BS: If Russia didn't do it..?

Subject: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 05 Apr 18 - 09:57 AM

In the light of recent revelations that BoJo of the FO has been caught with his trousers down in a lie over the Salisbury poisoning I think it is time to restart the discussion. The old thread was closed, so here is a new one. For those not aware of what I am on about here is a summary.

Of course Jonson has done it before. Here is a catalogue of other porkies that Boris has been caught out in.

Mind you, it should be no surprise that he was promoted to Foreign Secretary by a government that revels in lies and deceit. In my opinion that is.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Apr 18 - 10:16 AM

I am influenced by the fact that all the world's decent liberal democracies are satisfied that Russia did do it, e.g. the EU nations, Canada, Australia,....
I am sure they know more about the full story than we ever will, and I trust them over Putin's administration.

They have no reason to lie, but the guilty party does.
Also, Russia has previous.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 05 Apr 18 - 10:21 AM

Please note that the thread is about the lie told by our honest and upright Foreign Secretary. Don't let trolls divert it.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Raggytash
Date: 05 Apr 18 - 10:48 AM

Perhaps a change of title is in order "The Mendacity of BoJo"

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 05 Apr 18 - 10:53 AM

Good word!

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Donuel
Date: 05 Apr 18 - 11:10 AM

If Russia lied about the truth, they deny the truth.
If you deny Russia lied then you don't want the truth.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 05 Apr 18 - 11:18 AM

This could be quite an interesting thread. This means it will have a very short life I suspect. But congratulations for restarting it.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 05 Apr 18 - 11:32 AM

Putin did it!

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 05 Apr 18 - 11:44 AM

...now I'm not one to gloat [he said gloatingly...]

"punkfolkrocker - PM
Date: 20 Mar 18 - 01:16 PM

"mismanagement"...???

well.. errrmmm.. letting Boris loose to open his gob, for one thing.....


Now he is certainly a master of being easily convinced and certain on extremely problematic and complcated issues..."

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 05 Apr 18 - 11:48 AM

I have been an avid reader of everything I could find, relating to the incident. I also study the comments section that many of the articles have appended.
My cursory examination of the comments would suggest that the party line being delivered is not gathering the crowds of adherents expected.
This could present a serious problem for our future "democracy"
Could our trusted politicians be lying to us?????    (Again)

The great game in Syria is failing.
The UN is getting tired of the stories coming from the Yemen.
Things are kicking off in the Ukraine
etc.
etc.

All totally unrelated facts!       or are they?

Is this the true reality of globalism ?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 05 Apr 18 - 12:35 PM

An interesting snippet from a very dubious source

It was the restaurant wot done it

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Apr 18 - 01:02 PM

It really should be quite simple. If you are asserting that you know who the culprit is you should be prepared to give us the requisite evidence. All we've had so far is that a poison that's been around for 35 years was first made in Russia. We live in an era when almost anything can be easily copied or counterfeited, yet we're asked to accept that in 35 years no-one has yet managed it with this this stuff. Well maybe. We've had lots of people saying that what happened is typical of Russia so it must be Russia. We've had lots of people saying that a lot of countries who don't like Russia have said it must be Russia so it must be Russia. Well why wouldn't they. We've had people saying that we must trust the intelligence agencies (anyone for Saddam's WMDs?) and that it would be a Terrible Thing if those agencies were to tell us what secrets they have - bullshit! It doesn't make things any more true just because lots of people say they're true. Billions believe in a God that almost certainly isn't true. It seems to be almost a crime these days to demand actual evidence for things. Well not with me it isn't. I think there's a good chance that Russia dunnit but that's as far as it goes for me without further solid evidence. Just because people like Keith and bobad want it to have been Russia (do grow up), it doesn't make it any more likely that it was Russia.


Just sayin'...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Apr 18 - 01:04 PM

So it could be a vast global conspiracies with all the most liberal and democratic governments in the world conspiring to deceive, err, everyone else, or Putin did it.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 05 Apr 18 - 01:36 PM

Putin did it!

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 05 Apr 18 - 01:38 PM

Well Keith it was the most liberal and democratic government organised the delights of gladio , so all things are possible

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Apr 18 - 02:21 PM

I do not believe it possible that all those liberal democracies would engage in such a vast global conspiracy to all tell the same lies over this.
Much easier to believe it is a rerun of the Alexander Litvinenko murder, and all the others.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Apr 18 - 02:46 PM

Well we can either put forth reasoned arguments as I've just done or we can type predictably stupid things. We have the choice. "Reasoned" means you've thought about it before hitting the keys. It means giving us YOUR reasoned opinions, not the opinions of selected anti-Russia leaders of nations many of which you don't favour because of their stance on brexit (funny how selective some people can be, innit...). As we don't know whodunit as yet, we can't say who's telling lies or not. To say that requires unjustified assumptions. Belief is a wonderful thing. For a start, it doesn't require evidence.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Apr 18 - 02:47 PM

Link don't work, Iains.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 05 Apr 18 - 02:53 PM

Has anyone yet proposed the poisoning was an 'act of god'...

This incident will involve a lot of very complex insurance claims....??????

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 05 Apr 18 - 03:25 PM

Here is another link. Not with the same street cred as the original though.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Gladio

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Donuel
Date: 05 Apr 18 - 05:00 PM

Iains has a self awarded PHd on the subject of this thread.
He outranks everyone else here and should soon appear on FOX news to expound on his findings. Everyone else should await the revelations only he can unfurl.

unless

You are prejudiced against Vladimir Putin who gloats that he is the lifetime dictator of Russia, praise be upon him.

Is it his fault his opponents commit virtual and real suicide with guns, poisons and criminality?

Iains may not be a loyal Britain first commandant but he shall lead all who love this Historic Isle to the greater glories of the Russian State and its faultless leader.


psst... there is money in it for you.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 05 Apr 18 - 05:17 PM

Donuel we may find out one day who did the dastardly deed. However the way certain parties point the finger does not nothing to convince me as to the strength of their case. You would appear to be more easily easily led to the conviction that if the big boys say it is true then it must be true to the nth degree. It is a tenet of English law innocent until proven guilty. Does your countrymen's love of extraordinary rendition and waterboarding make such underpinnings of democracy superfluous or redundant?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Donuel
Date: 05 Apr 18 - 05:42 PM

There are desperate lawyers who try to get their client off of a murder charge with a flimsy technicality. Because of a history of your client's previous murder charges, sometimes circumstantial evidence is all the prosecution needs to fry your guy.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Apr 18 - 05:53 PM

But it's no better for justice than the lynch mob, Donuel.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 05 Apr 18 - 06:40 PM

The lynch mob is Putin and his henchmen, they mete their own justice.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Apr 18 - 07:55 PM

Here's the rub, bobad. We don't like Putin. I don't know a single person who would speak up for him. In fact we hate Putin. Putin pretends to hold fair elections after banning anyone who could possibly challenge him. Putin is a total git when it comes to Syria. Putin very likely interferes in other countries' elections. Putin's corrupt billionaire mates buy up huge tranches of London meaning that he gets a foothold here and is harder to oppose. One of Putin's henchmen owns Chelski football club and all sane footie fans bar the Shed-enders despise that. Putin is definitely corrupt in any accepted sense of the word. Putin is a threat to the stability of the planet (though quite likely less so than the turd in the White House).

Are you getting the message yet, bobad? He's persona non friggin' grata par excellence. He's detested by all sane westerners. He's a nasty bloody piece of work. I'd rather hack off my dangly bits with a rusty machete than call him my friend.

Do you get it yet, bobad? You don't NEED to tell us what an arse he is. We know, and have done for years. But there's just one teensy-weeny little thing. On the matter of the Salisbury poisoning, the thing has yet to be clinched. He may have done it. But he may not have. You don't know and neither do I. The difference between us is that you desperately WANT him to have done it, whereas I desperately want to know the truth. Neither you nor I can achieve our goals without - wait for it ( and you won't) - EVIDENCE.

Hope this helps...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 05 Apr 18 - 08:42 PM

You neglected to mention the long list of the recipients of his form of justice or do believe him innocent of those murders and attempted murders because of absence of proof and admission of guilt?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Apr 18 - 08:59 PM

Don't give a shit. Told you what I think of him. I'm concentrating on whatever evidence there is for the attack in Salisbury if you don't mind.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 05 Apr 18 - 09:15 PM

What you fail to understand is that these murders and attempted murders are carried out by a state, a state that controls the levers of the justice system including the investigative branch. No proof can ever be had without the cooperation of the state. Simple, even you should be able to grasp that.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Apr 18 - 09:23 PM

What you can't grasp is that you can't show that a person, state or president is guilty of anything without clear and direct evidence. Which is what you have not got.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Raedwulf
Date: 05 Apr 18 - 09:29 PM

The last time we had a decent, upright Foreign Secretary might well have been Sir Edward Grey (he of the "The lamps are going out..." quote). So Boris the Clown is a lying two-faced git. How is this a surprise in the modern political age? How does this alter the state of affairs?

No-one except Russia has a motive for assassinating Skripal. Early nerve gases, such as Sarin, are one thing; Novichok is another. Russia developed it. If someone else now has it, either A) Russia gave it to them or, B) Russia told them how they could make it. B) is surely inconceivable - you don't give away military-level secrets, especially when those secrets could so easily be used against you.

The appalling lack of care for the consequences of the delivery (daughter seriously incapacitated; random passers-by affected) bespeaks either terrorism or the actions of a state that thinks it can get away with whatever, and / or doesn't care if it gets called out. But why would a terrorist target some obscure Russian defector who no-one had ever heard of? Like Aum Shinrikyo in Tokyo, they'd release it on the Underground...

China indulges in the same propaganda that Russia does, but China have never been known to stoop this low. The crap they are spouting is not for our benefit. They know that few, if any, external to their country will believe them. They are talking to their internal audience. It's all very well saying "Well maybe", but what credible suggestions (never mind actual evidence) are there that Russia isn't behind this, Steve? I've seen none whatsoever.

The only reasoned & reasonable conclusion, in the absence of evidence that we are not privy to, is the "state-sponsored actor" of current quotes. And the only reasoned & reasonable conclusion is that the state in question is Russia. It's unlikely that any other state has access to Novichok except for defense research; there are few other states these days that would risk such a delivery method; there is no other state in the world, despite Russia's appaling bullshit, that has any interest in the death of Skripal.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 05 Apr 18 - 09:29 PM

Guess who controls the evidence.........I'll give you three guesses.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 05 Apr 18 - 09:42 PM

Anyway, these types of state sponsored actions are dealt with on the state level and that is what is currently happening and I don't think it's over yet.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Apr 18 - 10:05 PM

As I've said, the stuff has been out for decades. We live in an age of espionage and state skullduggery. Almost anything can be stolen, passed around by spies and copied. Nuclear weapons were started off by the US but now even North Korea has 'em. It's ridiculous to suggest that Novidoodah is a unique exception. It might be but you don't know. I'm not arguing with you, Raedwulf. But I am saying that, well, suppose it wasn't Russia in the dock but you personally. All these people are saying that the crime was absolutely typical of your past behaviour. We think that only you could have had the poison (even though it's been around for half our lifetimes). Only you have the motive to do this evil deed (rather odd that Russia doesn't really have a motive either, but hey ho, eh?). But, at the end of the day, we can't exactly pin it on you. You'd be a bit miffed if you got found guilty and put away on those grounds, wouldn't you? Maybe Russia did it. But maybe you'd better prove it beyond reasonable doubt first. It's what you'd want for yourself, so why do you want our justice standards to slip? Not just because you don't like Russia I hope?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: robomatic
Date: 05 Apr 18 - 11:53 PM

The Skripals are not the only folks with Russian sites on 'em who've been either attacked or rubbed out. I think other 'catters have posted a list of suspected victims, the prime known being
Litvinenko. The Russians have taken Crimea and maintain a bleed-the-Ukrainians dry force in Eastern Ukraine. And while there they shot down a Malaysian plane full of Dutch civilians.
It's been a case of "Who ya gonna believe, me or your lying eyes?"

The Skripal daughter is apparently talking now, so stay tuned.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 06 Apr 18 - 02:54 AM

None of this detracts from the fact that our foreign secretary blatantly lied. Does no one have any comments on that?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 06 Apr 18 - 03:00 AM

Yeah - seeing this play out with fingers crossed cynical truth stretcher Boris gets what he deserves this time...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Apr 18 - 03:27 AM

If Boris is shown to have lied, he will resign.
The ministerial code demands that.

On who did it, do you choose to believe the 28 honest, liberal democracies, or the gang that lied about cheating in the Olympics, lied about its intervention in Crimea, lied about the shooting down of a Malaysian airliner, lied about their murder of Litvinenko,.........

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 06 Apr 18 - 03:49 AM

BoJo's latest lie

A repeat of why we should not be surprised which leads with the headline

Why are we so surprised that Boris Johnson lied when he’s been sacked for lying twice before?

What astounds me most is that he was given the post of foreign secretary in the first place. Maybe Theresa May wants someone to make her look better?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 06 Apr 18 - 04:06 AM

I think he got the FS gig because everyone knew the Theresa May was a remainer - and she needed to appease the Brexit gang in her parliamentary party.
Boris came within an ace of becoming PM, if Gove hadn't queered the pitch for him.

As regards the nerve gas - I haven't a clue who did it.
Like the WMD debcle - really Boris could end up another victim of our security services - a bit like Blair.

Time somone sorted that lot out. You'd think after the Spycatcher revelations, every incoming PM would like to clean that particular Augean stables. But they all let them carry on - starting wars, subverting our democratic process like they did in 1979...with their posh boy recruitment policy and the special box at Lords.

I suppose by the time they become PM, a politician has been up to so much skullduggery , that MI5 has the goods on them.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Raedwulf
Date: 06 Apr 18 - 04:54 AM

Dave - Bending the truth is not the same as lying. Plus you have to prove that he knew that what he was saying was flatly contradicted by what he knew he was told. He may have heard what he wanted to hear, he may simply have misunderstood what he was told. If we haven't all done the former, we all know someone who has; does anyone want to deny they've done the latter? ;-)

I'm not the slightest exercised over the fact that a politician may have bent the truth, found a set of statistics that suit, cherry-picked their facts to suit their views instead of moulding their views around the facts. I expect that. Whatever they believe, they are there to toe the party line (the whip exists for that reason), and then there's the old, old joke - "How do you know when a politician is lying". The surprise, always, is a politician being honest & direct. Lying & evasion ("Before I answer let me just..." spout my party dogma...) are practically compulsory requirements for an MP, whatever ideology they espouse.

So Boris the Clown resigns or is sacked? So what? One politician is replaced by another politician who may (no pun intended) or may not be more able, more truthful, or whatever. Unless you've some personal beef against Johnson, it makes no bloody difference who is Foreign Secretary.

Steve - I'll get back to you. At this point, all I would say is, if you're going to play Devil's Advocate (done it many a time), suggest a credible alternative. Russia's "Oh, the UK did it to provide a distraction from..." not only is not credible, it also looks like a blatant attempt at diversion. Which smacks of guilty conscience. If Russia didn't, who plausibly might have?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 06 Apr 18 - 05:02 AM

Some one is telling porkies! Who is built like a porkie?


https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/apr/04/skripal-poisoning-deleted-foreign-office-tweet-leads-to-awkward-questions?CMP=tw

Brian Rix would be proud!

I would also suggest that to have the government of the day behave in such a high handed fashion, and risk a major diplomatic incident by mass expulsions, then they have a duty to the electorate to   provide irrefutable evidence to support their actions.
This they have failed to do. We need to be demanding answers.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 06 Apr 18 - 05:18 AM

I know politicians bend the truth, Raedwulf and have often complained about the same but BoJo has turned it into an art form equaled only by Trump and Farage. He has already been sacked at least twice for lying, yet May decided he should be let loose on the world at large. He is simply not fit to be entrusted with maintaining diplomatic relations. Loose canon is the phrase that springs to mind and one that could cause a major altercation or worse at that.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 06 Apr 18 - 05:22 AM

A link and interesting links to links within.


https://hat4uk.wordpress.com/2018/04/05/boris-johnson-why-it-is-justifiable-and-absolutely-vital-to-hound-our-foreign-secretary-

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 06 Apr 18 - 05:55 AM

An intriguing description of Alexander Boris de Pfeffel(kerfuffle) Johnson

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2018/04/boris-johnson-has-achieved-impossible-he-s-been-even-worse-expected

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Apr 18 - 05:56 AM

So, Raedwulf, if I'm standing in the dock accused of something I know I didn't do, in spite of all the circumstantial evidence pointing the finger at me, the judge can say to me, right, Shaw, you say you didn't do it - all right then, you'd better tell us who did otherwise you definitely did it!


Er, not quite how it works, is it?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 06 Apr 18 - 06:02 AM

I advocated that Russia should get involved with the investigation at the outset. I am puzzled over why, now that they have suggested that very thing, it is being dismissed out of hand.

Russia offers help to UK to probe poisoning

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Donuel
Date: 06 Apr 18 - 06:27 AM

Steve there are times when your post is a 100% reversal of the truth.
I have concluded you are not being sarcastic, making a parody or posing satire.
Even if you mean it you don't see it. For now I'll crack it up as a lazy quip not thought through. Are you OK? It's not Mad Cow is it?
If you are posting satire make it more obvious like;

Don Times reports;
Facebook to ACQUIRE Catholic Church
All private Data will be shared and viewed as a valid Confession.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Raedwulf
Date: 06 Apr 18 - 06:31 AM

Up to a point, Dave, I agree with you. My personal beef about Johnson is the 'bumbling buffoon' image that he projects. Either it's A) real, or B) fake. Both are dangerous. If it's real he is, genuinely, a loose cannon & who knows where he'll end up. If it's fake, he's not loose at all, but he is every bit as dangerous. For reasons which are too obvious to need explanation!

I wouldn't put him in the same box as Farceage or Trumpetty. Whatever he may be after, he is not the self-absorbed one-trick pony that they are. Boris believes in... something (no, I don't think it's just 'himself', though I would agree he has an ego!). One thing that I always find repellent in the left, when expressed (as it all too often is), is the notion that only the left have morals, ethics, principles. The Tories are all just selfish greedy bast... No they're not! They believe in what they believe in just as much as der lef' duz! I think 'trickle-down economics' is complete bullshit (primarily because it doesn't recognise a difference between 'value / wealth' and 'money'), but that doesn't entitle me to label someone who does believe in it, does it? It just means we differ.

The fact remains that if BJ is replaced, he is only replaced with A.N.Other. Other will be attacked regardless. If Other doesn't have the baggage that is attached to BJ, the attacks will be that they are just a party mouthpiece, doesn't have experience, something based upon their past utterances, etc. Other is no more likely to be upstanding & honest; it will only be that they are less known. I stand by my point - it makes fuck all difference who is FS, because it will still be a politician. And there is, still, no proof that Boris deliberately lied - he is, quite possibly, stupid & bumbling enough to have thought that he was told...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Apr 18 - 06:32 AM

As for suggesting a credible alternative, how can I? I haven't got enough evidence to conclude one way or the other whodunnit. It isn't being devil's advocate to say, give me more evidence before I can fairly make up my mind. Note "fairly." Nearly all the evidence I've seen so far comes into the category of "typical Russian behaviour so it was definitely Russia."

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Raedwulf
Date: 06 Apr 18 - 06:45 AM

Steve - deflectionary, diversionary. I'm not entirely sure what post Don is responding to, but I otherwise have to side with him. Your attempt at a parallel is entirely false. There is neither court nor judge in this case (and I would argue that the evidence is rather more than circumstantial, but that's another matter). You are being a perfect Boris in casting aspersions & evading the actual question.

If Russia is not the actor in this, who might plausibly be the guilty party? Genuinely, I cannot think of any other candidate.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Donuel
Date: 06 Apr 18 - 06:52 AM

Russian ambassador Vasily Numnutz warns Britain "YOU WILL BE SORRY"

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Apr 18 - 07:53 AM

Steve,
Nearly all the evidence I've seen so far comes into the category of "typical Russian behaviour so it was definitely Russia."

No evidence has been released except the type of agent.
All those who have seen the evidence are convinced it was Russia.

You made the analagy of someone in a criminal dock.
You could regard those 28 countries as the jurors.
Their verdict is "Guilty."

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Raedwulf
Date: 06 Apr 18 - 08:15 AM

Steve, 6:32 & 6:45 - cross-posting, as I'm sure you realise... Argh. I'm wanting to get out into the garden & plant things but... Oh alright...

A nuclear device is pretty simple to build, depending on what you want. An explosion? Little Boy was a simple gun. Modern nukes are far more complex & much, much harder to create, even though that tech is also relatively old. Plus, of course, you have to be able to acquire the necessary fissile materials. Dirty bomb? Just get a load of radioactive leftovers & pack them round a suitable amount of explosives. It's all very simple, tech-wise.

It's not ridiculous to suggest that Novichok is an exception. The tech, or rather chemistry, to produce poison gas is very much old hat. Nerve agents are only an extension of that. Again much of it, yes, is old hat. A competent chemist with a decently equipped lab could, I presume, produce them. Google Sarin & wiki will give you the chemical formula for it. After that, it's only a matter of working out what primary ingredients you need & how to construct the reaction chain...

Novichok is another matter; from wiki: "Russian scientists who developed the agents claim they are the deadliest nerve agents ever made, with some variants possibly five to eight times more potent than VX, and others up to ten times more potent than soman. They were designed as part of a Soviet program codenamed "FOLIANT". Five Novichok variants are believed to have been weaponised for military use. The most versatile was A-232 (Novichok-5)."

Note the "weaponised" - it's all very well to produce a doomsday weapon, but you don't want it going off in your own back yard, right? The first gas attacks were delivered from cylinders & were prone to being blown the wrong way by the wind. The first man-made nuclear explosion was a tower-mounted test device that couldn't have been deployed against an enemy.

Novichok agents may have been around for a long time. However, as above, they are claimed to the most poisonous agents known. What was used must have been "weaponised". Otherwise there would have been another twitching body beside the Skripals. So it's a subset of a military-level secret. Governments may indulge in skulduggery, but they don't release the information they gain. The West must know various chemical formulas that fall under the Novichok label, otherwise they would neither know what it was, nor be able to produce counter-measures (Porton Down has more or less admitted that it has).

It is neither reasoned nor reasonable to claim that because Novichok agents were originally created some 40+ years ago the process to manufacture them must therefore be available to non-state bodies or to individuals. You will happily resort to extreme pedantry in debate, Steve, so I have no hesitation in pulling you up on this. This is a shit argument, sir! States guard their secrets very, very carefully. Although the knowledge of Novichok chemistry is obviously not solely in the hands of the Russian govt, it is stupendously unlikely that it has escaped from the control of the states that have it. If it had, it would surely have been used ere now.

Someone attempted to murder Sergei Skripal. Whoever it was had to have a motive & the means to do it. Who knows who might have had a motive? But the only credible aggressor that had the means used & the will to apply the means in the careless & indiscriminate fashion that happened would appear to be Russia. That's logical analysis, not circumstantial evidence. Circumstantial evidence doesn't make a case; it can only add to it. The CE here is "We think Russia has done this sort of thing before". Without e.g. Litvinenko, we would still be pointing the finger at Russia, because Russia is the only credible would-be murderer.

And if it were me in the dock, no I wouldn't be stood there going "Of course it wasn't me, maybe it was you.." as Russia has done. I think I'd be going "Wow! Someone really wants to frame me for this... But sorry, Yer Honour, the evidence looks bad but it weren't me!"

And, for what it is worth, I have no feelings about Russia one way or t'other. Except that I think that Russia suffers under a fascist government not very different from Stalin's fascism*!

*Fascism is not a right wing thing; it's extreme authoritarianism. Consider that there is a N / S y axis to the commonly understood W / E x axis of left & right, when it comes to political ideology. The Nazis were fascists because they were authoritarian, not because they were extreme right wing (they weren't; they were more or less central overall). Marxism is not, doctrinally, authoritarian. But every real world occurrence (coz uz 'oomans iz stoopid) has been fascist. Fascism is about control; it's authoritarian. Stalin was a fascist, Hitler was a fascist, Putin is a fascist. Blessedly, it seems to be an idiosyncracy the UK is free of (however much anyone may loathe the Tories or Nigel Farceage!)

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Apr 18 - 08:43 AM

All you're actually doing is padding around the same old two-and-fourpence arguments. You assert that some evidence is "more than circumstantial." Well that's news to me. Which bits then? So states guard their secrets very very carefully, do they? So what's the point of all those spies then, and how come it's known that Novichok has been manufactured in Iran? That latter fact alone means that the cat's well and truly out of the bag. You say that circumstantial evidence can add to a case. Of course, but it can't stand alone. There has to be a case to begin with that's based on something a bit more solid than mere suspicion of a state that you hate already. Your logical analysis may follow the rules of logic on the face of it but if the premises on which your analysis is predicated are assumptions that you can't confirm then the whole edifice collapses. In other words, you've contrived an involved and intricate argument that has added precisely nothing new.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Donuel
Date: 06 Apr 18 - 08:44 AM

Raedwulf (sounds like a fascist Bannon gaming avatar)
may be building a nuclear device. Surveillance should focus on his easiest targets for stealing fissionable or poisonous components in his area which are Hospitals, Construction sites, older glass enclosed containment vessels (can be found almost anywhere) and older military contractor facilities like Grumman, General Dynamics, UTC and Lockheed Martin. Zor Valley NYS or Rocky Flats CO is by far easier to gain access than Hanford or Oak Ridge.

Nuclear reactor grounds have enormous quantities but security is somewhat tighter.

Please, no one should encourage this guy.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 06 Apr 18 - 08:49 AM

You know, you can make 'boiling a bum' out of 'building a bomb'. There is only 'db' left over. Sounds very suspicious to me.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Raedwulf
Date: 06 Apr 18 - 11:05 AM

Dave - Alright, I'm guilty! I was never a dba (database administrator, for those not in the know), but I was an analyst/programmer for a FTSE 100's company's Order To Cash system, which is practically the same thing ("what's going on in there; can you make it tell us this..."). I'll come quietly... ;-)

Don - I have no bloody idea what you're on about...

Steve - crap. Again. You say that circumstantial evidence can add to a case. Of course, but it can't stand alone. Yes, Steve, that's EXACTLY what I said - Circumstantial evidence doesn't make a case; it can only add to it. And you the occasional rabid grammar & speeling (sic!) hornet that thou art. ;-) C'mon, mate. I said that. Are you being guilty of reading of what you want to read, instead of what was written?

2/4d yerself. As you said, you're not arguing with me. Not precisely, but... Did you ever have a Scalextric track? Remember the crossover chicane? We're both headed in the same direction, but we never seem to be on the same track. Everything you just said can be thrown back in your face, which is my basic point. I don't know; happily, I'm not in a position where I have to judge.

However, the evidence available currently suggests no other actor than... No other possible actor than... Your own "Iran" proves my point more than yourn, because my point is not that state singular can keep its secret. It can't; it doesn't. But it takes the concerted effort of A.N.Other state to... And A.N.Other state hangs on to it like grim death too.

Ultimately, I make no more assumptions than you, Mr Shaw. But your assumptions do appear to be "There's no evidence so it could have been anyone". My assumptions are "The evidence available suggests..." I ain't making any judgements beyond "Rubbish arguments, Shaw. Must do better. D-" ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Apr 18 - 11:31 AM

"However, the evidence available currently suggests no other actor than... No other possible actor than..."

You really have got to do better than that. And not once have I ever said "it could have been anyone." In fact, I think I've said several times that it is more likely than not to have been Russia. Words to that effect. And what I said about circumstantial evidence doesn't clash with what you said at all. But coming to your logical conclusions needs a more solid set of premises than you currently have to hand, unfortunately. I'm still waiting for your "more than circumstantial " evidence, by the way. Finally, do keep it civil between us. You're getting a bit too sarky-out-loud. Calling my opinions crap or rubbish doesn't make them any more so than they may already be, and my name is Steve.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Donuel
Date: 06 Apr 18 - 11:57 AM

Apologies Max, The NSA automatically scans and stores all text that has the phrase building a bomb, among thousands of other key words.

What I am on about is both delicious and sad but it doesn't matter and you need not know.

Today just knowing the obvious is dangerous as it was in the Rosenberg days.

Suffice it to say if any of the posters here had actual hard evidence they would disappear. Since you are all here, enjoy the sandbox.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Apr 18 - 12:06 PM

"However, the evidence available currently suggests no other actor than... No other possible actor than..."
You really have got to do better than that

None of us have seen all the evidence.
Those that have are convinced by it.

Australia, Canada, France, Spain, Germany, Italy, .......

All the countries where you would have no worries if your kids went to live and work.
Countries that really believe in justice and freedom, unlike the current regime in Russia where critics of the government meet untimely deaths.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 06 Apr 18 - 12:19 PM

I have never been a DBA, a network analyst or a storage specialist but as a UNIX sysadmin I love all three, Raedwulf. If anything is going wrong there are three hurdles people have to get over before they hit me. LAN, SAN and Oracle. 99% of the time it is the latter. The other 1% it is the Russians...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: robomatic
Date: 06 Apr 18 - 02:24 PM

Dave the Gnome

As a Linux acolyte, thou art damned close to being a god. And I used to really really really hate SAP. And then I met Oracle.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 06 Apr 18 - 02:40 PM

HPUX and, more recently, RHEL. I am retiring soon though and decided about 2 years ago that I was not going to develop any more skills in that area. With the upsurge of AWS and Docker containers I think I made a wide choice. I do worry what will happen when everything is in the cloud but I guess that as usual it will all work out fine.

Unless the Russians get to it...

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: robomatic
Date: 06 Apr 18 - 02:42 PM

My close relative actually got remunerable employment because he knew a long gone DataBase but someone on the West Coast needed their data re-worked. You never know what you know that someone will want.

