Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Meanwhile from the White House as the staff turnover continues

SystemSystem Posts: 5,841
edited March 14 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Meanwhile from the White House as the staff turnover continues –

Tonight’s Leonard and Cochrane cartoon.

Read the full story here


«13

Comments

  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 5,184
    Firstish...
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 5,184
    This is interesting; it's possible the new CIA head torturer won't get confirmed -
    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/mar/14/rand-paul-gina-haspel-cia-director-torture-gleeful-joy
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 29,678
    Quite good. It does seem to get a lot of use.

    FPT

    nielh said:

    ydoethur said:

    He failed his A-levels, he failed polytechnic, and he had an undistinguished career as a housing officer before getting a safe seat where he had an undistinguished career as a backbencher where his chief energy seems to have been signing literally hundreds of EDMs every year. Every political group he has organised or led either failed entirely or was unimportant when its goals were achieved. It's hard to believe this is accidental.

    If therefore he is doing something rather dumb (and he is) we don't need to wonder if Milne is in the pay of the FSB. We just need to remember Corbyn, like the egregious Wisemann, is utterly clueless in what he's doing and will therefore usually do the wrong thing.

    I can't agree with your assessment of Corbyn.

    Corbyn is no fool. He has continuously made smart judgements and proved everyone wrong. His judgement on the Russia situation is smart. He is a model politician for the Trump era. I don't agree with him, but he is smart.

    The unde

    There will be more retailiations and tests from Russia, which we will increasingly reveal our impotence, and (in the minds of the electorate), the truth in Corbyn's position.

    Of course, this is not the same as supporting Corbyn, I just think that the situation will play in to his hands, and it would be very unwise to underestimate him.
    I respectively suggest you are out of touch with the idea Salisbury is being whipped up the media and is hugely insulting to the people living in Salisbury and other areas affected.

    This will escalate into International condemnation of Russia and you think the ordinary people will not notice
    Have you been to Salisbury recently Big_G? Life carries on much as usual - some trade impact but not as much as caused by the snow the week before.

    I'm not trying to dimish the seriousness of the Skripal attack but let's not exaggerate - Salisbury is still a thriving, comfortable, lovely, minor city in England.
    Not the way businesses in Salisbury see it Ben
    Yes, but is it Sawls-bury or Souls-bury?
    That’s the key question.
    Have people been saying it different ways? It'd not even occur to me it could be a difficult one to pronounce.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 19,463
    Not having a US SoS in office is not great for us right now notwithstanding the very strong support at the UN tonight.
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 3,008
    If it was the Russian state that did it why ? Surely if they did do it, they are clever enough not to be implicated.Also what was the retired double agent involved with these past few years .In his forced retirement in Salisbury.It has to be more complex , than we will ever be told.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 29,678
    Off topic, I have very much been enjoying the medieval RPG Kingdom Come: Deliverance. 51 hours put into it so far, and it's still enjoyably challenging and engaging - I have seen countless games which have hardcore mechanics around sleeping and eating, and alchemy and hunting etc, but none have ever really made me want to do any of those things (Skyrim for example), but Kingdom Come has. Not for everyone, it's frustrating at times and buggy as hell, but well worth its price.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 5,792
    kle4 said:

    Quite good. It does seem to get a lot of use.

    FPT

    nielh said:

    ydoethur said:

    He failed his A-levels, he failed polytechnic, and he had an undistinguished career as a housing officer before getting a safe seat where he had an undistinguished career as a backbencher where his chief energy seems to have been signing literally hundreds of EDMs every year. Every political group he has organised or led either failed entirely or was unimportant when its goals were achieved. It's hard to believe this is accidental.

    If therefore he is doing something rather dumb (and he is) we don't need to wonder if Milne is in the pay of the FSB. We just need to remember Corbyn, like the egregious Wisemann, is utterly clueless in what he's doing and will therefore usually do the wrong thing.

    I can't agree with your assessment of Corbyn.

    Corbyn is no fool. He has continuously made smart judgements and proved everyone wrong. His judgement on the Russia situation is smart. He is a model politician for the Trump era. I don't agree with him, but he is smart.

    The unde

    There will be more retailiations and tests from Russia, which we will increasingly reveal our impotence, and (in the minds of the electorate), the truth in Corbyn's position.

    Of course, this is not the same as supporting Corbyn, I just think that the situation will play in to his hands, and it would be very unwise to underestimate him.
    I respectively suggest you are out of touch with the idea Salisbury is being whipped up the media and is hugely insulting to the people living in Salisbury and other areas affected.

    This will escalate into International condemnation of Russia and you think the ordinary people will not notice
    Have you been to Salisbury recently Big_G? Life carries on much as usual - some trade impact but not as much as caused by the snow the week before.

    I'm not trying to dimish the seriousness of the Skripal attack but let's not exaggerate - Salisbury is still a thriving, comfortable, lovely, minor city in England.
    Not the way businesses in Salisbury see it Ben
    Yes, but is it Sawls-bury or Souls-bury?
    That’s the key question.
    Have people been saying it different ways? It'd not even occur to me it could be a difficult one to pronounce.
    Solsbry, isn't it?
  • DavidL said:

    Not having a US SoS in office is not great for us right now notwithstanding the very strong support at the UN tonight.

    Up Pompeo.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 27,476

    I can't imagine Corbyn is going to like the papers tonight.....

    The cult won’t care....Where as trump being Russia friendly, well that makes him a disgrace etc etc etc
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 2,675

    kle4 said:

    Quite good. It does seem to get a lot of use.

    FPT

    nielh said:

    ydoethur said:

    He failed his A-levels, he failed polytechnic, and he had an undistinguished career as a housing officer before getting a safe seat where he had an undistinguished career as a backbencher where his chief energy seems to have been signing literally hundreds of EDMs every year. Every political group he has organised or led either failed entirely or was unimportant when its goals were achieved. It's hard to believe this is accidental.

    If therefore he is doing something rather dumb (and he is) we don't need to wonder if Milne is in the pay of the FSB. We just need to remember Corbyn, like the egregious Wisemann, is utterly clueless in what he's doing and will therefore usually do the wrong thing.

    I can't agree with your assessment of Corbyn.

    Corbyn is no fool. He has continuously made smart judgements and proved everyone wrong. His judgement on the Russia situation is smart. He is a model politician for the Trump era. I don't agree with him, but he is smart.

    The unde

    There will be more retailiations and tests from Russia, which we will increasingly reveal our impotence, and (in the minds of the electorate), the truth in Corbyn's position.

    Of course, this is not the same as supporting Corbyn, I just think that the situation will play in to his hands, and it would be very unwise to underestimate him.
    I respectively suggest you are out of touch with the idea Salisbury is being whipped up the media and is hugely insulting to the people living in Salisbury and other areas affected.

    This will escalate into International condemnation of Russia and you think the ordinary people will not notice
    Have you been to Salisbury recently Big_G? Life carries on much as usual - some trade impact but not as much as caused by the snow the week before.

    I'm not trying to dimish the seriousness of the Skripal attack but let's not exaggerate - Salisbury is still a thriving, comfortable, lovely, minor city in England.
    Not the way businesses in Salisbury see it Ben
    Yes, but is it Sawls-bury or Souls-bury?
    That’s the key question.
    Have people been saying it different ways? It'd not even occur to me it could be a difficult one to pronounce.
    Solsbry, isn't it?
    Sallsbry pal.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 19,463
    Yorkcity said:

    If it was the Russian state that did it why ? Surely if they did do it, they are clever enough not to be implicated.Also what was the retired double agent involved with these past few years .In his forced retirement in Salisbury.It has to be more complex , than we will ever be told.

