this post was submitted on 31 Mar 2025
1044 points (86.9% liked)

196

5051 readers
2156 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.


Rule: You must post before you leave.



Other rules

Behavior rules:

Posting rules:

NSFW: NSFW content is permitted but it must be tagged and have content warnings. Anything that doesn't adhere to this will be removed. Content warnings should be added like: [penis], [explicit description of sex]. Non-sexualized breasts of any gender are not considered inappropriate and therefore do not need to be blurred/tagged.

Also, when sharing art (comics etc.) please credit the creators.

If you have any questions, feel free to contact us on our matrix channel or email.

Other 196's:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
1044
We're at war rule (lemmy.world)
submitted 4 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) by SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world to c/196@lemmy.world
 

Edit: The admins have told me if I don't say this was an accident then they will remove the post.

It's is verifiably an accident. It is also extremely convenient for the people she threatened.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] A_Very_Big_Fan@lemmy.world 97 points 4 days ago (5 children)

I'm like 99% sure the US government is capable of discreetly poisoning someone to have an epileptic seizure

[–] kingofras@lemmy.world 65 points 4 days ago (3 children)

If you think GRU doesn’t have activated operatives operating on US soil, you’re dream’in.

Seizures aka “you know we did it but you can’t prove it” is Vladdy’s trademark.

The US fingerprint is more like the 2 Boing whistleblowers.

[–] peoplebeproblems@midwest.social 34 points 4 days ago (1 children)

To be fair - most assassinations by Putin have a much more obvious tie.

She didn't fall out of a window, she didn't get exposed to Novichok, and it doesn't sound like polonium.

That being said, still could have been assassination but by other Russian mobsters.

[–] anomnom@sh.itjust.works 4 points 3 days ago

Sadly, it could have been the stress of losing her career and possible threats in her future that exacerbated her condition.

Or really it could have just been shitty luck too.

Let’s stay focused on the real conspiracies with Trump, musk, vote manipulation (look at mail in ballot rejections), and Putin’s digital army garbage.

[–] jrs100000@lemmy.world 18 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Hes usually much less subtle than than a seizure, particularly for a victim with a documented history of seizures.

[–] in4apenny@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 4 days ago (2 children)

An assassination doesn't have to be by a gun or poisoning, it can be done by stealing and/or replacing her seizure medication.

[–] jrs100000@lemmy.world 6 points 4 days ago

Either one of those should leave evidence in an autopsy and in a bottle at the scene. Putin doesnt normally kill people like that though, at least when its a revenge killing. He wants everyone to know that he did it, that there is nothing anyone can do about it, and that anyone could be next if they cross him.

[–] x4740N@lemm.ee 3 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Replacing or stealing medication does leave evidence

[–] x4740N@lemm.ee 0 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Smart assassin's get as much info as they can on their victim and use methods to make it look like natural death

Assassin find out they have seizures, they make it look like death by seizures

[–] Korhaka@sopuli.xyz 11 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Pretty sure polonium and novichok is their style. Very fucking obvious.

[–] alvvayson@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 4 days ago (1 children)

They use those things when they want the world to know it was them. The number of countries with access to Polonium or Novichok is extremely limited, and both are very easy and obvious to detect in an autopsy.

When they don't want the world to know, they make it look like a suicide or accident, e.g. falling out of windows.

[–] aaron@infosec.pub -1 points 4 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)
[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 35 points 4 days ago (3 children)

Evidently the family had said she had a history, so they would have had to be playing a long game. I suppose they could have been opportunistic about her condition to make a plausible death, but a plausible death to someone no longer involved in any inconvenient cases doesn't help any such cases nor does it "send a message".

Sometimes things just happen.

[–] Asafum@feddit.nl 21 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I'm more than willing to accept the "things just happen" theory considering the timeline we live in. Pieces of shit like Trump and McConnell live forever and get everything they want while good people die in their 40s.

[–] CthuluVoIP@lemmy.world 13 points 4 days ago

Shitbirds only get stressed when they’re worried they’re going to be held accountable. Everything else is an act. Stress is a killer, and the amount they feel is minuscule compared to anyone who gives a fuck.

[–] frostysauce@lemmy.world 3 points 3 days ago

But, but, if things just happen how could I show I'm smarter than everyone else by figuring out the REAL cause? Nope, must be a conspiracy.

[–] YarHarSuperstar@lemmy.world 2 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Not necessarily if they just knew what triggered it. Especially if they could trigger a bad one somehow

[–] Tinidril@midwest.social 6 points 4 days ago (2 children)

You missed the point that they have no motive to put effort into making it look natural. She was no longer a threat, so an accidental death does nothing for them. They could have killed her to "send a message" but that would be undone by making it look like natural causes.

[–] tacobellhop@midwest.social 2 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Bad people dont just wipe their hands of enemies when they stop. Until they stop breathing.

[–] Tinidril@midwest.social 3 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Bad people typically do bad things because they provide some perceived benefit. I have no doubt that Russia would kill her for the benefit of sending a message, but they wouldn't try so hard to make it look like an accident.

[–] tacobellhop@midwest.social 0 points 4 days ago

You would if you wanted to leave alive and make it look suspicious enough it could have been anybody. The country she represented has a lot of enemies all over the world.