I'm waiting for the Pascal renaissance.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Donuel
Date: 06 Apr 18 - 02:46 PM

Ancient astronaut archeologist orhodontic theorists agree
Putin did it

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Apr 18 - 02:50 PM

Odd in a way that the Salisbury Two didn't actually undergo "untimely deaths." Who'd have thought that the Russians could be so incompetent! Still. Now what was that about that decent liberal democracy in the Middle East faking UK passports for their Mossad chappies in order to kill a guy they didn't like in Dubai... Gosh, it's a murky old world innit!

Dark talk there, Donuel. You yank guys are still living the Cold War, aren't you? Ronnie Raygun's dead, chaps! You'll be fine!

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: robomatic
Date: 06 Apr 18 - 02:51 PM

FWIW:

There is a long tradition of Russian cruelty to civilians, both foreign and domestic, usually en masse but I have no trouble believing that key Russians in high places have selected individuals for special handling or revenge in particularly noxious manners.

Maybe they are admirers of Livia in "I Claudius". Maybe Lucretia Borgia struck a sympathetic cord with someone in power. Maybe it's a 'thing'.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Apr 18 - 03:09 PM

There's a tradition in a awful lot of countries of cruelty to civilians. It's all bad, always. I don't want to do whataboutery but I don't care much for blinkered hypocrisy either.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: robomatic
Date: 06 Apr 18 - 03:30 PM

We all gotta get a slap in at the usual suspects, don't we, mr subtle?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Apr 18 - 04:25 PM

Too bloody right. Just think before ye post.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 06 Apr 18 - 04:40 PM

My wife [she's got an MA btw..] just said...

"All this is very confusing isn't it.. I don't understand what's going on....?????"

Then she switched over from BBC News to some bright and noisy ITV light entertainment show....


That's what we are all supposed to do innit, if our tory govt had it's way...!!!

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Raedwulf
Date: 06 Apr 18 - 05:09 PM

I know what your name is. I call you Steve or Mr Shaw, both of which are your names, as I see fit, according to my humour, Which usually means how in / formal it seems to me is appropriate at the time, and in context with whatever. If you want to get the arsehole about that, more fool you.

I don't have to do better, Steve, Mr Shaw. You do. Well done for bolding 'suggests'. You are way more insistent than I am on this matter. I don't know who is responsible for this mess, and I really don't give a fuck who is. Innocents have been hurt because someone, somewhere, decided Sergei Skripal needed to be murdered. It's you that wants to quibble, far more than I. I could go on at length, but what's the point? I can affect things no more than you.

Scalextric, remember? But you really are an irritating bastard sometimes, Steve. The way you express yourself is just sandpaper sometimes. It's just easier to shoot the messenger. I've learnt to tone down my banter-but-others-see-abrasiveness; Mudcat taught me quite a bit about that. You? First post 13/5/07, 19,200+ posts & counting. Me? Less than 1150, first post 22/8/02. Lies, damned lies, statistics, eh? Mouthy much, Steve? Quantity over quality? If I call your opinions crap, I'm merely being blunt, as you often are. Don't like it, don't do it; don't recognise yourself, find a better mirror. The way one expresses oneself, eh? I know I do it; you seem to think you don't. It cuts all ways. If you ain't learnt that, then good luck with the etcetera! ;-)

I agree with you more often than not, where I've seen your remarks. I rarely comment, hence (perhaps) the difference in our stats. But don't try bullshitting me, sir. I don't ascribe words to you, but your words make you seem blind to the realities. It's all very well questioning, but if it wasn't Russia, who the fuck was it? Logical analysis only points one way & I've already told you what I consider to be 'circumstantial'.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 06 Apr 18 - 05:11 PM

BTW. As I am sure many are aware I am of Russian ancestry. My dad was Polish, born in Byelystok, but his dad was born in what is now Krupotkin on the Kuban river, which makes him (and me because it is passed on the male line) a Kuban Cossack. My dad told me he learned never to trust a Russian, by which he really meant anyone from around Moscow, from his dad. Funny old world init?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Apr 18 - 05:15 PM

My only response to that, this fine Friday evening, is to suggest that you have another vat of wine. And, if you don't drink, my alternative response is calm down, dear.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Raedwulf
Date: 06 Apr 18 - 05:18 PM

P.S. I'd apologise for derailing the thread, but Dave started it, the pervert! ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Apr 18 - 05:18 PM

I know you love it when I call you dear, Dave, but that was to Raedwulf. Hope you aren't too disappointed! ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 06 Apr 18 - 05:44 PM

Nice to see the ladies in such fine fettle this evening.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: robomatic
Date: 06 Apr 18 - 06:09 PM

I am a Russian culture admirer of longstanding, despite all the German names in my family tree. I regard the Russians as a people of being more victims of their government than not. But they don't always see it that way. Russian history has been both a cause of and a result of a lot of brutal violence on a tribal level.

Not for nothing, but I heard on the radio once that Hollywood movies that were exported to Russia changed the final reel to make sure the hero died. It was called "putting a Russian ending on the movie."

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Apr 18 - 06:21 PM

Well stuff Shostakovich, but apart from that I am also an aficionado of Russian culture. However, I'd say that we are all victims of our governments. Currently, all US citizens, for example, are victims of the Trump government. In this country we are victims of the feckless May government, and we're previous victims of the imbecilic Cameron. The great thing for many people about being victims is that they are blissfully unaware of their victimhood. It's not fair.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 06 Apr 18 - 06:38 PM

You can call me dear but don't call me Shirley.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Raedwulf
Date: 06 Apr 18 - 07:12 PM

Steve, Mr Shaw, Sir Etc, I've canned more than one reply. It isn't worth it, it won't achieve anything, you won't hear. But my fingers keep typing 'patronising cunt'. I hope that, at least, might make you stop & think. On the whole, knowing you only here on Mudcat, I like you & mostly agree with you. If I ever wind up in Bude (nude or not), I'll happily buy you a pint. But spare me the "calm down, dear". You twat. If I could be bothered to react to the random bunch of internet pixels that you are, I'd be laughing at you. Need I say more?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Apr 18 - 07:18 PM

Blimey, what an eejit...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Raedwulf
Date: 06 Apr 18 - 07:29 PM

Yes, you are...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 06 Apr 18 - 09:07 PM

Lads... good natured banter or not, a mod with an itchy thread close trigger finger might not be too lenient...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Apr 18 - 09:14 PM

I'm a lad but how do you know 'he" is? Get modern, pfr...!!! ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 06 Apr 18 - 09:25 PM

fellow sentient beings... - is that better.....???

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: robomatic
Date: 07 Apr 18 - 07:07 PM

SShaw,

Does the name Boris Nemtsov ring a bell? We're not all equivalent victims of our governments. There are all those dead ex-Soviets remember? All the dead Dutch citizens, and particularly all the dead and sidelined reporters in Russia, and the would be democratic opposition that's sidelined with trumped up legal issues.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Apr 18 - 08:45 PM

A fair few dead Palestinians in Gaza too. I haven't a clue what you're talking about.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 07 Apr 18 - 08:53 PM

That's what happens when terrorists try to infiltrate a sovereign country in order to murder its citizens.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Apr 18 - 09:23 PM

Yep. The lynch mob moves in.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 07 Apr 18 - 09:28 PM

Yup, but the good guys stood their ground.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 08 Apr 18 - 04:43 AM

The plot thickens!
AN ELECTRONIC message to Moscow sent on the day former Russian spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia were poisoned with a nerve agent in Salisbury. It was sent from a location near Damascus in Syria to “an official” in Moscow including the phrase ‘the package has been delivered” and saying that two individuals had “made a successful egress”.The message was intercepted by RAF analysts stationed at a listening post in southern Cyprus.

Seems a well traveled straw to me I am afraid.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 08 Apr 18 - 05:42 AM

Was the message sent by a "white helmet"
Did news travel to Damascus from Salisbury by magic?
Was the parcel from Amazon?
Which BIGGLES book is providing the latest script?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: The Sandman
Date: 08 Apr 18 - 07:30 AM

is it possible it was MI5 or the CIA?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Apr 18 - 08:10 AM

Chemivcal attack on civilians in Ghouta, Syria - dozens killed
Probably a coincidence
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Kenny B (inactive)
Date: 08 Apr 18 - 09:39 AM

Possibly, but I'd need proof.
why don't you start a new thread on it ?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 08 Apr 18 - 10:09 AM

It appears the Russians are no longer pretending about their invasion. There are reports of two tank convoys having crossed the border into Ukraine in the Rostov region.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Kenny B (inactive)
Date: 08 Apr 18 - 10:25 AM

Interesting, what is your source Bobad
Google search reveals nothing since around 2014?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 08 Apr 18 - 10:28 AM

https://twitter.com/fatimatlis/status/982946448101859328/video/1

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Kenny B (inactive)
Date: 08 Apr 18 - 11:12 AM

The posting is yesterday but the video is not dated.
I'm sure that if it true the US of A will make the most of it I'm sure Until then its unconfirmed , POTUS has another word for it ? : <)

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 08 Apr 18 - 11:30 AM

Definitely difficult to verify at this juncture as disinformation is a major weapon in today's wars.

The purported chemical attack in Syria is being denied, as is to be expected, by Russia and Syria and Russia is warning of dire consequences for any actions taken in retaliation. Meanwhile Trump is tweeting away blaming Obama.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Kenny B (inactive)
Date: 08 Apr 18 - 11:39 AM

If he's still in Mar a logo? is that's what's known as "par for the course"

It becomes dangerous when Fake news is intended as a double bluff N'est pas "par for the course"?

Discreditting the media is a separate tactic on its own

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 08 Apr 18 - 03:24 PM

Putin is now related to the Pied Piper


Two guinea pigs belonging to Sergei Skripal died and his cat were sealed in the house and died after the Salisbury nerve agent attack, the government has revealed. Meanwhile the rats are thriving


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5591057/Salisbury-areas-sealed-police-infested-rats.html

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Tradsinger
Date: 08 Apr 18 - 05:09 PM

The Russians must be hopping mad. Not only did their assassination attempt not work, but they used a substance with an audit trail straight back to Moscow. What were they thinking? I don't think they thought this through or predicted the consequences.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 08 Apr 18 - 05:30 PM

The agent was designed to be used in a completely different delivery system not in the way it was to target an individual. I believe it was jury rigged by some scientist without proper testing. You are right to conjecture that it wasn't thought through.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 08 Apr 18 - 06:09 PM

No doubt someone is hopping mad. The question still unresolved is precisely who that person might be. The latest "chlorine" gas attack in Syria has a similar problem, Who dunnit? When Syria is trouncing the opposition on every front and Trump announces US troops are leaving the oilfields north of Palmyra (while still actively building new bases) the devil's advocate may ask cui bono?
Is it another carefully choreographed media presentation by white helmet bullshit productions Inc?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 08 Apr 18 - 06:23 PM

"In violation of withdrawal lines, in a non-government-controlled area an SMM mini-UAV spotted on 4 April seven tanks (T-72), seven self-propelled howitzers (2S1 Gvozdika, 122mm), ten towed howitzers (five 2A65 Msta-B, 152mm, five D-30 Lyagushka, 122mm), seven multiple launch rocket systems (BM-21 Grad, 122mm) and seven surface-to-air missile systems (9K35, Strela-10), all stationary at an airfield on the south-eastern outskirts of Luhansk city (see SMM Daily Report 3 April 2018).

In violation of withdrawal lines in a government-controlled area near Kurakhove (40km west of Donetsk), the SMM saw a tank (type undetermined) on a flatbed truck heading south-west.

Beyond withdrawal lines but outside designated storage sites in a non-government-controlled area, the SMM saw ten tanks (T-64) near Kruhlyk(see the Ceasefire Violation section)."

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Donuel
Date: 08 Apr 18 - 07:54 PM

In reaction to the "Russian thing" The HLS is partnering with the NSA to scan and scrutinize every news producing agency of every ilk to determine which ones are the Instigating time bombs of chaos.

Through out the World.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 09 Apr 18 - 05:29 AM

Never let facts get in the way of a good war.

https://off-guardian.org/2018/04/08/douma-chemical-attack-facts-so-far/

or even why the war exists

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/The-Natural-Gas-War-Burning-Under-Syria.html

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 09 Apr 18 - 07:49 AM

Lololol.......Off Guardian is a Russian fake news site.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 09 Apr 18 - 11:03 AM

Yeah a bit like Trump won the elction!

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 09 Apr 18 - 12:26 PM

It may be just the wrong sort of fake news.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 04:26 AM

Like the following perhaps???

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J4utEI2EU64

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 05:09 AM

Dr Busby in the youtube clip above is an interesting fellow. He is hated by the establishment for his work on depleted uranium and it is dismissed.(How convenient!)
He also drew attention to heightened radiation monitored in the UK after shock and awe in the Gulf. This was denied of course, as false news no doubt(long before the concept became popular)
Since then I believe Halliburton has taken over the sensors so they can be turned off should such a situation ever repeat.

I suspect he was correct.

https://books.google.ie/books?id=EE1VCAAAQBAJ&pg=PT2963&lpg=PT2963&dq=radiation+++measured+in+uk+from+shock+and+awe&source=bl&ot

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Donuel
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 07:07 AM

Iains congratulations. Your spasms of lucidity are refreshing.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 07:14 AM

Unlike those of your goodself, that have yet to be seen!

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 07:23 AM

In answer to the original question maybe they did and maybe they didn't, the balance of probability indicating that they did.

However, idiots like Johnson spouting off his big ignorant mouth citing made-up evidence means the UK have no serious grounds or credence to state its case.

Mind you, if people are daft enough to vote Tory, that's the kind of thing you'd expect to happen.

Just be grateful that idiots like Johnson are nowhere near the justice system - otherwise nobody would ever be convicted.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 07:29 AM

What "made up evidence" did he cite?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 07:37 AM

Don't fall for it SPB. Most people know exactly what you mean.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 07:40 AM

I believe a rational person calls it myth, fantasy and bullshit!

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 07:49 AM

Porton Down says it was developed in Russia/Soviet Union. That is its source, as Boris said.
They also said that only a state could make it, and Russia does not admit sharing it with anyone.

Johnson denies lying or making anything up, and no-one in the opposition is prepared to describe what he said as a lie.

That is why I challenged your statement, "citing made-up evidence."
That has not been established.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 07:51 AM

Iains congratulations. Your spasms of lucidity are refreshing.

Except, in case you didn't notice, his attempt to steer the discussion away from Russia who are currently complicit in gassing civilians in Syria.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 08:04 AM

Apart from, unlike the nerve agent attack here, the alleged Syrian attack could cause a serious escalation of hostilities culminating in global destruction. You have to be pretty damn sure that Russia/Syria did indeed use chemical weapons before military intervention. Like the Salisbury poisoning, none of us here can categorically say who did it or even if it was done. There are enough people saying that what happened is very unclear and on that basis it would be foolish to take any action until proof is evident.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 08:17 AM

Here is a list of over seventy reported chemical attacks in Syria:

Wikipedia

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 08:43 AM

I am not convinced by the argument that if they did it before they must have done it this time. It is not the basis on which to start a war.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 09:09 AM

Right, just leave them to go on gassing their population, that's the ticket.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 09:15 AM



In case you haven't noticed there is a war which has been going on for seven years. It's time to stop the war and the gassing of innocent civilians.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 09:17 AM

Would you want to go to war on the basis of what may be true? I would want to make damn sure of my facts before I dropped the bomb on anyone. Particularly in this age of misinformation.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 09:23 AM

Dave,
There are enough people saying that what happened is very unclear

Yes but re. Salisbury, not anyone who has seen the evidence.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 09:27 AM

This war, and indeed all wars, does need to be stopped. But you do not stop a war with violence. All that does is replaces one war with another.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 09:29 AM

I would want to make damn sure of my facts

And how do you know that they aren't sure of the facts?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 09:35 AM

How do you know they are? :-)

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 09:51 AM

Well gnome, I have seen the videos and read the descriptions of the effect of the gas on the victims from the medical staff treating them. I have also heard them telling of how the gas was preceded by barrel bombs which drove the people into shelters below ground and how they were suffocated by the heavier than air gas. Anyone who thinks this is some false flag or staged event is incapable of rational thought.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 09:58 AM

If you are right and the chemical attack you describe did take place then Trump and co. will stop one lot of innocent civilians being gassed by dropping bombs on another lot of innocent civilians.

If you are not right then Trump and co. will drop bombs on innocent civilians for no good reason whatsoever.

I am pretty sure i know which is the more rational decision. And it is not to do nothing, it is to get to the truth.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 10:04 AM

dropping bombs on another lot of innocent civilians.

Stupid statement.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 10:15 AM

Stupid statement? How so?

Dropping bombs on innocent civilians is a by product of war. What is different in this case?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 10:25 AM

Dave,
But you do not stop a war with violence. All that does is replaces one war with another.

What about attacking Germany for invading Poland?

If you are right and the chemical attack you describe did take place then Trump and co. will stop one lot of innocent civilians being gassed by dropping bombs on another lot of innocent civilians.

Last time he attacked the military base that launched the chemical attack. No civilian targets.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 10:29 AM

As we all well know bob is a peace loving old hippy who longs for all violent armed conflicts around the world to cease immediately...



[spot the false news...???]

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 10:34 AM

PFR - :-D

When I was a lad, Spot was the dog, not the false news...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 10:54 AM

As we all well know punkster is a peace loving old hippy who longs for deterrence against the slaughter of innocent civilians around the world to cease immediately...

See, two can play your stupid game.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 10:57 AM

Heard mention of a stupid game but not heard why dropping bombs on another lot of innocent civilians is a stupid statement yet.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 11:01 AM

Bob - it'd have been a lot funnier if you'd just gone "Grrrrrrrrr... pesky punkfolkrock kids...!!!!!"

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 11:04 AM

I'll do it for a Scooby snack. Unless Spot the false news gets to it first.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 11:06 AM

DtG,

It is a stupid comment because ( in the past, under Republicans {So Clinton's firing on the aspirin factory is excluded}) the US response is to attack MILITARY forces and installations. IE, when the last gas attack occurred, the base that launched the plane that dropped the bombs was specifically targeted.

So to claim the result is "dropping bombs on another lot of innocent civilians " is a stupid statement.

Capish?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 11:09 AM

bob - anyway, I'll tell you just how hippy dippy idealistic I am...

I reckon any politician who declares war should be immediately arrested for war crimes...

Fortunately in the real world that can never happen,
so bloodthirsty folks can enjoy as many wars as they like
until the final world ending exchange of insults, threats, and WMD.....

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 11:13 AM

Lambrini - the true proletarian bottled plonk...!!!


[actually one chilled bottle aint too bad.. 2 bottles and you begin to feel your teeth disolving...]

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 11:14 AM

Bob - don't puzzle tooo hard.. it's not surrealist humour...
but acidently posted in the wrong thread...!!!

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 11:16 AM

In some cases, the alternative to war is what happened in Rwanda and Cambodia-


We should have stepped in and prevented those situations, and the attacks on Moslims in the Balkans. But, just as the great powers ignored the Turkish genocide of the Armenians, ( letting Hitler say " Who remembers the Armenians? as he set up the concentrations camps for Jews, Gypsies, homosexuals, and Communists)) we ignore what we should prevent at the risk of being held responsible by the future.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 11:33 AM

Bruce - while I'm still in hippy idealist mode...

Yes a truly great super-power should act to prevent and stop such genocides,
not turn a blind eye or prolong bloody conflicts for their own interests...


Now back to real world mode....

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 11:47 AM

if Russia did do it.

not a lot we or anybody else can do about it.
we've been fantasizing about our agents and assassins doing the business over there - james bond, george smiley, harry palmer etc for years.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 11:58 AM

One thing that can be done Al is freezing Putin's foreign accounts. It is estimated that he has some 200 billion dollars salted away. That would hit him where it hurts.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 12:33 PM

Dave,
but not heard why dropping bombs on another lot of innocent civilians is a stupid statement yet.

That is because no-one has suggested doing such an evil thing.

PFR,
I reckon any politician who declares war should be immediately arrested for war crimes...

Was Britain wrong to declare war on Hitler in WW2?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 12:41 PM

No I don't 'capish' BB. Nor do I speak faux gangster. Are you saying that there have been no civilian casualties in the attacks of the 'allies' on eastern countries. I find that rather difficult to believe. No innocent civilians killed in Iraq? Palestine? Afghanistan? Are you sure?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 12:43 PM

One thing for certain is future [if there is any future beyond this generation...???] historians are going to be well buggered
trying to understand this era of internet accusations, false news, and even more dishonest than ever politicians...???

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 12:55 PM

BTW bobad, I agree with your last post. Far better than lobbing bombs over the fence.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 01:20 PM

Did the Russians not announce not so long ago that a poison gas false flag event would occur?
Each time the US talks about de-escalating operations in Syria,up pops another gas attack, just in time.
If Assad is winning the battle, why throw away the war by gassing your own people.

Like novichok, no need for evidence before taking action.

Someone, somewhere desperately wants war. Everyone is getting boxed into a corner. Russia says there will be consequences.

Looks like a situation similar to events preceding WW1 is fast developing. I hope I am proved totally wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 01:29 PM

We can all agree on that last sentiment, Iains. Well, I guess we can?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 01:35 PM

Well Dave perhaps if I am right we can hope we both end up as a radioactive mote in the eventual winners eye!

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 01:40 PM

I was a student during the Falklands and Greenham Common era...

A fatalistic sense that "the end of the world is nigh" has been too deeply etched into Psyche of my generation...
So much so, like many of my contemporaries, I decided in my 20s I could never bring children into this world...

Not a very healthy outlook climate to grow up under...
and I can empathise with today's students increasingly turning to Corbyn
for probably very similar fearful reasons....

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 01:49 PM

It's a very tough call. I am far from saying that Russia and Syria are innocent. I am sure they are both guilty of many abuses. But so are many others, including some of our so called allies. I have no idea what the truth of this matter is. Very few do, including everyone on here. Well, unless someone here is a top security analyst with the highest clearance and too much time on their hands! What I am pretty sure of though is that if people keep baiting the bear, the bear will bite.

Then again, no one really knows if I am only saying that because I am a Russian spy ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 02:07 PM

But so are many others, including some of our so called allies.

Who else is using nerve gas and other chemical weapons? No-one Dave.
If its use becomes acceptable in conflicts, the world becomes a worse place.
Using it should bring consequences to the perpetrators. Some evils can not be ignored.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 02:41 PM

Wouldn't it be good if the leaders of nations would get into the ring and slug it out:-) Who would you back? Trump or Putin? I reckon May would take 'em both:-) Sadly, although I would back him in most circumstances, I wouldn't hold out much for Corbyn's chances. Unless he was in a tag team with Johnny Two Jags. Xi Jinping is probably a King Fu master. Looks a bit like Jackie Chan anyway.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 02:49 PM

"Are you saying that there have been no civilian casualties in the attacks of the 'allies' on eastern countries. I find that rather difficult to believe. No innocent civilians killed in Iraq? Palestine? Afghanistan? Are you sure?"


I have said nothing of the sort.


But the numbers killed because we did NOT intervene is known- 2 million in Cambodia, 800,000 in Rwanda. Add the 2 million Armenians, the 6 million Jews, the 2 million or so Gypsies....

Are you saying we could not have saved some of them if we had gone to war at the time?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 02:53 PM

DtG - yeah... but which one would smear Nobblechoc [or whatever Porton Down claims it to be]
all over the knuckles of his/her boxing gloves
while the others have only hidden horse shoes in theirs...!!???

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 02:59 PM

Bruce - I reckon I can distinguish between 'Going to war'
and 'fighting for a greater good to prevent or curtail war'...

Trouble is, a 'world police army' is a great dream, but in practice...?????

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 03:04 PM

Are you saying we could not have saved some of them if we had gone to war at the time?

Right back at you. I have said nothing of the sort.

But let's stop the pretence of there being no collateral damage.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 03:09 PM

There is a difference between "no" and "acceptable for the lives saved that would have been otherwise killed." collateral damage.


Let's stop pretending that if we do nothing, nothing bad will happen.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 03:31 PM

Who advocates doing nothing? I refer you to my post of 10 Apr 18 - 09:58 AM

I am pretty sure i know which is the more rational decision. And it is not to do nothing, it is to get to the truth.

It is pretty obvious that war does not solve problems. I don't pretend I have the solution but to keep making the same mistake over and over again is akin to lunacy.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 03:41 PM

I feel sure that if we put our minds to it here we could sort out the worlds problems. On second thoughts, I don't think slugging it out would be acceptable. How about we put all the world leaders in a big room and tell them they cannot have any tea until they have made friends with each other?

PFR - I am sure you have a wealth of ideas!

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 03:42 PM

War does not always solve problems, but it can.


Just ask the Carthaginians. Or the Trojans.

The THREAT of war has solved far more than the actual war- BUT the threat is only effective if it is believed. The MOST expensive military is the second-best-All it can do is make it expensive to beat that side.
That can sometimes prevent conflict, by setting a high price on the winning side.

The best will prevent conflict in more cases by demonstrating the that cost of conflict is too high for the losing side to accept.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 03:42 PM

Maybe if we got all their Mums or wives together and got them to tell their sons or husbands to stop being naughty boys?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 03:43 PM

Re your 10 Apr 18 - 03:41 PM

No bathroom breaks until they solve the problem.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 03:47 PM

War has never solved the problem. It just replaces it with another one. Whoever is the aggressor may be at fault but that is not the point. There must be a better way.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 03:49 PM

Now we are getting into the swing of it BB, but no bathroom breaks? Wouldn't that just make a mess on the floor?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 03:54 PM

That is a wish, not a proven fact. I agree it would be nice if it were so, but fail to see any demonstrations that it applies to Man as a species.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 03:55 PM

re 10 Apr 18 - 03:49 PM

If so, let them stay in the room anyway. ...Maybe make sure the ceiling is not too high, as well.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 03:58 PM

Might end up with the tallest leader getting his/her way, thought...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 04:00 PM

This could all go horribly wrong:

https://ahvalnews.com/syria/us-t

https://www.military.com/daily-news/2018/04/10/harry-s-truman-carrier-strike-group-deploy-norfolk.html

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Donuel
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 04:05 PM

Dave the Gnome
you're OK.
You're not a spy.
Of course you knew that
so why I said that
I know not why.

Ah now I remember
The victims are well
enough to testify.

..................


It's Iaians who is a propagandist using fake news.
He's upped his game,
by listing the sins of western folly and regime change
but

he's still the same.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 04:15 PM

The Sun-2 hours ago
"As he spoke a US Navy destroyer, the USS Donald Cook, was underway in the eastern Mediterranean after completing a port call in Cyprus. The Arleigh ... Meanwhile USS Harry Truman aircraft carrier strike group was on its way to the Syrian coast armed with cruise missiles and an array of warplanes."

Wish it was false news. This could end in tears.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Donuel
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 04:43 PM

Iains daring a teuton gluten Putin or a tiny timid Trump to go nuclear is not what you should do. Not even vicariously

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 04:49 PM

BTW bobad, I agree with your last post. Far better than lobbing bombs over the fence.

Freezing Putin's account would be in response to the Salisbury attack. Bombing Assad's machinery of war and its infrastructure would be the response to him gassing his people.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 04:57 PM

It is easy to be sure you are right when it is not your own life you are putting on the line. Sadly, in this case, it could be all our lives. All because you believe one despot over another.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 05:04 PM

Donuel your cryptic responses look like you treat it as a game. Perhaps you cannot access the real news where you reside. Perhaps as your country has not had collateral damage since the civil war then you think you can trivialise what is happening an ocean away.
    The Cuban missile crisis was an insignificance compared to the place we are at today. We have surrounded the russian bear with 400 +bases and now we are goading it. The bully on the block may find life becoming very serious in a heartbeat. Others can draw lines in the sand as well.
Do you think they merely bluff?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Donuel
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 05:13 PM

Dave, similar to your last post I was talking to a impoverished conservative who was excited about US attacks on Syria today. I asked him if he had any skin in the game like children. He said he was too poor to ever have any and I sounded like one of them liberals. After he blamed Obama we parted peacefully.

Trump is incensed today so Iains warning may not be as inflammatory as I first said.

Tears and fears from screaming ash
WWIII has come to pass
It was Truman who first used this junk
Now its his ship that is first sunk
What happens next will go untold
All we know is that it could unfold

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 05:15 PM

This speaks to the difference between you and me gnome.

"The world is a dangerous place, not because of those who do evil, but because of those who look on and do nothing."

Albert Einstein

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Donuel
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 06:53 PM

From: Iains - PM
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 04:15 PM

The Sun-2 hours ago
"As he spoke a US Navy destroyer, the USS Donald Cook, was underway in the eastern Mediterranean after completing a port call in Cyprus. The Arleigh ... Meanwhile USS Harry Truman aircraft carrier strike group was on its way to the Syrian coast armed with cruise missiles and an array of warplanes."

Wish it was false news. This could end in tears. Their GPS is...
_______________________


Loose lips sink ships Iains even though I am anti war.
However that Sun story is not searchable on my internet.
fake

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 10 Apr 18 - 09:08 PM

What I am pretty sure of though is that if people keep baiting the bear, the bear will bite.

puffed up bellicose buffoon Boris really does need to take a listen to The Lion And Albert...!!!!

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 11 Apr 18 - 01:52 AM

I know it is difficult to follow all the posts in the thread bobad so I will just refer you to my post of 10 Apr 18 - 03:31 PM where I make it quite clear, for the second time, that I do not advocate doing nothing. I am suggesting that there must be better way than violence. Do you disagree with that? If so, I think that may be a bigger difference.

BTW, try Dave or DtG if you want to abbreviate. They are both shorter and using 'gnome' just makes you sound like a school bully.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 11 Apr 18 - 04:06 AM

"However that Sun story is not searchable on my internet.
fake"

False news, or censored news. In the present situation what scenario is the most likely? It seems some of the sources I read have since "evaporated".

