RayC

So facts are BS and they won't change your mind. I'll just leave that there for all to see.

Fact, noun: a thing that is known or proved to be true. The events which I listed took place. That is known and undeniable. They are therefore, by definition, facts. If you deny this you are, by definition, delusional. Delusional, adjective: characterized by or holding false beliefs or judgements about external reality that are held despite incontrovertible evidence to the contrary, typically as a symptom of a mental condition. All completely irrelevant to the discussion of events in Ukraine in 2014. I vehemently back the Ukrainian people's right to self-determination. Something you obviously don't value. You are peddling a conspiracy theory. Nothing more, nothing less.

No it is not one version of history, it is a chronological listing of events. What the CIA did or didn't do in Latin America in the 1980s is completely irrelevant to the events in Ukraine in 2014. No one in their right mind would welcome an escalation in hostilities but that is a completely different topic. What is under discussion here are the events leading up to the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2014.

1. Yanukovych was elected on a pro-EU platform 2. In 2014 80% of the Ukrainian public were in favour of closer ties with the EU 3. The Ukrainian parliament had passed a bill approving the signing of the EU - Ukrainian Association Agreement 4. Yanukovych pulled out of a ceremony where this Agreement would be signed 5. Members of Yanukovych's own party voted to depose him as President 6. The Maïdan protests took place following these events If you, RFK or anyone else denies that these events took place, then not only do you know less than me but you are living in an alternative universe. It's ok to admit that you got something wrong. What is not ok is to deny the facts in order to act as an apologist for a despot.

Thanks. My thoughts exactly. Imo you have summed up the thoughts of most Labour supporters.

Indeed, never let the facts get in the way of a good conspiracy story. Do you dispute that Yanukovych was elected on a pro-EU platform? Do you dispute that the Ukrainian public were overwhelming in favour of closer ties with the EU (>80% approval ratings)? Do you dispute that the Ukrainian parliament had passed a bill approving the signing of the EU - Ukrainian Association Agreement formally establishing economic and political ties between the parties? Do you dispute that despite Parliamentary approval and his own campaign promises, Yanukovych - under pressure from Moscow which had imposed restrictions on Ukrainian imports - unilaterally pulled out of a ceremony where this Agreement would be endorsed? Do you dispute that members of Yanukovych's own party voted to replace him as President in light of these events? Do you dispute that the Maidan protests were as a result of these events? That is not opinion. That is fact. So If you do dispute any of that, then you are denying facts. So while the US may well have funneled 5 billion into Ukraine and Victoria Nuland may well have discussed who the US's favoured Presidential replacement would be, the US did not orchestrate a coup, oust a democratically elected pro Russian leader and install a pro-EU one. The Ukrainian people ousted a President who had done a complete volte face and replaced him with someone who would implement the will of over 80% of the electorate. Accept reality, take your heads out of the sand and stop acting as apologists for Putin.

The analogy with the events in the US in January 2022 is a false one. That involved some US citizens refusing to accept the result of a free and fair election. Imo a better analogy is Brexit and the 2019 British General Election. Boris Johnson was elected on a platform to 'Get Brexit done' I.e. implement the UK's electorate's decision to leave the EU. If Johnson had decided instead not to leave the EU but instead forge closer ties with the EU, then I don't think Brexit supporters could have been blamed for taking to the streets (and I say that as a Brit who is strongly pro-EU).

Thanks, Trans. Welcome back. Looking forward to the return of the crystal ball😉

Although the US may have fanned the flames, the Maiden Revolution was not initiated by the US. The fire was lit by ordinary Ukrainian citizens taking to the streets to object to Yanukovych ignoring the platform on which he was elected i.e. to develop closer economic ties with the EU, and instead doing a complete volte face and - under pressure from Moscow - aligning Ukraine economically with Russia. This root cause of this war is economic, with a dose of Putin's belief in a Greater Russia comprising of Belarus and Ukraine thrown in for good measure. Pre-war Ukraine was Russia's third biggest trading partner (behind China and the EU). Russia had been pressurising Ukraine to join a customs union with it for some time. Instead, Ukraine looked West and sought closer ties with the EU, something that Putin was unable to accept as it would be a major blow to the Russian economy; hence, the escalation of hostilities towards Ukraine starting in 2014. The invasion in 2022 was the end result. You can introduce as many non sequiturs as you like. The truth of the matter is that Russia was the instigator of this war.

Then it should be very long until reports in the conservative media outside of the UK start to appear.

I apologise. No I don't think the next 42 by-elections will offer any respite for Labour. Nor do I think that even if they lose control of every one of those councils that Starmer will be ousted from power as a consequence. Come the first of November when - assuming there is no scandal - Starmer is still PM you can admit that you were wrong.

