1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

You ‘conveniently’ fail to provide an explanation other than ‘mud sticks’ and then start throwing mud.

 

You are correct though, Putin is a nationalist.

 

There were also a string of apartment bombings under Putin's watch that were highly dubious. Not saying I believe in that conspiracy theory, but at least I'm critical. You on the other hand just blindly swallow anything your government tells you.

 

Russia targets their own citizens with no motive or proof, acceptable theory considered fact. Britain targets Russian citizens with a motive and no evidence, baseless conspiracy theory. 

 

1 hour ago, tumama said:

 

There were also a string of apartment bombings under Putin's watch that were highly dubious. Not saying I believe in that conspiracy theory, but at least I'm critical. You on the other hand just blindly swallow anything your government tells you.

 

Russia targets their own citizens with no motive or proof, acceptable theory considered fact. Britain targets Russian citizens with a motive and no evidence, baseless conspiracy theory. 

 

“Britain targets Russian citizens with a motive and no evidence, baseless conspiracy theory.” 

 

Where is your evidence that Britain ‘targets’ Russian citizens?

 

What ‘targetting’? What evidence of that ‘targetting’?

25 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

“Britain targets Russian citizens with a motive and no evidence, baseless conspiracy theory.” 

 

Where is your evidence that Britain ‘targets’ Russian citizens?

 

What ‘targetting’? What evidence of that ‘targetting’?

 

I didn't say evidence. I said they have a motive. I was pointing out the blatant hypocrisy in the English press. 

Just now, tumama said:

 

I didn't say evidence. I said they have a motive. I was pointing out the blatant hypocrisy in the English press. 

You said 

 

“Britain targets Russian citizens with a motive and no evidence, baseless conspiracy theory.” 

 

So what Russian Citizens did Britain target?

 

 

Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

You said 

 

“Britain targets Russian citizens with a motive and no evidence, baseless conspiracy theory.” 

 

So what Russian Citizens did Britain target?

 

Jesus. The Skripals obviously.

 

Not saying that they did. Just saying that's a more plausible theory. And it's hypocrisy calling one theory an absurd conspiracy theory and paint the other as a proven fact. 

Just now, tumama said:

 

Jesus. The Skripals obviously.

 

Not saying that they did. Just saying that's a more plausible theory. And it's hypocrisy calling one theory an absurd conspiracy theory and paint the other as a proven fact. 

 

Oh so now Britain targeted the Skripals, but of course you’ll only suggest it because your real fixation is not believing anything you are told.

 

Come on, tell us the ‘more plausible’ reasons why Britain should target the Skripals?

8 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

 

Oh so now Britain targeted the Skripals, but of course you’ll only suggest it because your real fixation is not believing anything you are told.

 

Come on, tell us the ‘more plausible’ reasons why Britain should target the Skripals?

 

Because they have an axe to grind with Russia. That they accused Russia of being guilty before the investigation was over, and that they lied and said that Porton Down had identified the nerve agent as having been produced in Russia, clearly proves that.

 

Skripal's handler supposedly worked for the company that produced the Steel dossier. They were friends and both lived in Salisbury. So it's quite likely that Skripal was involved in compiling that dossier. Perhaps he had some information about that they didn't want him to disclose. 

 

The timing is also interesting. That it happened when his niece visited him. Perhaps they were afraid that he was planning to go back to Russia. The symptoms as described by a witness is also interesting. It's consistent with BZ poisoning, not Novichok. Which would explain why they didn't just die on the spot. 

 

But these are just theories. Although they are way more plausible than U.K's conspiracy theory. 

 

3 hours ago, tumama said:

 

Because they have an axe to grind with Russia. That they accused Russia of being guilty before the investigation was over, and that they lied and said that Porton Down had identified the nerve agent as having been produced in Russia, clearly proves that.

 

Skripal's handler supposedly worked for the company that produced the Steel dossier. They were friends and both lived in Salisbury. So it's quite likely that Skripal was involved in compiling that dossier. Perhaps he had some information about that they didn't want him to disclose. 

 

The timing is also interesting. That it happened when his niece visited him. Perhaps they were afraid that he was planning to go back to Russia. The symptoms as described by a witness is also interesting. It's consistent with BZ poisoning, not Novichok. Which would explain why they didn't just die on the spot. 

 

But these are just theories. Although they are way more plausible than U.K's conspiracy theory. 

 

More pro-Russia nonsense to go with all the other pro-Russia nonsense you post in multiple posts across multiple threads.

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

More pro-Russia nonsense to go with all the other pro-Russia nonsense you post in multiple posts across multiple threads.

 

Insightful. Fascinating analysis.  

So here is a really really interesting development. The two latest people to be poisoned (the woman died) had a bottle containing the nerve agent in their home. Me thinks the surviving man has some serious explaining to do.

 

Quote

Salisbury poisoning cops find bottle of Novichok in victim Charlie Rowley’s home

Quote

Now the Met has confirmed a small bottle found in Charlie and Dawn's home contained the same nerve agent which left the former Russian spy and his daughter fighting for their lives.

More tests will now take place to see if the bottle which came to be in Charlie's house contains the same batch of substance used to poison the Skripals in March.

 

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6774123/salisbury-poisoning-novichok-amesbury-home-victim-charlie-rowley/

 

Now this could prove to be fairly significant. Are these two the people that poisoned the Russian and his daughter? Ouch! We may get some answers after all and it is unlikely to be as straight forward as everybody (The British Government) first thought. 

 

 

 

On 7/12/2018 at 3:52 PM, tumama said:

 

Yes of course my focus is on U.K, that is what this thread is about. The point you make is wrong. The law is clear, but not everyone respects it. 

 

Again, "able to act" can simply be a condemnation. I never said U.N could somehow punish Russia. That's not really what U.N does in cases like these. I'm obviously talking about potential future sanctions, or sanctions already in place that could get extended due to this. That is what the people will ultimately decide. Again, this is not rocket science. 

 

No information given to the public, is the same as having no evidence. Again, this shouldn't be hard to fathom. How is that contradictory? It's my opinion that U.K government's credibility is low, obviously not the same opinion of the other countries that expelled the diplomats. 

 

That is what a motive is. Just because you don't have a known motive, doesn't mean you are not guilty. But in this case we have no motive and no evidence. So your Novichok argument is bullshit then. Because obviously you have no problem writing other lengthy nonsense. 

 

 

 

The topic relates to two countries. That your focus is on the UK doesn't change that. The point made was not "wrong", as was demonstrated in other posts. There is no such "law", and inasmuch as there is, it is far from "clear".

 

What  you're talking about, in relation to the UN is nonsense (at best). That's obvious enough. The likelihood and possibility of the UN "condemning" Russia (on which forum, exactly?) makes the (new) proposition ridiculous. Sanctions already in place on Russia are by the US, EU and allies. Not much to do with the UN. Pretty much the same course of action with regard to expelling Russian diplomats in this case. None of this got anything much to do with "the people will decide". It's not rocket science, just pure rubbish.

 

No information given to the public, is not "the same as having no evidence". Governments often withhold information, and there are many details and facts, on a variety of issues, which are not public knowledge. Pretending otherwise is disingenuous, at best. To return to your nonsense "argument" - you claimed (without substantiating it) that countries kicked Russia diplomats solely on the UK governments' word. But you also claimed UK government's credibility was low. So obviously there are quite a few governments not seeing things your way, and presumably they are a tad more informed. If you wish to convey your opinions, by all means - presenting them as facts, and then obfuscating when countered, meh.

 

There were plenty of discussions detailing motives. Plenty of articles linked as well. That you ignore them won't make them go away.

On 7/12/2018 at 6:19 PM, tumama said:

And this:

 

https://www.opcw.org/chemical-weapons-convention/articles/article-ix-consultations-cooperation-and-fact-finding/

 

So according to the convention, U.K is required to give Russia sufficient information to answer their accusations. 

 

It doesn't quite say what you claim. Nice try.

On 7/13/2018 at 9:44 AM, dick dasterdly said:

Because they know that 'mud sticks', and also know that the politics of fear/distraction and nationalism work very well with the populace to increase support....

