Dogs Sleeping Forum

These words, taken from an 'Indi' article, should make people think harder about what is being spoonfed to us on a daily basis...

"Belllingcat, which has presented itself in the past as a microcosm of well-meaning and very British amateurishness, based in a Leicestershire bedroom, producing results that put the professional sleuths to shame. In fact, Bellingcat has grown rather a lot beyond its shoestring origins. It has money – where from? It has been hiring staff. It has transatlantic connections. It has never, so far as I am aware, reached any conclusion – whether on the downing of the Malaysian plane over eastern Ukraine, or chemical weapons use in Syria, or now, with the Skripals – that is in any way inconvenient to the UK or US authorities.

That need not cast doubt on its findings. But should the authenticity of the documents it cites not be subject, at very least, to the same scrutiny as might be applied to other evidence? And when, as this week, UK officials say they do not “dispute” Bellingcat’s identification of Chepiga and Mishkin, does this not prompt a few questions about whether, say, our “agencies” reached the same conclusions long ago, but kept quiet, or why most of the UK’s media apparently find Bellingcat a more trustworthy source than the UK intelligence services (possible answer: Iraq)? Might not the group’s good name be being used to get information into the public domain that officials do not want to vouch for? And, if so, would this be to inform, or to mislead? "

It continues.....

"For all the “revelations” of recent days, we are no further forward in knowing what happened to the Skripals – or to Dawn Sturgess, who remains the only person to have died, or to her partner, Charlie Rowley, who has now, like the Skripals and Detective Constable Nick Bailey, disappeared from the media. The two men caught on CCTV in Salisbury may indeed be GRU agents – though why the GRU would squander its brightest and best on such an apparently incompetently executed operation raises doubts. But no UK court would convict them of even attempted killing on the “evidence” that has so far been produced.

The CCTV footage from Salisbury has huge lacunae – though it is established that the cameras were working in Salisbury that day – and does not include any of the pair less than 500m from the Skripals’ house, nor any of the Skripals themselves. Why not? We still do not know where they were for most of that Sunday morning, who they might have met, or for what purpose, or precisely when the presumed attack occurred. Those are huge gaps."


Surely the Skripals were thoroughly 'de-briefed' ? What was their testimony ? Why isn't it public knowledge ?

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/sk ... 77161.html

Cannydc wrote:The CCTV footage from Salisbury has huge lacunae – though it is established that the cameras were working in Salisbury that day – and does not include any of the pair less than 500m from the Skripals’ house, nor any of the Skripals themselves. Why not? We still do not know where they were for most of that Sunday morning, who they might have met, or for what purpose, or precisely when the presumed attack occurred. Those are huge gaps."


Surely the Skripals were thoroughly 'de-briefed' ? What was their testimony ? Why isn't it public knowledge ?

The same crazy attention to detail that led to decades of JFK conspiracy theories.

Cannydc wrote:These words, taken from an 'Indi' article, should make people think harder about what is being spoonfed to us on a daily basis...

"Belllingcat, which has presented itself in the past as a microcosm of well-meaning and very British amateurishness, based in a Leicestershire bedroom, producing results that put the professional sleuths to shame. In fact, Bellingcat has grown rather a lot beyond its shoestring origins. It has money – where from? It has been hiring staff. It has transatlantic connections. It has never, so far as I am aware, reached any conclusion – whether on the downing of the Malaysian plane over eastern Ukraine, or chemical weapons use in Syria, or now, with the Skripals – that is in any way inconvenient to the UK or US authorities.

That need not cast doubt on its findings. But should the authenticity of the documents it cites not be subject, at very least, to the same scrutiny as might be applied to other evidence? And when, as this week, UK officials say they do not “dispute” Bellingcat’s identification of Chepiga and Mishkin, does this not prompt a few questions about whether, say, our “agencies” reached the same conclusions long ago, but kept quiet, or why most of the UK’s media apparently find Bellingcat a more trustworthy source than the UK intelligence services (possible answer: Iraq)? Might not the group’s good name be being used to get information into the public domain that officials do not want to vouch for? And, if so, would this be to inform, or to mislead? "

It continues.....

