Poisoned Russian spy.

[Peebo]

1 hour ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

14 EU Countries have said that they are to expel Russian Diplomats.

And the USA is to expel 60 Russian Diplomats and to close the Seattle Consulate.

12 of the Russian Diplomats are based at the UN in New York.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-43545565

Good way to bury any other negative news that might be causing a Storm in the US media. 

[JamboX2]

4 hours ago, Sraman said:

 

Nice to see you back Shaun. For us guys that are a bit too covered in bacofoil could you copy and paste the excerpt that gives us irrevocable facts about this particular incident please?

 

Whataboutery is extremely easy in this case given that we have been "at war" with the Russkies in one form or another since the second world war. There are lots of incidents to choose from. The trouble here though is that there are lots of incidents to choose from our lot as well and our history goes back a lot longer than that of the "bad" Russians. Yep, that's right, they used to be good didn't they? I wonder what happened to make them bad?

 

No doubt you would love to regale us with tales of uncaring leaders eliminating dissenting voices in the most awful of ways but, before you do, you should maybe ask yourself where they got the idea for that sort of behaviour, bearing in mind  they were starting a brand new country with a brand new system of Government whilst being opposed and demonised by half the world. 

 

While you ponder on that you may wish to spare a thought for #BlackLivesMatter, and rise up against the British establishment for their continuing maltreatment of Black people. I mean everyone's seen the video's of American cops shooting Black people for, well, being Black. But we all know that it wasn't them, oh no, it was the British establishment because they have form for this, especially the Tories. 

 

Now, that may be a silly example, of course it's a silly example because there is one crucial difference in the two narratives and that is, the existence of evidence. Yep, that's all us tinfoil hat wearers are asking for Shaun. 

 

We've been through two referendums in quick succession where everyone we are being asked to trust lied through their teeth. We have no choice but to question them and so far they have no answers. 

 

I could go on, but I feel my point is made. Hard facts and irrefutable evidence from now on, not the word of the depraved pig f*****g classes.

 

Given since the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia has largely been run by a mixture of oligarchs who were ex-Communist officials and a man like Putin who is ex-KGB and was Yeltsin's Prime Minister and now it's President.

 

A new state can only truly be new, run better and run with a new lease of life if the whole governing class changes. Russia has not seen that. 

 

In a battle of where I'd place my trust, it'll be western leadership over the Kremlin. The acts of the Russian state towards it's own people: journalists, opposition leaders, minorities and LGBT groups is straight out of the old Soviet days. Surprising given it's a nation run by the old school KGB and bureaucrats of those times.

[AlphonseCapone]

2 hours ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

14 EU Countries have said that they are to expel Russian Diplomats.

And the USA is to expel 60 Russian Diplomats and to close the Seattle Consulate.

12 of the Russian Diplomats are based at the UN in New York.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-43545565

 

Pretty robust response. More than I expected. 

[Captain Sausage]

But, but, but. Whur’s ra eviduns?!?!?

[felix]

18 minutes ago, AlphonseCapone said:

 

Pretty robust response. More than I expected. 

Been out the country so not keeping up with progress - have they found strong evidence it was Russia yet ?

[AlphonseCapone]

1 minute ago, felix said:

Been out the country so not keeping up with progress - have they found strong evidence it was Russia yet ?

 

Whatever they have must be persuasive. One chat and they've convinced Nicola Sturgeon, the EU, USA and Canada. Or maybe they are all gullible / part of the conspiracy. 

[Cade]

3 minutes ago, felix said:

Been out the country so not keeping up with progress - have they found strong evidence it was Russia yet ?

BoJo says it wiz ze rushuns

[felix]

1 minute ago, AlphonseCapone said:

 

Whatever they have must be persuasive. One chat and they've convinced Nicola Sturgeon, the EU, USA and Canada. Or maybe they are all gullible / part of the conspiracy. 

So no then.

[Victorian]

Heids must be steaming super-heated water under variously crafted aluminium bunnets.

[felix]

Just now, Victorian said:

Heids must be steaming super-heated water under variously crafted aluminium bunnets.

Is this a cryptic crossword clue you're needing help with ?

 

[AlphonseCapone]

7 minutes ago, felix said:

So no then.

