Nor the Conservative Politicians, so your point is? Putin is not making these allegations and is asking for the correct existing protocol to be implemented, but you and others don't want that, do you?
Why not?
Brexit, for once some facts.
- Thread starter flecc
- Start date
Why not?
Halleluya! behold the monster she's creating! (nice little earner though)
How is exporting weapons grade Nuclear material to Russia not a treasonable act?
I have been reading these comments with an increasing sense of bewilderment. Without not even the slightest shread of evidence some of you are accusing your pm of murder for political gain..talk about trolling.
Is your sense of hatred so acute that any semblence of common sense must be jettisoned?
Being sceptical about the motives of those one elects to power is sensible but this type of discourse is not.
In the actual case under question Who benefits from the poisoning? .
Russian interests of course. In many cases the simplest explanation is often the correct one. There are plenty of scenarios in which russian engagement would be of benefit. Revenge ,retribution, plausible denial, a warning to others
Are Russian interests prepared to kill people in other countries without declaration of war ... yes.
Was this a bungled attempt? Maybe perhaps there were others more sucessul . Had the father been found a few hours later dead on a bench it might well have been attributed to a heart attack.
Really where, when and who did that? be specific
the only reference I have found was Zlatans comments
"
And are you conspiracy theorists actually trying to say our government arranged this poisoning to make labour look unelectable. That is absolutely utterly barmy .
This government couldn't run a whelk stall, so you are always telling us. They cant enter negotiations without telling adversaries all they need to know...but somehow they can poison people in broad daylight and keep it all under wraps...I dont think so."
And my response was..
"
That last paragraph makes me wonder what you have been drinking
Care to explain what you actually mean?
Are you accusing the Government of poisoning people? no one else has,have they?
once again your imagination is running riot.
Last edited:
If Corbyn's comments in the house were correct why has this occurred? ( Quote from Times)
"A string of Labour backbenchers, including Yvette Cooper, Ben Bradshaw and Hilary Benn, then intervened to offer their backing to May, in what appeared to be pointed responses to Corbyn’s stance."
Daniel. Excellent post.
Yet again Labour in complete disarray because of Corbyn and or his spokesman.
Tories have been relatively united. Voting public next election remember all this. My point throughout has not actually been to point out guilt of Putin ( agreed its not proven either way, but chances are he,s guilty) its been Corbyn's and Labours stance on matter, both in comments and their unnecessary associations with Putin/ Russia. ( Galloway yesterday for example)
They are proving themselves split, confused and unelectable.
There is plenty of criticism of May on here but can you imagine what would be going on if Corbyn were in charge.
"A string of Labour backbenchers, including Yvette Cooper, Ben Bradshaw and Hilary Benn, then intervened to offer their backing to May, in what appeared to be pointed responses to Corbyn’s stance."
Daniel. Excellent post.
Yet again Labour in complete disarray because of Corbyn and or his spokesman.
Tories have been relatively united. Voting public next election remember all this. My point throughout has not actually been to point out guilt of Putin ( agreed its not proven either way, but chances are he,s guilty) its been Corbyn's and Labours stance on matter, both in comments and their unnecessary associations with Putin/ Russia. ( Galloway yesterday for example)
They are proving themselves split, confused and unelectable.
There is plenty of criticism of May on here but can you imagine what would be going on if Corbyn were in charge.
Last edited:
On here, yesterday, you and Tom.( and others suggesting May organised it)
Just read the posts OG.
Last edited:
I did and the subject was only raised by you!, nobody else.
Time you stopped doing this distorting of the facts.
Zlatan the only person who mentioned it was YOU, and I called you out about it as my recent post just now explains.
You really must get back to reality, and not elaborate on other peoples statement to try to make them say what you want them to.
the only comment I can find was this one of tillson's
"This unbelievably clumsy and amateurish attempt to kill someone provides far too many opportunities and advantages in certain quarters, and that makes me very suspicious indeed.
And what I may ask has that to do with Tom and I?
Hells teeth you really need to read the contributions to the thread and note who is making them, if you keep this up you could lose all credibility (not much to risk I know)
UK and Russia relations are damaged by this incident.
Putin, TM and JC all lose something.
Gavin Williamson is the clear winner.
Actually the USA has to export it's nuclear material it wants reprocessed to Russia for that, so the UK doing it as well would be seen as ok.
The US position results from SALT talks years ago when the Russians as the USSR then agreed to greater limitation of nuclear weapon numbers than the USA in exchange for the USA not having the ability to reprocess, Russia doing that for them. In strategic terms at the time the USA thought it a smart deal, but over time it seems to have been better for the Russians, ensuring a US dollar income flow regardless of sanctions.
