Poisoned Russian spy.

[Gorgiewave]

41 minutes ago, shaun.lawson said:

 

1. We've acted now because we can no longer ignore it, given it endangered so many of our own citizens. The article - and the series it's part of - sets out why we've turned a blind eye for so long: because we're terrified. But now that Russia appears to have raised it to this level... well, appeasement is only resulting in more and more trouble.

 

2. "Traitors" according to whom? A tyrant? And in any case, the victims also include an ordinary British scientist - who just happened to be the poor unfortunate to discover that Litvinenko had been poisoned with polonium. Said scientist apparently went on to "commit suicide" through multiple knife wounds... with two different knives. 

 

"We"? Since when did you have the slightest loyalty to the UK?

[shaun.lawson]

1 minute ago, Gorgiewave said:

 

"We"? Since when did you have the slightest loyalty to the UK?

 

Since I was born British, grew up in Britain, was given so much by Britain, made lots of British and non-British friends who live in Britain, have a British family and have British citizenship, thankyou. 

[Gorgiewave]

3 minutes ago, shaun.lawson said:

 

Since I was born British, grew up in Britain, was given so much by Britain, made lots of British and non-British friends who live in Britain, have a British family and have British citizenship, thankyou. 

And yet you have nothing but gloomy contempt for it.

[jake]

14 minutes ago, shaun.lawson said:

 

As long as it was possible to sweep things under the carpet, that's what we've done. Russia is a nuclear power which props up our economy, supplies much of our energy and is a lawless, mafia state. Naturally, we've done as much as possible to avoid antagonising it.

 

After Salisbury - which most certainly could not be swept under the carpet, and represented a whole new level - the question became: which is worse? Do we keep appeasing the crocodile and keep allowing this to happen on our doorstep - or do we finally take some sort of action? We don't have much to gain from the latter (if we had a lot to gain, I'd have a lot more time for the conspiracy theorists); we had zero to gain from the former.

 

Typical international relations, in other words. A choice of two almost equally awful options. But when a country is engaged in low level warfare against you, it cannot be ignored forever. 

Russia supplies very little of the UK energy so that threat is not applicable.

Which props are these you speak of regarding our economy.

 

International relations are in no way helped by not adhering to international codes of practice when you accuse a nation of using biological or chemical weapons.

The UK to my knowledge did not send a sample to Russia something which it is required to do.

And it may interest you to know that many in national parliaments across Europe are questioning the response of their governments to this.

 

 

[shaun.lawson]

1 minute ago, Gorgiewave said:

And yet you have nothing but gloomy contempt for it.

 

This is called "being British". You seem to have mislaid that somewhere.

[Ulysses]

55 minutes ago, jake said:

A British coroner ?

 

No, a made-up coroner.  I was taking the piss.

 

Christ, jake, learn to read. 

[Thunderstruck]

19 minutes ago, shaun.lawson said:

 

As long as it was possible to sweep things under the carpet, that's what we've done. Russia is a nuclear power which props up our economy, supplies much of our energy and is a lawless, mafia state. Naturally, we've done as much as possible to avoid antagonising it.

 

After Salisbury - which most certainly could not be swept under the carpet, and represented a whole new level - the question became: which is worse? Do we keep appeasing the crocodile and keep allowing this to happen on our doorstep - or do we finally take some sort of action? We don't have much to gain from the latter (if we had a lot to gain, I'd have a lot more time for the conspiracy theorists); we had zero to gain from the former.

 

Typical international relations, in other words. A choice of two almost equally awful options. But when a country is engaged in low level warfare against you, it cannot be ignored forever. 

 

In terms of energy, Russian gas can account for up to 14/15% of total used. The largest part of our gas supply is U.K. and Norwegian gas fields (including the “secret” oil and gas reservoirs west of Shetland that excite the bacofoil boys). We get as much via LNG tankers from Qatar as we do from Russia.

 

If worse comes to worst we have a conservative estimate of 3 gigatonnes of coal beneath our (mostly English) feet (much, much more under the sea off NE England) which could provide many decades of energy using technology similar to that currently used in oil fields. 

 

In turn, Russia is very dependent on sale of oil and gas to prop up its economy. 

 

It is in the interests of all for normal diplomatic and economic relationships to be restored. The Russians made an a**e of the Skripal hit, we know they did and they know we know they did. Like organised crime, nobody gets in a lather when there is a “bad on bad” incident but when it results in collateral damage to “civilians”, action is demanded and sooner or later a patsy is thrown to the wolves. 

