Thread by @Qoppa999

Better title:
How Bellingcat produced a lot of hot air and utterly destroyed their own storyline on the Czech spy case!

bellingcat.com/news/uk-and-eu…

The aim of the article is to bolster the rationale for why on earth would Russian intelligence blow up a munition depot in Czechia in 2014 (as the evidence-free "hypothesis" runs).

Answer: because the weapons were destined for Ukraine.

Alas, the Bulgarian arms dealer EMCO (who owned at the time parts of the munitions stored in the Czech depot by operator Imex Group) denied they were intended for export to Ukraine.

So, to save their narrative, Bellingcat turn to two anonymous (!) sources "close to Ukraine military procurement" (!) -- who promptly affirm that EMCO was the only effective provider for the special munitions urgently needed by Ukraine ....

From the correspondence between Imex and EMCO published by Bellingcat, however, it emerges that 1) those specific munitions were not even destroyed by the blast in October 2014; - 2) EMCO had no intention to sell them at the time!

Oops!

Instead of realising that the Ukraine connection - which was never more than a mere speculation - has thoroughly collapsed, Bellingcat now engage in more idle hypothesising: so maybe it was a preventative measure; or else GRU may have been just misinformed ....
🧐🤡🙃

This is a stunning and instructive example for what happens when you start with your conclusion and then make the evidence "fit" it:

you'll unwittingly and blindly present evidence that actually undermines your case!