The UK and Russia are the world's leading reprocessors, and Russia also has some use for the weapons grade material in their BN800 fast breeder reactor, the only active fast breeder type in the world now.
.
We in the UK have a PM who has been sabre-rattling for some time in an attempt to divert her failings both as a former Home Sec and as a PM.
The tory party is divided over the 'Brexit' issue and May's Premiership currently hangs by a thread. The Labour party is also split over 'Brexit' with the 'pink tory/Blairite' faction seizing an opportunity to exhibit a deal of sham patriotism because Jeremy Corbyn's speech in the Commons failed to condemn Russia as the Prime Minister did.
Those New Labour relics forming the 'anyone but Corbyn' camp which has on more than one occasion attempted to unseat the party leader (and failed miserably), have no more right to attack Russia than you have in determining which opinions are appropriate in these pages and which are not.
Tom
Usually when a person or state is innocent of a crime,they do their best to try to prove their innocence. Russia has tried to dismiss the poisoning rather than disprove it.
KudosDave
KudosDave
Back to the thread,the government have sent civil servants around the big importers/exporters and couriers/truckers to discuss something in secret,the companies have been forced to sign NDO's,non disclosure orders.
It wont take long for the content of those meetings to become public knowledge.
My guess,the government is panicking....no deal Brexit is starting to look like a possibility,perhaps they want all the paperwork to be completed at the shipper,with no customs checks....trusted trader sysyem.
Will that work????
KudosDave
It wont take long for the content of those meetings to become public knowledge.
My guess,the government is panicking....no deal Brexit is starting to look like a possibility,perhaps they want all the paperwork to be completed at the shipper,with no customs checks....trusted trader sysyem.
Will that work????
KudosDave
I cannot see how Russia can disprove TM's accusation without having access to any evidence or the case being presented to an international institution.
The case against Mr Putin was much, much stronger in the Litvinenko case.
He met with Russia's envoy, traces of Polonium 210 were found etc.
The accuser must provide proof of guilt, that's how it works in this country. There are a couple of exceptions, for instance, if accused of driving without insurance, the accused must prove that they had insurance at the time they were driving.
The thought occurs that it is going to be hard to prove either way, don't you think?
And remember they have asked for the Protocol to be observed, which is not "Dismissing it" is it?
Not really, Russia has asked for a sample so they can check the validity of the accusation. We've ignored that entirely justified request, so by refusing to supply the evidence of guilt we have in law conceded they are right and are innocent.
Our CPS and police forces have been currently under fire for exactly the same, failing to disclose evidence, thus calling into question many cases.
.
I take your point Zlatan, but we must be very careful to only point accusing fingers at other nations when we are certain of the facts. You must agree that very little in the way of evidence has been forthcoming.
Basically, an attempted murder has taken place on two people who we suspect could be enemies of Russia and / or maybe someone else. We know they have been poisoned with a substance that Russia developed and could now be in the possession of an unknown number of people.
Transpose this to the following scenario: Someone who double crossed you and humiliated you a few years ago is found dead with a stab wound to the chest. A forensic pathologist determines that the weapon used was a Stanley Fatmax FMHTO-62621 Flared Bolster Screwdriver. From records held, it can be shown that you bought one of these a few years ago.
I would say that there is certainly enough evidence for the police to arrest you and bring you in for questioning. (equivalent: Formal request for an explanation via The Chemical Weapons Convention)
There certainly isn't enough evidence to charge you. (equivalent: May has said Russia has done it).
To convict you would be ridiculous . (equivalent: May announced that she was going to pass sentence by taking action against Russia)
To pass sentence on you would be a total miscarriage. (equivalent: She has expelled Russian diplomats)
Would you be happy to be convicted on such evidence?
They haven't even metaphorically brought Putin / Russia in for questioning. Russia have gone straight from suspect to convicted and sentenced criminal without any of the process in-between. As I see it, that is all that Corbyn has said he would like to see happen, some dialogue via the appropriate channels and proper process.
It may be that Putin's Russia is responsible, but May's approach is a shambles, but at least she is consistent in that regard. As for Tommy Cooper & Mr Benn, would you expect anything else? Ask them again in 10 minutes, they might be swimming in another direction by then.
I'm not a massive fan of Corbyn, but I think he has more integrity than a good majority of the creatures which skulk around in the HoC.
Last edited: