The Proof, The Whole Proof, And Anything But The Proof

I recently wrote a rather scathing article on a disturbing trend that is becoming the norm within government and media outlets.

https://steemit.com/russia/@bigtig/arsenic-and-old-lies-a-tale-too-poisonous-to-make-up

This trend involves making grandiose claims which often fly in the face of any reason. These claims are either framed as statements of fact, or even more disturbingly, as proof to support the statement (but no-one ever gets around to providing the aforementioned proof).

The example I cited previously, concerned the poisoning of 2 members of the Skripal family in the United Kingdom.
This incident was met with histrionic reactions by both parliamentarians and media outlets, in the United Kingdom - and beyond.

Boris Johnson -UK Foreign Secretary and wannabe scarecrow looking for a brain -has been in fine form; making baseless allegation after outrageous accusation.

This, in and of itself, is terrifying. These inane outbursts are compounded when the allegations are proven to be untrue, yet there is no withdrawal from the position, or retraction of the accusation.

This has got to stop!

Let’s look at the Skripal case again.

Theresa - “Please think I’m as tough as Maggie”- May has stated that this was a Russian attack.

Boris Johnson doubled down by saying that Vladimir Putin knew about, and in fact ordered, this poisoning.

Question: Where is the proof?

These things have been stated as facts, so they should be able to show us the evidence.

If they have proof, this should not be a problem. If there is no proof, then they have no business making such allegations.

We have been told that the poison was planted in Yulia Skripal’s luggage in Moscow. Of course, no facts were provided to support this allegation.

Shockingly, within 36 hours of that baseless allegation, “intelligence sources” were reporting that the nerve agent may have been delivered via the air conditioning in the Skripal’s car.

They can have it one way or the other, but not both.

Unless Yulia Skripal has a luggage allowance that accommodated her taking a family sedan on the plane with her, the two allegations are mutually exclusive.

The poison cannot have been in the luggage from Moscow and also in the ventilation system of the car in the UK.
Whatever the case may be, once again we see that there was no evidence to support these statements; only wild supposition and extant prejudice.

Meanwhile, the Police in the UK have stated that an investigation may take months to conclude.

Why are they are bothering with an investigation? According to Theresa May, Boris Johnson, and most of the UK Parliament, the case is proven and Russia is guilty.

It must have been proven and Russia must be guilty because punishment has already been dished out. Diplomats have been expelled. Punitive measures have been taken to punish the guilty.

So, why bother having an investigation if Russia’s guilt is already established?

Could it be because nothing has been proven?

Could it be because no guilt has been established?

Could it be because, (despite the torrent of accusations that have been made against Russia), no-one in the UK knows who was responsible for these attacks?

The minor issue of a lack of evidence has not stopped the UK Government from passing judgment and (literally) prejudicially punishing Russia.

Theresa May stated that Russia must be guilty because “only Russia” had the formula for this poison.

As has already been identified, the list of people with the formula (and perhaps examples of the poison) is probably longer than the list of people who have no access. Would Russia have access to the formula? Most likely, but they have never denied that.

What the UK has been reticent to explore is that a myriad of other countries, including the UK itself, also have the formula.

Anyway, blaming Russia on the basis that the ‘alleged’ poison used may have been originally developed by the Soviet Union, makes as much sense as blaming the UK every time someone is killed by automatic gunfire, because the British invented the original (Maxim) machine gun.

Once again, there is no foundation to the UK’s accusations. It is simply a contrived establishment narrative, presented as fact by a fawning media who are either too scared, or too stupid to do their job properly.

What has been most frightening throughout this debacle is the way that other countries have leapt to support the UK’s insane rhetoric as though it was founded on absolute truth.

Most recently, Boris Johnson has repeated his spurious accusations against Russia, regarding their “haystack of lies”.
Ignoring the fact that the only thing that provably sits below a haystack is Boris Johnson himself, once more he was long on rhetoric and strong on prejudice, but utterly devoid of supporting evidence.

Boris Johnson has stated that he has evidence that within the last decade, Russia produced chemical weapons for the purposes of assassination.

What a convenient moment to divulge this! Of course, the evidence that Boris Johnson alluded to has not actually been produced but we know it is real because he said so.

If this information has been known for so long, however, why is it only being addressed now? Given that it would breach various international laws, why did Mr Johnson not choose to confront Russia earlier?

Keeping this information quiet would make Mr Johnson equally culpable if any untoward act were committed against UK or allied interests. Surely he would be compelled to speak out at the earliest possible moment if he possessed such critical intelligence?

Despite this, he has apparently not bothered to do so until this very convenient and timely moment.

Could it be because, like so much of the evidence that Johnson and co have relied upon or claim to have, it is either wrong or simply does not exist?

Once again, evidence is talked about, but when push comes to shove, no proof is provided, again!

Theresa May pointed out today that Russia had the capability and the motive to undertake this attack. Any proof of what that motive might be was, as usual, missing.

On the subject of motive, it is astounding that the UK Government has not seemed willing to explore the fact that, as a double agent, Mr Skripal betrayed the identities of hundreds of government agents. These names were given to the UK authorities and, most likely, to the Russian authorities.

Far from Russia being the only candidate with motive, one has to assume that there are potentially hundreds of suspects - none of whom are the Russian Government. There is no doubt that people exist who might have an axe to grind with Mr Skripal and who might also have the resources to pursue such a grudge.

I am not saying that Russia is innocent. I am not saying they are guilty. I have no proof either way.

I am saying that without proof of wrongdoing, by any civilized, democratic standard, Russia should be considered innocent until someone can provide proof to the contrary.

The UK has yet to produce a single piece of evidence to support any number of accusations that they have made.

Their own accusations have, in some cases, been contradicted by their own people, or have simply collapsed.

From this, it seems obvious that they do not have any proof to justify their allegations and accusations.

Despite this, on the basis of nothing more than innuendo, prejudice, and gossip, they have passed judgment on a foreign nation and summarily punished them.

All this has been done without a single shred of proof, or a solitary objection from the news agencies who are supposed to fight for the truth.

Tell me again how democracy and justice are alive and well and how we are protected from all- powerful figures making false accusations.

Remind me how, in a court of law, no-one has the power to simply allege something without proof.

Tell me how I am innocent until proven guilty and how I will not be punished for something unless it can be proven beyond reasonable doubt.

Please, tell me all about these wondrous things.

I like a good fairytale!