There is dissatisfaction with the government's performance, both in the country as a whole and the Labour party in particular. That is undeniable. However, that - and the fact that polls have Starmer/ Labour trailing in the polls - is almost completely irrelevant at this point in time. The government is not about to call a GE tomorrow. If things haven't improved by the second half of 2026, then Starmer's position may come under threat. Currently, imo he is safe. Perhaps because of his support for Ukraine. Smart money will stay on the sidelines

I'll admit that I confused the figures for the May elections with the total number of councils in England but nevertheless my point holds. Unless there is a scandal, the chances of the Labour PLP or NEC ousting a PM, who delivered a 174-seat majority in parliament less than a year ago, on the back of some bad results in local council elections is negligible. Clueless? Yes that about sums it up if you believe that Starmer will no longer be PM in November (unless there is a scandal).

I agree with your sentiments. The dying should never have started. That it did is down to one man and his supporters. That it won't stop is down to the same cabal.

Most might be but most victims of arson aren't politicians. Three completely unrelated incidents which have no bearing on this case. You have clearly decided what are the reasons for this attack. I'll remain open-minded and see what comes out at the trial. Only you know whether that is misinformation or disinformation. In any event, it is simply not true. Labour fielded candidates in over 95% of wards. Going into the election, Labour had 6 322 councillors. Afterwards it had 6 124, a decline of +/-3%. The NEC won't welcome any losses but the idea that the loss of the likes of Basildon council will see them oust Starmer is wishful thinking on your part. If things don't improve the mutterings about Starmer's leadership will, no doubt, grow louder but - notwithstanding what might be revealed in the arson case - the chances of him going before this time next year are very slim.

Each and every arson attack is personal? You know that for a fact? If it was a sting operation organised by a foreign power, I'd imagine that they would have sufficient resources to do background research on Starmer, wouldn't you? There were 1,641 by-elections in May. The results were not good for Labour but there was no pressure on Starmer to resign. However, you think that the results of 42 by-election results in the next 2 months will be enough to force Starmer from office? And you call me naive😂

Agreed. It is disgraceful. It's no surprise that the Putin-loving governments of Hungary and Slovakia are doing all they can to support Russia, but the other EU states should have done much more to wean themselves off their dependency on Russian energy. The time to act was 2014 not 2022. Still better late than never I suppose.

The 'male models' incident might be a Profumo type episode, it might be a sting operation or it might be nothing. Time will time. If the former, Starmer will be gone quickly. Assuming that 'there is nothing to see', I very much doubt that Starmer will be gone within the next 18 months. No one in the cabinet is going to openly challenge his leadership this year unless there is some other scandal. There may be grumbles on the backbenches, but there is not open rebellion and, more importantly, there is no one there who could mount a credible leadership challenge.

Genuine question: When do you think that Starmer will be gone by?

Were you on the electoral register? If not, then the MP was under no obligation to represent you. If you were on the electoral register - and that was the reason given to you for refusing to support your case - then imo this MP is failing in their responsibilities and, in your position, I would have complained to the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards. MPs are obviously not obliged to support constituents' every grievance as they may not think that there is a case to answer. However, imo they cannot refuse to support your case simply because you live abroad if you are registered as one of their constituents.

Completely ridiculous. Compare and contrast: https://www.amnesty.org/en/location/europe-and-central-asia/eastern-europe-and-central-asia/russia/report-russia/ https://www.amnesty.org/en/location/europe-and-central-asia/western-central-and-south-eastern-europe/united-kingdom/report-united-kingdom/

Whether it is a commercial or public channel is surely irrelevant to the point about those complaining about programmes which they themselves have not seen.

A MAD 2025 indeed. And no doubt, an outcome most Western-hating Russians are also looking forward to.

Imo largely token measures e.g. banning of a dozen or so Russian nationals from the EU, etc. A much stronger response was needed. It was an invasion of a sovereign country with whom - but for Russian invention - the EU would have had a trade agreement. Too little was done by the EU at the time. Imo at the very least, a plan - and serious intention - to move away from dependency on Russian energy supplies should have been implemented in 2014, not 2022.

You didn't. That particular comment wasn't directed at you specifically. It was a general observation. However, I understand why you might think that it was directed at you. Apologies. Nevertheless, my point stands: This is a non-story. GB News are considering the future of one of their programmes ... And? It's no surprise that an organisation should review the performance of one of its' products. Yes, it would be a strange behaviour to complain about a TV programme which the person has not seen. However, it is an assumption that is the case. In any event, why assume that such behaviour is limited to lefties? It's no less (or more) likely that right-wingers who don't watch HIGNFY might complain about it.