"For all the “revelations” of recent days, we are no further forward in knowing what happened to the Skripals – or to Dawn Sturgess, who remains the only person to have died, or to her partner, Charlie Rowley, who has now, like the Skripals and Detective Constable Nick Bailey, disappeared from the media. The two men caught on CCTV in Salisbury may indeed be GRU agents – though why the GRU would squander its brightest and best on such an apparently incompetently executed operation raises doubts. But no UK court would convict them of even attempted killing on the “evidence” that has so far been produced.

The CCTV footage from Salisbury has huge lacunae – though it is established that the cameras were working in Salisbury that day – and does not include any of the pair less than 500m from the Skripals’ house, nor any of the Skripals themselves. Why not? We still do not know where they were for most of that Sunday morning, who they might have met, or for what purpose, or precisely when the presumed attack occurred. Those are huge gaps."


Surely the Skripals were thoroughly 'de-briefed' ? What was their testimony ? Why isn't it public knowledge ?

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/sk ... 77161.html

I'm not convinced by Britain's "official line" on this whole affair. We (as a national entity) are pretty good at fake news.

Most people seem to have accepted Bellingcat's statements as gospel.

Not many seem to care who they actually are, or how, or where they get their 'information' from.

Amazingly complacent.

It's a few people.

Cannydc wrote:Most people seem to have accepted Bellingcat's statements as gospel.

Not many seem to care who they actually are, or how, or where they get their 'information' from.

Amazingly complacent.

According to the Russian Ambassador to UK Bellingcat has 'links to the British special services and deep state'.

https://www.channel4.com/news/russian-envoy-says-relations-with-uk-very-low

They were involved in investigations of MH17 in Ukraine among many others. They operate from an 3rd floor office in Leicester.

Here is their website.

https://www.bellingcat.com/

Grafenwalder wrote:They were involved in investigations of MH17 in Ukraine among many others. They operate from an 3rd floor office in Leicester.

Here is their website.

https://www.bellingcat.com/

Anyone can start up a website.

Knowing where they are, and the website they post on doesn't answer who they are, who funds them, whose side they are on and what their agenda is.

Cannydc wrote:These words, taken from an 'Indi' article, should make people think harder about what is being spoonfed to us on a daily basis...

"Belllingcat, which has presented itself in the past as a microcosm of well-meaning and very British amateurishness, based in a Leicestershire bedroom, producing results that put the professional sleuths to shame. In fact, Bellingcat has grown rather a lot beyond its shoestring origins. It has money – where from? It has been hiring staff. It has transatlantic connections. It has never, so far as I am aware, reached any conclusion – whether on the downing of the Malaysian plane over eastern Ukraine, or chemical weapons use in Syria, or now, with the Skripals – that is in any way inconvenient to the UK or US authorities.

That need not cast doubt on its findings. But should the authenticity of the documents it cites not be subject, at very least, to the same scrutiny as might be applied to other evidence? And when, as this week, UK officials say they do not “dispute” Bellingcat’s identification of Chepiga and Mishkin, does this not prompt a few questions about whether, say, our “agencies” reached the same conclusions long ago, but kept quiet, or why most of the UK’s media apparently find Bellingcat a more trustworthy source than the UK intelligence services (possible answer: Iraq)? Might not the group’s good name be being used to get information into the public domain that officials do not want to vouch for? And, if so, would this be to inform, or to mislead? "

It continues.....

"For all the “revelations” of recent days, we are no further forward in knowing what happened to the Skripals – or to Dawn Sturgess, who remains the only person to have died, or to her partner, Charlie Rowley, who has now, like the Skripals and Detective Constable Nick Bailey, disappeared from the media. The two men caught on CCTV in Salisbury may indeed be GRU agents – though why the GRU would squander its brightest and best on such an apparently incompetently executed operation raises doubts. But no UK court would convict them of even attempted killing on the “evidence” that has so far been produced.