It’s such a trope it’s in like every fake spy movie. If you get caught we don’t know you.

[–] Supervisor194@lemmy.world 0 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

Well they do have a motive to make it look natural, they're still actively fishing for plausible deniability, they're not going to go throwing people out of windows here. If she had a history of seizures, they without question knew it and could leverage it into unaliving her. The idea that she was resigned and no longer any kind of threat is naive, she could be in possession of a lot of damaging intel, given her activities.

I'm not saying this is definitively what happened, I'm just saying that dismissing it outright is probably too optimistic. Some consideration should be given to the fact that a) she was young, b) she went after Russian interests and c) she's dead.

Even if they were to find something in the autopsy though, I doubt we will ever hear anything other than "natural causes" because America is fully a Russian vassal state.

[–] Glytch@lemmy.world 6 points 4 days ago (1 children)

unaliving her.

You don't need to use Newspeak to bypass filters here. It's okay to say killing or murdering or assassinating

[–] Supervisor194@lemmy.world -2 points 4 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

I didn't use the word because I was trying to bypass filters. I like the word.

[–] Glytch@lemmy.world 0 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Plusgood, comrade, BB would be proud of you keeping your prolefeed clean of crimethink.

[–] Supervisor194@lemmy.world 0 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I'm literally saying the Russians had a reason to kill this woman and could have done so, but OK comrade.

[–] Glytch@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I wasn't commenting on that, just your advertising-algorithm-authorized Newspeak

[–] Supervisor194@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)
[–] Glytch@lemmy.world 0 points 3 days ago (1 children)

So why bring it up as a response?

[–] Supervisor194@lemmy.world 0 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Why not? Why do you feel compelled to apply peer pressure to make sure other users' language conforms to that which you approve? Who can say.

Edit: perhaps I'm just going about this all wrong. Let me ask you: are you trying to help me? Do you think my life would be improved if I used the word "assassinate" in this context instead of "unalived?" Or is it just that it grates on your nerves so much to see people use terms that are commonly used to get around filters that you feel obliged to correct me so I won't do it in the future, materially improving your life? Because this issue seems to be really important to you and I'd like this conversation to end amicably. Maybe you can convince me why it's in my best interest to not use this word and words like it.

[–] Glytch@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

It grates on my nerves because it's a capitulation to capitalist censorship. The only reason "unalive" started gaining prominence is because YouTube and tiktok find mentions of death and killing distasteful and will demonetize and hide videos and channels that use those words. It just bothers me how sanitized online discourse is getting and "unalive" is a particularly childish version of that. A woman died, potentially by assassination, and you chose a cutesy weasel word to describe it, that rubbed me the wrong way.

[–] Supervisor194@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Well, you've made an assumption and I get it now, but it's wrong.

Aside from Lemmy and Reddit, and mostly Lemmy these days, I'm not on any social media at all. I've never been on TikTok. I quit Facebook a year after I joined it - horrified by what it was doing - in 2007. I've never been on Twitter, I've never been on Twitch or Instagram, I've never been on any site where I had to avoid a filter, ever. In my life. Before reddit it was something awful and before that usenet. I'm fucking old.

So I didn't use the word because I am capitulating to capitalist censorship. I used the word here - and iirc I have used it in the past - as what I thought was simply a wry euphemism implying state-sponsored spycraft/murder. I consider the word assassination to be too "bottom-up" of a term - citizens assassinate presidents, not the other way around. Murder is too generic, murder is what criminals do or people do in crimes of passion. So I used "unalived" because I'm talking about a state actor doing something to a citizen.

I did not know that it carried any other meaning, nor that it came to prominence from circumventing censorship algorithms. I would have had no way to know.

Edit: I would never use some goofy shit like "seggs" for "sex" ffs, so I do see people here and on reddit who are in the habit of circumventing filters - but there's nothing about "unalived" that screamed anything other than "wry euphemism" to me.

[–] Glytch@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I did not know that it carried any other meaning, nor that it came to prominence from circumventing censorship algorithms. I would have had no way to know.

From one old guy to another: Are you unable to access urban dictionary or any other online dictionary? You're talking about how long you've been on the internet and yet you say you "would have had no way to know"? C'mon dude Duck Duck Go exists.

You made assumptions about what its connotations were and got them wrong and I mocked you for it. That's really all that happened here.

[–] Supervisor194@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

Saying "I would have no way to know" is not the same thing as "I'm a moron and can't look shit up." You have to think you don't know what something means before you're going to go look it up.

I never looked up unalived, because I didn't know it had some stupid context that would set somebody off and it's meaning is plain. If you think that makes me an idiot, then I guess that's just how it has to be. I think you should maybe relax a little.

im like 99% sure that they wouldnt bother.

[–] ShinkanTrain@lemmy.ml 9 points 4 days ago

The plans would have leaked out by now lmao

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world -1 points 3 days ago (2 children)

The word RUSSIAN was plastered before you like 9 times and you came to the conclusion "USA DID THIS"

[–] A_Very_Big_Fan@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago

I mean... Yeah, dude. Have you seriously not noticed that our current administration is in bed with Russia?

[–] peteyestee@feddit.org -1 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

The players are on the same team regardless of nationality. The war is beyond nations, but nations are a tool to forward the war. Humanity vs the soulless. This war is bigger than borders.