The great game is all smoke and mirrors. However this time around smoke is likely to be in the ascendancy.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6019299/uss-harry-s-truman-missiles-deployed-mediterranean-syria/

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 11 Apr 18 - 05:03 AM

For Donuel.
strange those pesky ruskies know more about deployments than you do.
What does that tell you about your society?


https://www.rt.com/usa/423744-us-aircraft-truman-syria/

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Apr 18 - 05:07 AM

I do not advocate doing nothing. I am suggesting that there must be better way than violence. Do you disagree with that?

What exactly do you suggest?
Chamberlain tried very hard to avoid using violence to curb Hitler, and how did that turn out?

Obama made chemical weapons use a red line, but did nothing when it was crossed so why would they not keep on doing it?
Do we want chemical weapons to become normalised, or should the war criminals have to face reprisals as a deterrant to the use of such proscribed weapons?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Donuel
Date: 11 Apr 18 - 07:47 AM

Well Kieth you lie by omission when you say Obama did nothing. He took the Syria conflict to Congress and asked for a declaration of WAR.

Congress spoke or rather mumbled ,er um maybe but not with my vote.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 11 Apr 18 - 07:50 AM

Don't go down that route, Donuel. Therein lies madness...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 11 Apr 18 - 08:15 AM

Yes Donuel and the Russians and Assad took that as a green light to gas the Syrians at will - more than seventy times to date reported. Meanwhile Iran is using the lack of response from the West to arm Hezbollah with missiles against Israel and is entrenching itself militarily in Syria with the aim of attacking Israel. At least the Israelis are backing up their vow to disallow this from happening by taking action against it. The thing the West doesn't seem to understand or chooses to ignore is that bullies like Assad, Putin and the Ayatollahs of Iran see lack of response as weakness and are exploiting it to their advantage as much as they can, meanwhile the bodies of the innocent pile up.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Apr 18 - 08:23 AM

Fair point Donuel, and it was not just Congress who refused to support punitive action.
The British Parliament also refused to stand with him (as did everyone on Mudcat except for Jim Carrol and me.)

Dave, what route are you warning Donuel not to go down?
Expressing an opinion you disagree with?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Apr 18 - 08:24 AM

...Jim Carrol, Bobad and me.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 11 Apr 18 - 08:31 AM

Some of us might see it as American hegemony not seeing the buffers ahead. As I have said before Russia and Iran have a legitimate presence in Syria. Any other invaders have declared war by illegal aggression.
The coalition no longer bother with proof or a UN mandate to legitimise their actions.
There have been rumours in the past of the Chinese deploying troops to Syria, although this has been denied.

But:

"While China has traditionally stayed out of the Syrian conflict directly, the Asian country has intervened to combat the spread of the Islamic East Turkestan network that has found its way to not only Syria, but Pakistan and Afghanistan.
Estimates suggesting that there could be around 2,500 of the foreign fighters in Syria aiding and assisting other jihadist elements within the war-torn Levantine country."

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 11 Apr 18 - 09:50 AM

200!

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 11 Apr 18 - 10:26 AM

Turkey calls on US, Russia to heal Syria wounds

Turkish Prime Minister Binali Yildirim is calling on the United States and Russia to work toward "healing wounds" in Syria, comparing their threats and exchanges of words to a street fight between "bullies."

Sounds like a sensible suggestion.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Apr 18 - 10:30 AM

A good first step would be agreeing to the UN enquiry into the attack which Russia vetoed.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Apr 18 - 10:32 AM

Also, Turkey could stop bombing the shit out of our brave allies the Kurds.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 11 Apr 18 - 10:32 AM

"Sounds like a sensible suggestion."

Probably a bit too sensible.
I wonder if our illustrious MPs have put a leash on May and the deranged mophead or should I say muppet?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 11 Apr 18 - 10:52 AM

A country that invaded and is illegally occupying northern Cyprus and its fascist dictator who is carrying out a brutal campaign in northern Syria giving advice to others to work toward "healing wounds" would be worthy of a Monty Python skit if not for the brutal reality that it is.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 11 Apr 18 - 10:56 AM

Oh, I dunno. Is it any worse than the comedy going on in Washington?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 11 Apr 18 - 04:46 PM

The brutal reality is that the Turkish guy is not very nice and he engages in obnoxious activities but "a fascist dictator" he is not, and the story of Cyprus, which I know quite well, isn't as black and white as you paint it. It helps if we confine ourselves to the real realities and not the fake realities confected by your hatred of anything with even the slightest Muslim whiff.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 11 Apr 18 - 05:32 PM

your hatred of anything with even the slightest Muslim whiff.

This from a Jew hating apologist for anti-Semites......nice.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Raggytash
Date: 11 Apr 18 - 05:46 PM

Bobad, I do know not of one poster on this site who hates Jews.

Read that carefully please, no one on this site hates Jews

and then read it again.

People may criticise the Israeli Government but that is NOT the same as hating Jews.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 11 Apr 18 - 05:50 PM

Raggtash, I do know not of one poster on this site who hates Muslims.

Read that carefully please, no one on this site hates Muslims

and then read it again.

People may criticise Islamists (do look it up if you don't understand what it means) but that is NOT the same as hating Muslims.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Raggytash
Date: 11 Apr 18 - 06:00 PM

You give a bloody good impression of hating Muslims then.

That is my last comment on this subject, I fear the thread will be closed if this continues.

Rights then good people, back to Russia.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 11 Apr 18 - 06:18 PM

You give a bloody good impression of hating Jews then.

That is my last comment on this subject, I fear the thread will be closed if this continues.

Rights then good people, back to Russia.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 11 Apr 18 - 06:30 PM

You're a pretty stupid man, bobad. I worded my criticism very carefully: "...your hatred of anything with even the slightest Muslim whiff."

No mention there of actual Muslims. So you respond with the worst, babyish, most splenetic insult you think you can muster, and which you're tediously and unimaginatively famous for here: "This from a Jew hating apologist for anti-Semites..." In Keith's cod-immortal words, you've lost.

You talk about brutal reality. Well here's a bit of brutal reality for you. I don't hate any Jews and number many Jews among my friends, as if the fact that they're Jews has any relevance whatsoever. It doesn't. I've battled against all forms of racism all my life. I hate all antisemitism and despise antisemites. Unlike you, I actually know what the terms mean and don't misuse them, as you deliberately do, to protect the Israeli regime from attack.

Now if you'll excuse me I have a Trip Advisor review to write about an eatery in a very Jewish area just outside Manchester that serves only kosher grub. I'm giving it five stars. You really don't understand much about anything real, do you?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 11 Apr 18 - 06:35 PM

Fling shit at me Shaw and you will receive it right back - so keep it up if you like, I don't back down to bullies like you.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 11 Apr 18 - 06:39 PM

Seems that Theresa is seriously contemplating bypassing parliament in order to go military on Assad. That would be her final, fatal mistake, but I still don't want her to do such a stupid thing.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Raggytash
Date: 11 Apr 18 - 06:39 PM

You're talking through your arse Bobad. I think today is the first time I have typed the word Jew on this thread and possibly the first time I have typed the word Jew on this forum.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 11 Apr 18 - 06:43 PM

Refer to my post of Date: 11 Apr 18 - 06:35 PM , the same applies to you.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 11 Apr 18 - 06:44 PM

Ignore, Raggytash.

I enjoyed my trip oop north and can thoroughly recommend the Coffee Sack on Scholes Lane. Best coffee in Prestwich (when I praised it the lovely lady tried to sell me a huge bag of coffee beans!) and they do poached eggs with avocado on sourdough like you've never had it.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 03:13 AM

Yes, very much the words of someone who has lost. Well, lost the plot anyway. Best to ignore it as white noise.

BTW - This thread was originally about the lies of our Foreign Secretary but as there does not seem to have been a separate thread on Syria I am happy to let it continue. Until such a time as it becomes as toxic as the nerve agent that sparked off the whole row...

Must try the Coffee Sack - Corner of Scholes Lane and Bury New Road, right near the Friendship Inn? I can run round that way to get on the M66 rather than joining the M60 at Pendlebury.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 03:20 AM

Sorry, Steve - Didn't see your Syria based thread till now. Please feel free to continue here or there!

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 03:50 AM

An interesting take on the current imbroglio:


http://stateofthenation2012.com/?p=97468
The embedded links are also quite thorough.

RT's Take:

Moscow said if the weapons were smart, they would target terrorists.
or
Are ‘smart’ missiles an attempt to destroy alleged chem attack evidence in Syria?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 04:01 AM

Steve,
.your hatred of anything with even the slightest Muslim whiff."
No mention there of actual Muslims

If someone hates the slightest Muslim whiff, of course you are accusing him of hating all Muslims.
It is not just Islamophobes who criticise the disusting regime in Turkey right now.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 07:13 AM

OPCW has confirmed Britain's assessment of the agent.
Johnson says "there is no doubt" that Russia did it.
Anyone still think he is lying by saying that?
28 reputable governments say he is not.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 07:35 AM

Today's news about Novichok in Salisbury is that there is not one scrap of extra info that we didn't all have already. Stunning revelations - not! :-)

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 07:47 AM

Today's news about Novichok in Salisbury is that there is not one scrap of extra info that we didn't all have already. Stunning revelations - not!

You and others here have questioned the British findings.
Now they are confirmed, so you can't any more.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Raggytash
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 07:53 AM

H.................oops

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 08:45 AM

H...uh?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 09:02 AM

As a scientific sort of chap, I'll wait for genuine evidence rather than yet another official's say-so. Four billion people believe in God and they're all wrong, after all. Still, as we're told that "lives are at stake" if the claimed real evidence is released, I suppose we may never know. We're now getting the same official line as to why there can't be a parliamentary debate about military action. Mustn't let the MPs have the supposed intelligence as "lives may be at stake." Worth remembering that we pay the wages of these arrogant, manipulating, lying bastards. I can't jump through hoops today, Raggytash, as my back's killing me after all that motorway driving on top of three days of virtual inactivity. Still, sun's out this end and the birds are twittering, a hundred times more sensibly than Trump is. And aren't Warburtons crumpets good when you've no energy to make anything better...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 09:33 AM

Interesting to note that The OPCW does not have the power to identify the source of the nerve agent, but merely to spell out its chemical properties. (Guardian 2 hours ago) Underlining what we have said all along that there is no actual proof that the substance was manufactured in or supplied by Russia.

Going back to the intention of the thread, also underlining what a lying bastard BoJo is.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 09:37 AM

Best to appreciate the small good things in life while we still can...

I look out my window and imagine...

"What if.... houses on my street suddenly without any warning started exploding and incinerating,
and all around became despairing bloody charred chaos...?????

Who amongst us is incapable of ever feeling any empathy...????

yes it's shit being a civilian just trying to live a quiet normal life...

Good job we have political leaders to protect us....

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 09:41 AM

Do I detect a hint of sarcasm there PFR? Tsk, tsk :-D

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 09:52 AM

..knowing my luck I'll be sat on the bog when the apocalypse shit hits the fan...


...I actually was sat on the bog when the Canary Wharf bomb went off...

A sudden inexplicable dramatic shock wave - I thought... that can't be anything I've eaten did that...

Then I got up and saw the TV news a short while later...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 10:26 AM

Steve,
As a scientific sort of chap, I'll wait for genuine evidence rather than yet another official's say-so.

The report compiled by the OPCW scientists of their analysis of the agent used is the hardest possible evidence there is or can be, so you will wait for ever for anything stronger!

Dave,
The OPCW does not have the power to identify the source of the nerve agent, but merely to spell out its chemical properties.

OPCW confirmed the British findings, so we know it is a weapons grade nerve agent developed by the Soviets, and that it was in extremely pure form.
Johnson says that only Russia has the means to produce that. What is your evidence that he is lying Dave?

If he can be shown to have lied he has to resign. The Opposition would call him on it if there was any evidence. Clearly there is not.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 10:34 AM

Government press release,
"
Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson said:
Today the international chemical weapons watchdog have confirmed the findings of the United Kingdom relating to the identity of the toxic chemical used in the attempted assassination of Mr Skripal and his daughter, and which also resulted in the hospitalisation of a British police officer. That was a military grade nerve agent – a Novichok.
This is based on testing in 4 independent, highly reputable laboratories around the world. All returned the same conclusive results.

There can be no doubt what was used and there remains no alternative explanation about who was responsible – only Russia has the means, motive and record.
We invited the OPCW to test these samples to ensure strict adherence to international chemical weapons protocols. We have never doubted the analysis of our scientists at Porton Down.
In the interest of transparency, and because unlike the Russians we have nothing to hide, we have asked the OPCW to publish the executive summary for all to see and to circulate the full report to all state parties of the OPCW, including Russia.
We will now work tirelessly with our partners to help stamp out the grotesque use of weapons of this kind and we have called a session of the OPCW Executive Council next Wednesday to discuss next steps. The Kremlin must give answers.
We must, as a world community, stand up for the rules based order which keeps us all safe. The use of weapons of this kind can never be justified, and must be ended."
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/salisbury-incident-foreign-secretary-statement-on-opcw-report

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 10:40 AM

It's safe to say politicians can't easily get proven as liars
if they have the power to restrict access to info
& suppress evidence that incriminates them...


Basically, if devious arses like Boris get do caught out and sacked...

apart from a little sting to their egos, it's no big deal
because they have the comfy luxury cushion of wealth to fall back on..

..and can always get lucrative work as TV personalities cashing in on their infamy....

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 10:44 AM

Dave's Guardian report,
"The international chemical weapons watchdog has backed the UK’s findings on the identity of the chemical used to poison the former Russian spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia in Salisbury.
The findings by the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons will be a major relief to the UK, which has said novichok, a military-grade nerve agent developed by Russia, was used in the attack."

"The executive summary released by the OPCW does not mention novichok by name, but states: “The results of the analysis by the OPCW designated laboratories of environmental and biomedical samples collected by the OPCW team confirms the findings of the United Kingdom relating to the identity of the toxic chemical that was used in Salisbury and severely injured three people.”"

"....also notes in its summary that the chemical had an “almost complete absence” of impurities."
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/apr/12/novichok-used-in-spy-poisoning-chemical-weapons-watchdog-confirms-salisbury

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 10:45 AM

Why are we so surprised that Boris Johnson lied

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 10:47 AM

If he lied the Opposition can force his resignation.
They would if they could.
They can't.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 10:47 AM

This piece of black Russian humour had been forwarded a lot around the net:

Skripal had been poisoned by a most powerful poison, 2 grams will kill half a country instantly! The Russians

- poisoned him in the restaurant

- no, on the bench

- no, in the car

- No, the door handle was smeared

- No, the suitcase was poisoned

- No, everything in the house was poisoned.

- Oh, and buckwheat was poisoned,

- but they did not die instantly, but walked around somewhere for four hours,

- but the policeman that discovered them almost died on the spot,

- but the poison was instantly identified,

- an antidote was instantly introduced, and Skripals and the policeman were saved;

- The policeman had been discharged next day!

- But they were in coma, and they will never recover!

- but no, the daughter had recovered fast!

- Oh, and dad is revived … a miracle!

- and they both are quickly recovering, your strongest poison is useless.

- the restaurant had been surrounded by police in spacesuits

- the park had been surrounded by police in spacesuits

- the house had surrounded by police in spacesuits

- they are in spacesuits, since the poison is deadly dangerous, but next to them are policemen without protection …

- The bench was cut down and removed: it’s such a terrible poison that the bench retained its toxic quality for two weeks;

- but the cat had survived in the poisoned house … the policeman had touched Skripal and nearly died, and the cat survived … and the guinea pigs would survive, but they were all forgotten, and died of hunger in the house;

- and their remains were immediately burned, as they are poisoned by the strongest poison;

- For two weeks they were poisoned by the strongest poison and survived, and now they had to be urgently cremated;

- Only guinea pigs died, the cat survived all this poison. It was stressful and hungry, so they killed it and cremated to make it certain nobody will find the secret etc etc.

The true hero of Skripal saga is the British ex-Ambassador Craig Murray, who followed the developments and unveiled many of its inconsistencies and outright lies. You may read his articles and twits to learn the details.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 10:55 AM

It is right and fair that someone should post Russia's side of the story, but remember no decent democratic government believes a word of it.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 10:56 AM

Comedy just reported Boris Johnson’s Russia LIES

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 11:00 AM

Nice one. Iains. Playing on Russia's version of 'Have I got (fake) news for you? :-)

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 11:11 AM

Russia or Boris...?????

The problem facing any genuinely intelligent neutral objective inquisitive British citizens is...

out of two known habitual liars, which one should we believe is more likely to be telling us the truth...!!!?????

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 11:16 AM

btw.. how does the law stand on wiring our politicians to lie detectors whenever they appear on TV...???

[ 2 immediate problems.. how reliable are lie detectors...??? and politicians would become even more crafty exponents of 'plausible deniability'...]

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 11:19 AM

One thing you have to hand to the Russians is that they sure know how to play to the saps.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 11:25 AM

... and Boris knows how to play closed minded prejudiced reactionaries...

Any truly intelligent observer would be sceptical of both Russia and the UK Govt...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 11:35 AM

As we are always being told: Look at the big picture.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 11:50 AM

So to sum up, what we've "found out" today is that novichok was used and that novichok was developed in Russia. Well blow me down!

Another thing we're constantly told is that some minute traces of stuff that were scraped off a doorknob after several elapsed days, or rescued from someone's bloodstream after a lot of metabolism ditto, or wherever they eventually scratched it up from, was "military grade"/"weapons grade"/"extremely pure", etc., therefore "must have been made in Russia" (classic non seq there, I'd say). We are all expected to swallow this bullshit hook, line and sinker because, well these important scientists mustn't be questioned. It's above our heads, innit, you see. Well I'm questioning it. What does "military grade" actually mean, how can you tell what "grade" (whatever that means - probably nothing, I'd say) something is after you've managed to get a titchy little bit of it after days, and has anyone ever found any novichok that was SUB-military grade? Accept nothing and question everything!

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 11:52 AM

A little background. warning article may contain untruths.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/mar/07/what-do-nerve-agents-do-and-how-hard-are-they-to-make-sergei-skripal

My take from this article is that for any suicide bomber the synthesis of nerve agents would present no problem. The only downside might be to meet Allah prematurely and forgo the 70 virgins.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 12:40 PM

We are constantly being told (which should always arouse suspicions when it's politicians doing it) that the stuff found is very pure, weapons-grade real-deal tackle. We are supposed to infer from that that it could only have come from Russia. I'd really appreciate it if someone could tell me how I'm supposed to connect those two facts in my tiny brain. I mean, a couple of weeks ago we were told that it could only have come from Russia anyway, without any mention of what "grade" it was supposed to be. We'll be told next I suppose that it could only have come from Russia because it was found smeared on the innermost doll of a babushka set bearing Putin's fingerprints that was verifiably made from a spruce tree that had Vlad's initials carved on it.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 12:59 PM

My mrs is a qualified professional, most days her job involves arbitrating disputes between difficult quarrelsome 4 - 5 years olds...

Frequently she is convinced both parties brought before her for judgement
are maliciously over-exaggerating and lying to make their opponent seem an even worse miscreant than themselves...

If only there wsa a similar powerful authority on the world stage
to put Putin, Trump, Boris, and May, et al, in the 'naughty corner' and keep them in during playtime...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 01:05 PM

PFR,
Any truly intelligent observer would be sceptical of both Russia and the UK Govt...

So you do not regard as intelligent the governments of every EU nation, Canada, Australia and all the other well informed liberal democracies.

I do. They have seen the evidence and they know who to believe.

Steve,
So to sum up, what we've "found out" today is that novichok was used and that novichok was developed in Russia. Well blow me down!

Also that it was highly purified, and that the British were honest and accurate in their analysis.
What we "found out" is not the whole story anyway.

I'd really appreciate it if someone could tell me how I'm supposed to connect those two facts in my tiny brain.

You are not. There is evidence not released.
The real scientists are able to make that connection, and have.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 01:41 PM

....it much be such a warm comforting intellectually numbed existence to give oneself over to absolute faith and belief.....?????

Something akin to habitually self medicating with opiates...?????????

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 02:03 PM

Is that what you imagine the governments of every EU nation, Canada, Australia and all the other well informed liberal democracies are doing?

That is very silly PFR.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 02:06 PM

PFR I hate having to agree with you but you leave me no alternative.

Some info. You have to feed it into google translate in small doses.
The translation comes out surprisingly well.

https://iz.ru/726202/aleksei-ramm-nikolai-surkov/pereputali-gaz-s-maziu

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 02:17 PM

Iains - yes, it is odd, but not altogether unpleasant, being mostly in accord with you this last few weeks...???

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 02:20 PM

"On March 13, the day after Theresa May blamed Russia for Skripal's poisoning, Gerasimov announced that he had discovered a US plan to fake a chemical weapons attack against civilians in Eastern Ghouta and then blame Assad's army.
It was coincidentally also the day after US Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley blamed Russia for stalling a ceasefire in Syria.

Only the keenest and perhaps most cynical observer of Russian propaganda might have thought at the time that the general's prediction of a chemical attack would actually come to pass.
That same seasoned observer might now be concluding that back then in early March, Gerasimov was actually employing his own asymmetrical doctrine to the Skripal issue.
What has now become clear is the full horror of last weekend's chemical weapons attack, with children, women and men dead in the basements where they were hiding.
International condemnation of Bashar al-Assad and Russia has followed, with diplomats from the US, the UK, France, Australia and other countries clear in their minds that the Assad regime was responsible.
The debate at the UN has since been blocked by Russia, balking at the independence of an investigation that would find out exactly who was responsible.

The OPCW, so vital in the Skripal case, has since been drawn in to reviewing the Syria attack -- and almost all mention of Russia's culpability in Skripal's poisoning has disappeared from view.
In asymmetric terms, Gerasimov seems to have pulled off the impossible: diverting attention, albeit at huge potential cost.
Yet Russia's top general had another trick in his pocket back in March: he announced that if the US were to launch an attack on Syria, Russia would target the American missiles and the carriers firing them.
On Wednesday this week, within hours of Russia's Ambassador to Lebanon repeating Gerasimov's March statement about targeting US missiles and carriers, US President Donald Trump entered the fray with a Twitter fusillade, loud enough to drown out any talk of Skripal by the cacophony responding to Trump's apparent declaration of strikes.
Even Gerasimov may have been surprised at the way Russia has buried its British problem. But now, it appears Moscow may be left with a far bigger and more dangerous issue on its hands.
Yet Gerasimov may have a solution for that too: huge numbers of Russian troops and heavy armor have been sighted heading to Russia's border with Ukraine, where Russian-backed Ukrainian separatists are reportedly increasing artillery exchanges with Ukrainian forces.
With his asymmetrical doctrine, Gerasimov appears to be armed with an array of patches for any holes in Vladimir Putin's strategies."

https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/12/opinions/russian-objectives-in-syria-and-the-uk-robertson-opinion-intl/index.html?utm_source=feed

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: robomatic
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 02:39 PM

How to argue in court:
You say my dog bit your son
BUT:
My dog was leashed on my property.
My dog was behind a fence.
My dog does not bite
My dog has no teeth.
And besides,
I have no dog.
And you have no son.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 12 Apr 18 - 02:58 PM

"o support this, Russia’s military strategy has evolved markedly over the last twenty-five years, embracing what some would call “unrestricted warfare.” This has been described as “warfare without rules” or “using all means, including armed force or non-armed force, military and nonmilitary, and lethal and non-lethal means to compel the enemy to accept one’s interests.” Other commentators have referred to this as “political warfare” or the act of fighting in the “gray zone.” It is important to understand here that the shift in the goal, from imposing one’s will by force to the acceptance of one’s interests by other means, fundamentally changes what it means to fight such impositions. Since many of these activities do not involve the use of violence, it is not always clear whether a military response is appropriate or not. Worse still, Western democracies largely reject this blurring of military and civilian tactics. Small wonder, then, that our government institutions, including the military, seem poorly equipped to provide an adequate response. Of course, this is precisely what Russia is banking on."

https://www.yahoo.com/news/obvious-does-russia-want-000500627.html


And for those who feel we can just let Russia have whatever it wants...
"While Putin’s Munich speech gave a clear indication as to Russia’s mutually supportive economic and geopolitical goals, his recent speech to the Russian parliament also gave us insight into some of the means whereby he intends to exert influence in the world. Reaffirming Russia’s national interests, Putin stated that Russia is prepared to go all the way to a nuclear confrontation with the United States in pursuit of these goals. The array of weapons that Putin presented included systems designed to preserve the nuclear deterrent, as well as systems that only make sense if viewed as “second tier” nuclear weapons: weapons that Russia could use locally, without precipitating an all-out nuclear exchange. More worryingly, it seems that these inherently destabilizing weapons are likely to be the ones to spearhead any military component of Russia’s overall plans."

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 03:56 AM

Diane Abbott said on R4 Today programme that it is "beyond reasonable doubt" Russia did it.

The dominant group here still refuse to accept it showing again how extreme and out of touch they are.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 03:59 AM

She also admitted that Russia is the biggest threat to world peace.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 05:58 AM

Interesting analysis of the language being used to explain the poisoning.
There are a couple of things jump out.
1)Experts claim it is not difficult to make just dangerous (just like TNT)
2)It is repeatedly stressed it is high purity.(AS an aside. Ore minerals contain a unique signature of impurities enabling their source to be determined with reasonable accuracy) To argue the same process can occur with the final product of an organic chemical synthesis that gives an extremely pure product is to stretch credulity. I would argue the lack of established provenance is the reason to stress high purity.
A red herring I would suggest.
3)Nowhere does the report mention novichok by name.
A deliberate omission. I think not.
4) Putting a security blanket over the full report does not do the government line any favours.
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2018/04/13/opcw-a13.html

O, what a tangled web we weave when first we practise to deceive!

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 06:07 AM

"8 hours ago - France's President Emmanuel Macron says he has "proof" that the Syrian government attacked the town of Douma with chemical weapons last weekend"
Sounds like he ain't sharing the proof.
The boys badly need a new hymn book, the singing of canaries is muted and the choir is discordant!

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 06:11 AM

...or....

arch tory news presenter Nick Robinson badgers wishy washy Diane Abbott
into saying anything that vaguely agrees with his aggressively insistent leading question
that "Russia is the bigger threat to world peace than America".....

Summed up immediately after in a report by political correspondent Iain Watson

"So I think fair to say, not an entirely unequivocal condemnation of Russia there from Dianne Abbot..
But she did say that she feels Russia was a bigger threat at the moment to world peace than America..."


Hmmmm.... Now I wonder what kind of people might deliberately misconstrue and misrepresent what was actually said
for their own malign motivations...???

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 06:16 AM

"“We have the proof that last week chemical weapons were used – at least chlorine – and that they were used by the Assad regime,” Macron told a TV interviewer."

"According to the New York Times, Mattis appealed at the meeting for more time to gather evidence to prove the Assad regime was responsible for the attack. But the administration appeared determined to deliver on the president’s threat to punish the use of poison gas."

"The PM May."If this is the responsibility of Assad's regime in Syria then it's yet another example of the brutality and brazen disregard for their people that they show."

Below an example of hymns and arias performed in unison.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y0RDadPheNQ

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 06:33 AM

... and it seems we have to wonder which side Trump is is on...Russia or America...???

Effectively tipping off Syria and Russia of planned missile strikes,
giving them time in advance to move targeted Syrian aircraft and military/political asets
to safety in Russian defended sites and bunkers...?????

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 07:19 AM

And while people play at point scoring on here the leaders of the worlds biggest nuclear powers square up to each other in a row that could result in global destruction. The alternative of a non violent solution seems to be be scorned by those intent on 'winning' their petty arguments on here. I really hope you do not get all you deserve as it will affect everyone else as well. Still, I suppose you can then say you won your point...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 08:16 AM

Russia has just declared that the Chemical attack was a plot hatched by western security forces

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 08:17 AM

WONDER IF THIS WAS ONE TOO!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 09:20 AM

They're running scared, pulling out all the stops in fabricating their denials, that's what bullies do when they are stood up to.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 10:06 AM

Ians,
Nowhere does the report mention novichok by name.
A deliberate omission. I think not.

It was named and its chemistry described in the full report.
In the open report it said it confirmed all the British conclusions.

Guardian,
"The international chemical weapons watchdog has backed the UK’s findings on the identity of the chemical used to poison the former Russian spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia in Salisbury."

"The executive summary released by the OPCW does not mention novichok by name, but states: “The results of the analysis by the OPCW designated laboratories of environmental and biomedical samples collected by the OPCW team confirms the findings of the United Kingdom relating to the identity of the toxic chemical that was used in Salisbury and severely injured three people.” "
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/apr/12/novichok-used-in-spy-poisoning-chemical-weapons-watchdog-confirms-salisbury

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 10:12 AM

Funny that. The scientists all say they cannot confirm who manufactured or administered the agent. It seems to only be politicians that are so certain who it was. Maybe they are all taking lessons off Gove the viper and disregarding what experts say?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 10:26 AM

Dave,
It seems to only be politicians that are so certain who it was. Maybe they are all taking lessons off Gove the viper and disregarding what experts say?

Or maybe they know more about it than you do.
It is not just British politicians, but the governments of every EU nation, plus Canada, Australia and all the other well informed liberal democracies in the world.

Perhaps you think it is some vast global conspiracy of lies?
Perhaps you think you know more about it than all of them?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 10:55 AM

The experts say they cannot confirm who manufactured and administered the agent. I am happy to believe them over a bunch of lying incompetents.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 11:05 AM

a bunch of lying incompetents.

You mean the governments of every EU nation, plus Canada, Australia and all the other well informed liberal democracies in the world.

Perhaps you think it is some vast global conspiracy of lies?
Perhaps you think you know more about it than all of them?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 11:07 AM

The experts say they cannot confirm who manufactured and administered the agent. I am happy to believe them over a bunch of lying incompetents.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 11:10 AM

Dave,
The experts say they cannot confirm who manufactured and administered the agent

They can but have not the power to state it.
The Guardian article you quoted,
"The OPCW does not have the power to identify the source of the nerve agent, only to spell out its chemical properties. It is standard OPCW procedure not to identify the laboratories involved in testing the samples, but the organisation draws from a multilaterally agreed list of labs."