 

There will be a few weeks of name calling and then good order will be restored. Putin gets to look “hard” to his domestic audience, May gets a much needed reputational boost and the “West” gets a chance to show unity.  

[John Findlay]

57 minutes ago, Thunderstruck said:

 

In terms of energy, Russian gas can account for up to 14/15% of total used. The largest part of our gas supply is U.K. and Norwegian gas fields (including the “secret” oil and gas reservoirs west of Shetland that excite the bacofoil boys). We get as much via LNG tankers from Qatar as we do from Russia.

 

If worse comes to worst we have a conservative estimate of 3 gigatonnes of coal beneath our (mostly English) feet (much, much more under the sea off NE England) which could provide many decades of energy using technology similar to that currently used in oil fields. 

 

In turn, Russia is very dependent on sale of oil and gas to prop up its economy. 

 

It is in the interests of all for normal diplomatic and economic relationships to be restored. The Russians made an a**e of the Skripal hit, we know they did and they know we know they did. Like organised crime, nobody gets in a lather when there is a “bad on bad” incident but when it results in collateral damage to “civilians”, action is demanded and sooner or later a patsy is thrown to the wolves. 

 

There will be a few weeks of name calling and then good order will be restored. Putin gets to look “hard” to his domestic audience, May gets a much needed reputational boost and the “West” gets a chance to show unity.  

Your last paragraph spot on. A scenario that has played out many times in the past and will play again in the future. Sabres have to be rattled now and again.

[niblick1874]

 

 

[Jambo-Jimbo]

7 hours ago, Thunderstruck said:

 

In terms of energy, Russian gas can account for up to 14/15% of total used. The largest part of our gas supply is U.K. and Norwegian gas fields (including the “secret” oil and gas reservoirs west of Shetland that excite the bacofoil boys). We get as much via LNG tankers from Qatar as we do from Russia.

 

If worse comes to worst we have a conservative estimate of 3 gigatonnes of coal beneath our (mostly English) feet (much, much more under the sea off NE England) which could provide many decades of energy using technology similar to that currently used in oil fields. 

 

In turn, Russia is very dependent on sale of oil and gas to prop up its economy. 

 

It is in the interests of all for normal diplomatic and economic relationships to be restored. The Russians made an a**e of the Skripal hit, we know they did and they know we know they did. Like organised crime, nobody gets in a lather when there is a “bad on bad” incident but when it results in collateral damage to “civilians”, action is demanded and sooner or later a patsy is thrown to the wolves. 

 

There will be a few weeks of name calling and then good order will be restored. Putin gets to look “hard” to his domestic audience, May gets a much needed reputational boost and the “West” gets a chance to show unity.  

 

There is a well rehearsed game to be played out, a game which has been played for at least the last 70+ years.

 

[Sraman]

11 hours ago, Ulysses said:

 

There are people - some of them on this forum - who can readily believe that the British government or the U.S. administration run false flag operations, or who are prepared to believe that the murder victims of American gun nuts are made up, or that NASA somehow persuaded over half a million people to lie about a faked moon landing, or that multiple layers of American federal, state and city governments did the same about a false flag operation on 9/11, and all because they watched some videos on YouTube.  Yet the minute it is suggested to these people that someone else's government might be acting the maggot they go into apoplexy demanding proof, and a standard of proof they don't expect from their YouTubers.

 

As if anyone engaged in the serious business of government is going to place their agents, operatives, informants and contacts at risk just so that a bunch of internet randomers can pronounce themselves satisfied with the quality of evidence. 

 

When I was a small boy, around about 5 or 6 years of age, if I broke anything in the house I used to blame my wee brother as he had a reputation for being a bit clumsy. After a few times of this the reputation became so re-inforced in my parents minds that whenever anything broke they blamed it on him straight away. They didn't need any evidence and  no matter how much my wee brother protested, they didn't believe him. 

 

You see, I have been a master at this game for many years and I can spot a pile of pish from a mile away in a sort of, takes one to know one way. 

 

The Russians have been the go to boogieman for my whole life, most likely yours as well, it's easy to blame them as they are already entrenched in our minds as the bad guys.

 

History is littered with examples of those engaged in the serious business of Government who are willing to shove anyone under the bus if it suits their aims. I agree, a bunch of Internet randomers, or as I like to call them, the electorate, is not something that anyone engaged in the serious business of government has ever given a stuff about which is why I find it incredible that anyone would take them at their word unless, of course, the pre-programming kicks in.