 

What do you want, wee felix fae JKB to given access to high level information

[felix]

3 minutes ago, AlphonseCapone said:

 

What do you want, wee felix fae JKB to given access to high level information

Confirmed chemical analysis of the agent.

Source of manufacture.

Where it was administered.

By whom.

it's not hard is it ?.

[Geoff the Mince]

4 minutes ago, AlphonseCapone said:

 

What do you want, wee felix fae JKB to given access to high level information

he probably does 

[felix]

1 minute ago, Geoff the Mince said:

he probably does 

..any reason why not ?

[shaun.lawson]

6 hours ago, Sraman said:

We've been through two referendums in quick succession where everyone we are being asked to trust lied through their teeth. We have no choice but to question them and so far they have no answers. 

 

A position of healthy scepticism where the UK government is concerned is, of course, entirely reasonable. But your position goes well, well, well beyond that.

 

No, Britain is not some paragon of virtue. It's entirely possible that a criminal conspiracy has resulted in us leaving the EU; our history has often been a horribly dark one. But for all our many ills, we're not a mafia state.

 

- We don't go around illegally annexing territory, as Russia did in Crimea

 

- If someone starts a business in London, they don't have to pay bribes to local leaders and gangsters for 'protection'

 

- We don't train thugs to go and smash up opposing fans at major football tournaments, before praising said thugs in Parliament

 

- We do at least attempt to avoid civilian casualties as far as possible on another of our ill-advised foreign adventures

 

- We don't conduct mass cyberwarfare against an entire political bloc, in the aim of causing as much chaos as possible

 

- And we sure as heck don't murder at least 14 people on the streets with complete impunity - but Russia has, as the link which jake refuses to read  sets out in comprehensive detail.

 

100%, cast iron, crystal clear evidence for what happened in Salisbury? It's impossible to produce. Which, of course, is precisely why Russia behaves like this in the first place. Always the victim, never the aggressor - Putin's all a bit Celtic if you ask me. Fortunately, however belatedly, the EU member states (many of which, through bitter recent experience, know all too well how much of a threat Russia is) have realised what side their bread's buttered on. 

 

International relations are always, I entirely accept, murky, complicated and unpleasant. But however appalled I've often been by Britain's behaviour, I'm always much more appalled by those who think we're the same as some of the worst regimes on the planet. We're not. Quite frankly, we're too incompetent to be so. 

[AlphonseCapone]

7 minutes ago, felix said:

Confirmed chemical analysis of the agent.

Source of manufacture.

Where it was administered.

By whom.

it's not hard is it ?.

 

You'd likely just find a reason to doubt anything they produced. 

[Victorian]

"Any reason why not"

 

 

[shaun.lawson]

8 minutes ago, felix said:

..any reason why not ?

 

National security.

[Geoff the Mince]

12 minutes ago, felix said:

..any reason why not ?

Shaun beat me to it . 

[felix]

2 minutes ago, AlphonseCapone said:

 

You'd likely just find a reason to doubt anything they produced. 

On the contrary. Could well have been Russia .

The name of the assassin/s and outline of where and how shouldl be ok to share with responsible adults no ?

 

Lack of

2 minutes ago, shaun.lawson said:

 

National security.

You need national security clearance to know the name of the person/s who killed Skripal  ?

[felix]

3 minutes ago, Geoff the Mince said:

Shaun beat me to it . 

See above.

[Geoff the Mince]

1 minute ago, felix said:

See above.

You don't think that there is sensitive info that if released into the public domain may compromise others ? 

 

I'd imagine the security services have quite few reasons to keep info secret . 

 

Would you not agree ? 

 

Or or would you rather they said to hell with that the public need to know ? 

[shaun.lawson]

16 minutes ago, Geoff the Mince said:

You don't think that there is sensitive info that if released into the public domain may compromise others ? 

 

I'd imagine the security services have quite few reasons to keep info secret . 

 

Would you not agree ? 

 

Or or would you rather they said to hell with that the public need to know ? 

 

Precisely.

 

To the resident conspiracy theorists on this thread: 14 people - some Russian, some British, all with links to Russia - have died in mysterious circumstances. The response of the UK and US authorities has been, in all cases, to cover this up, and employ absurd narratives which would insult the intelligence of a lettuce leaf.

