RayC
-
Posts
4,918 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Events
Forums
Downloads
Quizzes
Gallery
Blogs
Posts posted by RayC
-
-
On 6/2/2025 at 9:57 AM, Nick Carter icp said:
Again, that wasn't a football riot .
That was Muslims/Sympathisers attacking Jews , nothing to do with the football game .
That was political violence , just like the Paris riot
In the Belgium case, it was far-right thugs attacking Muslims.
-
1
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
8 minutes ago, Cameroni said:That's complete nonsense. Putin has repeatedly said the exact opposite, affirmed Ukraine's right to exist, denied the USSR can be revived or should be revived, all that is cheap NATO propaganda
Really? Straight from the horse's mouth. Sounds a lot like 'A Greater Russia' to me:
http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/66181
8 minutes ago, Cameroni said:Russia has no intention to invade the Baltics or Poland, again just more scaremongering nonsense.
Not in the slightest. You were the one who stated that the West only understands force. Given that, it would only be rational for countries neighbouring Russia to look at them with trepidation.
8 minutes ago, Cameroni said:No, as was made clear , despite claims of "non-alignment" Ukraine was very deeply co-operating with NATO in the many ways listed above.
You cannot disagree just because the FACTS do not fit your narrative. Actually you can and have done so here. Nothing you posted remotely justified Russia's annexation of Crimea. "Very deeply co-operating" = agreeing to potentially take part in NATO peacekeeping activities in Afghanistan and Kosovo. Yes, a real threat to Russia's security.
The FACT remains that Ukraine was 1) not seeking NATO membership and 2) was non-aligned at the time of Russia's annexation of Ukraine.
8 minutes ago, Cameroni said:An explosive New York Times exposé by Adam Entous and Michael Schwirtz sheds light on major developments preceding the full-scale invasion of Ukraine. According to the report, the Ukrainian government entered into a wide-ranging partnership with the CIA against Russia. This cooperation, which involved the establishment of as many as 12 secret CIA “forward operating bases” along Ukraine’s border with Russia, began not with Russia’s 2022 invasion, but just over 10 years ago.
Within days of the February 2014 Euromaidan Revolution that culminated with the ouster of President Viktor Yanukovych and ushered in a firmly pro-Western government, the newly appointed head of the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU), Valentyn Nalyvaichenko, reportedly proposed a “three-way partnership” with the CIA and MI6, the UK’s foreign intelligence service. Ukrainian security officials gradually proved their value to the U.S. by feeding the CIA intelligence on Russia, including “secret documents about the Russian Navy,” leading to the establishment of CIA bases in Ukraine to coordinate activities against Russia and various training programs for Ukrainian commandos and other elite units.
You mean this explosive expose?
http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/66181
Again nothing in this article - assuming that it is all true - justifies annexing another sovereign country's territory.
8 minutes ago, Cameroni said:I think the key issue is that Russia, for many years prior to 2008 made it clear that Ukraine joining NATO was as red line that could not be crossed. At the Bucharest announcement Putin voiced his clear opposition. He was ignored. When Ukraine persisted in co-opearting with NATO, whilst telling Russia it was non-aligned, obviously Russia could see what Ukraine was really doing. This was a grave concern because Ukraine is the key to the great European plains, which are impossible to defend if Ukraine joins NATO. So yes, it was legitimate on every level.
What you are saying amounts to, Ukraine should have ceased all contact with NATO even concerning such activities as peacekeeping in countries such as Kosovo. And on the economic front? Should Ukraine have withdrawn from the Association Agreement with the EU?
For an independent country, it doesn't seem like it would have had much independence.
-
2
-
1
-
2
-
1
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
3 minutes ago, jvs said:Maybe have a look at the laws in the Ukraine?
Elections are not held during time of war.
It's not just the laws that prevent elections being held in Ukraine, it's the small matter of a large part of its' infrastructure has been destroyed and a huge number of the electorate displaced.
Holding elections in Ukraine now is one of the most bone-headed suggestions I have heard in a long while.
-
4
-
1
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
On 6/2/2025 at 9:17 AM, impulse said:Don't you mean after the coup?
No, the coup had nothing to do with Ukraine - EU relations whereas the Russian annexation of Crimea had a huge bearing on them.