[Jambo-Jimbo]

37 minutes ago, Sraman said:

 

When I was a small boy, around about 5 or 6 years of age, if I broke anything in the house I used to blame my wee brother as he had a reputation for being a bit clumsy. After a few times of this the reputation became so re-inforced in my parents minds that whenever anything broke they blamed it on him straight away. They didn't need any evidence and  no matter how much my wee brother protested, they didn't believe him. 

 

You see, I have been a master at this game for many years and I can spot a pile of pish from a mile away in a sort of, takes one to know one way. 

 

The Russians have been the go to boogieman for my whole life, most likely yours as well, it's easy to blame them as they are already entrenched in our minds as the bad guys.

 

History is littered with examples of those engaged in the serious business of Government who are willing to shove anyone under the bus if it suits their aims. I agree, a bunch of Internet randomers, or as I like to call them, the electorate, is not something that anyone engaged in the serious business of government has ever given a stuff about which is why I find it incredible that anyone would take them at their word unless, of course, the pre-programming kicks in.

 

And from a Russian perspective it's the USA & the West who have been the go to bogeymen to blame for everything for many years, it's all CIA plots and all that sort of thing.

 

It's a two-way stream this blame game thingamajig, the West blames the Russians and the Russians blame the West.

 

[felix]

7 minutes ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

 

And from a Russian perspective it's the USA & the West who have been the go to bogeymen to blame for everything for many years, it's all CIA plots and all that sort of thing.

 

It's a two-way stream this blame game thingamajig, the West blames the Russians and the Russians blame the West.

 

..and you know this how ?

[Jambo-Jimbo]

2 minutes ago, felix said:

..and you know this how ?

 

Take it you've never watched RT then?

[Francis Albert]

10 hours ago, Thunderstruck said:

 

In terms of energy, Russian gas can account for up to 14/15% of total used. The largest part of our gas supply is U.K. and Norwegian gas fields (including the “secret” oil and gas reservoirs west of Shetland that excite the bacofoil boys). We get as much via LNG tankers from Qatar as we do from Russia.

 

If worse comes to worst we have a conservative estimate of 3 gigatonnes of coal beneath our (mostly English) feet (much, much more under the sea off NE England) which could provide many decades of energy using technology similar to that currently used in oil fields. 

 

In turn, Russia is very dependent on sale of oil and gas to prop up its economy. 

 

It is in the interests of all for normal diplomatic and economic relationships to be restored. The Russians made an a**e of the Skripal hit, we know they did and they know we know they did. Like organised crime, nobody gets in a lather when there is a “bad on bad” incident but when it results in collateral damage to “civilians”, action is demanded and sooner or later a patsy is thrown to the wolves. 

 

There will be a few weeks of name calling and then good order will be restored. Putin gets to look “hard” to his domestic audience, May gets a much needed reputational boost and the “West” gets a chance to show unity.  

Our dependency on Russian gas is as you say less than often assumed, and much lower than that of France and Germany as well as most of the East European states. However it is still important and at times of peak demand can be critical - 15% represents a lot of gas central heating boilers and a lot of industrial use.

During the recent attack from the "Beast from the East" the UK came as close at it has for many years to having to shut down industry due to a shortage of gas. This was not because Russian exports to Europe were reduced but because France which of course controls the pipelines bringing the gas to the UK prioritised supplies to French industry. (A fine example of the "esprit communitaire" in action).

All other major countries dependent on gas imports have large reserves held in strategic storage, capable of sustain supplies for up to 3 to 6 months in the event of supply interruption. The UK traditionally has had much less strategic storage because of its gas reserves in the North Sea. But until recently we did have one substantial storage facility (built by the then nationalised British Gas)  in the form of a converted offshore field off Lincolnshire. Though small by European standards this could supply the equivalent of two months of gas at about 10% of UK demand ... not far short of the equivalent Russian supplies. But we decided a couple of years ago that it was uneconomic to maintain it and it is has been decommissioned, leaving us with no strategic storage reserves at all. So while Boris Johnson rants against the evils of Russia we have deliberately decided to significantly increase our dependence on Russian gas and instead have fallen back, presumably, on Boris's diplomatic skills to ensure security of supply.

(The coal reserves you refer to will cost a lot more to develop than to maintain or expand gas storage facilities and of course even if economic would take decades to bring on stream)

 

[davemclaren]

4 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

Our dependency on Russian gas is as you say less than often assumed, and much lower than that of France and Germany as well as most of the East European states. However it is still important and at times of peak demand can be critical - 15% represents a lot of gas central heating boilers and a lot of industrial use.