 

These cases have included the "suicide" by multiple knife wounds (from two different knives) of the British scientist who discovered that Litvinenko had been poisoned with polonium; the "suicide" of a close British associate of Boris Berezovsky, who supposedly jumped from his flat despite there not even being enough room through the window for someone to jump through it, and scratch marks under the windowsill which the police didn't even notice; and the "suicide" of a British spy who supposedly locked himself in a sports bag and lay in a bathtub on a baking hot flat in mid-August, whose heavily decomposed body was found 12 days later. And a whole bunch of other cases with similarly ridiculous conclusions.

 

The reason for these outrageous cover-ups is that we're terrified. Russia is a nuclear state; Russia provides our energy; Russia more than props up our economy; Russian cyberwarfare could shut the UK down; Russia has interfered in elections all over the place; Russia has infiltrated and entirely undermined our most powerful ally. The only reason Salisbury has become such a big thing is, committed in a public space and seriously endangering many others, it was impossible for us to ignore. 

 

Conspiracy theorists invariably revert to the phrase: Cui bono? In anything to do with Russia and the severely diminished, powerless UK, the answer is: not us! Russia behaves with impunity because it can - and we've gone out of our way to avoid antagonising it. That's why your tinfoil is so ridiculous. 

Edited March 26, 2018 by shaun.lawson

[Jambo-Jimbo]

42 minutes ago, AlphonseCapone said:

 

Whatever they have must be persuasive. One chat and they've convinced Nicola Sturgeon, the EU, USA and Canada. Or maybe they are all gullible / part of the conspiracy. 

 

The Lithuanian President Dalia Grybauskaite last week said that she wanted more information from the UK.

She then had a private meeting at the EU summit with Teresa May where she later said that May had provided additional intelligence to her.

Now it must have been persuasive enough for Grybauskaite to then publicly back the British 100%.

 

Folks asking where the evidence is, and quite rightly to, but then dispute it was the Russians based solely on the lack of evidence being in the public domain, well I've this before, just because the evidence has not been plastered all over facebook and the internet doesn't mean there isn't any evidence.

What evidence there is will most likely be in the form of Intelligence and do folks really what secret intelligence reports where people's lives could be put at stake made public.

 

[felix]

9 minutes ago, Victorian said:

"Any reason why not"

 

 

Another cryptic puzzle ?

 

13 minutes ago, Geoff the Mince said:

You don't think that there is sensitive info that if released into the public domain may compromise others ? 

 

I'd imagine the security services have quite few reasons to keep info secret . 

 

Would you not agree ? 

 

Or or would you rather they said to hell with that the public need to know ? 

Oh absolutely - there will be sensitive info. which can't be released.

But at the moment there's no clear motive, no suspect and no  direct link with  Russia.  It's officially  "highly likely".

If there was something stronger, don't you think the government would come out with a more robust  statement   than "highly likely".

 "We have evidence" maybe ?

[Jambo-Jimbo]

25 minutes ago, Geoff the Mince said:

You don't think that there is sensitive info that if released into the public domain may compromise others ? 

 

I'd imagine the security services have quite few reasons to keep info secret . 

 

Would you not agree ? 

 

Or or would you rather they said to hell with that the public need to know ? 

 

No, not the public which needs to know, it's the conspiracy theorists who want to know everything, every detail.

But even when the authorities do release documents they still don't believe anything that get's released and no doubts it would be the same here, if the UK released classified material, they still wouldn't believe it.

 

[shaun.lawson]

Nice place, Russia. Definitely the good guys here. 

 

 

[jake]

So high level security information shared with all these governments .To avoid any dangerous leaks of information to the Russians who have infiltrated and undermined our most powerful ally.

We cannot say the information we have about the Russians even although they must surely know if they are guilty of these things in case the Russians find out about what the Russians are up to.

 

Makes complete sense.

I mean a country sophisticated enough you know like the US who infiltrate democratic elections you know like in South America .

Where dictators are schooled in the US by CIA fronted colleges I mean surely they already know what we know.

 

But I'm a tinfoil hat wearer because 

1.

I don't believe without evidence what is told to me because we have been taken to war before based on "sexed up" evidence

2.

Because I am aware that although the Russian government is not good that our most powerful allie also has a track record in South America that has overseen political assanination death squads ultra violence which unless you are in complete denial is CIA backed.

 

 

I do not see anyone advocating Russia as a place they would wish to copy.