Even your Diane Abbott says it is "beyond reasonable doubt."

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 11:10 AM

The head of Porton Down appears to have contradicted claims by Boris Johnson

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 11:12 AM

If Boris' claims were lies the opposition would call for his resignation.
They do not.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 11:14 AM

It's very pure, it's weapons grade, it's novichukchuk so it was dem Ruskies. That's what we're told. I'm still waiting to be told how we KNOW that a substance used days earlier that we retrieved in extremely tiny amounts from a doorknob/park bench/somebody's poo-poo/a dead guinea-pig was "weapons grade" or whatever other important-sounding technical term (terms that are designed for us neither to understand nor question) is used. And even if it is that pure, how does that prove it had to be only made in Russia? Do other countries not have science labs and intelligent personages in white coats and goggles wielding pipettes? C'mon, Iains, we need to batter this stuff home into one or two rather dense cranial cavities around here!

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 11:26 AM

Never mind, Steve. there are always those who follow the party line and those who think for themselves. Ne'er the twain shall meet.

On a much more interesting note, twice today the old thread name game came to mind. The first time was

The French Ambassadors
Concertinas

and the second, currently still there is you are quick

The French Ambassadors
Cover versions

Eeee, tha's got fert lowf

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 11:29 AM

Not only that, unless Porton Down already has some samples of novichok, how can they assess what "grade" the Salisbury stuff is? What are they comparing it with? How do they know anything about novichok, its grade, its purity, etc., unless they have some? And is there such stuff as sub-military-grade novichok???

Suppose I lived on a desert island and had never seen a Brussels sprout. You arrive on the island and give me a sprout to taste. I say wow, what a superb sprout! I've never seen one (at this you raise an eyebrow...) but I can confirm that the one I've just eaten is an absolutely first-rate example of sprouthood! Top grade! So pure! Restaurant quality!

Yeah, right, you'd say...!

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jon Freeman
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 11:32 AM

I wonder Keith, how many of these nations also accepted Saddam had loads of WMD which could be deployed in a short time?

Whatever, I’d think the starting point in what you ask is one whereby these nations would like Russia to be responsible. Is it possible that they would have questioned further had the US been the suspect?

As it happens, I do believe it is probable that Russia were behind the attack but I do not accept your arguments as proof. You constantly and wilfully confuse where a chemical(s) was originally developed with where a particular batch may have been produced and I’m sorry but I do not share your blind faith in any of the word’s governments.

--
Btw on a different theme, does anyone know of any “consumer grade” nerve agents?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 11:38 AM

I remember some days or was it weeks ago Porton Down distinctly avoided/evaded saying the mystery poison was novichok. The only thing we have been told about the OPCW analysis is that they agree with Porton Down.

This carries the argument no further forward. Various experts have said the synthesis of nerve agents is not difficult, it is dangerous.
Whether the analysis can determine contaminants sufficiently to fingerprint a specific lab to establish provenance is unknown.
This would of course dictate that an original sample is available for comparison. The continued stress on purity would suggest that such fingerprinting cannot be made and further that no provenance can be established because there is no archived sample for comparison.
The stress on purity could be merely a distraction also. All chemicals are available in two grades. General Purpose Reagent GPR and analytical grade Analar Sense would dictate the pure chemical would be used for a dangerous end product in order the step reactions give no unintended consequences caused by contaminants. Nerve agents are merely a step up from standard pest control chemicals.
What is omitted in the analysis is the lying and exaggerations of our weasel political class and their media fans. Bend It, Twist it, Shake it would seem to be the mantra of the political class.

It should be made part of their fitness routine when we put the bastards in uniform to go fight the war they are so anxious for.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 11:44 AM

I also find it very odd that, if it is a secret only the Russians know, how come we know it's chemical composition? And, if we know it's chemical composition, who else does? And if other people know it...

Oh, I'm sure you get the gist.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 11:46 AM

"Btw on a different theme, does anyone know of any “consumer grade” nerve agents?"


Yes - the dry shampoo my mrs sprayed in a haphazard cloud around her head,
and gassed the house out with a couple of mornings ago...

It made me nauseous and my skin still smelled of traces several hours later...!!!

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Donuel
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 11:55 AM

Good points guys. I thought the only point of this thread was to let Iains say Russia didn't do it.

So what does the poisoned daughter know and when did she know it?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 12:07 PM

The sick thing about all this of course is that if Britain had acted against Assad when the first AMNESTY report emerged revealing arrest without trial, torture and mass murder of opponents, this need never have reached this stage and Isis would have remained a wet-dream of a bunch of isolated fanatics   
Instead, they treated the man as an ally, sold him weapons (some of the sniper ammunition licensed by Britain was possibly sold to train the HOMS SNIPERS, and when the Arab Spring protests reached Syria, it was British armoured cars, tear gas and riot controls equipment that was used to quell the protesters and lock them away in Assad's torture chambers - even some of the Syrian officers were TRAINED IN BRITAIN
Britain took a vote whether or not to intervene after Homs - we washed our hands of our responsibilities
On poster not a million miles from this thread accused me of being a "fascist" when I suggested Britain should go in (different tune now).
When Assad's politicians were deserting him they begged the British Government to use their good offices to stop the killing and, if that did not happen, to seize the millions of pounds worth of London property owned by the Assad Family - nothing
When Assad first used chemicals on civilians, Britain was reprimanded for having sold CHEMICALS which may have been used to make the weapons being used
Now, a long time after the whole herd of Assad's, the Kremlin's and Isis's horses have bolted and the manyufacture of body-bags has beome a massive industry, the "free and democratic countries" that aome people set such sore by have gotten off their fat arses and decided to move - this time at the risk of starting WW3
Does anybody know the words of WE'LL MEET AGAIN
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 12:07 PM

Steve,
I'm still waiting to be told how we KNOW

You may never be told, but those who have been told, all those governments, are convinced as is Abbott so presumably Corbyn too.

one or two rather dense cranial cavities around here!

And also the governments of every EU nation, plus Canada, Australia and all the other well informed liberal democracies in the world, and your own party's leadership.

unless Porton Down already has some samples of novichok, how can they assess what "grade" the Salisbury stuff is? What are they comparing it with? How do they know anything about novichok, its grade, its purity, etc., unless they have some? And is there such stuff as sub-military-grade novichok???

OPCW confirmed all their conclusions, so who cares what you think about them?

Ians,
I remember some days or was it weeks ago Porton Down distinctly avoided/evaded saying the mystery poison was novichok

They have been quite clear that it was, and OPCW confirmed it.

Dave,
I also find it very odd that, if it is a secret only the....

I find it very odd that you think you know more than all those scientists and governments!

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 12:30 PM

It's the weekend.. let's have a dance to cheer ourselves up a bit on the eve of WW3...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s6-2b_3Dmxw

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 12:35 PM

"let's have a dance"
Think I'd rather take my chances with the gas if it's all the same with you PFR
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jon Freeman
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 12:37 PM

pfr.

I don't feel safe in this world no more
I don't want to die in a nuclear war
...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 01:04 PM

"They have been quite clear that it was, and OPCW confirmed it.(Novichok)"

Correct. The dispute was over provenance. Boris said it was Russian in origin. Porton Down identified the substance but not where it was made(for the reasons I outlined) OPCW confirmed Porton Down's analysis of a suspected nerve agent. It has been called novichok. Therein lies another story. Is there conclusive proof such a nerve agent had been synthesised, and if so by whom? I have seen no one waving a jam jar labelled biohazard about yet!
It is a bit like the chemical poisoning in Syria. There are conflicting reports as to if it happened and if it did, who carried it out.
Was it a bomb, a shell, or a strike on a chemical stockpile.
Who to believe? The white helmets are a totally discredited organisation and have been caught fabricating video recordings. AS far as I am aware OPCW has not yet started work in Syria to establish responsibilities.
Yet politicians have already reached conclusion and threatened reprisals that could have global significance.
Not much point in having a rule book and international organisations if they are totally ignored.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 01:16 PM

The OPCW report!


https://www.opcw.org/fileadmin/OPCW/S_series/2018/en/s-1612-2018_e_.pdf

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 01:21 PM

"... and my skin still smelled of traces several hours later...!!!"

I loved it when MY skin still smelled of Tracey's hours later...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 01:23 PM

and about the OPCW. They have been threatened. Have they been bought?



https://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/apr/16/iraq.comment

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jon Freeman
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 01:36 PM

I loved it when MY skin still smelled of Tracey's hours later...

I just hope she wasn't wearing patchouli oil...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 01:39 PM

Steve - that's the spirit.... let's all get into a last weekend before the end of the world party mood...!!!

Sod the new 5 drinks or less per week health guidelines.. it's a bit too late for that now
while intercontinental missiles are being dusted off and polished...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: robomatic
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 03:24 PM

What do you pay a missile polisher? Is it a higher rate when it's thermonuclear?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 03:24 PM

The scientists know that they cannot confirm who made and delivered the agent. I believe them. Some people don't. As whassername said in Game of Thrones. You know nothing Jon Snow.

I'm getting a bit bloated on canned black sheep. Probably time to open the Argentinian Malbec.

Party on, dudes.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 03:27 PM

There are one or two missile polishes on here, Robo. I take it it is a euphemism for What it sounds like? :-)

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 03:29 PM

We danced like it was 1999 back in 1999...
and nothing too bad happened when the fireworks went off to welcome in 2000...

..so that was a bonus 18 years of extended world peace... mustn't grumble....

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 03:34 PM

... I suppose by 'world peace' I really meant semi rural Scrumpyshire hasn't yet been incinerated off the west country map...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 03:38 PM

5 pints of scrumpy down your neck and you may feel you have been incinerated come morning.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 03:47 PM

I have Morrison's Nero d'Avola breathing. It comes from Sicily but I have it on good authority that the Mafia's methods are a bit less subtle than the resort to novichuckychuckchuck on your corkscrew.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 03:50 PM

What about the Yorkshire get on your nerve agent?

Novi ay up chuck.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 04:24 PM

there are always those who follow the party line and those who think for themselves.

EXACTLY!..............like on here, there are those following the Russian party line and there are those thinking for themselves and arriving at the only logical conclusion.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 05:07 PM

You are so funny, bobad.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: peteglasgow
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 05:15 PM

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 13 Apr 18 - 05:19 PM

Bob - amazing... you'll have to teach the rest us your signature 'turn what someone said the other way round' comedy routine..

We'd love to have a go at trying it.....

Some vintage performers are still working in their 80s doing the same hilarious set pieces...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Apr 18 - 04:34 AM

Dave,
The scientists know that they cannot confirm who made and delivered the agent. I believe them.

So do I, but there is other evidence.
That is how all those national governments were convinced.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 14 Apr 18 - 04:51 AM

One day all will learn it is the agenda that drives the responses.
This was scripted long ago. Lies are handed out as palliatives to keep the sheep happily grazing while all hell breaks loose. Those dominoes will fall - deep state demands it!

Hegemony
oil dollars
Control
The paradigm that will not be shifted (YET!)

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Apr 18 - 06:52 AM

Lies would not have convinced every EU nation, plus Canada, Australia and all the other well informed liberal democracies in the world, and the Labour Party's leadership.

Unless you think they are all in on the lie.
I think that just Russia is lying again, as it has done so often in recent years, e.g. lied about cheating in the Olympics, lied about its intervention in Crimea, lied about the shooting down of a Malaysian airliner, lied about their murder of Litvinenko,.........

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 14 Apr 18 - 07:43 AM

They are all not telling the truth..

Some more than others...

But we don't know which... and neither will future historians...

'they've' made sure of that...!!!

In this game objective 'truth' is not paramount.
What scores and wins most is that which appears to be true and convincing enough
to conceal and achieve true desired objectives.....


...Just a roughly remembered paraphrase of a little something I learned over 35 years ago on a Degree course focusing on Belief & Ideology...

Now back to the petty day to day routine of eating, shitting, and seeking distracting amusements
whilst worrying about family health and money...

I need pricey replacement tuners for a guitar...
I wonder how imminent world destruction will affect credit card repayments...
Better get that ebay order in quick.....

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Apr 18 - 07:53 AM

all the other well informed liberal democracies
The same "well informed liberal democracies" who stood by silently and did nothing and massacred his own people
The same crowd who stood by silently while e America poured burning petrol on barefoot farmers
These people mey be well informed but there's little liberal or democratic about these people when it comes to national self-interest
Give it a rest Keith - your record's worn out and it was crap to start with
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 14 Apr 18 - 07:55 AM

I am quite sure all the players lie through their teeth. Therefore as no one can be believed we have to rely on the balance of probabilities.
If Assad is winning and clearing out the last nest of vipers near Damascus he would have to be particularly braindead to gas his own people. He may be many things but his education and past profession clearly shows stupidity is not one of them.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 14 Apr 18 - 07:56 AM

I wonder how imminent world destruction will affect credit card repayments...

Not much to worry about on that front I'm afraid. Remember Putin's threat that he would shoot down any missiles fired against Assad and how Russia has all these formidable weapons with the ability to evade any countermeasures? Someone who brags about the size and ability of his armaments is like someone who brags about the size of his dick and what he can do with it - he is trying to cover up his shortcomings.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Apr 18 - 08:18 AM

"but his education and past profession clearly shows stupidity is not one of them."
Never worked with Oxford and Cambridge
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 14 Apr 18 - 08:28 AM

Bob - trouble with the dick analogy, is our band used to have a singer who bragged about his non stop...

.. the jammy bastard.. it was actually as huge as he boasted,
and he used it frequently, successfully, extremely promiscuously...

Most annoyingly, I copped off with one of his ex conquests, and she wouldn't shut up about the size of his tackle,
even while me and her were having quite a pleasant time together in bed...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 14 Apr 18 - 08:40 AM

As the song says Punky, it ain't the meat it's the motion.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 14 Apr 18 - 08:54 AM

" Remember Putin's threat that he would shoot down any missiles fired against Assad and how Russia has all these formidable weapons with the ability to evade any countermeasures?"
He further said retaliation would occur should Russian service personnel be put at risk.
So what are you attempting to say?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 14 Apr 18 - 08:56 AM

Maybe world leaders should just get together in a locked room and slap their tackle out on the conference table
just to just get it over and done with once and for all *...

...then zip back up, and get on with running the world peacefully for the rest of us;
which is actually the job we're paying those bloated ego arseholes to do...


[* ok.. bit of a glitch in the plan how May can join in..
maybe she could be the one going round the table with a ruler and notepad...???]

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 14 Apr 18 - 09:05 AM

"but his education and past profession clearly shows stupidity is not one of them."
Never worked with Oxford and Cambridge"

Try and grow up jimmie. I appreciate it is a challenge for you.

I have worked with a number of graduates from Damascus University.
They were all extremely capable.

Do you seriously think all those with an expensive education from eton and degrees from Oxford and Cambridge represent the Crème de la crème?
Such a belief could explain your bizarre postings.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 14 Apr 18 - 09:23 AM

French Declassified Intelligence Report Claiming Assad Behind Syria Gas Attacks

Complete report: Here

On the basis of this overall assessment and on the intelligence collected by our services, and in the absence to date of chemical samples analysed by our own laboratories, France therefore considers (i) that, beyond possible doubt, a chemical attack was carried out against civilians at Douma on 7 April 2018; and (ii) that there is no plausible scenario other than that of an attack by Syrian armed forces as part of a wider offensive in the Eastern Ghouta enclave.

The Syrian armed and security forces are also considered to be responsible for other actions in the region as part of this same offensive in 2017 and 2018. Russia has undeniably provided active military support to the operations to seize back Ghouta.

It has, moreover, provided constant political cover to the Syrian regime over the employment of chemical weapons, both at the UN Security Council and at the OPCW, despite conclusions to the contrary by the JIM.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Apr 18 - 10:06 AM

"Try and grow up jimmie. "
Try to act like an adult who knows enough to know that intelligence has nothing to do with education - two separate things altogether
Please take your inferiority complex elsewhere
Your attempts at bullying become sillier and sillier considering your llack of manners, knowledge and intelligence
Grow up - it was a **** joke
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 14 Apr 18 - 10:24 AM

Oi... there'll be no joking here... world war 3 is a very serious business
best left to our betters and superiors to conduct as they see fit...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 14 Apr 18 - 10:33 AM

pfr Does that not mean we should send them all to the front line? There can be no better place to see what gives.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 14 Apr 18 - 10:41 AM

Iains - yeah once they've finished measuring and comparing dicks...
tool em up with axes and mace - game of thrones style...

so we can all watch it televised live....

A bit like teatime "It's a knock out"...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Kenny B (inactive)
Date: 14 Apr 18 - 10:47 AM

PfR [* ok.. bit of a glitch in the plan how May can join in..
maybe she could be the one going round the table with a ruler and notepad...???] - she'll take Boris as an example

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 14 Apr 18 - 10:51 AM

Should give them sticks and stones. Then they can get some practice in for round 2.

Pause for thought. All that glisters is not gold!

https://southfront.org/there-are-some-problems-with-gas-cylinders-videos-used-by-white-helmets-as-evidence-of-douma-attack/

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Apr 18 - 01:43 PM

PFR,
They are all not telling the truth..
Some more than others...

Russia lies to conceal its guilt.
What possible motive have Australia, Sweden and all those other nations got, to pretend to be convinced of their guilt while knowing them to be innocent?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 14 Apr 18 - 01:52 PM

It must be such a lovely simple comfortable life not being sceptical or cynical
of the self interested nationalist motives and allegiances of international diplomats.....

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 14 Apr 18 - 02:03 PM

she'll take Boris as an example

That would be completely unfair. Men's private parts should never be measured against a dick like that...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 14 Apr 18 - 04:20 PM

A spiffing fairy tale attached! or is it??????????

http://www.moonofalabama.org/



The official stories have more holes than a Swiss cheese.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Apr 18 - 03:47 AM

Once again your extreme views are totally out of touch and unrepresentative of normal UK views.

It is ludicrous to suggest that the whole world is lying except Russia, the one government who make lying an art form.

Outside of RT, where can your views be found lads?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 15 Apr 18 - 04:16 AM

Keith the entire exercise is a means to an end.
A swiss lab claims the nerve agent is a Nato product, the coalition claims it is Russian.
The latest jolly jape is that the rain washed the poison off the doorhandle and therefore degraded it. Strange that the house shown has a canopy/porch over the front door.
Photographs show a poison gas cylinder supposedly on a roof, beside a hole made by something of very different construction. The photo indicates nothing of the sort, it could equally be a ground floor with ordnance penetration into a basement.

Need I continue?

It is very convenient to toe the party line.

In war the first casualty is truth.

I repeat my original argument from many months ago. If Assad is winning why invite a worldwide condemnation by gassing his own people.
Especially when mopping up the last pocket of resistance in the area.

The attacks would have occurred anyway. If not this pretext then another. The neocon blueprint was laid out years ago. Russia has thrown a spoke into it. Syria, Iran, then Russia.
Strange that a similar argument to mine on sky TV was pulled.
Try joining a few dots, instead of blindly following the herd.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Apr 18 - 11:56 AM

A swiss lab claims the nerve agent is a Nato product

Really? I will trust OPCW over this supposed "Swiss lab."

The latest jolly jape is that the rain washed the poison off the doorhandle and therefore degraded it.

Really? Even if true how would that be relevant? Who is claiming it?

Photographs show a poison gas cylinder supposedly on a roof, beside a hole made by something of very different construction.

Huh?

Need I continue?
It is very convenient to toe the party line.

No-one is toeing a party line.
Everyone except RT and the dominant extremists here accept the obvious truth.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Donuel
Date: 15 Apr 18 - 12:59 PM

I concur Keith

The possibility remains that Iains only wants us to believe he is a Russian social media provocateur.


naah

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 15 Apr 18 - 01:06 PM

There also remains the possibility that "Keith A of Hertford" is now a team sharing crib sheet pre-fab scripted arguments,
and perhaps even a log-in ID...?????

Ah.... the wonders of the marvelous internet age...!!!

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Apr 18 - 01:39 PM

PFR, can you challenge anything I have said?
Please specify anything I got wrong instead of just attacking me.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 15 Apr 18 - 01:47 PM

For Keef:


https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/01/world/europe/russia-sergei-skripal-uk-spy-poisoning.html


https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2018/04/knobs-and-knockers/

It will be interesting to see how parliament reacts to all this.
Why the three line whip I wonder?
Beware the ides of april mayhap?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 15 Apr 18 - 03:43 PM

Donuel, if you can't be open-minded here you shouldn't join in. You appear to be blindly and opportunistically anti-Russia and that is a stance that gets us precisely nowhere. Some of us simply want to get to the bottom of what's been going on, to be told the truth. You appear to be an aficionado of the bobad/Bruce/Keith lynch mob school of thought. It's very unhelpful.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 15 Apr 18 - 04:22 PM

the bobad/Bruce/Keith lynch mob school of thought

You left you list incomplete Shaw, allow me to complete it for you:

Every EU nation, plus Canada, Australia, the US and all the other well informed liberal democracies in the world, plus the Labour Party's leadership.

There, that should cover it.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 15 Apr 18 - 04:35 PM

I still believe that the scientists say that they cannot confirm who manufactured and delivered the agent. That being the case, why do those politicians who have a vested interest in it being the Russians not dispute that claim? Apart from BoJo of course who would not know the truth if it but him on the bum.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 15 Apr 18 - 04:54 PM

From the daily wail
Former Russian spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia were saved from death because the deadly nerve agent smeared on their front door was 'washed off by the rain'.
Ex-Russian scientist Vil Mirzayanov says in such weather conditions this substance could be used only by an idiot who knows nothing about the chemical characteristics of Novichok.

Was he a useful idiot or useless idiot??




http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5616859/Novichok-Salisbury-hitman-failed-kill-Skripals-raining.html

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 15 Apr 18 - 04:59 PM

It's a good thing that those whose opinions matter are capable of deductive reasoning.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 15 Apr 18 - 05:47 PM

It is indeed, No bad :-)

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 Apr 18 - 04:04 AM

As I keep saying, bobad, three or four billion people believe in God and they're all wrong. I won't try to impress you with a long list of their names.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Apr 18 - 04:44 AM

Dave,
I still believe that the scientists say that they cannot confirm who manufactured and delivered the agent.

Only because their remit does not permit them to.
They got round it by saying they confirmed UK scientists' conclusions.

politicians who have a vested interest in it being the Russians

They do not. There interest is in exposing the culprit of an attempted double murder using nerve gas in a UK town.

The evidence must be convincing because it has convinced every EU nation, plus Canada, Australia, the US and all the other well informed liberal democracies in the world, plus the Labour Party's leadership.

The only doubters are enemies of our Western democracies like you extremists here.

Steve,
four billion people believe in God and they're all wrong. I won't try to impress you with a long list of their names.

A short list of some believers you may have heard of,
JF Kennedy, Martin Luther King. Barack Obama, Nelson Mandela, ....
All fools?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 16 Apr 18 - 05:05 AM

Porton Down experts unable to verify precise source of novichok

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Apr 18 - 05:09 AM

Dave's link,

"Gary Aitkenhead, the chief executive of the government’s Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (DSTL), said the poison had been identified as a military-grade novichok nerve agent, which could probably be deployed only by a nation state.
Aitkenhead said the government had reached its conclusion that Russia was responsible for the Salisbury attack by combining the laboratory’s scientific findings with information from other sources.
The UK government moved quickly to make it clear that the prime minister, Theresa May, had always been clear the assessment from Porton Down was “only one part of the intelligence picture”."

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Apr 18 - 05:11 AM

Guardian,
"Putin: The New Tsar review – a portrait of a lonely, lying narcissist
   
Stuffed with insight and bizarre anecdotes, this documentary about the Russian president could almost be funny if it weren’t so scary"
https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2018/mar/10/putin-the-new-tsar-review-bbc2

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 16 Apr 18 - 05:38 AM

I guess the previous argument was a tad uncomfortable.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Donuel
Date: 16 Apr 18 - 06:48 AM

Russia did this bizarre video http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/262044-elderly-obama-kerry-featured-in-bizarre-russian-media-video

?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 16 Apr 18 - 06:50 AM

I have combined the scientific proof that there are some idiots on Mudcat with information from other sources and I now know who the main idiot is. Of course my other sources are top secret so you just have to trust me that they are right.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Apr 18 - 07:01 AM

Dave,
Of course my other sources are top secret so you just have to trust me that they are right.

I do not trust you or Putin, but when the evidence is so powerful as to convince every EU nation, plus Canada, Australia, the US and all the other well informed liberal democracies in the world, plus the Labour Party's leadership, I trust.

Only a delusional political fanatic would believe all those decent nations are involved in a lying conspiracy over this.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 16 Apr 18 - 07:57 AM

I fink most politicians are delusional, many fanatical, and some definitely psychopathic. Who in their right mind would ever dream of trusting them?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 16 Apr 18 - 08:14 AM

three or four billion people believe in God and they're all wrong

Please note the distinction between "believe" and "reasoning"..........you're welcome.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 16 Apr 18 - 08:17 AM

No one should as far as I can see, Iains. I have hopes for Corbyn but I suspect we may disagree on that.

Boris lies

Boris condemns lies

I should really commend that man. He never fails me :-)

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 16 Apr 18 - 08:22 AM

Dave in this case I think corbyn is the only one taking the sanity medication.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Apr 18 - 08:23 AM

If Boris had lied on this, the opposition would rightly demand his resignation.
They do not.

If Putin has lied, nothing.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Apr 18 - 08:33 AM

"Who in their right mind would ever dream of trusting them? "
Unless they're Syrian or Russian, of course!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Apr 18 - 08:49 AM

Jim,
"Who in their right mind would ever dream of trusting them? "
Unless they're Syrian or Russian, of course!!

Your willingness to pretend to believe Russian and Syrian politicians over Western democratically elected politicians is disturbing.

Presumably although Russia has abandoned even the pretence of being socialist, their antagonism to the democratic West still gains the allegiance of extreme Left anti-West fanatics like you and others here.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 16 Apr 18 - 09:48 AM

Jim, don't fall for it! We all know it will just end up in one of those stupid circular arguments which will go on until the thread is closed in desperation :-(

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Raggytash
Date: 16 Apr 18 - 09:54 AM

Hoop alert !!!!!

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Apr 18 - 11:42 AM

"Jim, don't fall for it! "
Thanks Dave and Rag
I have no intention of responding to Keith ever again (one day at a time as AA says)
I see no reason not to back-heel him in passing, but I'll keep that to a minimum
Helps to relieve the gloom of common sense
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Apr 18 - 11:51 AM

Oh ye of little faith!!
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 16 Apr 18 - 12:02 PM

:-)

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: robomatic
Date: 16 Apr 18 - 07:36 PM

Nothing to see here! Move along folks! Absolutely no criminal involvement!

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 03:49 AM

Our anti-West far-Left fanatics here can not admit that Putin's regime is far nastier than any Western government, with its history of state murder and lying.

You nit-pick at the evidence but it remains overwhelming, and you are unable to find any source other than RT not convinced by it.
Russia attacked the Skripals in Salisbury.

You will never admit it, but you know it is true.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 04:32 AM

Japan times

MOSCOW/AMSTERDAM – The British government says Russia is to blame for poisoning former spy Sergei Skripal with a nerve agent, and most chemical weapons specialists agree.

But they also say an alternative explanation cannot be ruled out: that the nerve agent got into the hands of people not acting for the Russian state.

Wired

This does open the door to a final, somewhat unlikely, theory. It could be the case that some non-state actor has used a nerve agent precisely to draw suspicion towards Russia. “If you were some kind of troublemaker who wanted to make Russia look bad, this would be a way of doing it,” Guthrie says.

New York Times

British Lab Has Not Identified ‘Precise Source’ of Poison in Spy Case

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 04:43 AM

So Dave, do any of them suggest Russia did not do it?
No.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 04:46 AM

Your NYT piece is 2 weeks old!

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 04:48 AM

Your WIRED piece 10th March!

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 04:51 AM

Your Japan Times piece is from March 15 (!) and opens,
"The British government says Russia is to blame for poisoning former spy Sergei Skripal with a nerve agent, and most chemical weapons specialists agree."

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 04:57 AM

Keith I think the argument revolves around clear unequivocal proof. The chemical has been identified (we are told) Experts tell us it is not a difficult synthesis. It is pure. Therefore any telltale contaminants that might identify location just are not there. No one can prove who made it!
Therefore this presents a problem. Many people believe in God. Are they correct or misguided? How many wars have been started as a result of deliberate "lies"
We deliberately carried out an act of war on the basis of if, buts and maybe's. Might be good enough for you, but not for me. If people are going to killed in my name I do not think it unreasonable to demand incontrovertible proof, especially if I am expected to take the word of MP snake oil salesmen.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 05:15 AM

It's just that alternative views are available, Iains. I am just not as certain as some that our elected representatives are to be trusted!

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 05:33 AM

Our "elected" representative, elected only in the sense of her having put together a hasty and grubby coalition lest we forget, routinely acts first and foremost in her own political interests. She is weak and vulnerable and she knows that whupping far-distant foreigners who her own electorate don't really get to see much of is a cast-iron way of strengthening her hand...she thinks. But we don't live any more in the world of the six o'clock news delivered by a complicit and pliable Beeb. We have it from multiple sources around the clock and we have social media and there are correspondents on the ground in Syria. Democracy demands a fierce reaction to what she's done and the cross-examining should pick her apart. All power to the opposition parties in these regards.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 06:50 AM

Ians,
Keith I think the argument revolves around clear unequivocal proof.

It has been proved to the satisfaction of every EU nation, plus Canada, Australia, the US and all the other well informed liberal democracies in the world, plus the Labour Party's leadership.

The people here still claiming to disbelieve what is obviously a fact do so from their own extreme political agenda.

Dave,
It's just that alternative views are available, Iains.

What credible sources are expressing an alternative view?

I am just not as certain as some that our elected representatives are to be trusted!

