How They Tried to Kill Me(nplusonemag.com)
nplusonemag.com
How They Tried to Kill Me
https://www.nplusonemag.com/online-only/online-only/how-they-tried-to-kill-me/
147 comments
I remember a few years back Iran send assassins to kill Iranian dissidents in Germany, Austria, and Belgium. The assassins were caught and politely returned to Iran on a private plane.
No punishment for planned/attempted murder.
The West is hopelessly naive about sophisticated and brutal adversaries like Russia and Iran.
No punishment for planned/attempted murder.
The West is hopelessly naive about sophisticated and brutal adversaries like Russia and Iran.
Is it possible they had diplomatic passports?
Most spies are known to the host nations as they work out of the embassy under cover jobs with standard diplomatic passports, therefore they have diplomatic immunity if they run into trouble and the best the host country can do is permanently evict them.
Most spies are known to the host nations as they work out of the embassy under cover jobs with standard diplomatic passports, therefore they have diplomatic immunity if they run into trouble and the best the host country can do is permanently evict them.
It’s not naïvety, it’s that that west would appreciate the same treatment when they send spies and assassins, which they do.
Exactly. It’s a newtonian game where an action creates a counter action. “You take off one of our field agents, we take off one of your. You return our agent to us, we probably return your agent to you”
I have no idea of the recruitment pool but I would imagine operatives who can perform assassinations and are not total loose cannons are in finite supply.
Without experience in this domain, I could fermi-guess optimal ones probably come from the few percentages of population who don’t suffer of PTSD after violence. So if you want a person of above average intelligence, who does not mind going to plausibly suicidal missions, and is able to keep it all together, AND has decided to take a career in cloak&dagger… I’d say such fields agents are not trivial to replace. Hence you probably want to issue the courtesy of returning opposing forces, rather than having to find a new field agent (or whatever they are called) or several.
Without experience in this domain, I could fermi-guess optimal ones probably come from the few percentages of population who don’t suffer of PTSD after violence. So if you want a person of above average intelligence, who does not mind going to plausibly suicidal missions, and is able to keep it all together, AND has decided to take a career in cloak&dagger… I’d say such fields agents are not trivial to replace. Hence you probably want to issue the courtesy of returning opposing forces, rather than having to find a new field agent (or whatever they are called) or several.
Again it is extreme naïveté, those assassins when caught are summarily executed. Iran will pick people off the street, accuse them of working for Israel and kill them, just to send a message to their own people. They’re not politely returning western assassins.
And it's your belief that the State Department-- let alone the CIA-- are totally ignorant of what Iran does to its staff?
Nope, I think the politicians at the top are hopelessly naive or simply too maliciously self involved to care. And are more concerned with appearances than any of the values they claim to espouse.
I don’t think it is naivety really, Western countries mostly don’t have to “send messages” to their own citizens. Summarily executing assassins or random people you claim to be assassins is just throwing away negotiating chips.
Or maybe they manage to recruit some of the spies/assassins to work as double-agents?
Another distinct possibility.
> which they do.
Citation sorely needed
Citation sorely needed
That was by Israelis, not Western Europeans.
The US tends to use drones these days eg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qasem_Soleimani
When has the West sent assassins to Iran or Russia?
The West prefers more refined tactics like missiles- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Qasem_Soleima...
[deleted]
It is more general than the west, it is that Good people are naive. They don't understand how many people are willing to lie and kill to get even petty gains from it. The USA is struggling with this asymmetry internally right now too. We are slowly and politely trying to prosecute people who attempted to overturn an election while they incite civil unrest and pass laws protecting themselves from prosecution
Part of the problem is that if you do it their way, you become them. What’s the point of winning if you get the same outcome as not winning? USA doesn’t need a left/center authoritarian regime just as much as it doesn’t want a right authoritarian regime.
So let’s not advocate for the left becoming authoritarian shall we? [parts of] Europe tried that already, it doesn’t work either.
So let’s not advocate for the left becoming authoritarian shall we? [parts of] Europe tried that already, it doesn’t work either.
Integrity is often confused with naivety in light of desired animalistic revenge.
It is good to be thorough with this stuff, and sometimes that means things go more slowly than we’d like. But the end result is that nobody reasonable could think it is a partisan witch hunt. It might be the case that a significant chunk of the populace is unreasonable, but that isn’t something that can be solved by changing courtroom procedures.
> The USA is struggling with this asymmetry internally right now too. We are slowly and politely trying to prosecute people who attempted to overturn an election while they incite civil unrest and pass laws protecting themselves from prosecution
This is an interesting statement to me, because the right uses very similar language in the opposite direction. To paraphrase: "we're playing by the rules while the left is using the federal government to silence political adversaries."
From where I sit, those statements don't seem entirely accurate, but they also are not mutually exclusive.
This is an interesting statement to me, because the right uses very similar language in the opposite direction. To paraphrase: "we're playing by the rules while the left is using the federal government to silence political adversaries."
From where I sit, those statements don't seem entirely accurate, but they also are not mutually exclusive.
The idea that the CIA is naive to what Russia does is pretty amusing.
Yes, if only they frequented social media, they might have some clue what Chinese, Russian, and Iranian security services were up to. Alas for their naivete...
Yes, if only they frequented social media, they might have some clue what Chinese, Russian, and Iranian security services were up to. Alas for their naivete...
It’s truly shocking how much misinformation people will believe because it jives with their current beliefs.
Do you have a source for that? Because the story as told seems vanishingly unlikely. Maybe nothing could be proven but that they were there illegaly?
And how would the inevitably resulting prisoner exchange later benefit anyone?
This matches with an account by Bellingcat reporter Christo Grozev, who was interviewed by the Financial Times [1]:
"How does it feel, I ask, to be here in absentia? Grozev laughs. After the Russians indicted him “in absentia”, he posted a selfie video from Palm Beach, Florida, against a sunset backdrop. “I said, ‘If this is absentia, it’s a pretty great place to be.’”
"Is Austria the least safe European country? “Yes,” he replies. “While we [Bellingcat] were investigating the Austrians, they were surveilling me and I wasn’t aware of that at the time. They were doing so explicitly at the request of the Russians. That is deep penetration.”
"He says the Germans advised him not to settle in Germany. He last visited Germany in 2020 under heavy guard as a witness in the prosecution of a Russian who had assassinated a Chechen exile. “We are also investigating examples of Russian security services penetrating German political circles,” he says. “France, I would not trust them: they don’t even trust themselves. The only place in Europe I can come to safely nowadays is the UK.”
"He is still angry, however, at London’s Metropolitan Police for cancelling his and his family’s attendance at the Bafta film awards this year. “Hearing it through the grapevine was offensive,” he says. “If there is also a risk to my family, they should tell me directly.”
"Both Turkey and the United Arab Emirates, which is teeming with Russians, are off-limits, he adds. “Dubai is Vienna on the Gulf,” he says. “I have heard this warning from both the Emirates and Turkey — ‘Do not come here. We will try to protect you. We will never extradite you [to Russia]. But we can’t guarantee your safety.’”"
Grozen did his interview in the United States, where he is currently living. I suspect that the separation by the sea (English Channel for the UK and the Atlantic for the US) increases the security.
[1] (Paywalled) https://www.ft.com/content/03f220e1-6a7e-4850-bf4e-4b0f521d8...
"How does it feel, I ask, to be here in absentia? Grozev laughs. After the Russians indicted him “in absentia”, he posted a selfie video from Palm Beach, Florida, against a sunset backdrop. “I said, ‘If this is absentia, it’s a pretty great place to be.’”
"Is Austria the least safe European country? “Yes,” he replies. “While we [Bellingcat] were investigating the Austrians, they were surveilling me and I wasn’t aware of that at the time. They were doing so explicitly at the request of the Russians. That is deep penetration.”
"He says the Germans advised him not to settle in Germany. He last visited Germany in 2020 under heavy guard as a witness in the prosecution of a Russian who had assassinated a Chechen exile. “We are also investigating examples of Russian security services penetrating German political circles,” he says. “France, I would not trust them: they don’t even trust themselves. The only place in Europe I can come to safely nowadays is the UK.”
"He is still angry, however, at London’s Metropolitan Police for cancelling his and his family’s attendance at the Bafta film awards this year. “Hearing it through the grapevine was offensive,” he says. “If there is also a risk to my family, they should tell me directly.”
"Both Turkey and the United Arab Emirates, which is teeming with Russians, are off-limits, he adds. “Dubai is Vienna on the Gulf,” he says. “I have heard this warning from both the Emirates and Turkey — ‘Do not come here. We will try to protect you. We will never extradite you [to Russia]. But we can’t guarantee your safety.’”"
Grozen did his interview in the United States, where he is currently living. I suspect that the separation by the sea (English Channel for the UK and the Atlantic for the US) increases the security.
[1] (Paywalled) https://www.ft.com/content/03f220e1-6a7e-4850-bf4e-4b0f521d8...
Journalists have always been targeted by all regimes, “authoritarian” or not. When puppet masters are questioned by journalists, their lives are materially affected.
Julian Assange, Shireen Abu Akleh, etc.
There’s a reason most mainstream media reporting is the equivalent of 2nd grade book report.
Julian Assange, Shireen Abu Akleh, etc.
There’s a reason most mainstream media reporting is the equivalent of 2nd grade book report.
Considering that she's presumably well-informed about global affairs, her resistance to the idea that russian secret services might be out to kill her, and especially her refusal to believe she might have been poisoned, is rather striking.
It's almost as if she had no idea that russian agents have been poisoning prominent people in foreign lands for the last couple of decades. Perhaps she thinks she's not prominent enough?
These poisonings target "prominent" people because they're supposed to make the news; they're meant as a warning. From that point of view, a journalist counts as "prominent".
It's almost as if she had no idea that russian agents have been poisoning prominent people in foreign lands for the last couple of decades. Perhaps she thinks she's not prominent enough?
These poisonings target "prominent" people because they're supposed to make the news; they're meant as a warning. From that point of view, a journalist counts as "prominent".
I don't know about the veracity of this particular story, but I've seen something like that denial before.
Someone accidentally stepped on the toes of some lawless dirty-tricks entity. They realized this after the fact. But when they seemed to get neutralized with very evil but textbook action, they said, in desperation (close from memory) "But why would ___?! I don't have any enemies!"
I'm not sure, but I think, if they would've been asked just then, they might've contradicted what they'd just said, to tell you who probably did it, and why they might get any of that party's attention. That might've been some powerful psychology speaking just then.
I suspect they were verbalizing reversion to their self image, and how they wanted the world to be. Something like this just wouldn't happen to them, and they're not in that world of stepping on the toes of characters like this, and don't want to be.
(Also, in case of this journalist, note the bit about the German official with poor bedside manner, when speaking with a potential victim of a heinous crime. Maybe the official was interrogating, or angry, or that was just their manner. The journalist spoke of shame as a reason, which I guess might be the journalist's cultural upbringing about being tough and not being the oppressed, but the German also seemed to be shaming.)
Someone accidentally stepped on the toes of some lawless dirty-tricks entity. They realized this after the fact. But when they seemed to get neutralized with very evil but textbook action, they said, in desperation (close from memory) "But why would ___?! I don't have any enemies!"
I'm not sure, but I think, if they would've been asked just then, they might've contradicted what they'd just said, to tell you who probably did it, and why they might get any of that party's attention. That might've been some powerful psychology speaking just then.
I suspect they were verbalizing reversion to their self image, and how they wanted the world to be. Something like this just wouldn't happen to them, and they're not in that world of stepping on the toes of characters like this, and don't want to be.
(Also, in case of this journalist, note the bit about the German official with poor bedside manner, when speaking with a potential victim of a heinous crime. Maybe the official was interrogating, or angry, or that was just their manner. The journalist spoke of shame as a reason, which I guess might be the journalist's cultural upbringing about being tough and not being the oppressed, but the German also seemed to be shaming.)
There's a cognitive dissonance of "this won't happen to me" that comes from years of walking on the line. She faced a lot of danger and intimidation and survived it. This created a survivor bias that made her discount the immediate danger.
I've seen this first hand. After a few missile alarms where everyone runs to shelters people start building confidence and stride gently. They assume that since they survived all the alarms, nothing will happen. I have that problem myself, I can't be legitimately afraid.
I've seen this first hand. After a few missile alarms where everyone runs to shelters people start building confidence and stride gently. They assume that since they survived all the alarms, nothing will happen. I have that problem myself, I can't be legitimately afraid.
From the article:
It wasn’t that the idea of it “seemed crazy” to me. During my time at Novaya Gazeta, four of my colleagues were killed. I organized the funeral of Khimki journalist Mikhail Beketov, he’d been a friend. I knew that journalists got murdered. But I did not want to believe that they could kill me. I was protected from this thought by revulsion, shame, and exhaustion. It disgusted me to think that there were people who wanted me dead. I was ashamed to talk about it. Even with loved ones, let alone the police. And I felt how exhausted I was, how little strength I had left, that I wouldn’t be able to go on the run again.