 

What I see is people not wishing to just go along with " Look we are telling you they are bad so just believe us because look other people are saying they are bad and honestly they are worse than us for lying"

 

Thankfully I wear a tin foil hat .

Wished more people had wore one before we took the life's of 1 million Iraqis and inflicted the misery they now endure.

Perhaps those on the left in this thread might like to take a look at the destabilization of South American countries who dared to have governments which didn't tow the US CIA politic.

 

Then again perhaps not.

[shaun.lawson]

Jake, it's very simple. Cui bono? In the case of Iraq, it was the US and UK. In the case of Latin America, it was the US.

 

And in the case of Russia now... you tell me. If you think we benefit from publicly antagonising a nuclear power and mafia state which controls our energy supply, funds our economy, kills our own people on our own shores, flies into our own airspace and which is conducting cyberwarfare against us on a daily basis, you're away with the fairies.

 

You are condemned by the very criteria which conspiracy theorists always employ.

[Victorian]

C4 prog about to start on this.      Should be interesting.     No doubt it's entire contents will be dismissed as pro-establishment propaganda by some.

[jake]

33 minutes ago, shaun.lawson said:

Jake, it's very simple. Cui bono? In the case of Iraq, it was the US and UK. In the case of Latin America, it was the US.

 

And in the case of Russia now... you tell me. If you think we benefit from publicly antagonising a nuclear power and mafia state which controls our energy supply, funds our economy, kills our own people on our own shores, flies into our own airspace and which is conducting cyberwarfare against us on a daily basis, you're away with the fairies.

 

You are condemned by the very criteria which conspiracy theorists always employ.

You choose to condemn a corporate media and vested interests when it suits your argument (anti Semite thread) but believe with no evidence the same people on this one.

 

I have to laugh at my handle as a conspiracy theorist from someone who also believes that media serves those with power who wage war for the benefit of our economy.

That's conspiring.

 

 

[shaun.lawson]

Just now, jake said:

You choose to condemn a corporate media and vested interests when it suits your argument (anti Semite thread) but believe with no evidence the same people on this one.

 

I have to laugh at my handle as a conspiracy theorist from someone who also believes that media serves those with power who wage war for the benefit of our economy.

That's conspiring.

 

 

 

Please explain to me how that can ever apply to Russia in any way. We have virtually no power; Russia has lots of power. War of any kind with Russia means the destruction of the UK.

[jake]

15 minutes ago, shaun.lawson said:

 

Please explain to me how that can ever apply to Russia in any way. We have virtually no power; Russia has lots of power. War of any kind with Russia means the destruction of the UK.

 

Kind of answered your own question .

We have no power yet here we are taking the fight to Russia.

Over a spy .

 

[Gorgiewave]

27 minutes ago, shaun.lawson said:

 

Please explain to me how that can ever apply to Russia in any way. We have virtually no power; Russia has lots of power. War of any kind with Russia means the destruction of the UK.

Shaun, we are in NATO, Russia are Russia. War with Russia would mean the destruction of Russia, not us.

[Notts1874]

55 minutes ago, Victorian said:

C4 prog about to start on this.      Should be interesting.     No doubt it's entire contents will be dismissed as pro-establishment propaganda by some.

If Jake had read the Buzzfeed article he may have recognised some of it.

 

Even had the lead journalist on the programme. Incidentally she was also instrumental in the exposé of FIFA.

[jake]

15 minutes ago, Notts1874 said:

If Jake had read the Buzzfeed article he may have recognised some of it.

 

Even had the lead journalist on the programme. Incidentally she was also instrumental in the exposé of FIFA.

Notts I did mean to reply to you on this.

 

I was trying to be smart about buzz feed.

A media outlet which has amongst others levelled against it cases of plagiarism and even fake news.

 

I tried to make this point but obviously it did not come across.

 

And that's about it.

Did the c4 programme give any evidence about the topic on this thread ?

 

Did it explain internal politics in Russia with links to those with business interests in the US .

You know people who might fair better without Putin.

 

 

[shaun.lawson]

21 minutes ago, Gorgiewave said:

Shaun, we are in NATO, Russia are Russia. War with Russia would mean the destruction of Russia, not us.

 

GW, Russia has come awfully close to taking over the US: certainly in terms of its government.

 

What will NATO do to protect us if the US isn't on board?

[shaun.lawson]

31 minutes ago, jake said:

 

Kind of answered your own question .