It is not just ours though Dave. All the great democracies are agreed on this. Only you extremists pretend to believe Putin over them.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 07:32 AM

Labour's "conviction that Russia did it"
Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn has accused the government of “waiting for instructions” from Donald Trump adding that military intervention risks “escalating an already devastating conflict”. He also called for a UN-led investigation of the chemical weapons attack in Douma.
Until there is proof positive, I suggest that this is the stance taken by every reasonable power
To suggest otherwise is lynch-mob' politics
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 08:01 AM

And just this week, another atrocity, the poison-gas barrel bomb massacre of more than 40 Syrians in the besieged district of Douma, has obliged Corbyn to return to his excuses and prevarications about Iran’s bloodthirsty satrapy in Damascus.

Mustn’t rush to judgment about what happened last weekend, Corbyn has insisted. Can’t be blaming Assad for that. Evidence, old chap. Which is exactly what Corbyn said when Assad’s bombers dropped sarin gas on the town of Khan Shaykhun last April. In that incident, more than 70 people were suffocated to death, according to the judgment of the UN’s Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons. But no, again, we mustn’t rush to judgment, says Jeremy Corbyn.

A proper independent investigation is needed, Corbyn again insists, strangely overlooking the dozen UN Security Council resolutions on Syria vetoed by Russia, most recently on Tuesday, in a veto that quashed a resolution that would have cleared the way for just such an investigation.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The World Health Organization, the Syria Violations Documentation Centre, the Union of Medical Care and Relief Organizations and several other agencies have painted a clear and precise picture of what happened in Douma on Saturday. Barrel bombs were dropped at two locations, within blocks of one another. Within hours, more than 500 people were suffering unmistakable signs of poison gas suffocation. At least 42 of them have died.

The barrel bombs were dropped from helicopters. There are no rebel forces with helicopters in Syria. This was no “false flag,” no matter what the Kremlin says. No “paid actors” were involved, no matter what the American alt-right says or the “anti-imperialist” left says, and there are no “peace talks” to join, no matter what Jeremy Corbyn says.

What would Trotsky have to say about the U.K.'s Jeremy Corbyn?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 08:30 AM

"What would Trotsky have to say about the U.K.'s Jeremy Corbyn?"
From The Nation Post
The National Post is a Canadian daily newspaper. It was founded in 1998 by Conrad Black (Canadian fraudster and answer to Rupert Murdoch) with the intent of countering what he saw as the "over-liberalizing" of editorial policy in Canadian newspapers, being built from the bones of the Financial Post, which Black bought from Sun Media (Canada's answer to News Corp) in 1997.
Given this pedigree, the Post's editorial stance tends toward the reactionary end of the conservative spectrum, but due to the sober (if not always neutral) tone of its news reporting, the Toronto Sun and its exclamatory headlines beat it for the title of Canada's answer to the New York Post.
Its owner, Postmedia, also owns most of the provincial newspapers (including both of British Columbia's papers) and maintains an iron grip on their editorial content (hence the reactionary slant). One of the most infamous cases of this was the Edmonton Journal endorsing the widely reviled Progressive Conservative party in the 2015 Alberta Election without its writers knowing.

What else would such a paper say?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 08:46 AM

Trotsky...!!!?????

errrmm... it's 2018 if Canadian media needs reminding.. not 1918...

Though, 2018 / 1918... could be easy for an older jounalist to get confused
if not woken up properly, and can't find reading glasses...

I bought my mum a Dementia friendly clock so she can keep daily track of what year it is...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 08:50 AM

btw.. seriously who does he think still remembers much at all about Trotsky, without heading to wiki, if they an be bothered...

I swear the rabid right is more obsessed with commie politicians from the long gone past
than any sensible folks I know...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 09:17 AM

“An individual, a group, a party, or a class that ‘objectively’ picks its nose while it watches men drunk with blood massacring defenceless people is condemned by history to rot and become worm-eaten while it is still alive.”

What Trotsky said about Miliukov and his party in 1912 can well be said about Corbyn today.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 09:25 AM

Sez you.

Oh, and the right wing press.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 09:37 AM

Oh, and the right wing press.

“Left wing, right wing, chicken wing — it’s the same thing to me,”

-Woody Guthrie

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 09:46 AM

But you see, bobad, Jeremy isn't "watching men drunk with blood massacring defenceless people..." etc. Like the rest of us he's being drip-fed the information that our leaderships are choosing to let us have, not "watching" at all. Like the rest of us, once he knows who these "men drunk with blood" are and precisely what they've done, he'd be just as happy as you to see a stern reaction. Me too. Unlike you, though, we don't go in for lynch mob methods. We want to see the evidence. The mere suspicion that this is being done, if it's being done, by Islamists or Ruskies doesn't cut it with us, and it shouldn't with you either.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 09:47 AM

Woody Guthrie would be appalled by your attitude.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 09:54 AM

Woody Guthrie would be appalled by your attitude.

Lol.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 10:19 AM

More time now
Bobad
If you or the right wing bumwipe you quote from knew the slightest thing about left politics you would be aware that what distinguished Trotsky and Trotskyism from most left parties (apart from the Anarchists) is the total rejection of Parliamentary Politics
Your attempts to link Corbyn with Trotskyism is as crass as anything else you have ever written
Buy a book!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 10:38 AM

The main function in this era, of a word like 'Trotsky' is to trigger fuddled reactionaries
into immediately automatically yelping and baying for a taste of modern left wing blood...

The history and meaning is irrelevant..
it's now merely a sound signal to command to attention behaviourly conditioned right wing attack dogs..

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 10:44 AM

The Khan Shaykhun chemical attack happened on April 4, 2017, an area of the Idlib Governorate that was under the control of Tahrir al-Sham, better known as the Al-Nusra Front terrorist group. The sarin gas release, which reportedly claimed the lives of between 74-100 civilians, happened after a Syrian Air Force anti-terrorist operation in the town. Damascus said it targeted the terrorists using only conventional weapons.

The investigators never visited the site of the incident, citing security concerns. And because the “integrity of the scene was devalued” after the “crater from which the sarin emanated was disturbed after the incident and subsequently filled with concrete” by the militants controlling the area.

Nevertheless, in its report, JIM( OPCW-UN Joint Investigative Mechanism) said “the Leadership Panel is confident that the Syrian Arab Republic is responsible for the release of sarin at Khan Shaykhun on 4 April, 2017.”

You pays yer money and makes yer choice. Easy innit. Truth! wotsat?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 10:47 AM

Your attempts to link Corbyn with Trotskyism

No such attempt is being made. It seems you are unable to to understand the application of a historic quote to present day events. It's a literary device - do look up how that works.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 10:56 AM

Steve,
The mere suspicion that this is being done, if it's being done, by Islamists or Ruskies doesn't cut it with us, and it shouldn't with you either.

I agree, but the evidence is damning.
Apart from the video which could be staged, we have blood and urine from victims which can not.

The gassing was instigated by a helicopter barrel bomb attack, which rules out any of the rebels.

You know all this, but you can not bring yourself to accuse a fellow opponent of Western democracy.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 11:05 AM

Not knowing the full facts, and stating this quite openly and honestly as an explanation for discomfort at jumping to conclusions;
is not.. repeat NOT..
a reason to be deviously extrapolated as meaning support for an evil regime...


got it rightwing dimwits...!!!???

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 11:16 AM

I may be a little dim, but I am not Right-wing. From your far-Left perspective the centre aground just appears Right-wing.

I do not jump to conclusions and would not ask you to, but all those people and governments have come to a conclusion based on evidence which you here choose to deride for what can only be political reasons.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 11:23 AM

I hate to be a stickler for detail but where is the evidence for helicopters and barrel bombs? I cannot recall the MSM mentioning such things and logically you would expect them to be all over it.Also compressing a gas into a 50gallon drum is not anything that would pass the most cursory health and safety inspection.
Figures I have seen quote 40psi to burst a conventional steel 55 gallon drum. A standard propane cylinder is rated for closer to 1000psi.

Someone is telling porkies again!

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 11:26 AM

got it rightwing dimwits...

It's a display of weakness when posters resort to hurling cheap political labels around. Adhering to any political dogma be it of the so-called right wing or left wing is a display of weak mindedness much like adhering to religious dogma. Try studying the issues and thinking for yourself for a change - if nothing else it makes for good mental exercise.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 11:29 AM

I will repeat yet again I am moderately left of centre for the most part,
with more leftward leanings on Education, Work, Welfare, Nationalisation..

.. and very right wing tendencies on aspects of law and order...

I'm just an ordinary bloke trying to understand and cope with life in modern Britain

Malicious accusations of being extreme far left are complete and utter bollocks...!!!!!

..and make the persistent lone accuser appear to be an inconsequential fool

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 11:31 AM

Poison gas was used in compressed form back in WW1, but no-one suggests compressed gas was used here.

The barrel bomb drop was widely seen and reported. Douma is on the outskirts of Damascus.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 11:35 AM

"It's a display of weakness when posters resort to hurling cheap political labels around"

oh no it isn't...!!!


"Adhering to any political dogma be it of the so-called right wing or left wing is a display of weak mindedness much like adhering to religious dogma. Try studying the issues and thinking for yourself for a change - if nothing else it makes for good mental exercise."

bob - what you just wrote is patronising piffle...

... but at least you are trying to be a bit more creative in your writing...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 11:49 AM

"Try studying the issues and thinking for yourself for a change"

did that, still do it, got several certificates in a drawer somewhere to prove it...


Here's one I just thought for myself, took about a minute, if that..

Some folks are not only brown nosers for high establishment and authority,
but are so full of and pleased with themselves
they'd lick their own arses if they were flexible enough...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 11:50 AM

If the gas was not compressed I doubt there would be enough to wipe out a single canary.-get real!

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 11:54 AM

Is anyone seriously suggesting that the scenes of children being medically treated for the effects of chemicals were faked !!
Surely Donald Duck's "fake news" hasn't reached that stage - YET
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 12:07 PM

Jim - frankly, those 'news' images looked just as much as like bewildered frightened little kids
being bullied and distressed by rough abusive men with hosepipes and inhalers...???

Whichever, those kids need protecting by some agency from outside of all this confusing chaos...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 12:27 PM

And the one who described her experiences at some length - scripted maybe?
Don't think so
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 12:37 PM

If the gas was not compressed I doubt there would be enough to wipe out a single canary.-get real!

Get real. It was not delivered in gas form. Nerve agents are usually a vapour or aerosol, and chlorine would be generated from chemicals within the munition.
You know all this. Your denials are all pretence.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 12:45 PM

What I don't understand about all this is, as far as I am concerned the Soviet Union shook off the "shackles of communism" twenty eight years ago and became part of the Democratic world, no those rightists who are condemning Russia appear to be suggesting that being one of the "free, decent, democratic countries" as our resident Lord Haw-Haw has described them, is capable of massacring civilians and using chemicals on them
I can't ever remember a Communist country ever being accused of chemical attacks, yet we know the good and the great "free, decent, democratic countries" have been using them since WW1 - our own dear WINNIE was very fond of them in fact
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 12:46 PM

oh no it isn't...!!!

Oh yes it is. It is nothing but name calling. It's the refuge of someone with a weak position trying to denigrate his opponent in order to bolster himself. It's base.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 12:49 PM

Jim - haven't seen them all...
BBC seems very selective of the one main clip mostly being repeated...

But the main point should be whoever is to blame for what,
those kids need protecting from the adults in Syria..

And from becoming further 'collateral damage' by 'our' or any other nations bombing PR stunts...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 12:50 PM

Jim, no-one would describe Putin's regime as a "free, decent, democratic country."

He regards such countries as his enemy.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 01:02 PM

Oh yes it is. It is nothing but name calling. It's the refuge of someone with a weak position trying to denigrate his opponent in order to bolster himself. It's base."

bob - pack it in.. it's not going to work..

just makes you look like a sanctimonious buffoon running out of ideas
in your perpetual offensive against humanistic pacifist 'opponents'......

There are plenty of other things you can pick on to berate me for,
but 'self esteem issues' is not one of them...!!!!


.. and I don't care either if your dick is bigger than mine...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 01:12 PM

"kids need protecting from the adults in Syria.."
I would have thought that both children and adults need protecting from the regime once the fighting stops - surely you are not suggesting that adult non-combatants colluded to blame Assad and Russia?
Assad is notorious for taking revenge on anybody he identifies as a non-supporter (ask Keith - he's an admirer who wanted to sell him riot-control equipment)
Anybody who supported the original Arab Spring protests fit neatly into Assad's (mark for special treatment) category
We really 'ain't seen nuffin yet'
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 01:23 PM

"surely you are not suggesting that adult non-combatants colluded to blame Assad and Russia?"

Jim - of course I'm not, why would I..???

.. well not all of them.......

..and if any at all, then that's open to the reasonable conjecture that permeates these current threads...

My straight answer is I DON'T KNOW....

But anything is seemingly possible in that shelled to shit death zone...

.. and most folks would place safety of children, the next generation, as a priority for saving...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 01:36 PM

"My straight answer is I DON'T KNOW...."
Nobody does, but I would have thought that such a deception involving cameraman, civilians, children and rescuers would have taken a bit of organisation and rehearsal - wouldn't have thought that there was time to have done that
I cannot see why it should not have been Russia, given their track-record in Chechnya - it's not the same country I held out great hope for all those years ago
As for Assad - Chemical attacks and slaughtering civilians appears to come second nature to the old friend and ally of Britain
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 01:42 PM

humanistic pacifist 'opponents'

Lololol!

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 01:45 PM

Jim - on a practical level..
If that scene in the hospital with hoses and inhalers was staged,
it wouldn't have taken much planning or time at all.

Anyone capable of using a Hi res phone cam and organizing quickly briefed activists into an impromtu improvised shoot
could have knocked that up very quickly indeed.

Just add genuinely terrified kids to add to the realism.

I'm not saying that is what happened, and it is not genuine.
But just pointing out how easy and quickly a scene like that could have been contrived as pure propaganda.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 01:46 PM

bob - that's right, we gotta retain a sense of humour...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 02:10 PM

" and chlorine would be generated from chemicals within the munition."
Standard manufacture of chlorine is by the electrolysis of table salt.
You'd be damm clever to fit that in a munition.
I am always ready to be corrected but the standard delivery of chlorine is by compressed gas.
The conventional understanding of barrel bomb is a drum packed with explosive and scrap iron to produce shrapnel.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 02:24 PM

"Anyone capable of using a Hi res phone cam and organizing quickly briefed activists into an impromtu improvised shoot"
Sorr PFR - you're beginning to sound more and more like Iains every minute
And then there's the planning conferences between the allies...
Nah - doesn't make sense to me
These were elderly men women and children I saw, and medical teams
Cecil B De M would have taken weeks to set up such a scene involving so many genuine-looking extras
As I said - Russia's and Syria's track-record clinches it for me - they've both been there and done this before - many times
Leopards - spots and all that
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 02:35 PM

Jim - this is pointless if we are not talking about the same clip.

As an ex AV technician, I am talking hypothetically about ONLY the most commonly shown clip on BBC
[well the one I see most of]
of kids being water blasted with hoses, and puffed with inhalers.

And for that ONE clip, I stand by what I say about the easy logistics
of quickly faking something very similar...
IF any one was motivated to do that...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 02:36 PM

Standard manufacture of chlorine is by the electrolysis of table salt.

Yes, but much easier to use chemical reagents.
Having said that I see that pressurised chlorine gas has been used in Syria.

Syrian chemical weapons use backed-up by second ...
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/...
Chlorine gas canister munitions have been photographed at the sites where tests conducted by The Telegraph demonstrated that the Assad regime had conducted gas attacks on civilians.
bellingcat - New Details of the February 1st 2018 Chlorine ...
https://www.bellingcat.com/news/mena/2018/02/12/new-details...

The standard warhead has been replaced with a large pressurized gas cylinder, and tail fins have been added to the rocket. The munition matches exactly with the design of munition used in the January 22 2018 chlorine attack in Douma, Damascus, as well as chlorine attacks that …

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 02:38 PM

"Standard manufacture of chlorine is by..." Not always, for use as a weapon. Standard chemical rounds/bombs are two chemicals that, when combined, form the desired agent. That was what was found in Iraq, BTW ( Several thousand empty rounds, as the chemicals are not usually stored in the shell. But we know Saddam didn't have anything like that- he even told us he had destroyed the ones the UN had found earlier. He wouldn't have lied about that, would he?

And there were a number of truck convoys seen just before the US invasion of Iraq, going from the Iraqi chemical weapons facilities and arms storage to Syria. Could the chemicals to produce weapons have been in those trucks?





And as an aside:



"A Russian journalist who reported on political scandals linked to President Vladimir Putin's associates and the death of Russian mercenaries in Syria has died in hospital after a mysterious fall from his apartment. CBS News partner network BBC News reports that neighbors found Maxim Borodin badly injured on the ground outside his fifth floor apartment in Yekaterinburg on April 12.

Local and regional authorities told the BBC that no suicide note was discovered and the door to his apartment was found locked from the inside. They said no criminal activity was suspected.

But Vyacheslav Bashkov, a friend of the deceased journalist, told the British network that Borodin had called him early on the morning of April 11, saying there was "someone with a weapon on his balcony and people in camouflage and masks on the staircase landing."

Bashkov described Borodin as a "principled, honest journalist," and told the BBC he called back later on the 11th to say he must have been wrong about his apartment being surrounded around 5 a.m., and that the mysterious armed individuals were apparently taking part in a security exercise.

The representative for media freedom at a European security organization told the BBC that Borodin's death should be investigated.

Harlem Désir of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe said the circumstances of the death were "of serious concern."

Borodin had reported recently on the death of hundreds of Russian mercenaries killed in U.S. airstrikes in northern Syria, after U.S.-allied forces came under attack in the region.

He had also investigated the bizarre story of a Belorussian sex worker arrested in Thailand who claims to have recorded conversations with a Russian oligarch which prove Russia meddled in the 2016 U.S. presidential election.

In October last year, a prominent journalist for one of Russia's leading news radio stations was stabbed in the throat by an unknown attacker who burst into her studio. Tatyana Felgenhauer is the deputy editor of Ekho Moskvy, often described as Russia's only independent news radio station.

Another popular Ekho Moskvy host, Yulia Latynina, fled Russia in September following a suspected arson attack on her car. After that attack, the Committee to Protect Journalists urged Russian authorities "to identify and prosecute those responsible for the attacks."

Russia's myriad state-owned media have long targeted Ekho Moskvy for its critical reporting of the Kremlin.

Felgenhauer survived, but the attack on her was only the latest -- unless the circumstances of Borodin's death are linked to crime -- in a series of as-yet unsolved attacks on Russian journalists."

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 02:39 PM

PFR,
As an ex AV technician, I am talking hypothetically about ONLY the most commonly shown clip on BBC

Our media did not show the more distressing clips of dead and dying kids.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 02:49 PM

This will not go down well!


http://truepublica.org.uk/united-kingdom/the-smoking-gun-evidence-in-syria-that-should-bring-the-british-government-down/

One of our ,no less!

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 02:57 PM

Another viewpoint- but one with obvious biases...


"TruePublica - Aims

    Publish news, analysis, commentary, reports, intelligence and research on events of public interest, particularly in respect of news events without propaganda, disinformation or fake news.
    Challenge neoliberal thinking that is causing a wave of disruption as western countries move from one social and economic crisis to another, particularly Britain and Europe
    Support the principles of real democracy (the will of the people) and capitalism (price discovery, not rigged markets) and civil liberty (freedom from state interference).
    Raise awareness of misinformation, disinformation and propaganda delivered by the vested interests of the media, corporations and governments.
    Act as a hub, liaise and partner with organisations with similar aims.


Status

    Independent research media organisation.
    Non Profit and privately managed organisation made up of contributing journalists, writers, authors and independent organisations.
    100 per cent of all funds centred on the expansion of TruePublica.




Evolution

TruePublica evolved from a project started in 2012 through a website that offered an alternative view on current affairs, particularly in Britain. It’s popularity required continual metamorphosis until it’s latest iteration, where, at its peak, the website reached over 1 million users a week, was as a top 1 per cent social media performer and rated “politically influential” by Twitrland. It was featured on well-known and highly influential outlets around the world – representing some of the most widely accessed news websites in the so-called ‘alternative’ news sphere. The website attracted writers from national newspapers and political policy writers, amongst others.

It’s initial success motivated a small team to tackle the current excesses of geo-political and neoliberal thinking to help the wider public understand the importance of questioning and researching these important public interest topics. The purpose of TruePublica is to enable more informed decisions such as civil liberty, human rights, privacy, social, economic and environmental issues as well as globalisation, war and pivotal events such as the refugee catastrophe unfolding in front of us all."




All depends on whose propaganda one wishes to believe. Seems like the story fits exactly into what the goal of this group purports to be.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 02:59 PM

There is a glaring omission in that the OPCW has clearly stated on numerous occasions that the "headloppers" also lob gas cylinders about with gay abandon and fabricate their own launchers. Don't ever see sky,bbc and cnn reporting this now do you?


http://www.comedonchisciotte.net/modules.php?name=News&file=print&sid=5206

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 03:16 PM

Well here's a list of things I need to be a bit more certain about:

It actually did happen.

It was what chemical?

It was delivered by a barrel bomb.

It was dropped by a helicopter.

The rebels don't have helicopters.

It definitely wasn't a put-up job.


Prove all those things, chaps. The first casualty of war is the truth. You can say all these things as often as you like, no matter even if they come from the mouths of your trusted authority figures. I don't trust 'em, you see. I don't think I'm an extremist just because I don't trust what politicians say. I think I'm being very sensible, in fact. I stood in a very cold town square in Bude in March 2003, holding hands in a circle of people who didn't trust politicians. The powers that be told us that we must have been wrong because "only a million" of us turned out, nationwide, on that chilly March day. But we were right, weren't we? Almost a million Iraqis died, millions more were left in misery and a Pandora's box of terrorism was unleashed on the world that we are still living with. You've forgotten that bIt, some of you.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 03:22 PM

https://gowans.wordpress.com/2018/04/08/eight-reasons-why-the-latest-syria-chemical-weapons-attack-allegations-are-almost-certai

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 03:30 PM

The standard warhead has been replaced with a large pressurized gas cylinder, and tail fins have been added to the rocket. The munition matches exactly with the design of munition used in the January 22 2018 chlorine attack in Douma, Damascus, as well as chlorine attacks that …

Do you reckon that represents the acme of Russian missile development brought in to aid Assad, or do you think a pointy head headlopper knocked it up in his garden shed?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 03:39 PM

Interesting the white helmets scarpered from Douma on the same coaches as the terrorists. I presume they learnt their next script while on the bus.
You can tell a man by the company he keeps, as someone is wont to tell us!

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Kenny B (inactive)
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 03:53 PM

New conspiracy theory made up by me .... why not?

White helmets ( AKA rentamob, private army doing good deeds like Crusaders in their spare time), financed by? plant some uninspiring gear and pay peanuts to kids to be filmed. to cause international consternation regarding poison gas to which POTUS retaliates and convinces his allies? to blow up a couple of sheds to convince his gullible converts to vote for a Trump led Republican party at the upcoming elections.

Seen it before .... I was war correspondent for the Beano

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 04:01 PM

Did you get a mention in dispatches from the Dandy? or were you creating cutaway diagrams of barrel bombs for the Eagle?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Kenny B (inactive)
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 04:09 PM

Cant tell you.
All DC Thomsom employees signed a non disclosure agreement and you got sent to work for the Sunday Post if you broke it.
Isvestia tried to copy it but the H.o.N man foiled it while he was working undercover   ...... Allegedly

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 Apr 18 - 04:01 AM

Ians,

Do you reckon that represents the acme of Russian missile development brought in to aid Assad, or do you think a pointy head headlopper knocked it up in his garden shed?

No, and neither do they include barrel bombs in their arsenal.
We know for a fact that Assad has used such weapons before.

Steve, it may not be proved to your satisfaction, but what decent democratic government shares your doubts?
You are just desperate to believe that the West is bad and anti-Western regimes good.
You condemn Israel on far less evidence.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 18 Apr 18 - 05:29 AM

"We know for a fact that Assad has used such weapons before."
perhaps we do perhaps we do not.

What we do know, and has been confirmed by the OPCW, is that the liquorice allsorts that is isis has fabricated cylinder bombs and launch vehicles. Anyone with a bit of knowledge and a walmart welder could fabricate the same in a relatively low tech workshop. That is fact.

and confirmed in the daily wail

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2860469/Syrian-rebels-strike-HELL-CANNON-Aleppo-s-besieged-residents-construct-devastati

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/gallery/hell-cannon-ultimate-home-made-weaponry-4748810
UN report

https://www.un.org/press/en/2017/sc13060.doc.htm

Read the language carefully! Note all the caveats. Proof is an elusive beast. Some of those conclusions would have problems with a jury if a conviction was required!

However as Lavrov states: "highly likely" is a new invention of British diplomacy to describe why they punish people – because these people are highly likely guilty, like in Alice in Wonderland by Lewis Carroll when he described a trial. And when they discovered that the jury could be engaged, then the King said "Let's ask the jury" and the Queen shouted "No jury! Sentence first – verdict afterwards." That's the logic of "highly likely".

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Apr 18 - 05:50 AM

"perhaps we do perhaps we do not."
You may choose not to know - little doubt elsewhere
The fact that Isis uses similar only puts the two on par
There is no justification for these weapons or similar - this includes past uses of napalm and Agent Orange and more recently, white phosphorus or chemical sprays to drive farmers off their lands - all acts of barbarism by modern-day barbarians
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 18 Apr 18 - 06:24 AM

But where does it end. GM food so "less" chemicals sprayed on it?
No white phophorus for smoke grenades;
Do we not perform chemical warfare regularly on arable lands?
Where was the outcry when sheep farmers were poisoned by organo phosphorus sheep dip. Did all those bee colonies collapse all on their ownsome, or did we have a hand in it?

What gives a farmer the right to exterminate pests? Some treat foxes as cuddly pets. Some eevn hug trees! Do people stop driving because of the pollutants they spray from their vehicles?
You ain't gonna feed the world by putting the genie back in the bottle.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 18 Apr 18 - 07:01 AM

Spring of 2000, the year I moved back to the West Country from London,
I went out for a leisurly cycle rediscovering country lanes from boyhood...
I was pedaling alongside fields when I was suddenly struck by severe symptoms
I could perhaps liken to how I imagine the effects of tear gas stricken victims.

I struggled to cycle home in great discomfort,
then was stuck in the house incapacitated for a few days..
It's a long time ago to remember back to,
But I think I felt weakened for quite a few weeks afterwards...

What was that then, pollen.. ? pestecides...???

I didn't bother going to the Dr for a check up, just shrugged it off manfully,,,

So I'll never know what caused that period of illness...

Ever since then I've been hyper sensitive to strong perfumes
and synthetic scented air feshners in pubs and other public places.

Even 'safe' chemical products are a serious problem to many ordinary folks...

Far more stringent controls should be placed on their manufacture and irresponsible use..
not just the evil weaponised chemical agents...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Apr 18 - 07:08 AM

"But where does it end. GM food so "less" chemicals sprayed on it?"
Cannot possible be compared to chemicals designed to destroy crops
In the case of Agent Orange, the pilots dropping the stuff were flying home to die of cancer they contacted
WHITE PHOSPHORUS
NOT ONLY RUSSIA AND SYRIA
EFFECTS

Must go easy on the Brussels sprouts!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 18 Apr 18 - 08:32 AM

Pfr Many years ago I had a temporary site office on a farm in the SW, where spraying occurred. Shortly after I had fairly severe Iritis for around 10 days. No other symptoms, no other sensible explanation. Also on two occasions while flying(out of hundreds)I have had symptoms of going into shock, lasting for several hours. I take no medication, have not seen a doctor for decades(apart from work medicals)and have no obvious explanation. I can only surmise that over time I have become sensitised to certain levels of contaminants in cabin air. The world health organisation have carried out studies supporting this idea.
Better not talk about the fumes released by a new car, or some plastic household materials.
Such is the world we live in.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Apr 18 - 08:58 AM

"Such is the world we live in. "
I'm fully aware of the fouled up planet we live on Ians
These are weapons deliberately targeted to kill and maim human beings - in the case of some, for generations to come
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 18 Apr 18 - 09:10 AM

I've not heard much in the news about Trident lately...

This latest trumped up playground bickering with Russia
probably means we will be hearing much more in favour of it as we get nearer to elections...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 18 Apr 18 - 09:15 AM

...and presumably, predictably, Trident will become yet again, a big stick to beat down with upon 'Ruskie lover' Corbyn...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 18 Apr 18 - 09:51 AM

I wonder what is happening in Gaza? 33 Palestinians dead and more than 4279 injured since 30 March, according to the Palestinian Ministry of Health. The escalating violence has also led to the injury of 41 health staff, of whom 3 were injured by bullets, with 13 ambulances damaged by bullets.

We are all being diverted away from events there. Why would that be?
and to put Syrian events in perspective:   
From last year:
The US-led coalition has admitted killing at least 484 civilians in air strikes in Syria and Iraq amid concern over potential war crimes in the battle to drive Isis out of Mosul. US Central Command (CentCom) insisted it “takes extraordinary efforts to strike military targets in a manner that minimises the risk of ..   collateral.....

Those pots and kettles must be in a permanent state of confusion!

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 18 Apr 18 - 10:21 AM

I wonder what is happening in Gaza?

It's quite simple really.

Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar has declared the purpose of the demonstrations in his statement: "We will take down the border and we will tear out their hearts from their bodies"

The Israelis are stopping that from happening.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 18 Apr 18 - 10:38 AM

Unfortunately peacekeepers have an impossible job in that region...???
... and a world police force is a needed but utterly unrealistic dream...

