Another Russian Assassination

[Gaaz]

He was testifying against Viktor Yanukovych. So of course he was going to be in danger. Why be in a country a former president left then testify against him? Just because he got removed from power doesn't mean he doesn't have any friends left?

Look at it from another point of view - cost and benefit to all sides involved.

Putin
Let us assume that Parshov was indeed a sleeper agent in an anti russian organization (think in terms of a US assasin / agent in AlQuaeda or Al Nusra ranks). Would he be valuable? Immensely! Add to that more hysteria from russophobes, as well as additional leverage in continuing to enforce sanctions against Russia. So the cost is extremely high. What would the benefits be? Killing one of the numerous "witnesses" against an old Ukrainian president that does not control anything anymore gives Russia nothing. Voronenkov was an ex politician and had nothing to do with military, so counter intelligence is also unlikely.

Yanukovich (ex president of the Ukraine):
Cost: Pretty high. As is with Russia, it involves trading a sleeper agent that could be used as a valuable asset to secure position in Russia (due to trading intelligence for favours, money, influence) to eliminate one of the witnesses in a court he can simply ignore. Even if Yanukovich is sentenced to death by the official Ukraine court (although death penalty does not exist there officially, but lets assume that it does), he can simply ignore it and live happily in Russia, and even travel all over the world. Even EU countries do extradition to Ukraine only on the basis of goodwill and unofficially. So he is probaply safe unless he drives into actual ukrainian territory. So gains for Yanukovich are also marginal at best, while costs are probably the highest of all parties potentially involved. We can assume that Russia might have sleeper agents in hostile organizations. But for a person out of power and in exile, they would be much more valuable, no?

Ukraine / Poroshenko (current president):
Costs are minimal. National Guard is one of his pet projects and has an abundance of fanatics. More so, these are mostly anti Russian, so persuasion of killing an ex russian politician would not be a problem. Especially considering that the actual killer (Parshov) was in the war zone, combating pro russian forces and was wounded in battle. Was Voronenko (victim) valuable as a witness? I seriously doubt that. This court is a farce and has no actual power in terms of inforcing it's decision. More so, the so called witnesses are numerous, including members of Yanukovich's government when he was in power.
Benefits include another spike in anti russan publicity, another trump (no pun intended) card in favour of anti russian coalition and sanctions. If by this murder removal of sanctions is postponed even by another month or a week, this means huge amounts of money for all parties involved. This is valuable! Valuable for Ukraine in terms of improving its own economic situation (even by a little) as a whole, or several businesses that gain benefits from sanctions on Russia in particular. More so, this could be a favour for some third party that needs to keep anti russian movement rolling in Europe or the US. And again, this is valuable, it can be traded.

I am not saying that I am 100% correct. But most of these things can be traced to their original source by following a cost-benefit reasoning, just like in any criminal investigation. And to me it looks like Ukraine has more to gain from this assasination than Russia, Putin or Yanukovich.

[Cybran]

Like do you people believe this? Couldn't it be that a group of journalists were genuinely interested in uncovering the situation and Putin just happened to be related to the case, because he is the encarnation of corruption?

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/04/12/swiss...ma-papers.html

In an exclusive interview Tuesday from Munich, Birkenfeld said he doesn't think the source of the 11 million documents stolen from a Panamanian law firm should automatically be considered a whistleblower like himself. Instead, he said, the hacking of the Panama City-based firm, called Mossack Fonseca, could have been done by a U.S. intelligence agency.

"The CIA I'm sure is behind this, in my opinion," Birkenfeld said.

Birkenfeld pointed to the fact that the political uproar created by the disclosures have mainly impacted countries with tense relationships with the United States. "The very fact that we see all these names surface that are the direct quote-unquote enemies of the United States, Russia, China, Pakistan, Argentina and we don't see one U.S. name. Why is that?" Birkenfeld said. "Quite frankly, my feeling is that this is certainly an intelligence agency operation."

The firm is a small player in offshore tax evasion. Happens to have no big US clients. Only damages enemies of US government.

[NED funded]

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/04/12/swiss...ma-papers.html



The firm is a small player in offshore tax evasion. Happens to have no big US clients. Only damages enemies of US government.

You just googled that. But whatever, so this guy comes in and gives his opinion and now that is enough to prove it was the CIA behind it?

[May90]

You just googled that. But whatever, so this guy comes in and gives his opinion and now that is enough to prove it was the CIA behind it?

You forgot the rules a bit. Putin is innocent until proven guilty; this doesn't apply to anyone on the West!