However, I will correct myself. Ukraine withdrew its' application for NATO membership in 2010 and was non-aligned until December 2014 when the Ukrainian parliament voted to end its' neutrality. Imo hardly surprising given that her neighbour had annexed its' terrority and was actively supporting separatist rebels. Ukraine did not actually formally re-apply for NATO membership until May 2022 following Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
On 6/2/2025 at 9:18 AM, Cameroni said:On 24 June 2010 the Ukrainian Cabinet of Ministers approved an action plan to implement an annual national program of cooperation with NATO that year.[82] This included:[82]
- Involvement of Ukrainian aviation and transport material in the transportation of cargo and personnel of the armed forces of NATO's member states and partners participating in NATO-led peacekeeping missions and operations;
- The continuation of Ukraine's participation in a peacekeeping operation in Kosovo;
- Possible reinforcing of Ukraine's peacekeeping contingents in Afghanistan and Iraq;
- Ukraine's participation in a number of international events organized by NATO;
- Training of Ukrainian troops in the structures of NATO members.
Ukraine and NATO continued to hold joint seminars and joint tactical and strategical exercises and operations during the Yanukovych Presidency.
And you think that any of that should have been viewed in Moscow as a threat to Russia's security and a justification for an invasion of a neighbouring sovereign nation?
On 6/2/2025 at 9:18 AM, Cameroni said:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine–NATO_relations
So whilst Ukraine was briefly non-aligned, this came to a swift end when Yanukovych was ousted in the CIA formented Maidan uprising.
Ukraine was non-aligned for 4 years from 2010 up until Russia's annexation of Crimea.
The coup was not CIA 'formented'. The Maiden uprising was a direct result of Yanukovych refusing to sign the EU - Ukraine Association Agreement, which had been passed by the Ukrainian parliament and had the support of > 80% of the Ukrainian electorate. Instead, negating the platform to forge closer ties with the EU on which he was elected, Yanukovych - under pressure from Moscow - did a complete volte face and unilaterally decided to align Ukraine with Russia
On 6/2/2025 at 9:18 AM, Cameroni said:And even during this "non-alignment" Ukraine was co-operating closely with and aiding NATO.
Over and over what you outlined previously? Can you supply details please?
On 6/2/2025 at 9:18 AM, Cameroni said:But all that is irrelevant, Ukraine had shown it was receptive to switching sides to Europe and NATO. NATO had shown that it had lied, and deceived Russia that it would not expand eastwards. When NATO brazenly announced in Bucharest that Ukraine would become a NATO member, it was only THEN that Russia understood it was lied to and the danger of Ukraine becoming more friendly with the West than Russia was very real. Only THEN did Russia resolved to take military action, when years and years of making clear that Ukraine was a red line, when years of diplomatic efforts were shown to be fruitless.
And the vast majority of that is irrelevant and much is incorrect. Wrt Europe, Ukraine had long been looking to develop closer ties with the EU. A signing of the Association Agreement would have, no doubt, lead to a formal application to join the bloc if the annexation of Crimea had not occurred.
The fact remains that Ukraine withdrew its' application for NATO membership in 2010, so the 'red line' which you use to justify Russia's actions not only hadn't been crossed but did not exist!
The truth of the matter is that Putin is a greater Russia zealot: He does not believe in Ukraine's right to exist as an independent nation. Russia was also not prepared to allow Ukraine to align economically with the West i.e. the EU, as doing so would have further weakened an already fragile Russian economy.
On 6/2/2025 at 9:18 AM, Cameroni said:The only language the West understands, sadly is force.
So that justified the invasion of Ukraine? Would that also provide a justification for invading the Baltic states or reclaiming the land which Stalin 'gifted' to Poland?
Sadly, it appears that we have returned to the post-WW2 situation where Russia is led by an expansionist despot.
-
2
-
3
-
2
-
1
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
38 minutes ago, Cameroni said:Please.
NATO grandly announced Ukraine was on track to become a member. Ukraine has enshrined the goal of NATO membership in its very constitution.
in February 1994, Ukraine was the first post-Soviet country to conclude a framework agreement with NATO in the framework of the Partnership for Peace initiative, supporting the initiative of Central and Eastern European countries to join NATO.
During President Viktor Yushchenko's first official visit to the United States, President George W. Bush declared: "I am a supporter of the idea of Ukraine's membership in NATO.