    Andrew Neil dealt with that point well today. This wasn't reckless. It was a deliberate message with a clear calling card to cause fear and consternation amongst enemies of the Kremlin. It would have been easy to kill this traitor (as they see him) quietly. They chose not to because they wanted people to know they are to be feared.
  • alex.alex. Posts: 2,806
    Yorkcity said:

    If it was the Russian state that did it why ? Surely if they did do it, they are clever enough not to be implicated.Also what was the retired double agent involved with these past few years .In his forced retirement in Salisbury.It has to be more complex , than we will ever be told.

    Because it wasn’t about killing the spy per se, but sending a message to others that they risk the same fate. Not much point sending a message if nobody know you’ve sent it.
  • kle4 said:



    Have people been saying it different ways? It'd not even occur to me it could be a difficult one to pronounce.

    I call it Salls-berry.
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 3,008

    I can't imagine Corbyn is going to like the papers tonight.....

    The cult won’t care....Where as trump being Russia friendly, well that makes him a disgrace etc etc etc
    That is true but to be fair , I am sure there is a more complex situation than we are been told.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 29,678
    edited March 14
    Yorkcity said:

    If it was the Russian state that did it why ? Surely if they did do it, they are clever enough not to be implicated.

    This keeps coming up as a theory, and it still strikes me as ridiculous - you don't believe even nations very good at these things can cock up on occasion? Are you seriously suggesting that if there is any evidence that they might be behind it that is proof it cannot have been them, because they are too clever for that? (And as others state, there are motivations where they don't care if people know - the BBC refer to it implausible deniability)

    I'm sure you are right things are more complex than what we have been told, but let's turn it around - if the evidence our government has did not point to Russia in some capacity, why would they accuse them? We have no election coming up to try to rally the population behind the government, our opposition rightly is not going to give the government an easy ride over other things because of this, it's not like we had great relations with them but why should we seek escalation of hostilities given our present foreign and domestic issues?

    We'll never prove what happened 100% because no doubt key details will be classified, and certainly we should not trust everything we ever hear, but the nerve agent aspect seems to be key as it is the link to a state actor (or severe state negligence) and how incredibly risky on our part to lie about that, versus high risk for them to do it...but less risk since they can always deny and international relations means any response will be limited in scale and time in any case.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 29,678

    kle4 said:

    Quite good. It does seem to get a lot of use.

    FPT

    nielh said:

    ydoethur said:

    He failed his A-levels, he failed polytechnic, and he had an undistinguished career as a housing officer before getting a safe seat where he had an undistinguished career as a backbencher where his chief energy seems to have been signing literally hundreds of EDMs every year. Every political group he has organised or led either failed entirely or was unimportant when its goals were achieved. It's hard to believe this is accidental.

    If therefore he is doing something rather dumb (and he is) we don't need to wonder if Milne is in the pay of the FSB. We just need to remember Corbyn, like the egregious Wisemann, is utterly clueless in what he's doing and will therefore usually do the wrong thing.

    I can't agree with your assessment of Corbyn.

    Corbyn is no fool. He has continuously made smart judgements and proved everyone wrong. His judgement on the Russia situation is smart. He is a model politician for the Trump era. I don't agree with him, but he is smart.

    The unde

    There will be more retailiations and tests from Russia, which we will increasingly reveal our impotence, and (in the minds of the electorate), the truth in Corbyn's position.

    Of course, this is not the same as supporting Corbyn, I just think that the situation will play in to his hands, and it would be very unwise to underestimate him.
    I respectively suggest you are out of touch with the idea Salisbury is being whipped up the media and is hugely insulting to the people living in Salisbury and other areas affected.

    This will escalate into International condemnation of Russia and you think the ordinary people will not notice
    Have you been to Salisbury recently Big_G? Life carries on much as usual - some trade impact but not as much as caused by the snow the week before.

    I'm not trying to dimish the seriousness of the Skripal attack but let's not exaggerate - Salisbury is still a thriving, comfortable, lovely, minor city in England.
    Not the way businesses in Salisbury see it Ben
    Yes, but is it Sawls-bury or Souls-bury?
    That’s the key question.
    Have people been saying it different ways? It'd not even occur to me it could be a difficult one to pronounce.
    Solsbry, isn't it?
    Sallsbry pal.
    Bingo - though I don't usually associate with you folks south of the plain, I'm a west wiltshire guy.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 13,179
    Yorkcity said:

    If it was the Russian state that did it why ? Surely if they did do it, they are clever enough not to be implicated.Also what was the retired double agent involved with these past few years .In his forced retirement in Salisbury.It has to be more complex , than we will ever be told.

    Well that is not the way the HOC saw it today with near unanimous support for TM and rejection of Corbyn especially by a large number of his MP's. And Ian Blackford of the SNP gave 100% support to TM as did Vince Cable.

    It was a historic debate and demonstrated the huge fissure looming in labour
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 2,675

    kle4 said:



    Have people been saying it different ways? It'd not even occur to me it could be a difficult one to pronounce.

    I call it Salls-berry.
    But you're a working class northerner TSE. You probably call Sowerby Bridge 'Sorby Bridge' :wink:
  • glwglw Posts: 4,207
    Yorkcity said:

    If it was the Russian state that did it why ? Surely if they did do it, they are clever enough not to be implicated.Also what was the retired double agent involved with these past few years .In his forced retirement in Salisbury.It has to be more complex , than we will ever be told.

    Why does it have to be more complex? An awful lot of people opposed to or critical of Putin have died in unusual circumstances. Perhaps Putin and his mob are simply vengeful.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 20,730
    Yorkcity said:

    If it was the Russian state that did it why ? Surely if they did do it, they are clever enough not to be implicated.Also what was the retired double agent involved with these past few years .In his forced retirement in Salisbury.It has to be more complex , than we will ever be told.

    If you kill a traitor (as Putin would see him) you don't want to make it seem like an accident. You want to show other would-be traitors what fate awaits them.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 29,678
    I am very curious about the CCTV situation re the Salisbury event. There's been rows in the city for yonks about the transfer of the CCTV assets from unitary to city council, and there were questions if the things were even operating, which apparently they were.
  • ElliotElliot Posts: 975
    kle4 said:

    Yorkcity said:

    If it was the Russian state that did it why ? Surely if they did do it, they are clever enough not to be implicated.

    This keeps coming up as a theory, and it still strikes me as ridiculous - you don't believe even nations very good at these things can cock up on occasion? Are you seriously suggesting that if there is any evidence that they might be behind it that is proof it cannot have been them, because they are too clever for that? (And as others state, there are motivations where they don't care if people know - the BBC refer to it implausible deniability)

    I'm sure you are right things are more complex than what we have been told, but let's turn it around - if the evidence our government has did not point to Russia in some capacity, why would they accuse them? We have no election coming up to try to rally the population behind the government, our opposition rightly is not going to give the government an easy ride over other things because of this, it's not like we had great relations with them but why should we seek escalation of hostilities given our present foreign and domestic issues?

    We'll never prove what happened 100% because no doubt key details will be classified, and certainly we should not trust everything we ever hear, but the nerve agent aspect seems to be key as it is the link to a state actor (or severe state negligence) and how incredibly risky on our part to lie about that, versus high risk for them to do it...but less risk since they can always deny and international relations means any response will be limited in scale and time in any case.
    You are trying to reason with people who can't be reasoned with. They start from the principle that an anti-Western power can't be blamed as the West is always more guilty, and then work backwards to find the justification.
  • alex.alex. Posts: 2,806
    Means, motive and opportunity, as Columbo always said.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 19,463
    Have to say the scoreline in the Camp Nou tonight is a travesty.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 29,678
    Elliot said:

    kle4 said:

    Yorkcity said:

    If it was the Russian state that did it why ? Surely if they did do it, they are clever enough not to be implicated.

    This keeps coming up as a theory, and it still strikes me as ridiculous - you don't believe even nations very good at these things can cock up on occasion? Are you seriously suggesting that if there is any evidence that they might be behind it that is proof it cannot have been them, because they are too clever for that? (And as others state, there are motivations where they don't care if people know - the BBC refer to it implausible deniability)

    I'm sure you are right things are more complex than what we have been told, but let's turn it around - if the evidence our government has did not point to Russia in some capacity, why would they accuse them? We have no election coming up to try to rally the population behind the government, our opposition rightly is not going to give the government an easy ride over other things because of this, it's not like we had great relations with them but why should we seek escalation of hostilities given our present foreign and domestic issues?

    We'll never prove what happened 100% because no doubt key details will be classified, and certainly we should not trust everything we ever hear, but the nerve agent aspect seems to be key as it is the link to a state actor (or severe state negligence) and how incredibly risky on our part to lie about that, versus high risk for them to do it...but less risk since they can always deny and international relations means any response will be limited in scale and time in any case.
    You are trying to reason with people who can't be reasoned with. They start from the principle that an anti-Western power can't be blamed as the West is always more guilty, and then work backwards to find the justification.
    While such people exist, I am confident Yorkcity is a more rational fellow based on past experience, even if our conclusions will differ.
  • ElliotElliot Posts: 975

    I can't imagine Corbyn is going to like the papers tonight.....

    The cult won’t care....Where as trump being Russia friendly, well that makes him a disgrace etc etc etc
    The cult will use it as justification that the press need to be controlled.
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 3,008
    edited March 14
    kle4 said:

    Yorkcity said:

    If it was the Russian state that did it why ? Surely if they did do it, they are clever enough not to be implicated.

    This keeps coming up as a theory, and it still strikes me as ridiculous - you don't believe even nations very good at these things can cock up on occasion? Are you seriously suggesting that if there is any evidence that they might be behind it that is proof it cannot have been them, because they are too clever for that?

    I'm sure you are right things are more complex than what we have been told, but let's turn it around - if the evidence our government has did not point to Russia in some capacity, why would they accuse them? We have no election coming up to try to rally the population behind the government, our opposition rightly is not going to give the government an easy ride over other things because of this, it's not like we had great relations with them but why should we seek escalation of hostilities given our present foreign and domestic issues?

    We'll never prove what happened 100% because no doubt key details will be classified, and certainly we should not trust everything we ever hear, but the nerve agent aspect seems to be key as it is the link to a state actor (or severe state negligence) and how incredibly risky on our part to lie about that, versus high risk for them to do it...but less risk since they can always deny and international relations means any response will be limited in scale and time in any case.
    I can believe with the break up of the Soviet Union , there was a loss of control, they would not admit.However if the Russian state authorised such an easily implicated attempt failed assassination of a retired double agent using this method why ? It would be interesting to know his retirement activity beyond golf.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 27,476
    Elliot said:

    I can't imagine Corbyn is going to like the papers tonight.....

    The cult won’t care....Where as trump being Russia friendly, well that makes him a disgrace etc etc etc
    The cult will use it as justification that the press need to be controlled.
    Only the morning star will be permitted in corbyistan.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 1,788
    DavidL said:

    Have to say the scoreline in the Camp Nou tonight is a travesty.

    Barca never got out of second gear. Easy win.
  • alex.alex. Posts: 2,806
    edited March 14
    Yorkcity said:

    kle4 said:

    Yorkcity said:

    If it was the Russian state that did it why ? Surely if they did do it, they are clever enough not to be implicated.

    This keeps coming up as a theory, and it still strikes me as ridiculous - you don't believe even nations very good at these things can cock up on occasion? Are you seriously suggesting that if there is any evidence that they might be behind it that is proof it cannot have been them, because they are too clever for that?

    I'm sure you are right things are more complex than what we have been told, but let's turn it around - if the evidence our government has did not point to Russia in some capacity, why would they accuse them? We have no election coming up to try to rally the population behind the government, our opposition rightly is not going to give the government an easy ride over other things because of this, it's not like we had great relations with them but why should we seek escalation of hostilities given our present foreign and domestic issues?

    We'll never prove what happened 100% because no doubt key details will be classified, and certainly we should not trust everything we ever hear, but the nerve agent aspect seems to be key as it is the link to a state actor (or severe state negligence) and how incredibly risky on our part to lie about that, versus high risk for them to do it...but less risk since they can always deny and international relations means any response will be limited in scale and time in any case.
    I can believe with the break up of the Soviet Union , there was a loss of control, they would not admit.However if the Russian state authorised such an easily implicated attempt failed assassination of a retired double agent using this method why ? It would be interesting to know his retirement activity beyond golf.
    What method would you have advocated? Effectively you are arguing that it could only have been them...if there was no evidence that it was them!
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 19,463
    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    Have to say the scoreline in the Camp Nou tonight is a travesty.

    Barca never got out of second gear. Easy win.
    Chelsea deserved at least a couple of goals, especially Willian. Their goal keeper really let them down although he redeemed himself somewhat when it was too late.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 2,675
    edited March 14
    Elliot said:

    I can't imagine Corbyn is going to like the papers tonight.....

    The cult won’t care....Where as trump being Russia friendly, well that makes him a disgrace etc etc etc
    The cult will use it as justification that the press need to be controlled.
    What's all this crap about 'the cult'?

    It's strange how this Salisbury attack has brought out a rabid streak in some PB right-wingers.

    Is it wrong to question, to consider all the possible alternatives? I think the Russian state did this but I cannot be 100% certain and I do believe there are other potential plausible theories. Does that make me a member of 'the cult'?
  • kle4 said:



    Have people been saying it different ways? It'd not even occur to me it could be a difficult one to pronounce.

    I call it Salls-berry.
    But you're a working class northerner TSE. You probably call Sowerby Bridge 'Sorby Bridge' :wink:
    I've slipped back into a proper Northern accent.

    I keep on dropping the c-bomb every time I say the words 'can't' or 'couldn't'
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 29,678
    Yorkcity said:

    kle4 said:

    Yorkcity said:

    If it was the Russian state that did it why ? Surely if they did do it, they are clever enough not to be implicated.

    This keeps coming up as a theory, and it still strikes me as ridiculous - you don't believe even nations very good at these things can cock up on occasion? Are you seriously suggesting that if there is any evidence that they might be behind it that is proof it cannot have been them, because they are too clever for that?

    I'm sure you are right things are more complex than what we have been told, but let's turn it around - if the evidence our government has did not point to Russia in some capacity, why would they accuse them? We have no election coming up to try to rally the population behind the government, our opposition rightly is not going to give the government an easy ride over other things because of this, it's not like we had great relations with them but why should we seek escalation of hostilities given our present foreign and domestic issues?

    We'll never prove what happened 100% because no doubt key details will be classified, and certainly we should not trust everything we ever hear, but the nerve agent aspect seems to be key as it is the link to a state actor (or severe state negligence) and how incredibly risky on our part to lie about that, versus high risk for them to do it...but less risk since they can always deny and international relations means any response will be limited in scale and time in any case.
    I can believe with the break up of the Soviet Union , there was a loss of control, they would not admit.However if the Russian state authorised such an easily implicated attempt failed assassination of a retired double agent using this method why ? It would be interesting to know his retirement activity beyond golf.
    Easily implicated is still easy for them to deny. so little risk. And if they lost control but wont admit it, the state deserves the blame.
  • alex.alex. Posts: 2,806

    Elliot said:

    I can't imagine Corbyn is going to like the papers tonight.....

    The cult won’t care....Where as trump being Russia friendly, well that makes him a disgrace etc etc etc
    The cult will use it as justification that the press need to be controlled.
    What's all this crap about 'the cult'?

    It's strange how this Salisbury attack has brought out a rabid streak in some PB right-wingers.

    It's it wrong to question, to consider all the possible alternatives? I think the Russian state did this but I cannot be 100% certain and I do believe there are other potential plausible theories. Does that make me a member of 'the cult'?
    One would have thought that if there were some plausible alternative theories, Russia might have been well placed to say what they are. They’ve been given fair opportunity. The best they appear to have come up with is that we did it ourselves.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 35,339
    There is no subject that divides Jeremy Corbyn and Labour MPs more than foreign policy. Though the party is able to broadly unite around issues such as austerity, the NHS and housing, its divisions are exposed whenever geopolitics dominates.

    The fallout to Corbyn’s response to Theresa May’s statement on Russia has provided one of the most notable examples since the Labour leader’s 2015 election. After Corbyn refused to blame the Russian state for the poisoning of double agent Sergei Skripal (leaving open the possibility that the nerve agent was deployed by another actor), his own MPs rose to condemn him by implication.

    Yvette Cooper, former shadow foreign secretary Hilary Benn, Ben Bradshaw, Pat McFadden and Chris Bryant (who once refused to become shadow defence secretary over Corbyn’s stance on Russia) were among those who offered their support to May and sharply distanced themselves from their leader.


    https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2018/03/jeremy-corbyns-russia-stance-has-reopened-labours-wounds
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 696

    kle4 said:



    Have people been saying it different ways? It'd not even occur to me it could be a difficult one to pronounce.

    I call it Salls-berry.
    But you're a working class northerner TSE. You probably call Sowerby Bridge 'Sorby Bridge' :wink:
    Shat, Anster, Tinsil, Simanance, Slack Bottom, who cares? I'll go head to head with any man on a point of pedantry I'm invested in, but this town pronunciation is all just a big multilocal wind up, isn't it?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 19,463
    Scott_P said:
    Really glad I didn't getting around to betting on this. I would have lost.
  • nielhnielh Posts: 1,051
    DavidL said:

    Yorkcity said:

    If it was the Russian state that did it why ? Surely if they did do it, they are clever enough not to be implicated.Also what was the retired double agent involved with these past few years .In his forced retirement in Salisbury.It has to be more complex , than we will ever be told.

    Andrew Neil dealt with that point well today. This wasn't reckless. It was a deliberate message with a clear calling card to cause fear and consternation amongst enemies of the Kremlin. It would have been easy to kill this traitor (as they see him) quietly. They chose not to because they wanted people to know they are to be feared.
    These enemies of the Kremlin presumably already know that they can be killed though, because they have been dying off in suspicious circumstances, for a long time. The means of the death varies.

    Assuming that Russia was behind this, the objective appears to be to use the chemical weapons to provoke a reaction from the UK, which in turn further demonstrates the weakness of our geopolitical position. These provocations will just keep coming.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 29,678

    Elliot said:

    I can't imagine Corbyn is going to like the papers tonight.....

    The cult won’t care....Where as trump being Russia friendly, well that makes him a disgrace etc etc etc
    The cult will use it as justification that the press need to be controlled.
    What's all this crap about 'the cult'?

    It's strange how this Salisbury attack has brought out a rabid streak in some PB right-wingers.

    Is it wrong to question, to consider all the possible alternatives? I think the Russian state did this but I cannot be 100% certain and I do believe there are other potential plausible theories. Does that make me a member of 'the cult'?
    No it doesn't, we will never be 100% certain, though unless one simply rejects our government as lying the plausible theories are not that many it wouldseem given the method used. But surely the cult reference was in relation to Cobyn's fanbase who wont tolerate any criticism of their leader for any reason, the type you get in any party.
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 3,008
    Sean_F said:

    Yorkcity said:

    If it was the Russian state that did it why ? Surely if they did do it, they are clever enough not to be implicated.Also what was the retired double agent involved with these past few years .In his forced retirement in Salisbury.It has to be more complex , than we will ever be told.

    If you kill a traitor (as Putin would see him) you don't want to make it seem like an accident. You want to show other would-be traitors what fate awaits them.
    Yes that makes sense .It certainly makes everyone aware.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 27,476
    Scott_P said:

    There is no subject that divides Jeremy Corbyn and Labour MPs more than foreign policy. Though the party is able to broadly unite around issues such as austerity, the NHS and housing, its divisions are exposed whenever geopolitics dominates.

    The fallout to Corbyn’s response to Theresa May’s statement on Russia has provided one of the most notable examples since the Labour leader’s 2015 election. After Corbyn refused to blame the Russian state for the poisoning of double agent Sergei Skripal (leaving open the possibility that the nerve agent was deployed by another actor), his own MPs rose to condemn him by implication.

    Yvette Cooper, former shadow foreign secretary Hilary Benn, Ben Bradshaw, Pat McFadden and Chris Bryant (who once refused to become shadow defence secretary over Corbyn’s stance on Russia) were among those who offered their support to May and sharply distanced themselves from their leader.


    https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2018/03/jeremy-corbyns-russia-stance-has-reopened-labours-wounds

    It's time like these when I wish labour was lead by Mr and Mrs cooper balls. I disagree with a lot of their views, but they aren't apologists for dictators and terrorists and they aren't economic illerates.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 13,179

    Elliot said:

    I can't imagine Corbyn is going to like the papers tonight.....

    The cult won’t care....Where as trump being Russia friendly, well that makes him a disgrace etc etc etc
    The cult will use it as justification that the press need to be controlled.
    What's all this crap about 'the cult'?

    It's strange how this Salisbury attack has brought out a rabid streak in some PB right-wingers.

    Is it wrong to question, to consider all the possible alternatives? I think the Russian state did this but I cannot be 100% certain and I do believe there are other potential plausible theories. Does that make me a member of 'the cult'?
    Would you like to share your theories.

    Seems the whole of the HOC and the vast majority of labour mps accuse Putin. (and I did listen to the whole debate live and witnessed attack after attack raining down on Corbyn from his own side)

    So not just 'rabid' right wingers
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 29,678
    Scott_P said:

    There is no subject that divides Jeremy Corbyn and Labour MPs more than foreign policy. Though the party is able to broadly unite around issues such as austerity, the NHS and housing, its divisions are exposed whenever geopolitics dominates.

    The fallout to Corbyn’s response to Theresa May’s statement on Russia has provided one of the most notable examples since the Labour leader’s 2015 election. After Corbyn refused to blame the Russian state for the poisoning of double agent Sergei Skripal (leaving open the possibility that the nerve agent was deployed by another actor), his own MPs rose to condemn him by implication.

    Yvette Cooper, former shadow foreign secretary Hilary Benn, Ben Bradshaw, Pat McFadden and Chris Bryant (who once refused to become shadow defence secretary over Corbyn’s stance on Russia) were among those who offered their support to May and sharply distanced themselves from their leader.


    https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2018/03/jeremy-corbyns-russia-stance-has-reopened-labours-wounds

    Ooh, they are daring to condemned him 'by implication'. Such brave rebels.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 5,262

    Elliot said:

    I can't imagine Corbyn is going to like the papers tonight.....

    The cult won’t care....Where as trump being Russia friendly, well that makes him a disgrace etc etc etc
    The cult will use it as justification that the press need to be controlled.
    What's all this crap about 'the cult'?

    It's strange how this Salisbury attack has brought out a rabid streak in some PB right-wingers.

    Is it wrong to question, to consider all the possible alternatives? I think the Russian state did this but I cannot be 100% certain and I do believe there are other potential plausible theories. Does that make me a member of 'the cult'?
    It is salutary to think back to 2003. Anyone claiming that they didn't think it was nailed on that Saddam had wmds, is to be regarded with suspicion.

    Having said that, I think it is nailed on that this was Russia. In 2003 I was saying that, ok, hes got em, but there is no excuse for not following due process. If Russia had responded in an adult manner and suggested some form of investigation without all the twattish sarcasm, I would be saying much the same. As it is, fuck em; if there is any injustice here they have brought it on themselves.
  • glwglw Posts: 4,207
    nielh said:

    These enemies of the Kremlin presumably already know that they can be killed though, because they have been dying off in suspicious circumstances, for a long time. The means of the death varies.

    The thing is once you start murdering your enemies you can never stop. If you do your rivals think you have gone soft and the time to replace you is it hand.

  • kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 901
    Yorkcity said:

    Sean_F said:

    Yorkcity said:

    If it was the Russian state that did it why ? Surely if they did do it, they are clever enough not to be implicated.Also what was the retired double agent involved with these past few years .In his forced retirement in Salisbury.It has to be more complex , than we will ever be told.

    If you kill a traitor (as Putin would see him) you don't want to make it seem like an accident. You want to show other would-be traitors what fate awaits them.
    Yes that makes sense .It certainly makes everyone aware.
    The message here is very simple. Putin is saying "look, I can commit a chemical attack on one of the "big guns" of the Nato treaty signatories, in flagrant violation of international law. I can act with impunity on their soil and they will do nothing, and other Nato treaty nations will do nothing to support them. So when I invade you, Latvia [insert other Eastern European country as appropriate], you can expect precisely no support. They are too weak to defend their own borders - do you really think they will be able to defend you?"
  • Insert gag about about what Jose would put on the side of a parked bus.

  • kle4kle4 Posts: 29,678
    glw said:

    nielh said:

    These enemies of the Kremlin presumably already know that they can be killed though, because they have been dying off in suspicious circumstances, for a long time. The means of the death varies.

    The thing is once you start murdering your enemies you can never stop. If you do your rivals think you have gone soft and the time to replace you is it hand.

    They also seem very much to enjoy being the target of western verbal attack, so implausible deniability as their strategy appears, well, plausible.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 13,179

    Insert gag about about what Jose would put on the side of a parked bus.

    Very good
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 2,675

    Elliot said:

    I can't imagine Corbyn is going to like the papers tonight.....

    The cult won’t care....Where as trump being Russia friendly, well that makes him a disgrace etc etc etc
    The cult will use it as justification that the press need to be controlled.
    What's all this crap about 'the cult'?

    It's strange how this Salisbury attack has brought out a rabid streak in some PB right-wingers.

    Is it wrong to question, to consider all the possible alternatives? I think the Russian state did this but I cannot be 100% certain and I do believe there are other potential plausible theories. Does that make me a member of 'the cult'?
    Would you like to share your theories.

    Seems the whole of the HOC and the vast majority of labour mps accuse Putin. (and I did listen to the whole debate live and witnessed attack after attack raining down on Corbyn from his own side)

    So not just 'rabid' right wingers
    It's the attacks on any questioning at all (e.g. the reasonable points raised by Yorkcity) that struck me as 'rabid' Big_G.

    As I said in my post, I believe the Russian state was behind this. But other thoughts that crossed my mind are: some rogue ex-FBS operative is settling a score, or maybe it was a Russian mafia hit. Neither seem very probable to me now (given official Russian reaction) but they crossed my mind.
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 3,008
    kle4 said:

    Yorkcity said:

    kle4 said:

    Yorkcity said:

    If it was the Russian state that did it why ? Surely if they did do it, they are clever enough not to be implicated.

    This keeps coming up as a theory, and it still strikes me as ridiculous - you don't believe even nations very good at these things can cock up on occasion? Are you seriously suggesting that if there is any evidence that they might be behind it that is proof it cannot have been them, because they are too clever for that?

    I'm sure you are right things are more complex than what we have been told, but let's turn it around - if the evidence our government has did not point to Russia in some capacity, why would they accuse them? We have no election coming up to try to rally the population behind the government, our opposition rightly is not going to give the government an easy ride over other things because of this, it's not like we had great relations with them but why should we seek escalation of hostilities given our present foreign and domestic issues?

    We'll never prove what happened 100% because no doubt key details will be classified, and certainly we should not trust everything we ever hear, but the nerve agent aspect seems to be key as it is the link to a state actor (or severe state negligence) and how incredibly risky on our part to lie about that, versus high risk for them to do it...but less risk since they can always deny and international relations means any response will be limited in scale and time in any case.
    I can believe with the break up of the Soviet Union , there was a loss of control, they would not admit.However if the Russian state authorised such an easily implicated attempt failed assassination of a retired double agent using this method why ? It would be interesting to know his retirement activity beyond golf.
    Easily implicated is still easy for them to deny. so little risk. And if they lost control but wont admit it, the state deserves the blame.
    It does murky old world these intelligence agencies.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 19,463

    Insert gag about about what Jose would put on the side of a parked bus.

    The bus, unfortunately, proved all too permeable.
  • glwglw Posts: 4,207
    kle4 said:

    glw said:

    nielh said:

    These enemies of the Kremlin presumably already know that they can be killed though, because they have been dying off in suspicious circumstances, for a long time. The means of the death varies.

    The thing is once you start murdering your enemies you can never stop. If you do your rivals think you have gone soft and the time to replace you is it hand.

    They also seem very much to enjoy being the target of western verbal attack, so implausible deniability as their strategy appears, well, plausible.
    It's hardly a suprise that a crook likes to have a reputation, but not enough evidence to be locked up.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 13,179
    edited March 14

    Elliot said:

    I can't imagine Corbyn is going to like the papers tonight.....

    The cult won’t care....Where as trump being Russia friendly, well that makes him a disgrace etc etc etc
    The cult will use it as justification that the press need to be controlled.
    What's all this crap about 'the cult'?

    It's strange how this Salisbury attack has brought out a rabid streak in some PB right-wingers.

    Is it wrong to question, to consider all the possible alternatives? I think the Russian state did this but I cannot be 100% certain and I do believe there are other potential plausible theories. Does that make me a member of 'the cult'?
    Would you like to share your theories.

    Seems the whole of the HOC and the vast majority of labour mps accuse Putin. (and I did listen to the whole debate live and witnessed attack after attack raining down on Corbyn from his own side)

    So not just 'rabid' right wingers
    It's the attacks on any questioning at all (e.g. the reasonable points raised by Yorkcity) that struck me as 'rabid' Big_G.

    As I said in my post, I believe the Russian state was behind this. But other thoughts that crossed my mind are: some rogue ex-FBS operative is settling a score, or maybe it was a Russian mafia hit. Neither seem very probable to me now (given official Russian reaction) but they crossed my mind.
    But it was not rabid right wingers. It was a huge HOC consensus, a demonstration of unity, apart from Corbyn, that showed Parliament at its best
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 19,463
    Ishmael_Z said:

    Elliot said:

    I can't imagine Corbyn is going to like the papers tonight.....

    The cult won’t care....Where as trump being Russia friendly, well that makes him a disgrace etc etc etc
    The cult will use it as justification that the press need to be controlled.
    What's all this crap about 'the cult'?

    It's strange how this Salisbury attack has brought out a rabid streak in some PB right-wingers.

    Is it wrong to question, to consider all the possible alternatives? I think the Russian state did this but I cannot be 100% certain and I do believe there are other potential plausible theories. Does that make me a member of 'the cult'?
    It is salutary to think back to 2003. Anyone claiming that they didn't think it was nailed on that Saddam had wmds, is to be regarded with suspicion.

    Having said that, I think it is nailed on that this was Russia. In 2003 I was saying that, ok, hes got em, but there is no excuse for not following due process. If Russia had responded in an adult manner and suggested some form of investigation without all the twattish sarcasm, I would be saying much the same. As it is, fuck em; if there is any injustice here they have brought it on themselves.
    I think, in fairness, that we did not expect a PM to so blatantly lie and fabricate. I, for one, was very inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt because I couldn't believe that a PM would behave like that. I assumed that he had evidence that he could not disclose.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 29,678
    Well that's a new one

    Police in Italy say they have broken up a "psycho sect" that enslaved members by forcing them to adhere to a strict macrobiotic diet and cut off contact with the outside world.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-43407696
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 19,184
    Arming teachers is looking like an ever-better idea:

  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 2,675
    Ishmael_Z said:

    Elliot said:

    I can't imagine Corbyn is going to like the papers tonight.....

    The cult won’t care....Where as trump being Russia friendly, well that makes him a disgrace etc etc etc
    The cult will use it as justification that the press need to be controlled.
    What's all this crap about 'the cult'?

    It's strange how this Salisbury attack has brought out a rabid streak in some PB right-wingers.

    Is it wrong to question, to consider all the possible alternatives? I think the Russian state did this but I cannot be 100% certain and I do believe there are other potential plausible theories. Does that make me a member of 'the cult'?
    It is salutary to think back to 2003. Anyone claiming that they didn't think it was nailed on that Saddam had wmds, is to be regarded with suspicion.

    Having said that, I think it is nailed on that this was Russia. In 2003 I was saying that, ok, hes got em, but there is no excuse for not following due process. If Russia had responded in an adult manner and suggested some form of investigation without all the twattish sarcasm, I would be saying much the same. As it is, fuck em; if there is any injustice here they have brought it on themselves.
    Yes, agree with that. Only thing is, I am not really sure they have brought anything much on themselves, as we don't really have much clout do we? And no expectation of serious support from the White House. One might almost wish Reagan was still POTUS :wink:
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,670

    Scott_P said:

    There is no subject that divides Jeremy Corbyn and Labour MPs more than foreign policy. Though the party is able to broadly unite around issues such as austerity, the NHS and housing, its divisions are exposed whenever geopolitics dominates.

    The fallout to Corbyn’s response to Theresa May’s statement on Russia has provided one of the most notable examples since the Labour leader’s 2015 election. After Corbyn refused to blame the Russian state for the poisoning of double agent Sergei Skripal (leaving open the possibility that the nerve agent was deployed by another actor), his own MPs rose to condemn him by implication.

    Yvette Cooper, former shadow foreign secretary Hilary Benn, Ben Bradshaw, Pat McFadden and Chris Bryant (who once refused to become shadow defence secretary over Corbyn’s stance on Russia) were among those who offered their support to May and sharply distanced themselves from their leader.


    https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2018/03/jeremy-corbyns-russia-stance-has-reopened-labours-wounds

    It's time like these when I wish labour was lead by Mr and Mrs cooper balls. I disagree with a lot of their views, but they aren't apologists for dictators and terrorists and they aren't economic illerates.
    Nevertheless their reading age isn't so high as to provide a great deal of reassurance in that latter regard.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 27,476
    IanB2 said:

    Scott_P said:

    There is no subject that divides Jeremy Corbyn and Labour MPs more than foreign policy. Though the party is able to broadly unite around issues such as austerity, the NHS and housing, its divisions are exposed whenever geopolitics dominates.

    The fallout to Corbyn’s response to Theresa May’s statement on Russia has provided one of the most notable examples since the Labour leader’s 2015 election. After Corbyn refused to blame the Russian state for the poisoning of double agent Sergei Skripal (leaving open the possibility that the nerve agent was deployed by another actor), his own MPs rose to condemn him by implication.

    Yvette Cooper, former shadow foreign secretary Hilary Benn, Ben Bradshaw, Pat McFadden and Chris Bryant (who once refused to become shadow defence secretary over Corbyn’s stance on Russia) were among those who offered their support to May and sharply distanced themselves from their leader.


    https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2018/03/jeremy-corbyns-russia-stance-has-reopened-labours-wounds

    It's time like these when I wish labour was lead by Mr and Mrs cooper balls. I disagree with a lot of their views, but they aren't apologists for dictators and terrorists and they aren't economic illerates.
    Nevertheless their reading age isn't so high as to provide a great deal of reassurance in that latter regard.
    Pissing icrap autocorrect...
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 2,675

    Elliot said:

    I can't imagine Corbyn is going to like the papers tonight.....

    The cult won’t care....Where as trump being Russia friendly, well that makes him a disgrace etc etc etc
    The cult will use it as justification that the press need to be controlled.
    What's all this crap about 'the cult'?

    It's strange how this Salisbury attack has brought out a rabid streak in some PB right-wingers.

    Is it wrong to question, to consider all the possible alternatives? I think the Russian state did this but I cannot be 100% certain and I do believe there are other potential plausible theories. Does that make me a member of 'the cult'?
    Would you like to share your theories.

    Seems the whole of the HOC and the vast majority of labour mps accuse Putin. (and I did listen to the whole debate live and witnessed attack after attack raining down on Corbyn from his own side)

    So not just 'rabid' right wingers
    It's the attacks on any questioning at all (e.g. the reasonable points raised by Yorkcity) that struck me as 'rabid' Big_G.