[Shalcker]

Rat him out about what exactly? The European public is already numb by the media and western political outrage. Panama leaks by the CIA didn't stick. MH17 didn't stick. Crimea didn't stick.


What did this guy have that would have been worse?

Btw, Voronenkov apparently was in Panama papers...

[Orbitus]

How many of those guys "going to rat out Putin" lived happily many years in London? Writing books and all?

As a rule, it doesn't. There are some murky areas with those who did intelligence work then defected, but absolute majority of political opponents are perfectly safe (see Navalny, or Kasparov, or any other).

No actual proof of interference have been presented so far, only whole load of "allegations"

Also still wasn't proven. And if they did, they mostly did it because they hated Clinton more, not because they somehow colluded with Trump.

As in "not at all".

Sorry, but you keep sucking on Put'n's cock. I know you are a Russian and you love your dictator.

[Ripster42]

More like:
Russia: 0
Rest of the world: 0
Political opposition to Putin: ~15

Makes it a little more obvious.

Why are you forgetting about Best Korea?

[Cybran]

You just googled that. But whatever, so this guy comes in and gives his opinion and now that is enough to prove it was the CIA behind it?

Organized Crime and Corruption and Reporting Project gets money from USAID (which is the civilian section of the CIA). Toner who was a State Department spokesperson already admitted that.

It's a sad joke how low Obama had to stoop and still nothing.

[Shalcker]

Sorry, but you keep sucking on Put'n's cock. I know you are a Russian and you love your dictator.

Sorry but you have no facts to support for your pre-determined conclusion here.

[Orbitus]

Sorry but you have no facts to support for your pre-determined conclusion here.

Except I do, I just don't want to waste my time with a known Russian and Putin sympathizer.

You said there was no evidence that Russia interfered in our election, 17 intelligence agencies disagree with you.

[Shalcker]

Except I do, I just don't want to waste my time with a known Russian and Putin sympathizer.

Says he while wasting time with exact same person...

You said there was no evidence that Russia interfered in our election, 17 intelligence agencies disagree with you.

And still provided no evidence at all.

[Orbitus]

Says he while wasting time with exact same person...

And still provided no evidence at all.

I will believe the intelligence community over some Putin apologist. Sorry, but you aren't going to win.

[Shalcker]

I will believe the intelligence community over some Putin apologist. Sorry, but you aren't going to win.

Everyone believing their own propaganda is default mode of human beings in general.

[Orbitus]

Everyone believing their own propaganda is default mode of human beings in general.

Here is the ODNI report of Russian meddling in our election last year. https://www.wired.com/2017/01/feds-d...ince-skeptics/

You said there wasn't any evidence, but there is a 25 page report that says otherwise.

[May90]

Here is the ODNI report of Russian meddling in our election last year. https://www.wired.com/2017/01/feds-d...ince-skeptics/

You said there wasn't any evidence, but there is a 25 page report that says otherwise.

*waiting for a whataboutist response*

[Orbitus]

*waiting for a whataboutist response*

Me too. I know he is going to make some bullshit excuse saying that Wired isn't a source or that the ODNI was biased or whatever. But what do you expect from a Putin apologist?

[May90]

Me too. I know he is going to make some bullshit excuse saying that Wired isn't a source or that the ODNI was biased or whatever. But what do you expect from a Putin apologist?

Either that, or he will just bail out on this one, wait for a couple of pages so everyone forgets about this question - and then charges back in with some other accusation.

[Shalcker]

Here is the ODNI report of Russian meddling in our election last year. https://www.wired.com/2017/01/feds-d...ince-skeptics/

You said there wasn't any evidence, but there is a 25 page report that says otherwise.

Freaking title of your article says "won't convince skeptics"; did you actually read it, or just link random articles?

Do you understand why it has this title?

- - - Updated - - -

Either that, or he will just bail out on this one, wait for a couple of pages so everyone forgets about this question - and then charges back in with some other accusation.

Why do you bully Orbitus? :P

[Orbitus]

Freaking title of your article says "won't convince skeptics"; did you actually read it, or just link random articles?

Do you understand why it has this title?

- - - Updated - - -

Why do you bully Orbitus? :P

Because you are a skeptic. Because it is obvious you didn't read the article or the ODNI report. Such a cop out bullshit.

[Shalcker]

Because you are a skeptic. Because it is obvious you didn't read the article or the ODNI report. Such a cop out bullshit.

Do you understand why it doesn't convince skeptics?

...i'll give you a hint, because released report lacks certain something. And officials ask you to believe that stuff not in report exits and is much more substantial.

And belief, unlike facts, is a choice. Choice most people make according to "what's best for their 'team'". As you do now.