It wasn’t that the idea of it “seemed crazy” to me. During my time at Novaya Gazeta, four of my colleagues were killed. I organized the funeral of Khimki journalist Mikhail Beketov, he’d been a friend. I knew that journalists got murdered. But I did not want to believe that they could kill me. I was protected from this thought by revulsion, shame, and exhaustion. It disgusted me to think that there were people who wanted me dead. I was ashamed to talk about it. Even with loved ones, let alone the police. And I felt how exhausted I was, how little strength I had left, that I wouldn’t be able to go on the run again.
While she is not a noname journalist I doubt many people from Russian anti-war community would recall her name before this investigation. There are few dozens of journalists and media figures well known in Russia opposition, but she was never one of them.
So journalists expect big political figures to be poisoned or killed, but not one of them.
So journalists expect big political figures to be poisoned or killed, but not one of them.
Not exactly "prominent". It's just "department of poisioning" of GRU should rationalize their finances, so they need to show "results", i.e. just poison "enemies of state", even if you're helping LGBTQ kids, or small ethnic group, e.t.c.
[deleted]
Julia Ioffe has talked about some of the less-lethal intimidation tactics that are used against foreign journalists in Russia.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b1HWNcLDK88&t=5610s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b1HWNcLDK88&t=5610s
It’s really easy to be in a state of denial to anybody. Health issues especially. It’s not a character flaw, just common human nature. It’s really damn hard to perceive your own positin objectively.
> her resistance to the idea that russian secret services might be out to kill her, and especially her refusal to believe she might have been poisoned, is rather striking.
During stalinist cleansings people almost always believed others were imprisoned/executed for a good reason, but they were innocent so this can't happen to them.
During stalinist cleansings people almost always believed others were imprisoned/executed for a good reason, but they were innocent so this can't happen to them.
The German counter-terrorism forces hold quite a bit of blame here. These things happening on German soil are unacceptable and it shouldn't be the victim's fault.
What is German media saying about this?
What is German media saying about this?
There won't be much discussion about that in Germany because it is old news. Every German knows that and this is not the first incident.
> We have political killings here. The Russian special services are active in Germany.
This quote is the reality. It is well known that we have Russian, Turkish, Iranian and other spies here, political killings happen from time to time and sometimes we even have terrorists registered as refugees because our Government has no IDs from them (this happened back when we had many refugees from Syria - some of them were IS-Terrorists)
We don't talk about America, we talk about Germany where the Military is a joke.
> We have political killings here. The Russian special services are active in Germany.
This quote is the reality. It is well known that we have Russian, Turkish, Iranian and other spies here, political killings happen from time to time and sometimes we even have terrorists registered as refugees because our Government has no IDs from them (this happened back when we had many refugees from Syria - some of them were IS-Terrorists)
We don't talk about America, we talk about Germany where the Military is a joke.
What things could and should they have done here, if pointing out the author's naivete is unacceptable victim-blaming? The assassins are active in Germany because that's where their targets go, and the author's behavior both before and after the attack seems to have foreclosed on any effective policing.
Effective policing happens before someone is poisoned. Everything after is a bandaid.
Can you be somewhat specific about what could be done with regard to the situation in Germany today?
The first step is to take responsibility and not to victim blame. American counter-intel would be livid about this kind of thing. Sure it happens but attitude counts for alot and counter-intel in Germany just seems like they have alot of ownership and Esprit de corps.
Assassinations happened on US soil in the height of the cold war. The Russians are really good at these sorts of things and it's pretty easy to do. As she mentioned, a person could touch her bare foot in the train to deliver poison. Spray her while moving next to her. Slip something into her drink.
Recognizing an agent is also impossible, they can't stop illegal immigration how can they stop well trained and documented foreign agents?
Recognizing an agent is also impossible, they can't stop illegal immigration how can they stop well trained and documented foreign agents?
Even by nominal US allies like the assassination of Orlando Letelier by Pinochet's secret services, by a car bomb in Washington DC.
This story is being falsely flagged.
Agree, this seems like it's being flagged in bad faith. In probably 13 years of HN membership, and maybe 14 - 15 of readership, I've never seen anything on HN before that's accrued 250+ points and been flagged.
@dang I realise you're probably incredibly busy, but are you able to remove the flag, please?
@dang I realise you're probably incredibly busy, but are you able to remove the flag, please?
Why was it flaged? Why falsely? There are plenty flagged articles recently, but without any explanation it's hard to find out why. Nobody learn from it.
At least we should have some options to set with flagging.
At least we should have some options to set with flagging.
Unsurprising
Thank you for asking why it's flagged.