During the recent attack from the "Beast from the East" the UK came as close at it has for many years to having to shut down industry due to a shortage of gas. This was not because Russian exports to Europe were reduced but because France which of course controls the pipelines bringing the gas to the UK prioritised supplies to French industry. (A fine example of the "esprit communitaire" in action).

All other major countries dependent on gas imports have large reserves held in strategic storage, capable of sustain supplies for up to 3 to 6 months in the event of supply interruption. The UK traditionally has had much less strategic storage because of its gas reserves in the North Sea. But until recently we did have one substantial storage facility (built by the then nationalised British Gas)  in the form of a converted offshore field off Lincolnshire. Though small by European standards this could supply the equivalent of two months of gas at about 10% of UK demand ... not far short of the equivalent Russian supplies. But we decided a couple of years ago that it was uneconomic to maintain it and it is has been decommissioned, leaving us with no strategic storage reserves at all. So while Boris Johnson rants against the evils of Russia we have deliberately decided to significantly increase our dependence on Russian gas and instead have fallen back, presumably, on Boris's diplomatic skills to ensure security of supply.

(The coal reserves you refer to will cost a lot more to develop than to maintain or expand gas storage facilities and of course even if economic would take decades to bring on stream)

 

Boris's diplomatic skills. ?

[felix]

9 minutes ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

 

Take it you've never watched RT then?

Yes .

Should have been more specific  - was asking how you knew , throughout the cold war years and specifically, from the 90's up until about a year ago - Russia "blamed the west".; in a similar fashion to how we held Russia up as the enemy ; since the war, now recently rekindled ?

The tit for tat thhingy .

[Sraman]

1 hour ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

 

And from a Russian perspective it's the USA & the West who have been the go to bogeymen to blame for everything for many years, it's all CIA plots and all that sort of thing.

 

It's a two-way stream this blame game thingamajig, the West blames the Russians and the Russians blame the West.

 

 

There are many more streams than two. The youtube ones seem to be the best though.

[Sharpie]

11 hours ago, niblick1874 said:

 

 

 

Without a doubt one of the best posts Nibs has ever made, and rates high on this wandering thread.

With regard to being European I as an ex pat have never thought of myself as so, now actually consider myself Canadian of Scottish heritage.  I also think for sure the Russians did it.

[Cairneyhill Jambo]

21 hours ago, Gorgiewave said:

Are Newcastle, Liverpool, Swansea and Belfast in Europe?

Yes they are. You must be thick as pigshit if you have to ask that. And you told someone to stop being an arse on another thread. Oh the irony!!

[Seymour M Hersh]

49 minutes ago, Cairneyhill Jambo said:

Yes they are. You must be thick as pigshit if you have to ask that. And you told someone to stop being an arse on another thread. Oh the irony!!

 

There's a ginormous large woosh coming your way! 

[niblick1874]

On ‎3‎/‎30‎/‎2018 at 04:54, Jambo-Jimbo said:

 

 

On ‎3‎/‎29‎/‎2018 at 20:33, niblick1874 said:

 

This one above posted on another thread over a year ago that, ha ha Trump said he was being spied on by the opposition. I got back to his post saying that because Clinton did not get elected and could not hide and cover up everything Trump would come across paper trails. What followed was two pages of, show us the paper trails nibs ha ha ha.

 

 

On ‎3‎/‎30‎/‎2018 at 04:54, Jambo-Jimbo said:

 

Nibs, once again your changing the narrative.

You got stick from me and others for saying there was a 'paper trail' which proved Obama wasn't born in the USA, but you keep ignoring that now and have twisted the 'paper trail' chat around to apply to the alleged spying on Trump.  If you check the other thread that you happened to mention, you'll find that the 'paper trail' chat was in relation to your claim about Obama and not about Trump.

But you know that already as you've been taken to task several times now for trying to change the 'paper trail' chat around to something else from it's original meaning.

 

Apologies for going off topic, folks

 

 

 

The above is a lie and he knows it. 

 

 

Page 44 on the Trump thread is where you will find the reply I mentioned above that I posted to his post. The 'show us the paper trail' shite really ramps up on page 47 onwards and the paper trail they were talking about was exactly what I said it was. Have a look.

 

I am not the one that is changing the narrative, it's the one that clamed I was changing the narrative that was changing the narrative. 

 

They don't want you knowing the facts folks. As I say, they are using the 'blame the Russians' everywhere because everywhere they are being found out.