On 27 April 2006 at a meeting of NATO foreign ministers, the representative of the NATO Secretary General, James Appathurai, stated that all members of the alliance support the speedy integration of Ukraine into NATO.
At the NATO summit in Bucharest in April 2008, NATO decided it would not yet offer membership to Georgia and Ukraine; nevertheless, NATO Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer said that those two countries would eventually become members.
An incomplete history. Why stop at 2008? Ahh .... here's why:
Ukraine voted to abandon the goal of NATO membership and re-affirm her neutral status in 2010.
Ukraine was a non-aligned country when Russia annexed Crimea in March 2014. She only reapplied for NATO membership in December 2014 following the annexation and Moscow's increased support for separatist rebels in Donbass.
-
1
-
2
-
36 minutes ago, frank83628 said:
Ray, you will never change my mind with your western propaganda, I am surprised you still regurgitate it when knowing full well it's Boll ox
Frank, You are unwilling to accept facts.
It is irrational to dismiss facts that don't fit your pre-ordained narrative as nothing more than Western propaganda and boll ox and refuse to change your mind.
36 minutes ago, frank83628 said:Are you the same Ray that is halfcast dude profile picture on phangan conscious page?
(That was genuine question, not sure what is ok or racist anymore?
No.
(Half-caste is now considered a derogatory phrase. Mixed race is an alternative).
-
40 minutes ago, JonnyF said:
Yes he fooled you all. He sold you a lie and you gobbled it up. Hook line and sinker.
Maybe you should learn something from this.
But I doubt you will.
I didn't think this was a thread about Brexit.
-
34 minutes ago, frank83628 said:
Ray ray, go away, you are just regurgitating the BBC media BS, I am on Putins side 100%, nothing you say will change that. Putin is a strong world leader, you are backing up weak politicians from the UK, stamer vs Putin, I bet Vlad for the win.
USA orchestrated the 2014 coup. And antagonised the situation to where we are today
So facts are BS and they won't change your mind.
I'll just leave that there for all to see.
-
1
-
1
-
-
Just now, frank83628 said:
You can repeat the western propaganda machine as much as you want, it doesn't make it true.
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.
Just now, frank83628 said:Even after WMDs, 911, , Assad gassing his people, Gaddafi, Saddam's babies in incubators, anthrax,
All completely irrelevant to the discussion of events in Ukraine in 2014.
Just now, frank83628 said:you still vehemently back those that have lied to you and been proven liars.. fool me once and all that, gullible. Com
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.
-
1
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, impulse said:
That's one version of history.
No it is not one version of history, it is a chronological listing of events.
4 hours ago, impulse said:But I still remember when the CIA didn't foment any coups in Latin America, according to the approved history books of the time. (Edit: Nor SEA) Now, we all know better.
What the CIA did or didn't do in Latin America in the 1980s is completely irrelevant to the events in Ukraine in 2014.
4 hours ago, impulse said:I'm not a Putin apologist. I'm a realist.
4 hours ago, impulse said:The only way Crimea and Donbas are going back is to risk WW3, a NATO ground war, and nuclear Armageddon. I'd prefer that not happen.
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
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, frank83628 said:
Yes, I dispute all the western propaganda you wrote.
RFK only yesterday spoke about the US coup and NATO expansion to Putins borders, and how the US provoked the war.
do you think you know more than him when it comes to Ukraine? Do I believe someone that is in US government or someone on an expat forum that reads the bbc
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.
-
1
-
-
6 hours ago, brewsterbudgen said:
As a Labour voter, I'm hugely disappointed by Starmer's leadership and the government in general...so far. Particularly his pandering to Reform which will prove very counter-productive. I can't see him resigning though, and it's fanciful to think there will be another election before 2029. A lot can happen, and will.
Thanks. My thoughts exactly. Imo you have summed up the thoughts of most Labour supporters.
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, frank83628 said:
The US funneled 5 billion into Ukraine, the US orchestrated the coup, Victoria Nuland is on recorded telephone conversation discussing who they will put in power..
The US ousted the democratically elected pro Russian leader and installed a pro western/ EU one
3 hours ago, impulse said:Never let facts get in the way of a good Commie bashing.
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.
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, VBer said:
On January 6, 2021 ordinary US citizens took the streets and Capitol. However it was not accepted by US government.