(cargo cult) tagging @dang
(cargo cult) tagging @dang
502 for me.
https://archive.ph/wDi29
https://archive.ph/wDi29
Please unflag this.
Russia as a state didn't "descend into fascism".
It was always like that. For centuries.
I have heard stories about NKVD methods since childhood. The victims were my family members living in the estern Poland, after it was invaded by Stalin at the very beginnings of WW2.
What was happening before red revolution, during tsars rule, is in the literature.
It is funny how generations of intelligent, well-educated westerners live in denial, unable to admit that the barbarians have been always the neighbors. It never changed. The methods of .ru government never changed and the political whitewashing of it never changed.
PS. Ofc the first victim of Russian system is and has been the Russian citizens, murdered, robbed, brainwashed, dumbed down, manipulated and deprived. What is called by us "Stockholm syndrome" is a default life approach there.
It was always like that. For centuries.
I have heard stories about NKVD methods since childhood. The victims were my family members living in the estern Poland, after it was invaded by Stalin at the very beginnings of WW2.
What was happening before red revolution, during tsars rule, is in the literature.
It is funny how generations of intelligent, well-educated westerners live in denial, unable to admit that the barbarians have been always the neighbors. It never changed. The methods of .ru government never changed and the political whitewashing of it never changed.
PS. Ofc the first victim of Russian system is and has been the Russian citizens, murdered, robbed, brainwashed, dumbed down, manipulated and deprived. What is called by us "Stockholm syndrome" is a default life approach there.
Right. The history of Russia, as fascinating as it is, is the same story again and again for centuries.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journey_from_St._Petersburg_...
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journey_from_St._Petersburg_...
Because admiting wrongdoing of Russia would go in face of their "America bad" mantra.
It is really funny to see western leftist pointing American imperialism here and there and when obvious non-American imperialism start happening all the western leftists are trying to bend over backwards to justify how Russia is not doing imperialism, how SVR and GRU squads can't be compared to what CIA is/was doing. Their doublethink is palpable.
It is really funny to see western leftist pointing American imperialism here and there and when obvious non-American imperialism start happening all the western leftists are trying to bend over backwards to justify how Russia is not doing imperialism, how SVR and GRU squads can't be compared to what CIA is/was doing. Their doublethink is palpable.
This isn't really that inconsistent tbh. Your own country's transgressions should always be a higher concern as you have more moral culpability for them and more leverage to change them.
And one of the very core attributes of modern imperialism is using real faults in other nations to subvert, divide, and discredit local movements. It's hard to condemn another state without inadvertently contributing to your own state's nationalist propaganda.
And one of the very core attributes of modern imperialism is using real faults in other nations to subvert, divide, and discredit local movements. It's hard to condemn another state without inadvertently contributing to your own state's nationalist propaganda.
When lobbyists in Germany advocated for increased cooperation with Russia and against letting Ukraine into NATO because "we Germans have a moral debt towards Russians" - it seems ethical, humble, self-depreciating and anti-imperialistic.
But it was the exact opposite in reality. Notice how Germans hadn't said the same about other eastern european nations before 2022. Despite the fact that other nations were hit just as hard if not harder by Germany in WW2, and unlike Russians - didn't started the WW2 as allies of hitler.
Somehow the debt only applied to the authoritarian militaristic country that has lots of gas, not to its victims.
The historical self-depreciating rhetoric of some pro-russian Germans was used to justify siding with the bully against the victim because it's more profitable and historically it was the "realpolitik" choice.
Yes, imperialism is bad. But sucking up to imperialist regimes just because they aren't your own country isn't the answer. WTF people.
But it was the exact opposite in reality. Notice how Germans hadn't said the same about other eastern european nations before 2022. Despite the fact that other nations were hit just as hard if not harder by Germany in WW2, and unlike Russians - didn't started the WW2 as allies of hitler.
Somehow the debt only applied to the authoritarian militaristic country that has lots of gas, not to its victims.
The historical self-depreciating rhetoric of some pro-russian Germans was used to justify siding with the bully against the victim because it's more profitable and historically it was the "realpolitik" choice.
Yes, imperialism is bad. But sucking up to imperialist regimes just because they aren't your own country isn't the answer. WTF people.
There’s the historical pattern of German imperialism as well, where the sovereignty of peoples and lands between Germany and Russia does not exist. The historical smell is not good. “There is nothing of concern east of Germany except Russia”. Hence CCE countries joined the NATO as soon as they could.