We have no power yet here we are taking the fight to Russia.

Over a spy .

 

 

And you'd understand why we have no choice in that if you read the article I linked to. You refused to. Go figure.

[Notts1874]

1 minute ago, jake said:

Notts I did mean to reply to you on this.

 

I was trying to be smart about buzz feed.

A media outlet which has amongst others levelled against it cases of plagiarism and even fake news.

 

I tried to make this point but obviously it did not come across.

 

And that's about it.

Did the c4 programme give any evidence about the topic on this thread ?

 

Did it explain internal politics in Russia with links to those with business interests in the US .

You know people who might fair better without Putin.

 

 

No problem.

 

Watch it and read the article ?

[Gorgiewave]

5 minutes ago, shaun.lawson said:

 

GW, Russia has come awfully close to taking over the US: certainly in terms of its government.

 

What will NATO do to protect us if the US isn't on board?

SL, 60 diplomats expelled today and the Seattle consulate closed.

[Gorgiewave]

12 minutes ago, shaun.lawson said:

 

And you'd understand why we have no choice in that if you read the article I linked to. You refused to. Go figure.

 

Anyway, Shaun, how are you? Is your Uruguay football book out yet?

[shaun.lawson]

14 minutes ago, Gorgiewave said:

 

Anyway, Shaun, how are you? Is your Uruguay football book out yet?

 

Nah. Got bored of it years ago. Imagine coming all the way out here, only to discover that my topic was boring as ****!  Like topic, like man, as others might suggest. 

 

But I stayed cos I love the place, will probably apply for Uruguayan citizenship (jointly with the UK) shortly, and live in a lovely apartment in Punta del Este now. How's you?

[Gorgiewave]

7 minutes ago, shaun.lawson said:

 

Nah. Got bored of it years ago. Imagine coming all the way out here, only to discover that my topic was boring as ****!  Like topic, like man, as others might suggest. 

 

But I stayed cos I love the place, will probably apply for Uruguayan citizenship (jointly with the UK) shortly, and live in a lovely apartment in Punta del Este now. How's you?

I'm fine. Approaching the end of a biology degree. Enjoying maths for the first time really ever. Very slowly researching a book on Spanish intellectual history.

 

How's your Spanish coming along? Do you speak more Spanish or English these days?

 

Have you visited the new Tynecastle yet?

[jake]

1 hour ago, shaun.lawson said:

 

GW, Russia has come awfully close to taking over the US: certainly in terms of its government.

 

 

And I'm the conspiracy nut ?

[jake]

https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/long-read-does-the-uks-case-against-russia-stack-up

 

And the Russian view

 

https://sputniknews.com/analysis/201803221062799422-uk-russia-spy-skripal/

 

 

[shaun.lawson]

14 minutes ago, jake said:

https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/long-read-does-the-uks-case-against-russia-stack-up

 

And the Russian view

 

https://sputniknews.com/analysis/201803221062799422-uk-russia-spy-skripal/

 

 

 

Sputnik 

 

The position of that 'academic' is, I'm afraid, absolutely obliterated by the article you refused to read and the Panorama doc I posted earlier too. The latter sheds a horribly grim light on the reality of Russian politics and society.

[Boris]

7 hours ago, Gorgiewave said:

Shaun, we are in NATO, Russia are Russia. War with Russia would mean the destruction of Russia, not us.

 

I take it when Threads was on, it was past your bedtime?

[Skacelsid]

It is more than likely that the Kremlin was behind the recent murder and attempted murders ( using nerve agent ) on UK soil. But do not expect the actual culprits to be traced or arrested, it is no coincidence suspects have not been arrested or identified, it is reasonable to assume that there would be witnesses and/or cctv footage especially for the nerve agent attack as the victims were in very public areas in the hours preceding. This side of the incident has had little or no coverage, had it been a street crime or terrorism we would have had suspects made known, probably right away. But a public trial and long conviction in a high security UK Jail of Russian agents would not be welcomed by the UK government or seen as good for international tensions, that is understandable in this world I am afraid. Also It is very possible that the perpetrators were  Russians with British passports and that would not go down well given the tory party funding issues and the amount of property in London acquired through ''dirty money'' that has come to light. Either way I am not saying this difficult situation has been mishandled, but do not expect the whole truth or complete openness.

