guilty.
In the earliest news reports that came out it was pointed out that Skripal’s wife, brother and son have died in mysterious circumstances. As also pointed out above, there were many opportunities for the Russian govt to do away with him instead of using him in a prisoner swap. He is said to have betrayed hundreds of fellow spies for money. I’m pretty sure a number of those, or people linked to them, would have an interest in harming him, and I don’t think it too far fetched to consider that some among them could have access to the means to have carried out such a hit.