Eternally warring factions will eventually drag the rest of the world down the shit hole with them...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Apr 18 - 10:49 AM

"It's quite simple really."
It is indeed Bobad
I'll stick with Iains
"33 Palestinians dead and more than 4279 injured since 30 March,"
rather than your pro Israeli terrorist propaganda if its all the same with you
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 Apr 18 - 11:03 AM

Ians,
"We know for a fact that Assad has used such weapons before."
perhaps we do perhaps we do not.

We do!
Wiki,
"In August 2016, a report[1] by the United Nations and the OPCW explicitly blamed the Syrian military of Bashar al-Assad for dropping chemical weapons (chlorine bombs) on the towns of Talmenes in April 2014 and Sarmin in March 2015 and ISIS for using sulfur mustard on the town of Marea in August 2015.[3] Several other attacks have been alleged, reported and/or investigated."

"The third report(The UN-OPCW Joint Investigative Mechanism) blamed the Syrian government for two gas attacks in 2015, and accused ISIS of using mustard gas.[99] In October 2016 the leaked fourth report of task force determined that the Syria had conducted at least three gas attacks in 2015.[99]
In January 2017, they declared that they had composed a list of those responsible for using chemical weapons in the war. The list, which has not been made public, is divided into three sections. The first, is titled "Inner-Circle President" and has six people, including Assad, his brother, the defense minister and the head of military intelligence. The second section names the air force chief and its four commanders, including the heads of the 22nd Air Force Division and the 63rd Helicopter Brigade. The last section titled "Other relevant Senior Mil Personnel" includes two colonels and major-generals. This they said indicates that the decision to use gas came from the very top.[100]"

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Apr 18 - 11:21 AM

"We will take down the border and we will tear out their hearts from their bodies"
Are you seriously suggesting that a bunch of unarmed Gazan protestors are capable of fulfilling such a threat - or that they consider that hey could do it?
You stretch our credulity way beyond the limit
The Isreali armed forces are well trained and well armed with the latest weapons - and nuclear facilitated
The best the protesters have come up with so far are catapults
This excuse is as old as Lidice
If I had seen our homes and hospitals hospiatls razed to the ground, our wives and children murdered and our land taken from us as often as the Palestinians have this is exactly the kind of threat I would make
You are transparent in your defence of the indefensible Bobad
A SELF-HATING view of the conflict
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Apr 18 - 11:30 AM

ANOTHER "SELF-HATING" JEWISH VIEW
jIM cARROLL

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 18 Apr 18 - 12:19 PM

Keith surely you do not expect me to believe something just because it is in Wiki?
As an example of an OPCW report:
The release of sarin at Khan Shay khun on 4 April 2017.basically comes down to the sarin probably belonged to the Syrian Arab Republic.
The crater was probably formed by a bomb rather than IED
Syrian Arab aircraft were in the vicinity that day, therefore they are probably the guilty party.


Probably does not equate with unequivocally!

Extracted from United Nations /2017/904
Security Council
26 October 2017
Letter dated 26 October 2017 from the Secretary General
addressed to the President of the Security Council

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 Apr 18 - 02:41 PM

Keith surely you do not expect me to believe something just because it is in Wiki?

No. Tell me which bits you question and I will provide chapter and verse.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 18 Apr 18 - 03:32 PM

Keith I have no problem with the OPCW methodology of taking samples and sending them to independent labs for verification. I have carried out the same procedure myself in the past for base metal content in soil samples. It is a pretty standard procedure if you want to crosscheck results. The primary function of the OPCW is identification of chemicals. The problem arises when determining who manufactured the chemicals and who was in charge of the delivery system? Two very different things. You also need to consider were the attacks targeting
terrorists or civilians? You also need to consider the impartiality of the inspectors on the ground and their qualifications for accurate analysis of a hole in the ground and attributing it to specific munitions. I am sure Assad probably has used chemicals in the past, but were they deliberately targeting non combatants? The Syrian Iraqi
border is porous and munitions can come in from everywhichwhere, including liberated government stockpiles. If the crazies line people up to chop off heads, they obviously have little compunction in gassing civilians wholesale, in order to deceive.
Having read a number of the reports some are emphatic in assigning blame, some are shall we say Dubious. As a battlefield scenario gassing your own people in the winning stages is the hallmark of stupidity and fits no sort of rationale.

I wonder why coalition use of white phosphoros in in densely populated areas of Mosul and in the Islamic State's de facto capital of Raqqa, does not raise the same levels of opprobrium on the (western)World Stage? The mainstream media can suffer very selective amnesia at times!

Many times I largely agree with you, but this time around the propagandists have hijacked the narrative and you are falling for it.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Apr 18 - 04:21 AM

Ians,
Assad probably has used chemicals in the past, but were they deliberately targeting non combatants?

Even if civilians were not targeted the use of chemical weapons is banned by international law.

I wonder why coalition use of white phosphoros....

WP is not an illegal weapon.
It is illegal to target civilians with anything.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 19 Apr 18 - 05:29 AM

WP is not an illegal weapon. Not strictly true. It depends on the nature of the weapon containing it and if civilian areas are being targeted.
It is forbidden for use against civilians as well as legitimate military targets that happen to be in a major civilian population center if the munition is delivered by air. This is due to its incendiary effect.( I do not fully comprehend the air bit. grenade, shell, bomb, rocket all arrive by air and if an IED kills or injures civilians it is still illegal) As white phosphorus is pyrophoric it keeps burning until used up and can cause horrendous injuries. The staus of white phosphorus is disputed.


Israeli Manual on the Rules of Warfare (2006), which explains:

A chemical weapon is a weapon intended to work on the systems of life and is constituted from a substance that causes a chemical reaction in the body expressed in such symptoms as asphyxiation, burning, weeping, etc., whereas phosphorous is an element in nature which reacts to the oxygen in the air by catching fire. In that respect, phosphorous is no different from petrol (gasoline) reacting to a lighted match, and what differentiates it from chemical weapons is that its reaction is not directed against the human physiology in particular, it will burn whatever it touches. (so that's ok then!That is one hell of a justification!)

I have no doubt water is a chemical weapon when used for waterboarding!

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Apr 18 - 07:36 AM

I have no doubt water is a chemical weapon when used for waterboarding!

It does not rely on its chemistry for its effect, and waterboarding is a form of torture not warfare.

WP is not an illegal weapon.

It is forbidden for use against civilians as well as legitimate military targets that happen to be in a major civilian population center

That is true of all weapons, not just WP.

. The staus of white phosphorus is disputed.

By who? WP is not an illegal weapon. Chlorine and Sarin, both confirmed to have been used by Assad, are.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 19 Apr 18 - 12:15 PM

Keith; The arguments laid out quite thoroughly.

I draw your attention to the "shake at bake" testimony included. Drive opponents out of their trenches with phosphorus and blow them to pieces with HE.(After-Action Review (AAR) for the Battle of Fallujah, ¶9b, reprinted in FIELD ARTILLERY 23, 26 (Mar.-Apr. 2005)

https://sites.duke.edu/lawfire/2016/09/29/white-phosphorus-sometimes-can-be-lawfully-employed-as-an-anti-personnel-weaponbut-sho

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Apr 18 - 01:05 PM

Charlie Dunlap, J.D. may dispute that WP use is always legal, but under international law WP is not an illegal weapon.

Chlorine and Sarin are.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 19 Apr 18 - 01:35 PM

I think we could argue at cross purposes for ever. It seems a pretty artificial distinction to me. High explosive is a chemical as is Uranium235. It is bit of an argument over semantics in reality, rather like barrel bombs. A bomb is a bomb, is a bomb.
The actual wording below is far from precise.
https://www.opcw.org/chemical-weapons-convention/articles/article-ii-definitions-and-criteria/

http://en.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13940721001520
Will the OPCW be in any rush to check out the above?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Apr 18 - 02:30 PM

"When used properly in open areas, white phosphorus munitions are not illegal, but the Human Rights Watch report concludes that the IDF repeatedly exploded it unlawfully over populated neighborhoods, killing and wounding civilians and damaging civilian structures, including a school, a market, a humanitarian aid warehouse, and a hospital. "
HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH

The Lancet
"White phosphorus burn
Loai Nabil Al Barqouni'Correspondence information about the author Loai Nabil Al BarqouniEmail the author Loai Nabil Al Barqouni
, Sobhi I Skaik, FRCSEd
, Nafiz R Abu Shaban, MSc
, Nabil Barqouni, CABP
Published: 03 July 2010
In January, 2009, an 18-year-old man presented to the emergency department after suffering an attack with an incendiary shell. He had many painful patches of full-thickness burns, which were surrounded by sloughed tissue. His wounds covered 30% of his body surface area, and were distributed on both upper and lower limbs, and his right shoulder. There were no signs of inhalation burns. After a clinical diagnosis of white phosphorus burns was made, the airway was secured, resuscitation fluid was initiated, and wounds were irrigated with diluted sodium bicarbonate solution before wet dressing."
The Lancet 2010
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2016/09/19/saudi-arabia-appears-to-be-using-u-s-supplied-white-phosphorus-in-its-war-in-yemen/?utm_term=.1cf789864178

UK USED W P in IRAQ

If White Phosphorus is not a banned weapon if ***** well should be

Now let's hear the excuses
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Apr 18 - 02:51 PM

I CONFESS
White Phosphorus FAMILY ALBUM
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 19 Apr 18 - 03:56 PM

Jim I do not doubt that any rational person would like to see chemical weapons banned. But to play high and mighty with the Syrian regime while ignoring fully documented cases among our "allies" rings a little hollow. The greatest remaining declared stockpile of such weapons is in the US.
I think the playing field needs to be leveled and the impartiality of OPCW reports insisted on. More than a few conclusions are based on circumstantial rather than actual evidence. As I said earlier, the language of these reports needs to be studied carefully.

If the same level of publicity was given to alleged Saudi transgressions in the Yemen, as those in Syria,I might have more confidence in the present system. The terrorists in Syria are also guilty. How often is that fact given publicity? The only devil incarnate is Assad according to the heavily biased mainstream media.

It seems to me the bias in reporting is "encouraged" and is merely a device to enable further acts of war against Syria. Such future action should be clearly permitted by UN agreement.
The existing inspection regime is clearly not working properly.
https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/cbwprolif

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 Apr 18 - 05:07 PM

I agree with that.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 Apr 18 - 07:44 PM

And though I'm Peter Hitchens' number seven-billion fan, he was absolutely spot on tonight on This Week in demanding evidence for the alleged chemical attacks in Syria. I promise to fall out with him again very quickly...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Apr 18 - 08:02 PM

"The greatest remaining declared stockpile of such weapons is in the US."
Can't disagree with that Iains - that's why I would never use the term "U.S." and "allies" in the same sentence, but it really isn't as simple as that and it most certainly doesn't let Assad off the hook
The U.S, has survived and an international power by drawing support from history's monsters - Batista in Cuba who turned the Island into "America's open sewer" where American tourists went to watch Cuban girls being screwed by animals, Papa Doc's Haiti, kept in order by the killer, Tonton Macoute, South Vietnam's Hitler admiring Marshal Nguyen Cao Ky, mass killer and torturer, Augusto Pinochet, armed financed and supported by the CIA....
All these were "safe pairs of hands" for the U.S., though in moments of weakness it was admitted, "they may be monsters, but they're OUR OUR MONSTERS"
I believe Assad to be one of these - pointing at the crimes of the U.S. in so way changes that fact
"Terrorists"
Terrorism is a fact of all major conflicts - it is a tactic used in every war by the weakest groups against the stronger- Trotsky wrote a fascinating pamphlet on the subject - (no - I am not a Trot) - one sides term is "terrorism" - the other side's "guerilla warfare"
Isis is a terrorist group with aims far beyond the downfall of the Assad regime, though many of their supporters were drawn in because of the vacuum left by the West's inaction - indifference even.
In the long run, the interests of the people as a whole over-ride all this - nothing will ever erase the Assad family's record on that one.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Donuel
Date: 19 Apr 18 - 08:10 PM

In the US we do not have this debate in the media whatsoever.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 20 Apr 18 - 03:50 AM

"The U.S, has survived as an international power by drawing support from history's monsters"

"Isis is a terrorist group with aims far beyond the downfall of the Assad regime, though many of their supporters were drawn in because of the vacuum left by the West's inaction - indifference even."

The first statement true to an extent.
The second statement perhaps a total distortion! The truth is likely far murkier. There are many rumours about support for Isis from "unlikely???" sources. Below a typical example of such   heinous lies?

https://medium.com/insurge-intelligence/isis-was-state-sponsored-by-us-allies-says-former-government-intelligence-analyst-exclus

add the article below to the p(l)ot, and where oh where is the truth???

http://theduran.com/stunning-coincidence-chlorine-containers-from-germany-and-smoke-bombs-manufactured-in-salisbury-skripal-pois

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Apr 18 - 04:19 AM

In order for the evidence that has mounted up against both Assad and Russia to be a 'conspiracy'. the conspirators would have to have a massive, well-oiled conspiracy-machine consisting of propagandists, scientists, acting teachers to rehearse the witnesses, finances to bribe the Human Rights groups, rescue teams, journalists....... regular meetings in order to be singing from one hymn sheet.... a world wide conspiracy organisation in fact
When you watch Trump publicly arm-wrestling with Stormy Daniels and attempting to suppress her ****-and-tell information in the cack-handed way he is you realise how unlikely that is.
Russia has been behaving in the ruthless manner it has since the fall of Communism, it has become as sophisticated corrupt as any other "free, decent and democratic" country
These is the way these countries have always operated against their enemies - Britain included, and certainly the U.S, (100 failed assassination attempts on Castro and a record of successful ones on other 'inconvenients')
It is well within Russia's capabilities to have carried out what i is accused of and there is no reason for them not to have done so.
I watched the Labour Party representative on Question Time last night giving what I presume what is the party line on the American-led raid
She said she believed that Russia and Assad were guilty of what they were accused of, but in order to prevent it happening again it was necessary to nail the evidence first - makes sense to me!
The waar against Iis appears to have been won, but Assad has yet to extract his revenge on those who opposed him - and he will - he cannot afford not to
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Apr 18 - 04:20 AM

It seems a pretty artificial distinction to me.

To the rest of the world the Geneva Conventions on the conduct of war were a triumph for humanity.
Wars are still horrific but suffering has been reduced thanks to that achievement.

If we say anything goes just because we can not abolish all war and all weaopnry we take a huge step backwards.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 20 Apr 18 - 04:26 AM

The Geneva convention is ignored by terrorists. How is the modern world going to deal with that? Use Daleks perhaps?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Apr 18 - 04:30 AM

Can't open your first link Iaians but I hope its's more convincing than your untraceable blog
These arguments need to move beyond throwing blogs at each other and have to take a long view over what is happening taking whole picture into consideration
Frankly, I'm tired of conspiracy theorists accusing other conspiracy theorists of conspiracy theories
It reduces the whole ting to a Mad Comics CARTOON STRIP
DR Strangelove was always the one that rang my bells
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Apr 18 - 04:43 AM

Ians and Steve,
The Geneva convention is ignored by terrorists. How is the modern world going to deal with that? Use Daleks perhaps?

Terrorists ignore all the rules, especially in their treatment of civilians.
That is not an argument for the civilised world to abandon the rules too.

We have added to those 20th Century achievements, banning landmines for instance.
Do you two oppose that as well?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Apr 18 - 05:10 AM

"The Geneva convention is ignored by terrorists."
The Geneva convention and human rights laws are ignored by anybody when it suits them
Go look at the number of vetoes used by the US to defend mass- murder, then go count the number of illegally held 'suspects' in Guantanamo
There have been calls from one "democratic country" to close down the International Human Rights courts rather than face trial for its crimes
Blaming terrorists for what they all do is a little shallow
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Apr 18 - 05:41 AM

The Geneva convention and human rights laws are ignored by anybody when it suits them

Not true. Breaches of Geneva convention are war crimes. War criminals are brought to justice.

What acts of "mass murder" has the world ignored US veto or not?

illegally held 'suspects' in Guantanamo

The problem is that no country will take them.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Apr 18 - 06:17 AM

No intention of entering into a dialogue to respond to your nonsense Keith - Guantanamo was a human rights abuse from day one and remains so
America will never be punished for any of its long history of and continuing war crimes so it is the last state in the world to lead an attack a country committing war crimes that measure small compared to their own
Response to you, over

What needs to be considered is why any of these wars are taking place
Isis arose from the West's refusal to act on appalling crimes against the people of Syria
A positive response to the Arab Spring Protests could have secured genuine change throughout the Arab World, but that did not suit the West's need for an uninterrupted flow of oil and a source of cheap goods for our shops
Not interfering in a "Civil War" is utter bullshit
The same people who were describing intervening in Assad's massacre of his people as "fascism" answer now up on their soap-boxes praising the heroes who flew in and bombed Assad a week ago - twisted logic or an indication of what this is really about
Are chemical weapons that we find horrendous enough to go to war for really that much worse than the many thousands of Assad's opponents who were rounded up, tortured and "disappeared"?
If humanity is the cause of intervening now, why did we vote down the idea of intervening when Assad's snipers were offering a packet of fags to each sniper who could kill a woman and a child with a single bullet on the streets of Homs - and why have those who support this intervention changed their minds?
Rhetorical question - whatever our leaders do is the right thing to some people as long as their shade of politics is "RIGHT"
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 20 Apr 18 - 06:44 AM

War crimes are never "brought to justice" when they are committed, or alleged to have. Been committed, by countries such as the UK or the USA. They aren't even brought to court. The only countries, or rulers, who are put in the dock are from countries which have been militarily defeated.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 20 Apr 18 - 06:44 AM

"War criminals are brought to justice."
Was not going to war on the basis of mythical WMD not a criminal act?
Seems to me it was the innocents received the punishment. Bush and Blair still strut the world stage.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Apr 18 - 06:54 AM

Jim,
Are chemical weapons that we find horrendous enough to go to war for really that much worse than the many thousands of Assad's opponents who were rounded up, tortured and "disappeared"?

No, but because we can not achieve everything is no reason not to act where we can achieve.
Obama rightly made use of chemical weapons a red line.

McGrath,
committed, by countries such as the UK or the USA. They aren't even brought to court.

British and US soldiers have been convicted in their own countries.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Apr 18 - 08:15 AM

"Was not going to war on the basis of mythical WMD not a criminal act?"
Absolutely - has there ever been any question of this?
"Bush and Blair still strut the world stage. "
You just said it all Iains
The crass dishonesty of people who defend their Governments right or wrong has just been illustrated perfectly by our resident eejit suggesting that it was acceptable to keep suspects chained up in cages dressed in boiler suits because "no country will take them."
This is the feller who defended obvious serial rapists, pedophiles and sexual predators because they hhad not been tried therefore they were innocent until proven guilty despite their long history of offenses
The man chained up in cages in the boiling sun have never been tried, no evidence has ever been produced against them therefor they are innocent so THEY SHOULD BE PERFECTLY FREE TO RETURN TO THEIR OWN HOMES
Sheessh!!!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 20 Apr 18 - 08:23 AM

IDF Commander: We Fired More Than a Million Cluster Bombs in Lebanon

Phosphorous and cluster bombs heavily used; unexploded munitions litter wide area of Lebanon.

This was a Haaretz article just after the war in 2006 (sorry, you'll have to google it). For those who still think that "decent democracies" don't do such things. Then there's those fighter jets we're selling to Saudi Arabia. Politics before people every time.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Apr 18 - 09:04 AM

Cluster bombs were legal then, and WP still is.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Apr 18 - 10:26 AM

Landmines were legal once as were many chemicals
The fact that they were permissible does not lessen the inhumanity of those who use them and hiding behind a law makes those who advocate it makes them equally inhuman
We are talking about acts of inhumanity against third war civilians and laws that are passed by those who wage those wars and give themselves permission to wage those wars in any way they see convenient
It's about time we discusses these events in human terms rather than whot politicians decide is permissible or not

Fairly recent report on the use of CLUSTER BOMBS , including by major CUSTOMERS FOR BRITAINS WEAPONS
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 20 Apr 18 - 10:46 AM

Cicero wrote: "Silent enim leges inter arma".

Approx. I million died in Vietnam during the late war.
Credible estimates of Iraq War casualties range from 150,000 to 460,000. Other highly disputed estimates, such as the 2006 Lancet study, and the 2007 Opinion Research Business survey, put the numbers as high as 650,000 and 1.2 million respectively

The death toll in Libya when Nato intervened was perhaps around 1,000-2,000 (judging by UN estimates), eight months later it was probably more than ten times that figure. Estimates of the numbers of dead over the following eight months – as Nato leaders vetoed ceasefires and negotiations – range from 10,000 up to 50,000. The National Transitional Council puts the losses at 30,000 dead and 50,000 wounded.
In Syria nearly 1/2 million killed.
During the war in Afghanistan (2001–present), over 31,000 civilian deaths due to war-related violence have been documented; 29,900 civilians have been wounded. Over 111,000 Afghans, including civilians, soldiers and militants, are estimated to have been killed in the conflict
In Yemen 10,000 people have died as a result of the war, over 5,000 of them have been civilians.(That is likely a very low and inaccurate figure.) Cholera and malnutrition add to the death toll.

Moderation has been another casualty in this struggle for power. The wars have resulted in increased Muslim hostility, jihadism and radicalisation. Hard-liners have prevailed, while moderates are marginalised and silenced.
There is Nothing for the WEST TO BE PROUD OF IN THESE CONFLICTS.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Apr 18 - 11:06 AM

So you all think war is bad.
Do you imagine anyone disagrees?

Ians,
There is Nothing for the WEST TO BE PROUD OF IN THESE CONFLICTS.

You are just anti the West, and our dominant Far-Left Mudcat group happily support you in that.
Russia was in Afghanistan too, and has nothing to be proud of in any of its foreign adventures.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 20 Apr 18 - 11:19 AM

Did I just read somebody daft enough to type..

"Ians........
You are just anti the West, and our dominant Far-Left Mudcat group happily support you in that."

hysterical.... that's got to be laugh of the day...!!!

bring on a sunny spring weekend of rifts between right wingers....


Of course, even though I am a far lefty extremist [even though I'm not really...]
what I observe lately
is Iains being very pro intelligent informed critical analysis,
and t'other chap being very pro stupid clump headed bigotted denouncements.....

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 20 Apr 18 - 11:23 AM

I've called Iains many things, often sotto voce, often not, but I've never called him "Ians."

Anyway, Iains, come and join the most moderate bunch of extremists you've ever met! Just gotta get you onside over brexit now... :-)

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Raggytash
Date: 20 Apr 18 - 11:31 AM

No change there then Steve, I just surprised that Iains (note the spelling) is still jumping through hoops.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Apr 18 - 11:36 AM

"You are just anti the West, and our dominant Far-Left Mudcat group"
You are responding to nothing here with a shred of humanity or intelligence - are you surprised that nobody wants to talk to you
If we wanted the establishment view we would wait for the next election and listen to their party political broadcasts
You are an arse-licking establishment moron
I find myself pleasantly surprised in totally agreeing with Iains - welcome to the "far-left" - we'll share a cell when Keith gets hus UN - British Activities Trials underway
What a flag-wagging tosser!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 20 Apr 18 - 12:08 PM

All together now... Patriotic British far left extremists unite in song...

Rule Britannia & Jeruselam

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Apr 18 - 12:41 PM

Iains posts from a pro-Putin position.
Although Russia has dropped any pretence of socialism, the far-Left still support him because he stands against the West.

I read that a lot of pro-Russian posters have appeared on internet forums lately.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 20 Apr 18 - 12:56 PM

"Although Russia has dropped any pretence of socialism, the far-Left still support him because he stands against the West."


Looks like I've not been checking the latest edition of the Far Left Handbook...!!!???

Sorry, I didn't realise I was supposed to be supporting Putin..

I'd better pull my finger out and get on with supporting the nasty criminal dictator rotter immediately...!!!

Putin Putin rah rah rah...!!!!!

...there.. will that do...?????

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 20 Apr 18 - 01:08 PM

When I was in my militant trade unionist prime and associating ill-advisedly with various far-left groups, one curious thing I noticed about them was that they all hated Russia. If you were a barrister defending a murderer in court, it would be ridiculous for anyone to claim that you were pro-murderer. You'd simply be pro-evidence. Proper evidence.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 20 Apr 18 - 02:14 PM

Keith from the way you take the "party" line in this thread it is obvious that you believe the politicians every time.
The intervention in Libya ostensibly was on humanitarian grounds. The ensuing death toll suggests that the stated aim was not achieved.
But if you follow the munneee a different, far more plausible scenario, unfolds. NATO intervention may have been motivated by Gaddafi's attempts to establish a unified federation of African states that would use the gold dinar as its currency and demand that foreign importers of African oil pay in gold. (What does that do to the almighty dollar?)
Iraq was invaded for a number of reasons, The WMD angle was merely a pretext. A summary is here
reasons
Syria. A spontaneous uprising mutating into a civil war we are told.
Well here is another view:
http://democratic-syria.blogspot.ie/2012/08/the-arab-spring-spontaneous-public.html

I can assure you that I simply do not believe these events developed as we are led to believe. It is not a fight for people's rights, it is a battle to subdivide and conquer. The people on top of the sand are not the issue, the oil under the sand is! Syria is stalling a pipeline route for Saudi oil and Quatari gas straight to europe.

If I was cynical I would say Afghanistan is a part of the equation too. Some would argue the opium is a cash crop for the CIA. When I was in Singapore in the early to mid 70's there were many Bird Air, Air America and other dodgy transports cluttering up the tarmac at Seletar , and the Golden Triangle was a hop skip and jump up the road.(Coincidence?) The old Gil's Grill in the Shaw center on Orchard road hosted a variety of strange people beside the oilfield and I used to hear some totally outlandish tales there, some of them likely based on reality.

Having had a bit of a wandering life I tend to treat official stories with permanently raised eyebrows. The world simply does not work the way the media would have us believe. As I repeatedly say(to no avail)yes/no, black/white rarely exists. The truth resides in a grey fog. I have no idea what the true story is most of the time, but my "bullshit " detector is highly developed and generally points in the vague direction of what actually happened. The only certainty is that the pretext for starting wars is generally false.(not always,   but usually)
There is a saying "All wars are Banker's Wars" The arguments in support are quite strong.

In conclusion Russia, China and Iran are dumping the dollar for oil purchases. Western(American) Bankers will not take kindly to that!
You appear to reside in the perfect as opposed to the actual world.

I think a cursory study of the Iran Contra affair is a lesson in the perfidy of politicians and their underlings.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Apr 18 - 02:54 PM

Whoops
Personally, I'd rather go with ENCYCLOPÆDIA BRITANNICA than an anonymous blogger Iains
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 20 Apr 18 - 03:36 PM

You pays your money, you make your choice.
Do you think wikileaks is a tissue of lies, or a devilish mix of fact and propaganda(by the time we get to see it)?
Is Assange a hero or a criminal?
They say history is written by the winners! Is encyclopedia brittanica not writing history on the given subject? True or false?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 20 Apr 18 - 05:13 PM

The official story on the Gulf of Tonkin Incident was later   shown to be a pack of lies, as a pretext for escalating the Vietnam War.

The true story of the Israeli attack on the USS Liberty is still murky.
A BBC documentary suggests the Israeli attack would be blamed on the Egyptians to give the US an excuse to attack Egypt. The true story is still hidden in layers of conflicting narrative, and the fact no clear unambiguous explanation has emerged suggests collusion and hankypanky still holds sway.

The MyLai massacre was covered up for 18months before hitting headlines. 3 US servicement who tried to protect civilians were shunned, and even denounced as traitors by several U.S. Congressmen, including Mendel Rivers, Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee. Only after thirty years were they recognized and decorated, one posthumously, by the U.S. Army for shielding non-combatants from harm in a war zone.

Truth is an elusive beast and takes time to surface, sometimes it never does!
Just three examples.There are many others. Each is a can of worms.
Surely no one ever takes anything purely on trust anymore?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Apr 18 - 06:19 PM

"Do you think wikileaks is a tissue of lies"
Mixed
- Assange gave information we needed dd to have as did my hero Mordechai Vanunu
I prefer Wikileaks to unnamed blogs - but in the end, you need to find out what you can and maker up your own mind
Amnesty and Human Rights Watch work every time for me - unbiased and independent
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: robomatic
Date: 20 Apr 18 - 08:08 PM

Last night the Alex Jones show was casting aspersions about the cause of the gas attacks and freely quoting RT as a source, (straight from Putin).

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 20 Apr 18 - 09:12 PM

You don't know that, do you?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 20 Apr 18 - 10:13 PM

Please indulge me..
This seems to good an opportunity not to transplant a slighty modified version
of my final post in the now closed thread [yes.. that one..]

I think it's more relevant here, now...
and yes I couldn't be bothered editing out the crap whimsical paragraph...



Last night I fell asleep during a long drama documentary about Daniel Boone...
[hooray for buffer memory and rewind...!!!]

Interestingly this documentary seemed almost as fictionalised as if it had been a Hollywood action movie,
compared to the wiki history for this man.
I don't know why they bother making these productions.
Either make an accurate documentary,
or just give us a proper scant regard for history based on real 'a true story' pop corn action movie.
These expensively stage hybrid re-enactment drama-docs just over condense, simplify, and fictionalise far too much.
I feel cheated.

Which brings me on to the point of real time news reporting of current international conflicts and wars;
and being able to trust what is depicted on screen and in print.

How would World War 2 have progressed if 24/7 news channels and internet social media had existed back then.
With every event being covered and commented on in fine detail in up to the minute real time..
with panels of journalists and experts arguing opinions on what is really happening and who is to blame...

How much different might received history be now,
how altered would classic World war 2 movie accounts of dramatic heroic events have to be...?????

Now, 21st century.. how much longer before viewers are invited to to phone in to select winners and losers,
who gets killed in Syria and who survives onto the next round...????

Ok let's spin the wheel of death - odd numbers Asshat & Russia did it,
even numbers it was staged by activists..
bonus number and we will implicate CIA / MI6...

Ffs.. If we can't trust modern media and social networks...???