Edited April 2, 2018 by niblick1874

[shaun.lawson]

2 minutes ago, niblick1874 said:

They don't want you knowing the facts folks

 

Is it true that you think Obama was born in Kenya?  

[niblick1874]

Just now, shaun.lawson said:

 

Is it true that you think Obama was born in Kenya?  

No

 

[niblick1874]

On ‎3‎/‎26‎/‎2018 at 18:23, 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?

 

Seeing as you brought it up, you may find this of interest.

 

Have you heard about Mr and Mrs Ohr?

 

The wife is a Russian expert and hubby was very high up in the Justice Department (his office was four doors down the hall from Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein). He was demoted when he was found out not that long ago and most people that know about it are asking why he was not fired let alone put on trial.

 

Mr Ohr met with Cristopher Steels in 2016, Christopher Steels being the one that came up with the Trump-Russia dossier. Ohr also met with the founder of Fusion GPS more than once, a company that specialises in smear jobs as well as the company that hired Christopher Steel to come up with the Trump-Russia dossier. Mrs Ohr gets hired by Fusion GPS to work on the Trump-Russia dossier and is paid by..........................

 

You know what, I'll let everyone go check this stuff out themselves as the more you follow the paper trail (yep, the same one) the more out there it gets .

 

It's all proven fact and you couldn't make it up. 

 

But...................................................The Russians are close to taking over the American government

 

Blame the Russians for everything and if you don't, you're a Russian spy.

 

 

[niblick1874]

On ‎4‎/‎1‎/‎2018 at 10:02, bobsharp said:

 

Without a doubt one of the best posts Nibs has ever made, and rates high on this wandering thread.

With regard to being European I as an ex pat have never thought of myself as so, now actually consider myself Canadian of Scottish heritage.  I also think for sure the Russians did it.

 

You know what that reminds me of, A sucker punch. Nasty. No class what so ever.

[shaun.lawson]

1 hour ago, niblick1874 said:

Mr Ohr met with Cristopher Steels in 2016, Christopher Steels being the one that came up with the Trump-Russia dossier. Ohr also met with the founder of Fusion GPS more than once, a company that specialises in smear jobs as well as the company that hired Christopher Steel to come up with the Trump-Russia dossier. Mrs Ohr gets hired by Fusion GPS to work on the Trump-Russia dossier and is paid by..........................

 

 

This is all very well, but it's 100% irrelevant. The investigation into Russian interference started well before the Steele Dossier. Subsequent co-ordinated intelligent assessments on the extent of Russian interference didn't even use the Steele Dossier as a source.

 

But still: congratulations on having the wool well and truly pulled over your eyes by that oh-so-trustworthy Donald Trump, and his treason weasel pals.  

Edited April 2, 2018 by shaun.lawson

[Sharpie]

1 hour ago, niblick1874 said:

 

You know what that reminds me of, A sucker punch. Nasty. No class what so ever.

 

Well at least it solicited an opinion from you that didn't come direct from Fox news orf  Google  I am though quite impressed that you do in fact have some knowledge of class it is not something I had seen any evidence of in the past..

[shaun.lawson]

On 3/31/2018 at 06:39, Gorgiewave said:

 

Russian state TV, eh?

 

 

 

[jake]

22 minutes ago, shaun.lawson said:

 

 

 

Do you honestly believe that Russia is/Was close to taking over the US ?

 

I mean really any part of it?

[Boris]

On 30/03/2018 at 23:03, Francis Albert said:

Why is it a huge and growing threat? OK it still has a lot of nuclear weapons which could wipe us all out but that is not a growing threat - it has existed for all my life. And the Russians are no more likely now to launch a suicidal nuclear attack than they ever were. As far as conventional war is concerned the threat is much diminished because Russia now lacks the resources it once had to conduct such a war and sustain it. The Russian economy is of about the same size as the Italian economy. It is in world terms a minnow.

What has this online war achieved? And please don't say it has succeeded in giving us Trump and Brexit.

We did not drag the US into a fight against communism. (I agree that the fact that Boris Johnson shares the office of  Foreign Secretary with his great predecessor Bevin is an outrage).

A better response to the demise of the Soviet empire and its puppet East European regimes would have been to offer a modern version of the Marshall Plan to the former Warsaw Pact powers and draw Russia into the European economy and democratic principles. Instead we extended the military alliance of NATO eastwards.

Kennan was hardly wrong or isolated in having a malign view about Stalin's USSR. Unlike many more hot-headed anti-communists he had a realistic view about what the West could do about it including the "taking over" of the eastern half of Europe, and his strategy of containment preserved peace until the USSR and its satellites collapsed.  