[Sraman]

22 hours ago, shaun.lawson said:

 

A position of healthy scepticism where the UK government is concerned is, of course, entirely reasonable. But your position goes well, well, well beyond that.

 

No, Britain is not some paragon of virtue. It's entirely possible that a criminal conspiracy has resulted in us leaving the EU; our history has often been a horribly dark one. But for all our many ills, we're not a mafia state.

 

- We don't go around illegally annexing territory, as Russia did in Crimea

 

- If someone starts a business in London, they don't have to pay bribes to local leaders and gangsters for 'protection'

 

- We don't train thugs to go and smash up opposing fans at major football tournaments, before praising said thugs in Parliament

 

- We do at least attempt to avoid civilian casualties as far as possible on another of our ill-advised foreign adventures

 

- We don't conduct mass cyberwarfare against an entire political bloc, in the aim of causing as much chaos as possible

 

- And we sure as heck don't murder at least 14 people on the streets with complete impunity - but Russia has, as the link which jake refuses to read  sets out in comprehensive detail.

 

100%, cast iron, crystal clear evidence for what happened in Salisbury? It's impossible to produce. Which, of course, is precisely why Russia behaves like this in the first place. Always the victim, never the aggressor - Putin's all a bit Celtic if you ask me. Fortunately, however belatedly, the EU member states (many of which, through bitter recent experience, know all too well how much of a threat Russia is) have realised what side their bread's buttered on. 

 

International relations are always, I entirely accept, murky, complicated and unpleasant. But however appalled I've often been by Britain's behaviour, I'm always much more appalled by those who think we're the same as some of the worst regimes on the planet. We're not. Quite frankly, we're too incompetent to be so. 

 

Time for the OxBridge set to move over? The best university education money can buy and they are just churning out incompetents?

 

There was an advert on telly last night asking for us to part with our cash to save the poor children of the Yemen. The poor children of the Yemen who are being bombed by our "Very good allies" using the bombs we made and supplied them with. Is that what makes our lot good and their lot bad? We will blow you up then ask our people to pay a bit towards your medical bills whereas they will just blow you up?

 

Please stop quoting the BBC. They are nothing more than liars and British Establishment propaganda merchants. Having not been subjected to their outright lies and propaganda, due to being outwith the country, you'll just have to take it from me that this statement is factual.

[shaun.lawson]

43 minutes ago, Sraman said:

 

Time for the OxBridge set to move over? The best university education money can buy and they are just churning out incompetents?

 

There was an advert on telly last night asking for us to part with our cash to save the poor children of the Yemen. The poor children of the Yemen who are being bombed by our "Very good allies" using the bombs we made and supplied them with. Is that what makes our lot good and their lot bad? We will blow you up then ask our people to pay a bit towards your medical bills whereas they will just blow you up?

 

Please stop quoting the BBC. They are nothing more than liars and British Establishment propaganda merchants. Having not been subjected to their outright lies and propaganda, due to being outwith the country, you'll just have to take it from me that this statement is factual.

 

I'm well aware of the serious flaws in the BBC. So much so that I even wrote an article about it!

 

https://blog.politicsmeanspolitics.com/with-or-without-theresa-may-the-tories-are-doomed-9cdfa610630f?gi=8167249cc5

 

However, unlike you - you just go way, way too far, so end up with your very own version of confirmation bias instead - I view output from the BBC on a case by case basis. I don't regard Auntie as part of some all-encompassing conspiracy against critical thought.

 

On this thread, I've cited one Panorama documentary, which I'd encourage anyone to watch. The journalist doing the documentary is followed throughout his time in Russia. He's spied on. Stories are made up about him on Putin's many propaganda channels - we even see the process of how that's done - and he interviews opposition figures who've been attacked and threatened at the behest of the regime. He couldn't interview another such figure, because he'd been murdered.

 

Sorry - but nothing that the BBC do or what happens in British politics and media is comparable to that in any way. I couldn't agree with you more about Yemen - hence my referring to that montrosity on another thread - or about the Oxbridge set. Who are a complacent, incompetent, corrupt joke... but unlike Putin's lot, they're not evil. They're not trying to destabilise the world. 

 

In summary though: the problem with you being 'woke' is it clearly causes you to ignore and dismiss anything which might not be convenient to your world view. That isn't woke at all. It's just another way of being asleep.