    As I said in my post, I believe the Russian state was behind this. But other thoughts that crossed my mind are: some rogue ex-FBS operative is settling a score, or maybe it was a Russian mafia hit. Neither seem very probable to me now (given official Russian reaction) but they crossed my mind.
    But it was not rabid right wingers. It was a huge HOC consensus, a demonstration of unity, apart from Corbyn, that showed Parliament at its best
    'Rabid' on PB not in the HOC!
  • nielhnielh Posts: 1,051
    kyf_100 said:

    Yorkcity said:

    Sean_F said:

    Yorkcity said:

    If it was the Russian state that did it why ? Surely if they did do it, they are clever enough not to be implicated.Also what was the retired double agent involved with these past few years .In his forced retirement in Salisbury.It has to be more complex , than we will ever be told.

    If you kill a traitor (as Putin would see him) you don't want to make it seem like an accident. You want to show other would-be traitors what fate awaits them.
    Yes that makes sense .It certainly makes everyone aware.
    The message here is very simple. Putin is saying "look, I can commit a chemical attack on one of the "big guns" of the Nato treaty signatories, in flagrant violation of international law. I can act with impunity on their soil and they will do nothing, and other Nato treaty nations will do nothing to support them. So when I invade you, Latvia [insert other Eastern European country as appropriate], you can expect precisely no support. They are too weak to defend their own borders - do you really think they will be able to defend you?"
    Yes: that is pretty much the nub of the issue. The aim is not to actually invade countries though, just to bring them within Russia's sphere of control, with the long term project of weakening them and turning them in to economic vassals of the Great Russian State.

    There are actually books in Russia that set all this out as a theory, so none of it is surprising.
  • John_MJohn_M Posts: 6,466
    nielh said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Yorkcity said:

    Sean_F said:

    Yorkcity said:

    If it was the Russian state that did it why ? Surely if they did do it, they are clever enough not to be implicated.Also what was the retired double agent involved with these past few years .In his forced retirement in Salisbury.It has to be more complex , than we will ever be told.

    If you kill a traitor (as Putin would see him) you don't want to make it seem like an accident. You want to show other would-be traitors what fate awaits them.
    Yes that makes sense .It certainly makes everyone aware.
    The message here is very simple. Putin is saying "look, I can commit a chemical attack on one of the "big guns" of the Nato treaty signatories, in flagrant violation of international law. I can act with impunity on their soil and they will do nothing, and other Nato treaty nations will do nothing to support them. So when I invade you, Latvia [insert other Eastern European country as appropriate], you can expect precisely no support. They are too weak to defend their own borders - do you really think they will be able to defend you?"
    Yes: that is pretty much the nub of the issue. The aim is not to actually invade countries though, just to bring them within Russia's sphere of control, with the long term project of weakening them and turning them in to economic vassals of the Great Russian State.

    There are actually books in Russia that set all this out as a theory, so none of it is surprising.
    Finlandisation redux.
  • ToryJimToryJim Posts: 3,264
    kle4 said:

    Well that's a new one

    Police in Italy say they have broken up a "psycho sect" that enslaved members by forcing them to adhere to a strict macrobiotic diet and cut off contact with the outside world.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-43407696

    It's definitely somewhat surreal.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 29,678

    Elliot said:

    I can't imagine Corbyn is going to like the papers tonight.....

    The cult won’t care....Where as trump being Russia friendly, well that makes him a disgrace etc etc etc
    The cult will use it as justification that the press need to be controlled.
    What's all this crap about 'the cult'?

    It's strange how this Salisbury attack has brought out a rabid streak in some PB right-wingers.

    Is it wrong to question, to consider all the possible alternatives? I think the Russian state did this but I cannot be 100% certain and I do believe there are other potential plausible theories. Does that make me a member of 'the cult'?
    Would you like to share your theories.

    Seems the whole of the HOC and the vast majority of labour mps accuse Putin. (and I did listen to the whole debate live and witnessed attack after attack raining down on Corbyn from his own side)

    So not just 'rabid' right wingers
    It's the attacks on any questioning at all (e.g. the reasonable points raised by Yorkcity) that struck me as 'rabid' Big_G.

    As I said in my post, I believe the Russian state was behind this. But other thoughts that crossed my mind are: some rogue ex-FBS operative is settling a score, or maybe it was a Russian mafia hit. Neither seem very probable to me now (given official Russian reaction) but they crossed my mind.
    But it was not rabid right wingers. It was a huge HOC consensus, a demonstration of unity, apart from Corbyn, that showed Parliament at its best
    'Rabid' on PB not in the HOC!
    Well, PB is always a little bit rabid. After all, you get bit once by the infected, what can you expect?
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 2,675

    IanB2 said:

    Scott_P said:

    There is no subject that divides Jeremy Corbyn and Labour MPs more than foreign policy. Though the party is able to broadly unite around issues such as austerity, the NHS and housing, its divisions are exposed whenever geopolitics dominates.

    The fallout to Corbyn’s response to Theresa May’s statement on Russia has provided one of the most notable examples since the Labour leader’s 2015 election. After Corbyn refused to blame the Russian state for the poisoning of double agent Sergei Skripal (leaving open the possibility that the nerve agent was deployed by another actor), his own MPs rose to condemn him by implication.

    Yvette Cooper, former shadow foreign secretary Hilary Benn, Ben Bradshaw, Pat McFadden and Chris Bryant (who once refused to become shadow defence secretary over Corbyn’s stance on Russia) were among those who offered their support to May and sharply distanced themselves from their leader.


    https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2018/03/jeremy-corbyns-russia-stance-has-reopened-labours-wounds

    It's time like these when I wish labour was lead by Mr and Mrs cooper balls. I disagree with a lot of their views, but they aren't apologists for dictators and terrorists and they aren't economic illerates.
    Nevertheless their reading age isn't so high as to provide a great deal of reassurance in that latter regard.
    Pissing icrap autocorrect...
    You can always switch it off :smile:
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 27,476

    IanB2 said:

    Scott_P said:

    There is no subject that divides Jeremy Corbyn and Labour MPs more than foreign policy. Though the party is able to broadly unite around issues such as austerity, the NHS and housing, its divisions are exposed whenever geopolitics dominates.

    The fallout to Corbyn’s response to Theresa May’s statement on Russia has provided one of the most notable examples since the Labour leader’s 2015 election. After Corbyn refused to blame the Russian state for the poisoning of double agent Sergei Skripal (leaving open the possibility that the nerve agent was deployed by another actor), his own MPs rose to condemn him by implication.

    Yvette Cooper, former shadow foreign secretary Hilary Benn, Ben Bradshaw, Pat McFadden and Chris Bryant (who once refused to become shadow defence secretary over Corbyn’s stance on Russia) were among those who offered their support to May and sharply distanced themselves from their leader.


    https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2018/03/jeremy-corbyns-russia-stance-has-reopened-labours-wounds

    It's time like these when I wish labour was lead by Mr and Mrs cooper balls. I disagree with a lot of their views, but they aren't apologists for dictators and terrorists and they aren't economic illerates.
    Nevertheless their reading age isn't so high as to provide a great deal of reassurance in that latter regard.
    Pissing icrap autocorrect...
    You can always switch it off :smile:

    I feel like I spend more time checking / correcting sentences than writing them.
  • hunchmanhunchman Posts: 2,482
    More rabid Russian xenophobia on here tonight. Our government has offered no proof that Russia did it. Why did they fail to comply with the Russian response of handing over the substance concerned? The timing of the Salisbury incident bothers me in the run up to the Russian election. And Salisbury seems very convenient for the UK government being the major population centre nearest to Porton Down.