The CCTV footage from Salisbury has huge lacunae – though it is established that the cameras were working in Salisbury that day – and does not include any of the pair less than 500m from the Skripals’ house, nor any of the Skripals themselves. Why not? We still do not know where they were for most of that Sunday morning, who they might have met, or for what purpose, or precisely when the presumed attack occurred. Those are huge gaps."


Surely the Skripals were thoroughly 'de-briefed' ? What was their testimony ? Why isn't it public knowledge ?

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/sk ... 77161.html

Canny, Why do you give a fuck, you support a man who is supposed to deliver this country into the Putin fold politically, Just like all the other Labour supporting stupids on here. So Russia sending killers here will be supported by your man regardless of what he says for public consumption. I suggest you think very hard on him and his hidden agenda.

Rocthedog wrote:

Cannydc wrote:These words, taken from an 'Indi' article, should make people think harder about what is being spoonfed to us on a daily basis...

"Belllingcat, which has presented itself in the past as a microcosm of well-meaning and very British amateurishness, based in a Leicestershire bedroom, producing results that put the professional sleuths to shame. In fact, Bellingcat has grown rather a lot beyond its shoestring origins. It has money – where from? It has been hiring staff. It has transatlantic connections. It has never, so far as I am aware, reached any conclusion – whether on the downing of the Malaysian plane over eastern Ukraine, or chemical weapons use in Syria, or now, with the Skripals – that is in any way inconvenient to the UK or US authorities.

That need not cast doubt on its findings. But should the authenticity of the documents it cites not be subject, at very least, to the same scrutiny as might be applied to other evidence? And when, as this week, UK officials say they do not “dispute” Bellingcat’s identification of Chepiga and Mishkin, does this not prompt a few questions about whether, say, our “agencies” reached the same conclusions long ago, but kept quiet, or why most of the UK’s media apparently find Bellingcat a more trustworthy source than the UK intelligence services (possible answer: Iraq)? Might not the group’s good name be being used to get information into the public domain that officials do not want to vouch for? And, if so, would this be to inform, or to mislead? "

It continues.....

"For all the “revelations” of recent days, we are no further forward in knowing what happened to the Skripals – or to Dawn Sturgess, who remains the only person to have died, or to her partner, Charlie Rowley, who has now, like the Skripals and Detective Constable Nick Bailey, disappeared from the media. The two men caught on CCTV in Salisbury may indeed be GRU agents – though why the GRU would squander its brightest and best on such an apparently incompetently executed operation raises doubts. But no UK court would convict them of even attempted killing on the “evidence” that has so far been produced.

The CCTV footage from Salisbury has huge lacunae – though it is established that the cameras were working in Salisbury that day – and does not include any of the pair less than 500m from the Skripals’ house, nor any of the Skripals themselves. Why not? We still do not know where they were for most of that Sunday morning, who they might have met, or for what purpose, or precisely when the presumed attack occurred. Those are huge gaps."


Surely the Skripals were thoroughly 'de-briefed' ? What was their testimony ? Why isn't it public knowledge ?

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/sk ... 77161.html

Canny, Why do you give a fuck, you support a man who is supposed to deliver this country into the Putin fold politically, Just like all the other Labour supporting stupids on here. So Russia sending killers here will be supported by your man regardless of what he says for public consumption. I suggest you think very hard on him and his hidden agenda.

I "give a fuck" because I like to see loose ends neatly tied up, without doubts hanging around like a bad smell. I would be justified in asking why you don't ?

As for the Labour / Putin garbage...... please save your Daily Heil smearing rhetoric for someone who doesn't laugh every time I read it. And remember, Tories are adopting policies which were put forward by Labour just a couple of years ago, but derided by them as 'insane'. And now we have a cap on energy prices.... Insane, eh ? Sure - nicked straight from Labour's "hidden agenda", which by the way has the sound of 'smear Labour, Phase 3'.

Cannydc wrote:

Grafenwalder wrote:They were involved in investigations of MH17 in Ukraine among many others. They operate from an 3rd floor office in Leicester.

Here is their website.

https://www.bellingcat.com/

Anyone can start up a website.