A careful reread of my comment will show that I don't endorse "sucking up to imperialist regimes" of any kind. I am responding to the idea that it is somehow foolish or immoral to respond to your own country's imperialism even in light of the imperialism of other countries.
The point you're making seems good I just don't know why you're trying to make it to me is all.
The point you're making seems good I just don't know why you're trying to make it to me is all.
Especially impressive about westerners is their honesty about the shortcomings of their own nations.
I'm in the west and I'm often the only person in the room who is aware that the US has been murdering children in almost a dozen countries around the globe for the past two decades. Like they are vaguely aware on a surface level but they haven't really conceptualized the fact and say things like "Russias unprecedented invasion!" dramatically and as if they had a moral leg to stand on.
Unintentional collateral death in the pursuit of preventing much bigger tragedies is in no way comparable to an intentional conquest and indiscriminate bombing of civilian targets. Not to mention the direct molestations and mutilations that the author has extensively documented. And of course the many attempted cover ups (culminating in the attempted assassination).
The moral equivocating is absolutely despicable.
Has the US killed children? yes! Was that ever the stated or unstated goal? Never.
The moral equivocating is absolutely despicable.
Has the US killed children? yes! Was that ever the stated or unstated goal? Never.
In the pursuit of preventing much bigger tragedies? I can't speak of my anger rn. The IS is found and fed by America. They indiscriminately kill muslims and non-muslims, they don't behave like muslims at all and for some reason (?) they never touch Israel. All so that you can tell a hecking lie to come and murder our kids and rape our wives, and plunder whatever resources in our hands! To afterwards award the man who destroyed seven countries with a Nobel! I'm once again reminded that there is no modernity, it's medieval age all the way down, all the kings of west war for nothing but their power! We muslims are in no way inclined to harm you, GTFO of our countries!
They behave like Muslims historically did.
No. Muslims did jihad, not terrorism. See the difference directly in a meme from the eyes of a leading Muslim news platform: https://muslimskeptic.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/photo_3...
In addition to that, it's strictly forbidden to plunder or steal, or harm women, children and elderly in the Islamic jihad. Pretty high standards the USA cannot and would not even dream of achieving. Snowden revelations come to mind.
In addition to that, it's strictly forbidden to plunder or steal, or harm women, children and elderly in the Islamic jihad. Pretty high standards the USA cannot and would not even dream of achieving. Snowden revelations come to mind.
Ideals were not always followed in practice. Early Christians were pacifists.
Thank you for this comment.
I would add, contrary to that, physical eradication of certain parts of society has been and is the goal of Russian rulers. (Ukrainian hunger, Ukrainian dams in 1930s - the purge of Ukrainians didn't start February last year)
I would add, contrary to that, physical eradication of certain parts of society has been and is the goal of Russian rulers. (Ukrainian hunger, Ukrainian dams in 1930s - the purge of Ukrainians didn't start February last year)
Westerners are also experts in using language like an expert musician can play an instrument, always impressive to watch.
The slavish apologizing is absolutely risible :)
The US regime has (a) committed repeated genocides including children against Native Americans and black slaves (b) perpetuated the Jim Crow laws including terror, bombings and lynchings against the black population up through the 60s (c) invaded or directly supported lethal coups, dictators and genocides in Guatemala, Chile, Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, Indonesia (d) overthrown governments and participated in assassination plots in South Vietnam, Congo, Iran (e) supported Saudi Arabia in their shameful war in Yemen. An incomplete list to be sure.
It's not that this is worse or better than [some other nation]. It's just that it's bad and pretending that the regime "meant well" is indefensible.
The US regime has (a) committed repeated genocides including children against Native Americans and black slaves (b) perpetuated the Jim Crow laws including terror, bombings and lynchings against the black population up through the 60s (c) invaded or directly supported lethal coups, dictators and genocides in Guatemala, Chile, Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, Indonesia (d) overthrown governments and participated in assassination plots in South Vietnam, Congo, Iran (e) supported Saudi Arabia in their shameful war in Yemen. An incomplete list to be sure.
It's not that this is worse or better than [some other nation]. It's just that it's bad and pretending that the regime "meant well" is indefensible.
Nuance, and context is everything, and you're missing a lot of those in your statement.
Even a drunk driver, who hits a child, is seen differently than a sober driver who purposefully decided to run one down.
Even a drunk driver, who hits a child, is seen differently than a sober driver who purposefully decided to run one down.
>the US has been murdering children in almost a dozen countries around the globe for the past two decades.