 

I find it ridiculous that the "uk-demands-russia-explain-nerve-attack-after-two-more-people-struck-down" - bearing in mind the uk govt. has provided zero evidence that russia was responsible for the first attack - let alone the latest incident involving two civilians!

 

IMO, this demand is the equivalent of the 'funny'question 'How often do you beat your wife?'.....  i.e. All implication, when there is no evidence at all  - especially in this latest case.

 

Never mind that you can't make a coherent argument as to what "mud" sticks, or how things actually helped May's government. If that was the aim, probably less convulsed ways of going about it. But since you're keen on the "nationalism" angle:

 

Russia election: Putin's team says Skripal scandal 'mobilised nation and increased turnout'

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russia-election-latest-putin-victory-skripal-attack-link-increase-citizen-turnout-uk-salisbury-spy-a8262996.html

 

Your closing "analogy" reminds me of some other lines "walked into that window", "fell down the stairs", "them sneaky door frames". Carry on.

On 7/13/2018 at 1:50 PM, tumama said:

 

Jesus. The Skripals obviously.

 

Not saying that they did. Just saying that's a more plausible theory. And it's hypocrisy calling one theory an absurd conspiracy theory and paint the other as a proven fact. 

 

Only it isn't "more plausible". Not by a long-shot.

16 hours ago, Morch said:

Only it isn't "more plausible". Not by a long-shot.

 

No, it's much more plausible that the Russians did it to punish traitors. That's why they gave him 18 years in prison instead of life. I mean why go the easy way when you can kill them abroad, that causes extended and further economic sanctions against you?

 

Given the latest developments in this case it's starting to look more like an amateur job perpetuated by either an individual or a small country. 

On 7/14/2018 at 3:05 AM, Andaman Al said:

So here is a really really interesting development. The two latest people to be poisoned (the woman died) had a bottle containing the nerve agent in their home. Me thinks the surviving man has some serious explaining to do.

 

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6774123/salisbury-poisoning-novichok-amesbury-home-victim-charlie-rowley/

 

Now this could prove to be fairly significant. Are these two the people that poisoned the Russian and his daughter? Ouch! We may get some answers after all and it is unlikely to be as straight forward as everybody (The British Government) first thought. 

 

 

 

As you say, it is an interesting and inexplicable development.

 

We all wait to hear Rowley's statement on this issue.  Presumably he's still too ill to talk?

Just now, tumama said:

 

No, it's much more plausible that the Russians did it to punish traitors. That's why they gave him 18 years in prison instead of life. I mean why go the easy way when you can kill them abroad, that causes extended and further economic sanctions against you?

 

Given the latest developments in this case it's starting to look more like an amateur job perpetuated by either an individual or a small country. 

At the moment, none of the theories put forward are particularly plausible - hence the discussion/debate amongst a few of us on these threads!

23 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

As you say, it is an interesting and inexplicable development.

 

We all wait to hear Rowley's statement on this issue.  Presumably he's still too ill to talk?

 

He might be, or they haven't released what he said yet. 

 

I find the location of these two incidents interesting given their close proximity to Porton Down. If Rowley, or someone he knows worked there, they would be able to produce this nerve agent. But then why target the Skripals? That someone would by co-incidence target a former spy I find very unlikely.

 

Add to it the witness that saw them when they were sitting on the bench, that said Skripal was waiving his hand in the air, like someone who is on psychedelic drugs. That's consistent of BZ poisoning, not Novichok. So perhaps they were attacked with both. If they were, then maybe the intent wasn't to kill them.

 

Skripal made no attempt to hide his identity. So it would be easy for an inexperienced intelligence service from a country such as Ukraine to carry this out.

 

It would also be interesting to see if U.K is scrambling to give all the other former Russian spies new identities right now. Because if they are not, shows they don't think Russia is behind this. 

 

Lastly, the voice recording between the niece and the cousin is also interesting. The part where she says you are not going to get a visa. To me that shows that the niece is being held against her will. Essentially kidnapped by the British authorities. 

34 minutes ago, tumama said:

 

He might be, or they haven't released what he said yet. 