Knowing where they are, and the website they post on doesn't answer who they are, who funds them, whose side they are on and what their agenda is.

Already posted a link. Russias Ambassador to UK claims to be 'in the know' about that. Whether you choose to believe him or not is another matter though i've not heard or read any denials from UK gov.

Cannydc wrote:

Rocthedog wrote:

Cannydc wrote:These words, taken from an 'Indi' article, should make people think harder about what is being spoonfed to us on a daily basis...

"Belllingcat, which has presented itself in the past as a microcosm of well-meaning and very British amateurishness, based in a Leicestershire bedroom, producing results that put the professional sleuths to shame. In fact, Bellingcat has grown rather a lot beyond its shoestring origins. It has money – where from? It has been hiring staff. It has transatlantic connections. It has never, so far as I am aware, reached any conclusion – whether on the downing of the Malaysian plane over eastern Ukraine, or chemical weapons use in Syria, or now, with the Skripals – that is in any way inconvenient to the UK or US authorities.

That need not cast doubt on its findings. But should the authenticity of the documents it cites not be subject, at very least, to the same scrutiny as might be applied to other evidence? And when, as this week, UK officials say they do not “dispute” Bellingcat’s identification of Chepiga and Mishkin, does this not prompt a few questions about whether, say, our “agencies” reached the same conclusions long ago, but kept quiet, or why most of the UK’s media apparently find Bellingcat a more trustworthy source than the UK intelligence services (possible answer: Iraq)? Might not the group’s good name be being used to get information into the public domain that officials do not want to vouch for? And, if so, would this be to inform, or to mislead? "

It continues.....

"For all the “revelations” of recent days, we are no further forward in knowing what happened to the Skripals – or to Dawn Sturgess, who remains the only person to have died, or to her partner, Charlie Rowley, who has now, like the Skripals and Detective Constable Nick Bailey, disappeared from the media. The two men caught on CCTV in Salisbury may indeed be GRU agents – though why the GRU would squander its brightest and best on such an apparently incompetently executed operation raises doubts. But no UK court would convict them of even attempted killing on the “evidence” that has so far been produced.

The CCTV footage from Salisbury has huge lacunae – though it is established that the cameras were working in Salisbury that day – and does not include any of the pair less than 500m from the Skripals’ house, nor any of the Skripals themselves. Why not? We still do not know where they were for most of that Sunday morning, who they might have met, or for what purpose, or precisely when the presumed attack occurred. Those are huge gaps."


Surely the Skripals were thoroughly 'de-briefed' ? What was their testimony ? Why isn't it public knowledge ?

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/sk ... 77161.html

Canny, Why do you give a fuck, you support a man who is supposed to deliver this country into the Putin fold politically, Just like all the other Labour supporting stupids on here. So Russia sending killers here will be supported by your man regardless of what he says for public consumption. I suggest you think very hard on him and his hidden agenda.

I "give a fuck" because I like to see loose ends neatly tied up, without doubts hanging around like a bad smell. I would be justified in asking why you don't ?

Over what? UK has always been secretive when it comes to intelligence and we only get told what the authorities want us to know. Talking about 'loose ends' and 'doubts hanging around like a bad smell', take a look at the Gareth Williams (GCHQ) case as an example of that. The authorities eventually got that buried and disappeared from the media leaving it to CT'ers and conjecture. Never even gets a mention now.

Your point re. Gareth Williams is well taken.

My view is that 'the authorities' (in this case, HM Government) would have absolutely LOVED to stand up in parliament and crowed that they knew who the Salisbury pair really were.

Presumably our spooks would be obliged to brief the PM fully, if they were the ones to find out. She couldn't resist passing it on, that's for sure. So, Bellingcat outpointed MI6, GCHQ et al. Which either points to them being very lucky, or a very polished, professional unit, well financed and with some very good links in high places. Your choice...

This thread may help:

Stooo wrote:This thread may help:

It doesn't.

It sounds a bit like this....

https://www.pressgazette.co.uk/ex-daily ... -laureate/