The Marshall Plan after WW2 was certainly one of the most far sighted policies in history. It is a pity the West's reaction to the end of the Cold War was nowhere near as far sighted but instead not only preserved but expanded an anti-Russian military alliance which the Russians inevitably saw as a threat ... and led the way to Putin's current domination of Russian politics.

 

Good post.  

 

We really had the opportunity to deal fairly with the post Yeltsin Russia but we (the US/West) messed it up. 

[Boris]

On 01/04/2018 at 00:29, Gorgiewave said:

And yet you have nothing but gloomy contempt for it.

 

 

Is Shaun a saboteur?

 

Crush him!  Crush him!!!

[Gorgiewave]

3 hours ago, Boris said:

 

Good post.  

 

We really had the opportunity to deal fairly with the post Yeltsin Russia but we (the US/West) messed it up. 

Naw, we didnae. They're gangsters, we're no.

 

Vlad vs Ann.

[Gorgiewave]

3 hours ago, Boris said:

 

 

Is Shaun a saboteur?

 

Crush him!  Crush him!!!

Unwittingly, yes. A bore.

[Boris]

Just now, Gorgiewave said:

Naw, we didnae. They're gangsters, we're no.

 

Vlad vs Ann.

 

Bless.  

[Gorgiewave]

3 hours ago, Boris said:

 

 

Is Shaun a saboteur?

 

Crush him!  Crush him!!!

You're another Britain-hating intellectual. Just not pathological like Shaun.

[Boris]

Just now, Gorgiewave said:

Unwittingly, yes. A bore.

 

Watch and not yourself...

 

[Boris]

Just now, Gorgiewave said:

You're another Britain-hating intellectual. Just not pathological like Shaun.

 

Prove it.  Where have I said that I "hate Britain"?

 

Quite defamatory GW.  

[Gorgiewave]

1 minute ago, Boris said:

 

Watch and not yourself...

 

 

Jog on.

 

[Gorgiewave]

1 minute ago, Boris said:

 

Prove it.  Where have I said that I "hate Britain"?

 

Quite defamatory GW.  

You constantly belittle it and assume it to be sinister.

 

You're not on The Guardian or Shaun Lawson levels though.

[Boris]

Just now, Gorgiewave said:

 

Jog on.

 

 

Right arm unsurprisingly extended...

 

[Boris]

1 minute ago, Gorgiewave said:

You constantly belittle it and assume it to be sinister.

 

You're not on The Guardian or Shaun Lawson levels though.

 

No I don't.

 

Examples plz.

[Gorgiewave]

Just now, Boris said:

 

No I don't.

 

Examples plz.

 

[Gorgiewave]

 

[Boris]

15 minutes ago, Gorgiewave said:

 

 

Sorry, posts by me saying I hate Britain?

[Gorgiewave]

3 minutes ago, Boris said:

 

Sorry, posts by me sayinhttp://www.hmfckickback.co.uk/index.php?/topic/175766-poisoned-russian-spy/&page=14g I hate Britain?

Posts by you expressing disdain for Britain.

[Boris]

5 minutes ago, Gorgiewave said:

Posts by you expressing disdain for Britain.

 

You think?  Wow.

 

"sounds like a very British Coup" means I hate Britain?  

 

[Space Mackerel]

On 31/03/2018 at 22:40, Ulysses said:

 

There are people - some of them on this forum - who can readily believe that the British government or the U.S. administration run false flag operations, or who are prepared to believe that the murder victims of American gun nuts are made up, or that NASA somehow persuaded over half a million people to lie about a faked moon landing, or that multiple layers of American federal, state and city governments did the same about a false flag operation on 9/11, and all because they watched some videos on YouTube.  Yet the minute it is suggested to these people that someone else's government might be acting the maggot they go into apoplexy demanding proof, and a standard of proof they don't expect from their YouTubers.

 

As if anyone engaged in the serious business of government is going to place their agents, operatives, informants and contacts at risk just so that a bunch of internet randomers can pronounce themselves satisfied with the quality of evidence. 

 

So they can’t prove it was made in Russia after all. 

 

 

[Mikey1874]

Britain avoiding a joined up approach with Porton Down saying it can't say nerve agent was from Russia.

 

They must have their reasons. 

[maroonlegions]

So Maybot was a tad premature in her act of openly blaming Russia for the source of the nerve agent then.

 

 

 

UK scientists unable to prove Salisbury nerve agent came from Russia;

 

INDEPENDENT.CO.UK