So finally.. I don't know what's really real or not just from watching BBC news reports,
and so don't think most ordinary folks should make arrogant dogmatic pronouncments based on such uncertainty...
The only reasonable position should be healthy scepticism in public discourse,
even if we have made our own minds up based on informed judgement and opinion / prejudice in private...???

Respect expert opinions, but do not automatically trust them entirely ...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Apr 18 - 04:10 AM

Picking up from last night's posting
Information is becoming less and less available despite the internet
Last year Britain lost thousands of SENSITIVE HISTORICAL DOCUMENTS
I am finding while searching for information during discussions here that information that was freely available last year had disappeared, particularly on Israel - as far as I can find, the dozens of photographs of children burned by white phosphorus have been removed from the net
A year or so ago, Haaretz pointed out that many of the David Ben Gurion Papers have been locked away from the public gaze
We all know how Trump passes on what he wishes the people to have - and we know how his 'tail' in Westminster is always happy to wag Americas message here
The Irish referendum on pregnancy termination is now dominated by vicious misinformation put out by church-dominated 'No' supporters (such as "access to abortion will inevitably lead to euthanasia" as pronounced by the Bishops)   
A population with even less access to the facts that we have had in the past is not a comfortable prospect for the future
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 21 Apr 18 - 04:23 AM

Pfr Congratulations. I like your summary.

My take is below:
Do politcians lie?
Do bears shit in the woods?
Is the pope a Catholic?

An illusion masquerades as reality much of the time and is only presented after spin, censorship and extensive massage.

An example: We are told Arab spring was spontaneous when it reached Syria, and dissatisfaction with the regime was so high it mutated into civil war.
But:
View 1

View 2

View 3

Now what of the above best explains the present chaotic situation in Syria?
Who has a persistent history of meddling?
Who has grabbed the oil and gas assets of the regime and straddles the main water supply of the country?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Apr 18 - 04:27 AM

Iains,
Keith from the way you take the "party" line in this thread it is obvious that you believe the politicians every time.

I do not, but when the choice is between believing Putin (Guardian,"Putin: The New Tsar review – a portrait of a lonely, lying narcissist)
or the governments of every liberal democracy in the world, I believe the democracies.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 21 Apr 18 - 04:40 AM

Given a choice between believing any politician and trusting my own judgement I would chose the latter. But the choice is never as binary as some people have us believe. There are elements of grey that politicians rely on. The yarns they spin all contain an element of truth but if you hold up that yarn for close scrutiny you will find the holes.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Apr 18 - 05:04 AM

Dave,
Given a choice between believing any politician and trusting my own judgement I would chose the latter.

Then you are a fool. What knowledge is your judgement based on?
Have you studied the reports available to governments?
What do you know about any of this Dave apart from what you read in the papers?
Did you take into account that he has previously murdered here, and lied about that as well as lying about cheating in the Olympics, lied about its intervention in Crimea, lied about the shooting down of a Malaysian airliner, lied about their murders of Litvinenko, liberal politician Boris Nemtsov and investigative journalist Anna Politkovskaya,...

These governments have seen the actual evidence and based on that evidence their judgement is that Putin and his regime lied about this too:-
United States: 60 United Kingdom: 23 Ukraine: 13 Canada: 4 France: 4 Germany: 4 Poland: 4 Lithuania: 3 Czech Republic: 3 Spain: 2 Australia: 2 Denmark: 2 Italy: 2 Netherlands: 2 Albania: 2 Estonia: 1 Romania: 1 Sweden: 1 Croatia: 1 Finland: 1 Latvia: 1 Hungary: 1 Macedonia: 1 Norway: 1

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 21 Apr 18 - 05:12 AM

Back to the thread:
No recent news on Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia.
Is a D notice in force?
Are they still in the UK?
Why are the Russians not allowed to see their citizens?
Why have they not been interviewed on TV?
Questions, Questions!
No matter how I look at this 2+2 still makes 5.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Apr 18 - 05:47 AM

"Why are the Russians not allowed to see their citizens?"
Are you serious?
Even if the accusations of Russian involvement are unfounded no authorities would give the main suspect access to the victims
Not sure what your three links are supposed to prove - one from Wiki who you have already dismissed as unreliable the others from dissidents groups who do not deal in any way with Assad's reign of terror
Are you seriously suggestion that the Britannica article is part of a conspiracy theory?
Grabbing articcles that back your arguments and ignoring the thousands of others that don't is 'Keithising' the discussion - he's already worked that on into the ground, so you are too late
If you are going to make a case you need to expose the decades of information on torture chambers and mass-murder head on and not sidestep them, as you (and your articles) are doing here
Of course the CIA are involved - interference in other nations policies is what they do - this in no way lessens the crimes of Assad's terror regime
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 21 Apr 18 - 06:17 AM

Of course the CIA are involved - interference in other nations policies is what they do - this in no way lessens the crimes of Assad's terror regime

But this begs the question was the chicken or the egg first to the party?
All regimes maintain control by the black arts. Why was the report on David Kelly locked up for 70 years? The jolly japes at Guantanamo Bay
are performed in the name of democracy. At least Saudi makes no effort trying to hide it's authoritarian rule.

There is a high degree of hypocrisy throughout. We are supposed to distinguish between good baddies and bad baddies. The only distinguishing feature between the two camps is red and black on a balance sheet! That is the reality!

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Apr 18 - 06:25 AM

Why are the Russians not allowed to see their citizens?

Skripal's daughter was reported as refusing to talk to anyone from the regime, perhaps because they tried to murder her and her father.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 21 Apr 18 - 06:43 AM

The jury is still out, on what can only be an allegation, as yet.
Interesting they are hidden from the media. Are they still in the UK?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Apr 18 - 06:44 AM

Incidentally
Back in 1968 I was part of the massive demonstration against Vietnam at the American Embassy in Grosvenor Square - I had Peggy Seeger as a minder (still makes me wake up with the cold sweats when I remember her enthusiasm)
I was pissed of to see a number of "demonstrators" i assumed were Anarchists using placards as spears to hurm at the police lines - until I saw the same "demonstrators" in the police lines keeping the crowds back
Anarchists or agents provocateurs this in no way lessened the justice of the demonstration against what was happening in Vietnam
MI5s involvement in no way lessens the justification ao the Arab protests (unlss, of course, you claim that they had no reason to protest in the first place)
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Apr 18 - 06:45 AM

"The jury is still out, on what can only be an allegation, as yet."
Until it is "in" - you don't give the accused access to the victim

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Apr 18 - 06:53 AM

I would suggest that they are hidden from any strangers, given the nature of the attack
It seems that, now the site of the attack has been opened up, the public may be at risk from the poison used
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 21 Apr 18 - 09:15 AM

It is folly to believe anything that governments tell you blindly and equally nonsensical to trust any media source. The best we can do it listen to all the arguments and make up our own minds.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 21 Apr 18 - 10:19 AM

"Information is becoming less and less available despite the internet"
That is probably true if qualified by a timeframe encompassing the rapid growth of internet access. This would probably be since 2000.
The TV age has only really existed in the UK since the mid 50's
The BBC started in 1922. Telegraphy by semaphore in 1797,electrically 1822. The first transatlantic cable 1858. Spreading news was obviously subjected to natural constraints until the growth of satellite communications and the internet.
Government everywhere likes to control who knows what, irregardless of what part of the political spectrum they inhabit. They have been trying desperately to censor it, especially in recent years.
Probably deregulation and charging for bandwidth will do much to throttle it back and coupled with search engine interference the internet of tomorrow will be semi castrated. But they will still hoover up your every key stroke. Control is the name of the game.
However for most applications the internet is a research instrument without equal.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 21 Apr 18 - 10:33 AM

The best we can do it listen to all the arguments and make up our own minds.

Alternatively, the worst we can do is ignore all the evidence on ideological grounds.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Apr 18 - 10:44 AM

If no evidence exists ideology and past record is all we have to go on
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Raggytash
Date: 21 Apr 18 - 10:48 AM

You're jumping through hoops Dave!!

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 21 Apr 18 - 10:49 AM

Jim - we understand you are mightily disillusioned with Russia, and for very good reasons...

..and chances are, ultimately Putin's Russia is actually to blame for everything...???

But your insistent condemnation of Russia is getting a bit overwhelming
whilst others here are proposing a sceptical doubtful analysis
of how our Boris/May Govt is exploiting this Salisbury incident
for their own cynical devious tory ends...

You may actually be in danger of starting to sound a bit like you're crossing the floor to K****'s side...!!!?????

Which would be entirely bonkers,
and obviously not really where you are intentionally going with this anti Russia sounding line of argument...????

Gotta be careful K**** don't start thinking you're becoming mates with him...

Comrade Punkerovfolkrockerski

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 21 Apr 18 - 11:25 AM

Side stepping them I hope, Raggy :-)

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 21 Apr 18 - 12:00 PM

Do you not notice that gory photos and video clips are not shown in the UK. War is only shown in a sanitized form. That is obvious censorship, on the grounds that you do not want to give kids or little old ladies nightmares. I doubt anyone has an argument with that.
That is merely a part of what happens however. D notices and spin masters primarily, if not exclusively serve, the government and their handlers. What is presented is for the majority to graze on, because only a minority questions the content.

An example using climate change:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/268074188_Twist_and_Shout_Images_and_Graphs_in_Skeptical_Climate_Media

If the messenger cannot be removed, first destroy his reputation and credibility.

Example: Dr David Kelly was officially Chief Scientist for Chemical and Biological Defence at Porton Down and head of microbiology at the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory.
He was acknowledged to be a foremost expert in the field of biological and chemical weapons.
Yet...
Aug 5, 2003 - Downing Street was forced to admit last night that a senior official had tried to discredit the Iraq weapons expert David Kelly by describing him as a Walter Mitty fantasist.

To take on faith the utterances of government is very, very foolish!

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 21 Apr 18 - 12:06 PM

Jim - reason for my last post is a reminder of the thread title
[which I forgot to include in that post..]

"BS: If Russia didn't do it..?"...

here we entertain the hypothetical notion of other remotely possible culprits... that's all...

In my mind, this is an anti - tory thread... but then, that's what all threads should be...!!!



Comrade Punkerovfolkrockerski

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Apr 18 - 12:17 PM

"But your insistent condemnation of Russia is getting a bit overwhelming"
Sorry - have I nor said that no evidence exists - could have sworn I had?
I said I see no reason why they didn't - THE HAVE DONE SIMILAR THINGS IN THE PAST, (or are you suggesting the Boris/May Govt did did this for their own cynical devious Tory ends as well)... they interfered in the American elections and possibly the Brexit referendum.... not the Russia I knew.
I watched the programme on the Trump/Putin/Mafia links and realised how firmly the new Russia has moved to being one of Keith's "decent, democratic and fair minded countries" with all that implies
I have no doubt that British security are quite capable of having carried out such an attack, but what on earth have they got to gain from it?
Britain has been totally wimpish in its attitude to Assad and to Putin - what has happened to change that?
Nothing, as far as I can see
When all this is over Assad, Putin and whatever right wing moron running Britain will climb back into one another's pockets - the British establishment needs "a safe pair of hands" at the helm in "free" Russia
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Apr 18 - 12:22 PM

Sorry - not being definitive about all this - I really would be interested in a response to what Britain could possibly gain from this - ***** if I can work it out
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 21 Apr 18 - 12:40 PM

Jim - all's ok..

Basically everywhere else it's "Russia definitely dunnit" - and even though they quite likely did,
I'd love this to be a catalyst for exposing Boris/May in some related collusion over the on-going Salisbury dirty doings...

That'd be a good result..
to get rid of the tory govt blight on Britain for at least another 5 years...

[well it's a sunny spring Saturday - gotta aspire to have some positive dreams...]

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 21 Apr 18 - 12:47 PM

Follow the money!
Europe’s second-largest gas supplier after Russia exported 116 billion cubic meters (bcm) of natural gas via pipelines to receiving terminals in Britain, Germany, France and Belgium last year, up from the previous record of 108.6 bcm in 2016.

Norway’s pipeline gas exports meet about a quarter of Europe’s demand.
BUT: in the 2020's production will decline.
Quatar has the 3rd largest gas deposits in the world. The trans Syrian pipeline to export to the Med. is simply not going to happen. Russia, Syria and Iran say so. Reason Below.


When Norway puts the brakes on who is going to take up the slack.
Who is going to calling Mr Putin SIR?

Russia         47,800,000         million cubic meters reserves.
Iran           34,020,000         
Qatar                24,530,000

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Apr 18 - 12:50 PM

"I'd love this to be a catalyst for exposing Boris/May in some related collusion over the on-going Salisbury dirty doings..."
Me too, but to be perfectly honest, they're doing a great job in shitting on their own doorstep to need out help - leave it to their expertise in that
Personally, I think the next step is going to be stopping Assad from wreaking his revenhge
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 21 Apr 18 - 05:24 PM

I wonder if the BBC or CNN pick up on   this:


"The United States, France and the United Kingdom violated international law by launching airstrikes against Syria in response to a suspected chemical weapons attack, an independent German parliamentary report has found."

“Military force used against a state to punish it for infringing an international convention violates the prohibition of force under international law,” said the report by the German parliament’s non-partisan

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Kenny B (inactive)
Date: 21 Apr 18 - 06:44 PM

Iains .. "I wonder if the BBC or CNN pick up on   this:"
          I hope you are not holding your breath

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 21 Apr 18 - 10:58 PM

Big story on BBC today is the untimely death of a Swedish DJ.......
Not a lot of time left for other less important breaking news....!!!!

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Apr 18 - 03:24 AM

"Military force used against a state to punish it for infringing an international convention violates the prohibition of force under international law,"
I am totally opposed to the airstrikes but they weren't made to "punish" anybody - Assad and Russia will remain friends of Britain and America as long are they are useful
It is language like this that avoids the important issues here
The raids were "gesture politics" - an attempt to appear as if something was being done when in fact the situation is still the same and civilians are still being slaughtered daily.
If human rights and war crimes were an issue, action should have been taken when the knowledge of how Assad was dealing with opponents (as far back as 2006) became public knowledge.
Had this happened the world would never have had Isis to deal with
You are still scooping up and flinging around meaningless opinions from the most bizarre sources which is probably why you are failing to identify them.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 22 Apr 18 - 04:15 AM

You are still scooping up and flinging around meaningless opinions from the most bizarre sources which is probably why you are failing to identify them.
Insults to make up for lack of substance in your argument?
Are you one of the muppets that cannot believe anything unless delivered on a plate with all the trimmings by the BBC? or perhaps you have not been taught the delights of google? or maybe you   refuse to believe others do not agree with your narrow, blinkered, entirely obsolete mindset?

Can you not make a post without being abusive? Perhaps the moderators should chastise you, instead of simply closing the threads you infect.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Apr 18 - 04:26 AM

"Insults to make up for lack of substance in your argument?"
No - this is eaxtly what you are doing
Unless you have reduced to Keith's level of ignoring arguments by claiming nobody is producing it, it is you who is not putting forward YOUR case
"Can you not make a post without being abusive?"
Where is there any abuse in my posting?
"Perhaps the moderators should chastise you, instead of simply closing the threads you infect. "
Back to your old self - pity!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Apr 18 - 05:30 AM

As happens Iains I am in ttal agreement over the illegality of this attack - nothing about this dirty, dirty war is or should be legal
Not the point
The important things is that it is immoral and inhuman and siding with one side or the other makes anybody who does that part of it
If you find that "insulting" - feel free to do so
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 22 Apr 18 - 07:24 AM

Jim there are nuggets of truth in what you say, but your presentation skills need work on.

The media present Assad as a murdering tyrant.

How many has Assad killed in the last 10 years?
How many the coalition?

Seems the tyrant aspect is dominant over the murdering.

A few items to consider:

1)We are told most chemical weapons are binary.
Question: The recent missile mission in Syria supposedly targeted the factories producing chemical weapons. Now if you blow up stockpiles of A and B do they not mix? When they mix do they not produce toxic clouds?
Now who is the guilty party in this case? How many people were poisoned as a result of this carefully crafted chemical weapon attack?
Was is not a war crime worthy of International opprobrium?
What did we have? not a whisper!
I notice that during a recent UN debate when the Syrian representative had the floor to point out a few uncomfortable truths, the arrogant US representative got up and walked out!

2) The Novichok story by no means convinces everyone.
A summary below.
summary

3)The chemical weapon allegation at Douma was publicised as a false flag event by the Russians and Assad weeks ago. The first western reporters on the ground report false flag-no evidence seen. White helmets evacuated along with the terrorists. I wonder why?

4) The missile attack was supposedly on chemical weapon facilities, the Russians claim the attack was to degrade Syrian air defences.
Who to believe?
What are the more strategically important targets?

5) The coalition(US) had no UN sanction for the missile attack.
Why carry it out before the OPCW had time to investigate and report?

6) The media rarely mention is that Chinese troops are already on the ground in Syria to fight thousands of Uyghur militants, whether in ISIS or the Chinese al-Qaeda.


"The United States is not the only country with red lines. By disregarding and violating other states’ legitimate security interests, be it Russia or China, President Donald Trump risks opening the Pandora’s box of drawing in additional great powers to defend the Syrian government from terrorists and regime change.
China has key interests in Syria"

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Apr 18 - 07:28 AM

“Military force used against a state to punish it for infringing an international convention violates the prohibition of force under international law,”

That was not the legal argument used.

BBC,
"In the summary of legal advice given by Attorney General Jeremy Wright to Mrs May, Downing Street outlined why the UK was "permitted under international law" to take measures in the face of "overwhelming humanitarian suffering".
It said there were three reasons why the strikes met international laws for military action on humanitarian grounds:
The "repeated lethal use of chemical weapons by the Syrian regime constitutes a war crime" and it was "highly likely the regime would seek to use" such weapons again
Other attempts to "alleviate the humanitarian suffering caused by the use of chemical weapons" had been blocked and there was "no practicable alternative" to the strikes
The action was "carefully considered" and the "minimum judged necessary for that purpose""

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Apr 18 - 07:59 AM

"
Jim there are nuggets of truth in what you say, but your presentation skills need work on. "
Matter of opinion - they seem clear enough to most people
"How many has Assad killed in the last 10 years?
How many the coalition?"
Not even a consideration - once certainly does not cancel out the other and Assad's reign of terror goes way back beyond the present conflict and is the cause of it
You can't justify crimes by pointing to other criminals
Assad tortured and murder many thousands before Isis was the tinkle in anybody's eye and when this is all over he will murder many more if he is not banged up as a war criminal - the nature of the beast
Everything else in your posing is an example of your taking sides, which sets you apart from the rest of us - as far as I am concerned, my concern has been for the loss of life and liberty of vast masses of humanity - as far as the politicians are concerned - I hope they all rot in their self-made hells and leave the the rest of the planet to get on with their lives
Another anonymous quote (from The Strategic culture Foundation) doesn't move us on from here one iota
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 22 Apr 18 - 08:15 AM

Jim the only way to judge severity is by the number killed. Putting labels on participants does not lessen the crime.

"Another anonymous quote (from The Strategic culture Foundation) doesn't move us on from here one iota"
The authors clearly list themselves.
You make your usual attack on the source, not the content.

Do you expect me to also discount everything in the mainstream media simply because they are proven organs of propaganda or a particular political bias?
I make this point again. Do you only believe what the BBC tells you?

I make no secret of casting my net as wide as possible. I also make it very clear I do not believe everything my sources say.

Can you not sort wheat from chaff, or do you throw the baby out with the bathwater?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Apr 18 - 08:27 AM

"Jim the only way to judge severity is by the number killed. "
I'm not attempting to judge the "severity" neither should any human being be; it's the cause of these shitty wars that should concern us and the effects they are having on this planet and its people
Neither Assad or his opponents can take the high ground her so why support any of them - nobody ever asked me or mine whether our money should be spent in the pursuit of oil (which is what all these things are basically about)
Just watched a survivor of the latest Afghanistan atrocity - a young woman who said "all I want is to live lives in peace and go to college - too much to ask?
Not as far as I'm concerned
Any moron who believes that these attacks were made "on humanitarian grounds: " is a friggin' moron (but in this case, we knew that anyway
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 22 Apr 18 - 10:03 AM

Jim I keep saying there are no angels in this confrontation. My interest is trying to unravel the truth. The reasons given in the mainstream media merely provide unverified pretexts for illegal actions. The way the novichok fiasco is unravelling lends credence to this belief.
Had russian counter missile defences really taken out all those missiles, what would that do to the stock of Lockeed and others of their ilk that thrive on the international arms trade? So what to make of competing claims as to who shot down what?
What to make of Genie Energy drilling illegally on the Golan Heights in stolen Syrian territory? What to make of America sitting on Syrian Energy sources?
Perhaps being a banker should be made a capital offence?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Apr 18 - 10:44 AM

Still taking sides
Not interested

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 22 Apr 18 - 06:28 PM

So you have no interest in the fact that thousands of people are being killed in a totally illegal war performed without UN sanction. A war carried out by the same coalition responsible for a death toll that exceeds largely unsubstantiated allegations of Assad's killings by hundreds of thousands. Your tunnel vision ideology leads you up some inhuman pathways.
   Nearly 50 years ago, Bob Dylan romped through a century of American warfare in his song “With God on Our Side.” From killing Indians to developing nuclear weapons, in Dylan’s view Americans acted with the hubris of knowing they had divine approval. After all, “You never ask questions / When God’s on your side.
    What were the justifications offered?
    Humanitarian in Libya
    Alleged WMD in Iraq
    Alleged Chemical weapons Syria

    Does the view above, eloquently expressed by Dylan, explain why you only assign guilt to one side?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Apr 18 - 06:57 PM

"So you have no interest in the fact that thousands of people are being killed in a totally illegal war performed without UN sanction. "
I'm more interested that many thousands more have been systematically detained, torturesd and murdered for decades without the Us, the UN or Britain showing the slightest interest in stopping it - your refusal to discuss it is an indication that it doesn't disturb you in the slightest
The coalition was a product of the failure of anybody to do anything to stop it so when those same people who sat on their hands and did SFA while that was going on invade a country strikes me as unbelievably hypocritical
Waste of time my asking you to comment on that one (again)
Isis is our monster - we turned a group of interned cranks into a world threat and you want me to pick sides - no thanks
I watched the victims of the gas attacks being cleaned up by rescue teams - I've watched the survivors cradling their dead from Assad's slaughter of civilians for several years now, I read the daily stories of the massacres - particularly in Homs, I watched the series on the refugees who made it to Britain where survivors sporke over the telephone to their families back in Syria
Ths is probably the worst closely day-to-day reprted series of atrocities ever and you want me to worry about an attack that hasn't been sanctioned by the U.N. - are you for real?
One of the things I find most grotesque in all of this, and for that matter, of all wars, is that there are legal and illegal ways of slaughtering thousands and that all you have to so is get permission from a committee and you can invade anybosy.
For crying out loud - what kind of    Science-Fiction world are we living in.
I've made my point about the invasion - I'm against it, but that doesn't mean I'm taking sides, as you are
I will be surprised if you respond to any of this - you haven't so far
Jim Carrolll

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Apr 18 - 04:34 AM

Iains,
So you have no interest in the fact that thousands of people are being killed in a totally illegal war performed without UN sanction

What war is that Iains?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 23 Apr 18 - 05:35 AM

Keith if you need to be told I suggest you sign up for remedial classes.
It is estimated in excess of 400,000 Syrians have been killed. The media may call it a civil war, but there is plenty of evidence to
suggest it is a proxy war, initiated by the same people that destroyed Libya and Iraq.

With the added bonus of this and
that

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Apr 18 - 05:42 AM

I make your links Russian millionaire's Global Research and "not available"
"Why, why, why Delilah ?"
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 23 Apr 18 - 07:24 AM

"Why, why, why Delilah ?"
I am as confused as you! My original links are repeated below.
"A funny thing happened on the way to the forum"
here is the original.

https://www.globalresearch.ca/war-is-good-for-business-insider-trading-secret-information-and-the-us-led-attack-against-syria/5637056

and the second

https://www.blacklistednews.com/article/65342/missile-manufacturer-raytheons-value-rose-by-25-billion-immediately-following-the-syria.html

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Apr 18 - 07:31 AM

Iains, Syria is a civil war.
No Western country is engaged on either side.
Russia and Iran are heavily engaged on the side of Assad, otherwise he would not be winning.

So you have no interest in the fact that thousands of people are being killed in a totally illegal war performed without UN sanction

Not by us or any Western power.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 23 Apr 18 - 08:20 AM

I think you are jumping through hoops, Iains. Any minute now you will not be able to jump high enough and you will 'lose' ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 23 Apr 18 - 08:30 AM

"Iains, Syria is a civil war."

.."Please may we bomb your homes to maim & kill your families, thank you very much...???"

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 23 Apr 18 - 10:46 AM

I think truth is more important than hoops. There is plenty of data out there to to suggest that what has happened on the ground in Syria has a reality at odds with the story presented by the mainstream media. Some, like the sphinx may like to keep their orifices below the sand of the Nile and thereby remain closed to alternatives and thus inscrutable. I however get the hump, like the camel, when people refuse to entertain the idea that perhaps other beliefs may have a factual basis.
Very convenient how coalition airstrikes target Syrian assets and infrastructure and simultaneously the terrorist are able to reform and attack.
Very inconvenient when said terrorists are found to have caches of western weaponry. Does Father Christmas shower his largesse on terrorists?
This thesis could be developed extensively but it would be a wasted effort.
I find it worrying you are so convinced of your own righteousness.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 23 Apr 18 - 10:52 AM

"I find it worrying you are so convinced of your own righteousness."

on a forum like this we have the option of not taking such clump headed folks seriously, dismissing, and ignoring them...

It's when they wield real power in the real world that's truly terrifying...!!!

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Apr 18 - 12:17 PM

PFR,
.."Please may we bomb your homes to maim & kill your families, thank you very much...???"

Who is bombing whose homes in Syria?

Iains,
Very convenient how coalition airstrikes target Syrian assets and infrastructure

What Syrian assets and infrastructure have been targeted by the coalition Iains?

"I find it worrying you are so convinced of your own righteousness."

Rightness not righteousness! I am in good company PFR. Emily Thornberry says she is convinced it was Assad too.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 23 Apr 18 - 12:36 PM

So what..

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Apr 18 - 02:05 PM

So what?
not taking such clump headed folks seriously, dismissing, and ignoring them

Your view of the Shadow Foreign Secretary.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 23 Apr 18 - 02:07 PM

..if you say so...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 23 Apr 18 - 02:55 PM

Keith The standard of your literary efforts at rebuttal are far exceeded by Janet and John Book 1. Merely throwing the odd statement back with a question mark is hardly a counter argument. If you dispute what is said at least try to give a supporting argument, otherwise there is little point in acknowledging your presence.
yours is the consummate response of querying all just by the use of ?
To be taken seriously you need to put a little more effort into your warblings here!

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Raggytash
Date: 23 Apr 18 - 03:42 PM

Hoops Iains, and ever more hoops.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Donuel
Date: 23 Apr 18 - 06:50 PM

Iains Rules of Order must be obeyed or you will receive demerits and insults. Very Trumpian.
No one here will advise you to be nice person except yourself.

You remind me of the internet of 2001.
Just when you sound sane you go 'A Link Too Far'
Many of the Trolls of that era contracted virulent soul eating cases of Conspiria. Those who survived might work for bots by now.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 05:01 AM

Congratulations Donuel. Another post of just hot air wandering about in a maze of obfuscation.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 05:04 AM

A view from the trenches!
https://ahtribune.com/culture-media/2233-skripal-and-douma.html

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 05:43 AM

Iains,
Merely throwing the odd statement back with a question mark is hardly a counter argument. If you dispute what is said at least try to give a supporting argument, otherwise there is little point in acknowledging your presence.

Throwing back statements with a question mark is asking for the statement to be justified.
In case that was not obvious, I also put a question, e.g. "Who is bombing whose homes in Syria?" and "What Syrian assets and infrastructure have been targeted by the coalition Iains?"

No Western country is bombing homes in Syria. Only 3 military targets were struck and without a single casualty.
No infrastructure or assets were targeted except illegal ones under international law.

PFR, I asked Joe to remove my post from late last night. He kindly did but also deleted my apology which you may not have seen.

I am very sorry for the things I said in that post. I was unwell and not myself.
Sorry,
keith.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 07:01 AM

Keith. Documented data below with very instructive graphics. I would have severe reservations about the attribution of casualties. I recommend you carefully study the methodology of collation and attribution. It is a grey area in my opinion.
I know that the coalition and MSM like to emphasize surgical strikes, but even with smart weapons(and what percentage are dumb weapons?) mis targeting occurs.
How many surgical    strikes hit schools, buses,hospitals, generating capacity etc ect. The idea that civilians do not get killed by all sides in this conflict is preposterous.
https://airwars.org/data/

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 07:03 AM

Keith - I'm addressing you by name for this post = I didn't see your apology, but respect that felt you needed to say sorrry.

Your 'offending' post was hilariously out of character, and was amusing - not taken as hurtful..

Seriously there was no need to apologise for such a trifle amongst the usual level of robust BS banter,
insults, and counter insults..

My default position is i don't agree with deletions at all, ever..
unless the posted material breaks hate speech laws that put mudcat in jeopardy.

..and calling me a **** is water off a ducks back - sticks 'n' stones and all that...

So, all's well, and you keep yourself well...

now back to as we were......

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 07:09 AM

Keith.
three U.S.-led coalition strikes on a school near Raqqa in March 2017 killed 150 residents - roughly five times the toll acknowledged by the Pentagon, which said at the time that dozens of militants and not civilians were killed.

The U.N. investigators found no evidence that Islamic State fighters were at the school and said the U.S.-led coalition had violated international law by failing in its duty to protect displaced civilians known to be sheltered there since 2012.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 08:36 AM

Iains,
I would have severe reservations about the attribution of casualties

Syria would have reported any.

I know that the coalition and MSM like to emphasize surgical strikes, but even with smart weapons(and what percentage are dumb weapons?) mis targeting occurs.
How many surgical    strikes hit schools, buses,hospitals, generating capacity etc ect.