Do you want to spell out what countries, specifically, you have in mind here?
Do you want to spell out what countries, specifically, you have in mind here?
Pakistan, Yemen, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria and Somalia from the top of my head.
That isn't to mention CIA backed coups, etc.
Isn't it weird most Americans can't name, much less find on a map, the nations they are at war with?
That isn't to mention CIA backed coups, etc.
Isn't it weird most Americans can't name, much less find on a map, the nations they are at war with?
The most 'amusing' fact here is what a country with 1.3M army doesn't even have any hostile nation at it's borders, so it's forced to literally go to other side of the planet to fight with anyone.
[deleted]
I'm perfectly aware of the US's flaws. What Russia is doing - a war of conquest against a democracy, involving war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide - is not morally equivalent.
I think it’s mostly a matter of scale. The US does all of those things (maybe not genocide). They’re a lot better at whitewashing it.
You’re not the only American in this room to have noticed things like that
After major political changes, such as the February Revolution or the collapse of the Soviet Union, there were brief periods of freedom. But, yeah, most of the time Russian authorities are quite oppressing and power-grabbing (even if not all the instances were fascist in a strict sense).
Almost all major elections since 1996 have been rigged, for example. But many people in the West keep saying that every Russian is accountable for atrocities committed by the Russian government because they "elected" that government.
The rest of Europe (if Russia can be considered as being in Europe) went through centuries of war, revolution, upheaval, debate, and other forms of blood, sweat, and tears... all of it culminating in modern humanist thought. Modern Europeans across the socio-economic spectrum think of themselves as having rights and opinions and so on. That's a novel idea in human history (and one we should all heartily embrace)
Russia had more than it's fair share of heartache, but it is not an outlier in not having been through the Western European developmental pressure cooker.
Russia had more than it's fair share of heartache, but it is not an outlier in not having been through the Western European developmental pressure cooker.
Russia is unique in that it was european enough to be the colonizer not the colonized (so it didn't get modern law from its colonial masters), and yet not european enough to develop a modern approach to human rights by itself.
You say “modern” but we could say “western” as well. There is a well documented gradient in attitudes of elites to autocracy as a style of leadership between Europe and Asia. I.e as Alexander the Great moved east, he took up to the local institutions of totalitarian leadership, and was considered a total dick by his generals due this.
Also traditional example is the feud between Greek city states and Persia (Which is documented in the painstakingly historically accurate movies such as ‘300’).
I’m not saying peoples are predestined to be forever in one system of governance, but the differences predate enlightenment way, way back.
Also traditional example is the feud between Greek city states and Persia (Which is documented in the painstakingly historically accurate movies such as ‘300’).
I’m not saying peoples are predestined to be forever in one system of governance, but the differences predate enlightenment way, way back.
>The rest of Europe (if Russia can be considered as being in Europe) went through centuries of war, revolution, upheaval, debate, and other forms of blood, sweat, and tears... all of it culminating in modern humanist thought.
As Timothy Snyder points out, Europeans didn't stop engaging in imperialist wars because they grew morals and humanist thought, they stopped engaging in imperialist wars because in the 50s and 60s they either lost them all, or knew they couldn't afford to win them.
Russia may or may not undergo the same development, but losing in their war of conquest over Ukraine is a prerequsite to any kind of progress in this area.
As Timothy Snyder points out, Europeans didn't stop engaging in imperialist wars because they grew morals and humanist thought, they stopped engaging in imperialist wars because in the 50s and 60s they either lost them all, or knew they couldn't afford to win them.
Russia may or may not undergo the same development, but losing in their war of conquest over Ukraine is a prerequsite to any kind of progress in this area.
Yep.
For example Winston Churchill lamented deeply the loss of India and considered Gandhi an annoyance.
Another reason was that the American system of rule based relations instituted after second world war meant former colonial masters could still economically utilize the raw inputs from their colonies without risk of losing the colony to another colonial power and hence being cut off from those markets and resources.
Before second world war any territories unable to defend themselves from european powers were more or leas up for grabs - hence you were afraid that giving your colony independence, another colonial power would have simply annexed them, thus you would lose the resources and the market.
The US rule based order was overall good for the world, regardless of so many documented events of behaving as dicks within it.
For example Winston Churchill lamented deeply the loss of India and considered Gandhi an annoyance.
Another reason was that the American system of rule based relations instituted after second world war meant former colonial masters could still economically utilize the raw inputs from their colonies without risk of losing the colony to another colonial power and hence being cut off from those markets and resources.