 

I find the location of these two incidents interesting given their close proximity to Porton Down. If Rowley, or someone he knows worked there, they would be able to produce this nerve agent. But then why target the Skripals? That someone would by co-incidence target a former spy I find very unlikely.

 

Add to it the witness that saw them when they were sitting on the bench, that said Skripal was waiving his hand in the air, like someone who is on psychedelic drugs. That's consistent of BZ poisoning, not Novichok. So perhaps they were attacked with both. If they were, then maybe the intent wasn't to kill them.

 

Skripal made no attempt to hide his identity. So it would be easy for an inexperienced intelligence service from a country such as Ukraine to carry this out.

 

It would also be interesting to see if U.K is scrambling to give all the other former Russian spies new identities right now. Because if they are not, shows they don't think Russia is behind this. 

 

Lastly, the voice recording between the niece and the cousin is also interesting. The part where she says you are not going to get a visa. To me that shows that the niece is being held against her will. Essentially kidnapped by the British authorities. 

"He might be, or they haven't released what he said yet."

 

Yes, I wondered about that - but at the moment there's no evidence about anything!

 

So whilst it's right (IMO) to be extremely sceptical, it's a case of 'wait and see' as to what happens/is said, next.

3 hours ago, tumama said:

 

No, it's much more plausible that the Russians did it to punish traitors. That's why they gave him 18 years in prison instead of life. I mean why go the easy way when you can kill them abroad, that causes extended and further economic sanctions against you?

 

Given the latest developments in this case it's starting to look more like an amateur job perpetuated by either an individual or a small country. 

 

You keep pushing the same nonsense. His sentence wasn't quite "going easy" other than in your imagination. Going by your "logic", Skripal would have never been exchanged for Russian spies caught in the West. And yet...

 

Assuming Russia was responsible for the attempt on Skripal's life, I doubt his survival and the operation becoming a mess were part of the plan.

 

The "recent developments" do not actually support the assertions you push.

26 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

You keep pushing the same nonsense. His sentence wasn't quite "going easy" other than in your imagination. Going by your "logic", Skripal would have never been exchanged for Russian spies caught in the West. And yet...

 

Assuming Russia was responsible for the attempt on Skripal's life, I doubt his survival and the operation becoming a mess were part of the plan.

 

The "recent developments" do not actually support the assertions you push.

 

So, you're saying that 18 years is somehow the same as life without the possibility of parole? Surely, if they wanted to show a message to traitors, they would never let them out. But you conveniently leave that argument out, because it destroys yours. 

 

You go on and say that the FSB would botch the assassination attempt. This is the FSB we're talking about. They are professional, that they would first botch the assassination and later somehow just discard the bottle in a dumpster (presumably), doesn't sound like the FSB at all. Yeah and let's do all this shit right when Russia is hosting the world cup. That makes perfect sense doesn't it? I want what you are smoking.

An off topic post has been removed

On 7/15/2018 at 4:41 PM, tumama said:

 

So, you're saying that 18 years is somehow the same as life without the possibility of parole? Surely, if they wanted to show a message to traitors, they would never let them out. But you conveniently leave that argument out, because it destroys yours. 

 

You go on and say that the FSB would botch the assassination attempt. This is the FSB we're talking about. They are professional, that they would first botch the assassination and later somehow just discard the bottle in a dumpster (presumably), doesn't sound like the FSB at all. Yeah and let's do all this shit right when Russia is hosting the world cup. That makes perfect sense doesn't it? I want what you are smoking.

 

I haven't actually said what you allege with regard to Skripal's sentence. And obviously haven't left anything out - rather you injected more nonsense into the discussion. The arguments your "destroy" exist mostly in your imagination.

 

I haven't even referenced the FSB, so the "you go on and say" bit, is just more rubbish. Any intelligence organization can make mistakes, and they all have failures. There is no 100% operational success rate. Russian intelligence organizations are not infallible - for example, if they were, Skripal wouldn't have managed to carry out his original act of betrayal.

 

The attempt on Skripal was in early March. The World Cup was mid-June to mid-July.