Why did these particular Ukrainian citizens have not waited for the next presidential election to choose a president who represented the real wish of all Ukrainian citizens? Why have they decided it for all regions, including Crimea and Donbas?
Your country most likely will not face anything good if your current government overthrown by coup.
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).
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, transam said:
Well said, Raymond.....👍
Thanks, Trans. Welcome back. Looking forward to the return of the crystal ball😉
-
1
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
1 hour ago, frank83628 said:There was more than 1 man involved in the US funded coup of 2014
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.
-
1
-
2
-
1 hour ago, James105 said:
This is the same guy who had an HIV test recently as well as a gay billionaire sugar daddy showering him with gifts and the arsonists are all rent boys. No one, and I mean no-one, in a committed stable straight monogamous married relationship has an HIV test. I mean, what are the odds that this is all coincidental and its a politically motivated attack? If the bookies took bets on this kind of thing I think the odds of there not being a "personal" connection would be quite astronomical.
Then it should be very long until reports in the conservative media outside of the UK start to appear.
-
2 minutes ago, The Cyclist said:
Is that a feeble attempt at an apology after this utter guff ?
No misinformation
No disinformation
And very, very true.
The latest Council election
You think it is going to get better across the 42 By-Election across the next 2 months 😀😀😀
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.
-
1 hour ago, James105 said:
The left wing press/media have turned on him. The left have turned on him. He has already lost the millionaires, the working class, the farmers, the pensioners, the greens, the small and medium sized businesses. Their large majority is built on sand and polling suggests a wipeout even bigger than the Tories last time should an election be held tomorrow. The only growth is in the number of illegal immigrants arriving and the amount spent on benefits for foreign nationals (which has now reached £1bn per month). GDP per capita continues to decline which means everyone is getting poorer no matter what kind of minuscule GDP growth there is.
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.
1 hour ago, James105 said:The real question is why on earth would a foreign power make the effort to do something that would oust such a weak, incompetent PM that weakens and diminishes the UK each day he is in office? If an enemy is shooting themselves in the foot on such a regular basis then the opponent wouldn't take their gun away. So the smart money would be on these rent boys that committed arson being known to him in a personal capacity.
Perhaps because of his support for Ukraine. Smart money will stay on the sidelines
-
57 minutes ago, The Cyclist said:
How about giving it a rest ?
Labour finished the last round of by-election with 98 Councillors, having started with 285 Councillors
That is a loss of 187 councillors. You do the maths, is about 68%.
The info is freely available if you care to look, even the BBC has it.
https://www.bbc.com/news/live/c39jedewxp8t
Just admit it. You are either trolling, clueless or your name is Kier.
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).
-
5 hours ago, impulse said:
I'm supporting the kids dying on both sides. Ukes and Russkies. Dying over borders that haven't moved in over 2 years and lots of dead bodies.
It's time for the dying to stop and the rebuilding to begin. Long past time.
5 hours ago, impulse said: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.
-
1
-
-
6 hours ago, The Cyclist said:
Most arson attacks in the UK are insurance jobs, gang related or personal vendettas.
Most might be but most victims of arson aren't politicians.
6 hours ago, The Cyclist said:Here is the last 3 sting operations in the UK involving politicians
See if you can guess what the 2 common denominators are ?
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.
6 hours ago, The Cyclist said:Labour only contested a small number of those by elections, and still lost 70% of their councillors in the contested seats.
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%.
6 hours ago, The Cyclist said:Another hammering like that will see him out the door, ousted by the NEC.
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.
-
1 hour ago, The Cyclist said:
You missed out that they are also Male Escorts.
Nothing to see here. Move along now.
How does a 21 & 25 year old know about a property that Starmer allegedly sold 20 years ago ?
Arson / attempted arson is a personal attack, not a sting operation.
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?
1 hour ago, The Cyclist said:The cabinet ? You appear to be pretty naive, his downfall will not come from the cabinet.
There are about 42 by-election across June and July, suffer defeats like they did, as posted above and he will be gone.
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😂
Paris football riots? What's the deal?
in Political Soapbox
Posted
I'm not denying that the Amsterdam riot was anti-Jewish but your initial reply could be read as implying both the Belgian and Dutch riots were anti-Jewish which is not the case.
In a similar vein to Amsterdam, there was no need for the Brugge "supporters" to go to Molenbeek. They also went there just for confrontation.
There's no monopoly when it comes to political violence.