Before second world war any territories unable to defend themselves from european powers were more or leas up for grabs - hence you were afraid that giving your colony independence, another colonial power would have simply annexed them, thus you would lose the resources and the market.
The US rule based order was overall good for the world, regardless of so many documented events of behaving as dicks within it.
They developed the beginnings of humanism and applied it to themselves long before colonialism even started.
Racist thinking was prevalent and helped justify colonialism and humanism existing at the same time.
But you’re right, if Russia loses, everyone will win, even Russians.
Racist thinking was prevalent and helped justify colonialism and humanism existing at the same time.
But you’re right, if Russia loses, everyone will win, even Russians.
>"It was always like that. For centuries."
Centuries ago all countries were committing atrocities and all kinds of large scale crimes one can imagine. You do not even have to go back that far.
Centuries ago all countries were committing atrocities and all kinds of large scale crimes one can imagine. You do not even have to go back that far.
I'm no assassin but wonder how someone could fail to kill someone with poison. Aren't there a million deadly choices out there that would do the job reliably? Is the FSB security apparatus this incompetent?
Yes.
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/12/21/europe/russia-navalny-poi...
But could be warning as well, ofc. The point is, we don’t know. Whatever the outcome, it’s a show of force.
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/12/21/europe/russia-navalny-poi...
But could be warning as well, ofc. The point is, we don’t know. Whatever the outcome, it’s a show of force.
I guess it's better not to have a body, since it keeps things uncertain and doesn't give law enforcement cause to get involved.
I think its a mixture of incompetence, micromanaging (you need to use very inappropriate radioactive or chemical warfare agents like Novitchok) and indifference (since terror is a major goal).
Here are elite GRU assassins giving an interview to support their cover story: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZatub49aIA
Here are elite GRU assassins giving an interview to support their cover story: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZatub49aIA
Not an expert, just guessing.
In the past they used radioactive poisoning which is pretty easy to trace back and caused collateral damage. That's problematic. Poison is very dependent on dosage and delivery without compromising the agent might be tricky.
In the past they used radioactive poisoning which is pretty easy to trace back and caused collateral damage. That's problematic. Poison is very dependent on dosage and delivery without compromising the agent might be tricky.
There seem to be a lot of people who survive. Navally, the Skipals.
And Russia I think is the only country with a government poisoning lab and policy to do this stuff? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poison_laboratory_of_the_Sovie...
And Russia I think is the only country with a government poisoning lab and policy to do this stuff? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poison_laboratory_of_the_Sovie...
Any time I heard about Novaya Gazeta, it was always them doing incredibly brave journalism. Sad to hear they got shut down for good.
They moved to https://novayagazeta.eu/
They didn't really "move", it a different (though related) paper that lost some journalists from the old one who were unable or unwilling to emigrate and are kept silenced by fear for their personal safety. It is managed by a different editor (promoted from the old paper) and has a quite different feel to it.
The journalists that have been killed in/by Russia in the past 20 years either revealed corruption close to Putin's inner circle or human rights violations by Russian forces in Chechnya.
It was inevitable that they would also begin to target journalists who revealed human rights violations by Russian forces in Ukraine.
It was inevitable that they would also begin to target journalists who revealed human rights violations by Russian forces in Ukraine.
This is really scary, disturbing and infuriating.
> I corresponded about my trip to Munich over Facebook Messenger. It’s not secure and I knew that
Technically, this is intriguing. Is Facebook compromised, or do you think they compromised her phone, or the phone or whoever she was talking to?
Technically, this is intriguing. Is Facebook compromised, or do you think they compromised her phone, or the phone or whoever she was talking to?
Facebook work with cops all around the world, might as well be an official request from russian internal affairs.
Messenger does not yet have the same level of end-to-end encryption as WhatsApp, but they are working towards that.
They had voice recordings of her, so it's unlikely it was facebook messenger
probably MATE, not MITM
tokamak(4)
ot1138(4)
>“That is what drives us crazy,” the detective said. “You come here and act like you’re on vacation. Like this is some paradise. It doesn’t even occur to you to keep yourself safe. We have political killings here. The Russian special services are active in Germany. Your carelessness, yours and your colleagues, knows no bounds.”
It's very difficult to reconcile what seems like the safety of Europe with the reality of a war that is being fought online as much as on the ground. Journalists have always been targeted by authoritarian regimes, but the connectedness of the modern world makes them dangerous even outside after leaving the country. Clearly this is what the Russian state believes.