Don't be silly, Donuel. I seek out multiple sources and I have stated that in my opinion the odds are on Russian involvement. While I still think that, to me it's looking more doubtful by the day in this instance. At the very least there appears to have been a rush to judgement and it's notable how the drip-feed of "evidence" has dried up. Iains' source is one of many I've resorted to and I'm constantly on guard against confirmation bias. In fact, I dislike Putin and his regime intensely and the last thing I would do is strain to find ways of letting him off any hook. As for "accepting an Iains link" I can assure you that I read it end to end then spent a quarter of an hour looking up the author's credentials. If anyone's gullible, it's you for dismissing a piece of writing because it's an "Iains link." By all means dismiss it because it's shite if that's what you think. That's what I do with his Express and Mail and Guido links, once I've read 'em. Right?