Again, Syria would have reported any.

The idea that civilians do not get killed by all sides in this conflict is preposterous.

It is preposterous to suggest that Western strikes have killed civilians in this conflict.
There has only been one previous strike against Assad. Last year an air base was hit.
Putin's and Assad's air strikes have caused civilian deaths in this conflict.

The strikes you now refer to were not against Assad or his regime. They were part of the war against ISIS, and not relevant to this discussion.
Syria was also fighting ISIS.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 08:59 AM

Don't say we didn't warn you...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 10:01 AM

Isis is operating on Syrian territory
The coalition is targeting Syrian territory
Strangely enough Syrians live Syria(Those that have not become refugees)
If Syrians live in Syria and the coalition has carried out thousands of missions releasing munitions in Syria, then it is naive to the point of blockheadedness to refuse to acknowledge that Syrians have likely been killed when in close proximity to explosions.

The Coalition has so far confirmed 218 of 2,493 claimed incidents as causing 770 civilian fatalities. In addition 85 further civilian deaths have been confirmed in unidentified incidents, at least 80 of which were the result of non-US Coalition actions.

In addition to these confirmed events, it is our provisional view at Airwars that between 5,181 and 7,920 civilian non-combatants appear likely to have been killed in 977 further incidents where there is fair and uncontested public reporting of an event – and where Coalition strikes were confirmed in the near vicinity on that date. Some 183 of these likely incidents were in Iraq (1,551 to 2,301 reported deaths) and 794 events in Syria (with a reported fatality range of 3,630 to 5,619.)

At least 1,281 children and 805 women are reported to be among those killed in confirmed and likely events, along with 4,697 or more civilians reportedly injured. Airwars presently lists the names of 2,976 reported civilian fatality victims from confirmed and likely Coalition events.

Across both nations, 151 alleged civilian casualty incidents have so far in our view been discounted, ie are highly unlikely to have involved Coalition aircraft (751 to 1,153 claimed deaths). This categorisation is often a result of Coalition feedback on alleged incidents. An additional 384 to 533 civilians reportedly died in 62 events where the reporting appears fair, but where it remains unclear whether the Coalition carried out any attack in the vicinity on the date in question.

A further 2,353 to 2,741 claimed deaths are attributed to 423 alleged Coalition airstrikes which are presently weakly reported or single-sourced.

An additional 6,581 to 10,271 asserted fatalities resulted from 510 contested events (for example, claims that the Iraq Air Force or proxy ground actions might instead have been responsible.)

Some 149 further contested events (943 to 1,384 deaths) may have involved Russian aircraft in Syria. And 21 additional contested events (139 to 179 deaths) were attributed variously both to the Coalition and to Turkey.
Now stop being a stupid boy and stop arguing. Wars kill people indiscriminately.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 10:35 AM

Iains - it's like trying to reason with a mid Medieval era Crusader...???

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Raggytash
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 11:22 AM

Iains, I have appreciated many of your posts on this subject. You have provided many thoughtful, incisive and meaningful contributions and I'm sure many of us on here have learnt from you posts.

However you do not stand any chance at all of educating some people so for the sake of your sanity don't jump through any more hoops it is a complete waste of time. I'm sure you have noticed that I, and some others, ignore the idiot, some would say troll.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 12:12 PM

Iains,
So you have no interest in the fact that thousands of people are being killed in a totally illegal war performed without UN sanction.

The war against ISIS was sanctioned by UN, so you have just changed wars.

It is estimated in excess of 400,000 Syrians have been killed. The media may call it a civil war, but there is plenty of evidence to
suggest it is a proxy war,

Again, you and the rest of us were discussing the civil war, not the war against ISIS. The alleged poison gas attack was part of the civil war, not the war against ISIS.

This discussian has been about the poison gas attack in Syria and the nerve agent attack in Salisbury. The debate has been about Russia's culpability in those incidents.
Hence the title!

I suggest a new thread if you want to discuss the war against ISIS. Previously everyone here has supported it. You seem to be arguing against it. It should make for an interesting discussion.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 12:33 PM

May I be so bold to assert that this, and the previous similar titled, thread
responds to the official presumption that Russia dunnit..
Here we ask but what if they didn't.. who else did and why...???

It's an exercise in imaginative conjecture and hypothesis
to prioritise sceptical questioning over dogmatic answers..

That's all - mind stretching fun and games - hopefully to illuminate, rather than trivialise very serious current news events...

Therefore, in this context it's mostly irrelevant and boring if any folks keep banging on and on
that horrible big bastard Russia did it.. over and over again...

Not in this thread please...

Thread drift and interesting diversions are fine, no problems with that...
just stop banging with on with the same old monotonous tune that don't need to be sung here...!!!

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 12:39 PM

I think it was the zlangrunits of Alpha Centuri.

Either that or it was you. This whodunit business is very suspicious.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 12:48 PM

Any one up for writing a very boring overlong new folk song

"Russia dunnit - or did they...???         
yes they did
no they din't
yes they did
no they din't
yes they did
no they din't
yes they did
no they din't
yes they did
no they din't
Russia dunnit - or did they...???         
yes they did
no they din't
yes they did
no they din't
yes they did
no they din't
yes they did
no they din't
yes they did
no they din't
Russia dunnit - or did they...???         
yes they did
no they din't
yes they did
no they din't
yes they did
no they din't
yes they did
no they din't
yes they did
no they din't
Russia dunnit - or did they...???         
yes they did
no they din't
yes they did
no they din't
yes they did
no they din't
yes they did
no they din't
yes they did
no they din't

All join in now.. I think you know the words
you should have thought about getting a pint and going for a slash
when the last song finished.
All together now
repeat until last orders bell and chucking out time...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 01:00 PM

Well Keith in all honesty when it comes to the various sects of headloppers I make no attempt to keep up with the name changes.
There is a narrative that the coalition is fighting the latest reincarnation of terrorists, but there is a strong counter argument that suggests covert support. There are numerous reports of helicopters whisking away the leading lights on the basis of when the going gets tough, the tough get going. It is never questioned where all those shiny brand new toyota technicals come from in their droves
And how do all those US and Nato munitions end up in terrorist hands and territory?
    There is sufficient data out there to suggest that the war about terror and fighting Assad in Syria is really all about promoting regional instability, regime change and the formation of fractious statelets that can be controlled easily.
A dispassionate review of the numerous data sources suggests we are being lied to on a scale that is unprecedented in all prior history.

It is time the emasculated mainstream media reclaimed their independence, integrity and curiosity. They have many questions to both ask and demand answers to.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 01:20 PM

Iains,
Well Keith in all honesty when it comes to the various sects of headloppers I make no attempt to keep up with the name changes.

So you are unable to distinguish between the war against ISIS and the Syrian civil war!

Hardly worth trying to discuss either with you then.

Like all civilised people, and the UN, I supported the war against the evil and genocidal ISIS. You are on your own on that one.

The West chose not to engage in the civil war, except in response to use of poison gas by Assad.
Russia and Iran chose to engage fully on the side of Assad, who was close to defeat but now close to total victory thanks to them.

Hope that helps.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 01:32 PM

It seems to me that a chap persistently making 2+2=5.98765432345 to suit his own ends...

ie.. if you said 'that' then what you really mean is...
"this this this this this and this, even though it's basically the opposite of what you meant when you said 'that'..."

is not a very positive, honest, intelligent form of debate...
never has been.. never will be...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 01:35 PM

I'll mention that I've also observed aggressively conservative young americans employ similar argument tactics on youtube...

Not very mature of enlightened.. hopefully they may grow out of it...????

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Raggytash
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 03:25 PM

Question for you good people, when did calling other posters "shits" become part of being civilised.

Just wondering like ..........

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Kenny B (inactive)
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 03:35 PM

Raggy ... u on the right thread ? your mention of shits is the first on this thread

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 03:51 PM

Not so Kenny. The offending text, now deleted, read

You shits are in bed with Putin and Assad.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 03:52 PM

For Keith. A slight change of venue to illustrate the media war. I find the viewpoint quite challenging.

https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/media-mass-deception-180409092703608.html

And to follow, a map of Syria showing the dispositions of all combatants. Apart from the US forces. However we are told they are east of the Euphrates (ie the Syrian and Kurdish border)

Now for anyone with a mind to think, the map represents the de facto partitioning of Syria with embedded assets to ensure it's permanence.
The Turks also have a Kurdish problem. (Divide and conquer?) There have been a number of coalition airstrikes in the vicinity of this border on Syrian assets and also on Deir Az Zor when Syria booted the "rebels" out a few months ago
As the map is from Al Jazeera the explanatory notes need to be used with caution.
Now it must be obvious to anyone that the entire area is a mishmash of competing factions, most not very nice people.
Being very cynical, I would say Isis fights the Syrian Army all the time and America carries out sorties on supposed Isis(in reality the Syrian Army) on mondays and thursdays, and the rest of the week is training Isis and rearming them to continue the "good" fight. But slowly the mask is dropping. The end game is regime change. Meanwhile the state dept and pentagon play mix and match.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 04:08 PM

Question for you good people, when did calling other posters "shits" become part of being civilised.

It has been apologized for so get off your high horse.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Kenny B (inactive)
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 04:32 PM

I sit corrected :<)

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 04:55 PM

Apologies. No point in babbling about a mythical map above. Here is the link.


https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/interactive/2015/05/syria-country-divided-150529144229467.html

and a more confusing one.

https://syriancivilwarmap.com/

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Apr 18 - 04:19 AM

I am sorry for those remarks. I was unwell and not myself when I made them.
I asked Joe to delete them and apologised at the time.

PFR,
It seems to me that a chap persistently making 2+2=5.98765432345 to suit his own ends...
ie.. if you said 'that' then what you really mean is...

I did not invent the fact that Iains suddenly started talking about the war with Isis as if it was part of the civil war in Syria.
I did not invent the fact that when challenged he admitted "in all honesty when it comes to the various sects of headloppers I make no attempt to keep up with the name changes."

Iains,
the rest of the week (USA)is training Isis and rearming them to continue the "good" fight.

Completely untrue. US and Coalition air power has driven ISIS from all its territories and the survivors are now on the run.
Your claim is entirely made up by you. It has not been made by anyone else anywhere.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 25 Apr 18 - 05:26 AM

Once again, Iains, don't say you was not warned!

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 25 Apr 18 - 06:21 AM

Keith part of my response might have been a little tongue in cheek, but there is an underlying grain of truth. You appear to live in a fantasy world where everything can be as simple as black white yes no.
I think I have managed to paint a picture where it is pretty obvious everyone lies through their teeth and everyone that has come to the party has conflicting aims and desires. Humanitarian concerns are on no one's agenda.
Proxy support for Isis via Quatar and Saudi has been alluded to by various sources, and parachute drops of munitions to one set of crazies seems to always end up eventually with the Isis set of crazies. Munitions with clearly established identity and accompanying end user certificates end up in war zones thousands of miles from their stated destination. Planes unload at destinations never logged on any flight plan. Collusion occurs at all levels between many governments. The picture painted by the MSM could hang on any wall, but the bottom feeders thrive.
But never mind, you keep feeding on everything the presstitutes feed you. I prefer to cast my net far wider and as a result I see a far murkier world out there.
Meanwhile for anyone still bothering with this thread a couple of links to consider. The thing to ask yourself is "what game plan" is being followed?
Is the mighty coalition toppling a brutal dictator on the grounds of a humanitarian rescue on an epic scale? One is rather put in mind of the old adage "better dead than red" judging by the resultant death toll.
Or is it blindly following the script outlined by General Wesly Clark ,
the former Supreme Allied commander and Chief of NATO in Europe saying saying that within 5 years(from 2007) seven countries must fall, one of them is Syria.
An alternative view below.

https://www.globalresearch.ca/poison-gas-weapon-of-choice-for-false-news/5635839?utm_campaign=magnet&utm_source=article_page&utm

or the world according to the BBC (what they say is intriguing-what they do not say is significant.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-29004253

The next article is very interesting especially the last paragraphs.

https://www.wired.com/story/terror-industrial-complex-isis-munitions-supply-chain/

Thus far the war in Syria has been by proxy. The most likely candidate to make a severe escalation is Israel. Her continuing raids on Syria will eventually generate retribution. Israel has been a loose cannon in the Middle East for decades. It need to be put on a leash, not encouraged.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 25 Apr 18 - 06:29 AM

OMG - Now you are inviting retribution from bobad as well. Are you a masochist?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Apr 18 - 06:36 AM

Iains,
support for Isis via Quatar and Saudi has been alluded to by various sources

Yes, and you could have mentioned Turkey too, but no Western involvement.

Thus far the war in Syria has been by proxy.

Then who are the proxy comabatants? No Western country.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 25 Apr 18 - 06:40 AM

No Dave. I am having a boring morning so I am playing with Mr. Google.

https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-qa-is-saudi-arabia-funding-isis

and one for the trump haters here, all's about Hilary


https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/hillary-clinton-wikileaks-email-isis-saudi-arabia-qatar-us-allies-funding-barack-obama-knew
Three cheers for Wikileaks!

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Apr 18 - 09:32 AM

BTW, the lead item on BBC and ITV news today, yet again, is Labour Party anti-Semitism.
Just Labour.
I was right about that too.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 25 Apr 18 - 09:47 AM

Right..

Right then...

Righty tighty - lefty loosey...


... handy to remember for those with loose screws...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 25 Apr 18 - 09:48 AM

Why on earth is someone going on about antisemitism in a thread about dodgy Russian dealings I wonder.

Trolling I guess. Just ignore it.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 25 Apr 18 - 09:57 AM

DtG - you are soooooo right..

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 25 Apr 18 - 10:06 AM

That makes a change! :-)

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 25 Apr 18 - 06:15 PM

Hmmm. Considering the rampant, naked Tory racism revealed by the Windrush outrage, which is oh so real, oh so awful and oh so disgusting, I should think that the confected "outrage" about so-called Labour antisemitism, whipped up by disaffected anti-Corbynites in Labour and by right-wing Jewish groups such as the Board Of Deputies (the true antisemites), I'm amazed that anyone here should have the balls to bring it up again. What a laugh.

And, to the two trolls likely to respond, that's my piece and don't even begin to THINK that I'll enter into exchanges with you.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 25 Apr 18 - 06:17 PM

Er, dodgy sentence construction there but you know what I mean innit...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 25 Apr 18 - 06:38 PM

I'm getting addled. It was ok after all!

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Apr 18 - 06:49 PM

"Just Labour"
It is now impossible to distinguish between Antisemitism and criticism of Israel
OFFICIAL
Talk your eye off a moron for five minutes and he becomes a bigger moron
Proven beyond a shadow of doubt
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 03:15 AM

Keir Starmer said on R4 just now that those who deny the problem are part of the problem, which means you guys.
He said he spoke for Corbyn too.

It shows again how extreme your views are.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 03:21 AM

Interesting report from the Home Affairs committee that contains the truth of the matter, Steve. But, as I said, it does not belong on here. I have bookmarked the page for future reference. There will, of course, be cherry picking from it by certain parties but, having read it in full, I can confirm that there is more in our favour than otherwise.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 03:48 AM

"It shows again how extreme your views are. "
Someone who describes as "silly" and ""harmless", an antisemitic poem calling for the death of Jews written by a wartime fascist who was head of a group preparing for Hitler's victory in the war - is the last one in the world to accuse anybody of being "extreme" Keith
In your sick support for that piece of antisemitic filth, you are supporting not only an attack on the Jewish People at a time when they were being rounded up for mass-extermination, but also the gang who were preparing for the Nazis to take over Britain
I have put up the poem - you have never withdrawn your views on it, despite the fact that we now know that the predictions of the mass-murder of Jews cane into fruition six milionfold shortly after it was written
In the full knowledge of those deaths, Bobad, Robo and Bearded Bruce - all enthusiastic accusers of the rest of us as "Jew haters" support Ramsey's poem with their refusal to condemn you for the anti-semite you have proven yourself
Anybody who would like to see the people Keith and his team are supporting - Look up Archibald Maule Ramsey - a true 'British Gentleman'   
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 03:56 AM

Another botched attempt? What a bunch of amateurs?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5655125/Scientist-developed-Novichok-poison-used-Salisbury-run-car.html

As believable as below!

http://lasvegas.cbslocal.com/2016/08/10/the-list-of-clinton-associates-whove-died-mysteriously-check-it-out/

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 03:57 AM

Jim - This is what he wants.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 06:54 AM

Jim - K**** is getting desperate to provoke you...

stay streadfast mate...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 06:56 AM

I can;t blame predictive text... "steadfast" is wot should have been spilled corrictly..

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 06:57 AM

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 07:38 AM

By way of a diversion, PFR, I am currently listening to 'Thunder and Consolation' by New Model Army over earphones while pretending to work. Right up your street I reckon but you probably already know that :-)

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Donuel
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 08:15 AM

[Iains         I found a new BFF for you.]

Subject: RE: BS: Guns in America
From: beardedbruce - PM
Date: 17 Apr 18 - 03:39 PM

Donual,

If you HAVE an RPG, YOU are in violation of the law, and a felon...

You remain one of those with "stubborn and complete intolerance of any creed, belief, or opinion that differs from one’s ownAs for " if you want a cure for all racism and religious bigotry, just get rid of all the different people"

Isn't THAT what YOU are in the process of doing? ANYONE who differs with YOUR opinions is evil, wrong, Nazi, and should be removed.

When do you start the ovens up? No room for ANY discussion.

[This is what a case of Conspiria looks like in stage 4. You are a 3]

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 08:58 AM

DtG - judging by very recent posts...


what may be more appropriate here is "Old Model Barmy"...?????

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 09:32 AM

Donuel. Try English!

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 10:52 AM

"Jim - This is what he wants. "
Sorry lads - too good an opportunity to expose this bunch of extremist reactionaries
Nice article in the Irish Times this morning which backs up Corbyn's comparing Israeli regime to Isis
Suppose the writer must be another "self-loathing Jew we are reading about more and more nowadays
Jim (back from Galway with a vengeance) Carroll

EUROPE MUST INTERVENE TO STOP THE GAZA SHOOTINGS
Ilan Baruch Opinion
Ilan Baruch is a retired diplomat and former Israeli ambassador to South Africa

An independent inquiry must be established to transparently investigate incidents in which live ammunition was fired at unarmed demonstrators
The use of military force to enforce an imposed regime is typical of colonialism. Israel adamantly rejects being deemed a colonial power in the Palestinian territories. Yet reality shows, time and again, that the government of Israel cannot claim to have a morally acceptable vision of the future if it continues using violence against unarmed citizens.
Shooting into a crowd of demonstrators who pose no danger to Israeli citizens or soldiers might prove to be a war crime. It is the duty of the international community, especially European Union member states, to intervene. Such use of live ammunition must be forbidden against future demonstrations.
Nearly a century has gone by since soldiers of the British Indian army opened fire at an unarmed, nonviolent crowd of pilgrims, gathering in a public garden in Amritsar, in Punjab. The crime of the 379
dead and hundreds of wounded was the mere fact that they assembled, in defiance of government decrees. The incident rattled India and Britain. Some historians claim this point in time, namely April 13th, 1919, was when Britain began to lose its grip on India and, ultimately, its entire empire.
Almost 60 years have passed since police forces in disarray fired into a mass of nonviolent demonstrators in Sharpeville, in South Africa. The demonstration was part of a large campaign headed by the ANC (and by its rival, the PAC) against the pass laws, a set of rules, imposed by the apartheid authorities, severely restricting the freedom of movement of most African citizens. The police shot 69 people dead and severely wounded 180 others. That day, March 19th, 1960, was the beginning of the end of the apartheid regime, dismantled 34 years
later, when free elections were first held.

UNARMED DEMONSTRATORS
On Sunday, January 30th, 1972, British forces opened fire on unarmed demonstrators in Derry. Thirteen people were killed on the spot, and another died a few days later from his wounds, in what would later be known as Bloody Sunday. Many years passed before the Saville inquiry deter¬mined that opening fire at demonstrators was unjustified and unjustifiable. The seeds of the Belfast Agreement were planted the day British soldiers shot at unarmed, nonviolent civilians.
On Friday, March 30th, civil-society organisations in Gaza initiated a new course of action: nonviolent protest. Tens of thousands of demonstrators have been assembling each Friday after prayer, at protest centres located along the border fence dividing the Gaza Strip from the sovereign territory of Israel. They will do so again tomorrow.
The Israel Defense Forces were prepared for the demonstrations. Snipers received orders to shoot live ammunition at demonstrators, in some cases even to shoot to kill. The soldiers were not defending themselves. Nobody was endangered - neither Israeli citizens nor the soldiers. Fire was opened to deter citizens from approaching the fence separating Gaza from Israel.
Israel’s nightmare is that masses of Palestinians cross the fence and sweep into Israel. The Israel Defense Forces would have no response to that. On the other hand the lives of Palestinians in
Gaza are becoming meaningless to many in Israel, for which history will surely judge us. An independent international inquiry must be established to transparently investigate incidents in which live ammunition was fired at unarmed demonstrators.
Yet where is the international community? Why do the protests seem so half-hearted? Why aren’t diplomatic means being used to deter Israel from such direct and brutal violence towards unarmed nonvio¬lent Palestinian demonstrators? Could the European Union and its members, including Ireland, believe that this isn’t
the time for a stern rebuke of Israel, as the situation in Syria is boiling to a point of conflict between the superpowers?
These countries might not be pleased with Israel’s conduct but seem to prefer the profitable economic co-operation between Israel and EU member states. Is Ireland, too, among the states that hope the demonstrations will just dissipate, saving them the trouble of a sharp diplomatic rebuke? What scares Israel about these nonviolent demonstrations in Gaza? The possibility that this form of popular protest will spill over to the West Bank and East Jerusalem, leaving the authorities helpless. Firing live ammunition at nonviolent, unarmed demonstrators is an act of inconceivable brutality, yet standing indifferently on the sidelines is inconceivable, too.

ILAN BARUCH'S RESIGNATION

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 11:20 AM

Jim - yes that's an informative read.. but...

Is it not possible to ask mods for a single dedicated "Israel" perma-thread...?????

..a bit like setting up a boxing ring in a pub car park
to keep the hardcore aggro safely contained out and away from the bars of merry bantering boozers..

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Donuel
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 11:56 AM

[Iains, BFF means best friends forever.

To everyone else, 20 years ago we used to say "if you feed the troll he will follow you home".

Still there are many interesting side issues here that would make good new thread subjects unless you enjoy the insults.]

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 12:33 PM

"Is it not possible to ask mods for a single dedicated "Israel" perma-thread...?????"
Sorry - don't agree
This has long departed the original subject and has entered the "Labour Antisemitism" realms
Israel first came up on 11th of this month (not guilty on that one)
As far as I am concerned, these items are interlinked with the now established practice of States interfering with the internal affairs of others - Russia attempted to influence the US elections and Brexit - now Israel attempting to bring down a Labour Leader because he has declared his opposition to their policies in Gaza
Seems to be the shape of things to come
Rather than allow the trolls like Keith close threads that can make no headway on - lets deal with it in its entirety
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 01:18 PM

Jim - I know that it's all obviously interrelated... I agree with you.. but...

Soon enough all threads become about Israel if certain folks get their own way...

Pro Israel propagandists want nothing more than their agenda to be the most prioritised publicised issue discussed everywhere...!!!

I wish a particular UK political party dedicated to protecting the welfare of the less well off in our society
had the balls [ or Prescotts] to just tell 'em to eff off
with their disruptive interfering self promoting hijacking and blackmailing extortionate control freak demands...


..and now back to blaming Russia for everything - no wait - that's not what this thread is about either...!!!!!

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 01:20 PM

Donuel the reality is that the original thread title revolved around seemingly unsubstantiated allegations of initially novichok and later Douma. Unfortunately you cannot even begin to seek the truth without unraveling the history of the Middle East at least since the fall of the Ottoman Empire and the machinations of Empire post WW1. There are at least six components of the present chaos and a little digging would throw upp many others.
1)The geographic/political boundaries are largely artificial constructs
2)Between 25 and 35 million Kurds inhabit a mountainous region straddling the borders of Turkey, Iraq, Syria, Iran and Armenia. They make up the fourth-largest ethnic group in the Middle East, but they have never obtained a permanent nation state.
3)There are religious divides between Sunni and Shiites
4)Energy sources and their distribution networks bring in competing interests.
5)"Terminology on terrorist attacks are often misleading and the resulting danger to the Middle East often misunderstood. The Islamic State and its so-called provinces mimic quasi-states and insurgencies—
the terrorism label obfuscates much of the groups’ practices. The Islamic State and related groups use terrorism, of course, but they also wage insurgencies, control territory, and otherwise shape the region beyond terrorist attacks. These actions are often far more dangerous and consequential than terrorism."
6)Arms sales e.g. UK UK arms sales 2015-16. Saudi Arabia: £3.3 billion. United Arab Emirates: £265 million. Turkey: £175 million. Qatar: £139 million. Israel: £105 million. Oman: £71 million. Egypt: £65 million. Jordan: £19 million. Bahrain: £19 million. Kuwait: £13 million. Lebanon: £2.8 million. Yemen: £266,000 ... others dispute the figures as way too low.arms sales Now if anyone can unravel the true story of what is really happening in Syria they may well have a very good explanation as to why Russia, Assad and Iran are being constantly demonized. In my view it is a devils brew and Israel and her rogue attacks may well be the detonator to create a global war. It is a country in defiance of innumerable UN resolutions and takes zero notice of the International community.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 03:01 PM

"Soon enough all threads become about Israel if certain folks get their own way..."
If you check, all the Israel threads have been closed - none have died a natural death thanks to the trolls
If what I say about Israel's entryist tactics into British politics, the stronger Corbyn's support base gets, the more Israel will intervene
If I'm wrong fine - show me where I am
Keith and co would love to have a free hand to smear Corbyn and the Labour Party with Antisemitism - unless you accept he is right, then the probable alternative needs to be discussed
The suggestion that Israel's supporters have invented Labour antisemitism has been on the scene for a lot longer than I have been banging on about it - the Israeli Labour paper Haaretz raised it first
Promise I won't over-do it, but please don't let these twots off the hook by making it a no-go area - that is one of their get-out-of-jail cards when they are at a loss for a response
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 03:19 PM

Jim - you say nothing much in your last post I disagree with..

If I was labour leader I would show far less indulgent patience and tact under such hostile contrived false attack...

Which is probably why Corbyn has that job and not me...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Donuel
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 03:22 PM

History threads have a long reputation here. Even Iains is at his best with history. Examples of chronicling present day history is the trick pony.
Besides the present day history, there could be ancient history or the history of the 3rd Reich . Jim I know you have a book in you.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 03:52 PM

You will not listen to me, but these are your own people.

Guardian, "Shadow minister(Starmer) says those who deny Labour has antisemitism issues are ‘part of the problem’"
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/apr/26/keir-starmer-hits-back-at-mccluskey-labour-antisemitism-remarks

That is YOU lads.

"“Jeremy Corbyn has made it clear, and it is obvious, that we have got a problem with antisemitism. We have got to deal with it robustly and effectively,” he said."

Deny that Lads?

BBC, "Jeremy Corbyn has rejected claims by close ally Len McCluskey that "Corbyn-hater" Labour MPs were using an anti-Semitism row to "smear" him."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43897221


That is what YOU claim lads. Corbyn wants you to shut up.

Your views are extreme well beyond his.
He is saying what I have been telling you all along.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 04:19 PM

Igmore the troll.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 04:25 PM

I remember the days of warped and damaged vinyl LPs that always got stuck repeating over and over again on the same groove...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 04:27 PM

Better point out I don't mean you DtG..
before some smart arse tries to be clever...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 04:30 PM

I am just telling you what your leader says.

He says you are wrong and should stop making your silly claims.

He is saying exactly what I have been saying all along.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 04:31 PM

If anyone would care to open a thread on the any issues in the Labour party please feel free. Think of it as care in the community.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 04:34 PM

I did realise PFR. Thanks for making it clear anyway. Now, anyone care to make any suggestions as to who it was if it wasn't the Russians.

I think Boris himself is a good suspect. Even the name is Russian. I bet he is really Putin's BFF.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 05:21 PM

The best vinyl record I ever bought had a hole that wasn't in the middle. I just thought that the recording wasn't very good, until I heard a track from it played perfectly on Radio 3...Never believe what you hear....


I blame Putin, natch...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: robomatic
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 07:30 PM

There was a GAZA thread started by me 'specially for posts like some of the above but the usual suspects blew it up and SShaw admitted in another thread that he requested that it be closed due to folks he said were trolls.

So we get the anti-Israel crowd to creep into other threads which sorta makes them the trolls now.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 07:49 PM

Have another vat of wine, old chap.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 09:27 PM

"So we get the anti-Israel crowd to creep into other threads which sorta makes them the trolls now. "
At least we have "anti Israel" instead of "The Jews"
Seems you have disgraced yourself into dropping that line
If it is true, as I believe it is, Israel and Russia are joined at the hip in manipulating the politics of other states for their own ends "Anti Israeli feeling" has a place here

As far as I am concerned, there is irrefutable evidence that this whole campaign hss been deliberately engineered to smear Corbyn
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jeremy-corbyn-labour-antisemitism-protest-powerful-special-interest-group-jewish-a8278761.html

The accusations first appeared within a month of Corbyyn decalrins support for the Palestinians, following a meeting of a party of "Labour Friends of Israel members returning from a meeting with Netanyahu
This BRUSHED UNDER THE CARPET INCIDENT seems to be evidence of an orgabised campaign to bring Corbyn down
Let's hope he stands his ground
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: robomatic
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 09:36 PM

The plot sickens. . .

---

Per a request from the originator of the thread, "I asked for this thread to be closed because it has been hijacked. If you want to discuss Israel or antisemitism please start your own thread." Previous Israel and antisemitism threads tend to be closed when the BS gets too deep to tolerate. So proceed at your own risk.