    Of course I have no proof or evidence of who dunnit, but given what I know about many members of this government having followed the money trails they have been involved in, they are some of the very last people that I would trust. There are far too many people jumping to conclusions, when there is no firm evidence to allege that Russian government backed agents carried out the misdeed.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 21,607
    Can I just say...

    Larry Kudlow??? I know more (quite a lot more) about economics than he does.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 2,675
    kle4 said:

    Elliot said:

    I can't imagine Corbyn is going to like the papers tonight.....

    The cult won’t care....Where as trump being Russia friendly, well that makes him a disgrace etc etc etc
    The cult will use it as justification that the press need to be controlled.
    What's all this crap about 'the cult'?

    It's strange how this Salisbury attack has brought out a rabid streak in some PB right-wingers.

    Is it wrong to question, to consider all the possible alternatives? I think the Russian state did this but I cannot be 100% certain and I do believe there are other potential plausible theories. Does that make me a member of 'the cult'?
    Would you like to share your theories.

    Seems the whole of the HOC and the vast majority of labour mps accuse Putin. (and I did listen to the whole debate live and witnessed attack after attack raining down on Corbyn from his own side)

    So not just 'rabid' right wingers
    It's the attacks on any questioning at all (e.g. the reasonable points raised by Yorkcity) that struck me as 'rabid' Big_G.

    As I said in my post, I believe the Russian state was behind this. But other thoughts that crossed my mind are: some rogue ex-FBS operative is settling a score, or maybe it was a Russian mafia hit. Neither seem very probable to me now (given official Russian reaction) but they crossed my mind.
    But it was not rabid right wingers. It was a huge HOC consensus, a demonstration of unity, apart from Corbyn, that showed Parliament at its best
    'Rabid' on PB not in the HOC!
    Well, PB is always a little bit rabid. After all, you get bit once by the infected, what can you expect?
    Yep, fair point :smile:
  • hunchman said:

    More rabid Russian xenophobia on here tonight. Our government has offered no proof that Russia did it. Why did they fail to comply with the Russian response of handing over the substance concerned? The timing of the Salisbury incident bothers me in the run up to the Russian election. And Salisbury seems very convenient for the UK government being the major population centre nearest to Porton Down.

    Of course I have no proof or evidence of who dunnit, but given what I know about many members of this government having followed the money trails they have been involved in, they are some of the very last people that I would trust. There are far too many people jumping to conclusions, when there is no firm evidence to allege that Russian government backed agents carried out the misdeed.

    I know a few people who have worked for the government, they told me they were planning the false flag attack to take place on Finchley Road, but they realised you were watching them, so they switched it to Salisbury.
  • nielhnielh Posts: 1,051
    A bit of light relief. Best response to an FOI request I've ever come across.

    https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/where_does_my_council_tax_go

  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 27,476
    Nurse nurse one of them hasn't taken his meds and has escaped...
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 2,675

    IanB2 said:

    Scott_P said:

    There is no subject that divides Jeremy Corbyn and Labour MPs more than foreign policy. Though the party is able to broadly unite around issues such as austerity, the NHS and housing, its divisions are exposed whenever geopolitics dominates.

    The fallout to Corbyn’s response to Theresa May’s statement on Russia has provided one of the most notable examples since the Labour leader’s 2015 election. After Corbyn refused to blame the Russian state for the poisoning of double agent Sergei Skripal (leaving open the possibility that the nerve agent was deployed by another actor), his own MPs rose to condemn him by implication.

    Yvette Cooper, former shadow foreign secretary Hilary Benn, Ben Bradshaw, Pat McFadden and Chris Bryant (who once refused to become shadow defence secretary over Corbyn’s stance on Russia) were among those who offered their support to May and sharply distanced themselves from their leader.


    https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2018/03/jeremy-corbyns-russia-stance-has-reopened-labours-wounds

    It's time like these when I wish labour was lead by Mr and Mrs cooper balls. I disagree with a lot of their views, but they aren't apologists for dictators and terrorists and they aren't economic illerates.
    Nevertheless their reading age isn't so high as to provide a great deal of reassurance in that latter regard.
    Pissing icrap autocorrect...
    You can always switch it off :smile:

    I feel like I spend more time checking / correcting sentences than writing them.
    I just post then check and edit!
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 13,179
    hunchman said:

    More rabid Russian xenophobia on here tonight. Our government has offered no proof that Russia did it. Why did they fail to comply with the Russian response of handing over the substance concerned? The timing of the Salisbury incident bothers me in the run up to the Russian election. And Salisbury seems very convenient for the UK government being the major population centre nearest to Porton Down.

    Of course I have no proof or evidence of who dunnit, but given what I know about many members of this government having followed the money trails they have been involved in, they are some of the very last people that I would trust. There are far too many people jumping to conclusions, when there is no firm evidence to allege that Russian government backed agents carried out the misdeed.

    Not the view held by our MPs (apart from Corbyn) who were remarkably together across the parties today in the HOC, nor tonight in a statement from Donald Tusk or from the UN ex USSR
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 2,675

    hunchman said:

    More rabid Russian xenophobia on here tonight. Our government has offered no proof that Russia did it. Why did they fail to comply with the Russian response of handing over the substance concerned? The timing of the Salisbury incident bothers me in the run up to the Russian election. And Salisbury seems very convenient for the UK government being the major population centre nearest to Porton Down.

    Of course I have no proof or evidence of who dunnit, but given what I know about many members of this government having followed the money trails they have been involved in, they are some of the very last people that I would trust. There are far too many people jumping to conclusions, when there is no firm evidence to allege that Russian government backed agents carried out the misdeed.

    I know a few people who have worked for the government, they told me they were planning the false flag attack to take place on Finchley Road, but they realised you were watching them, so they switched it to Salisbury.
    I see what you did there... :wink:
  • kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 901
    hunchman said:

    More rabid Russian xenophobia on here tonight. Our government has offered no proof that Russia did it. Why did they fail to comply with the Russian response of handing over the substance concerned? The timing of the Salisbury incident bothers me in the run up to the Russian election. And Salisbury seems very convenient for the UK government being the major population centre nearest to Porton Down.

    Of course I have no proof or evidence of who dunnit, but given what I know about many members of this government having followed the money trails they have been involved in, they are some of the very last people that I would trust. There are far too many people jumping to conclusions, when there is no firm evidence to allege that Russian government backed agents carried out the misdeed.

    Someone needs a close shave with Occam's Razor.
  • Back when I was a student I had to write an essay on who was the UK's top ally in Europe.

    I said it was Russia, we were the bookends of Europe that kept Germany in its place.

    So no one can ever call me a Russiaphobe.
  • hunchmanhunchman Posts: 2,482

    hunchman said:

    More rabid Russian xenophobia on here tonight. Our government has offered no proof that Russia did it. Why did they fail to comply with the Russian response of handing over the substance concerned? The timing of the Salisbury incident bothers me in the run up to the Russian election. And Salisbury seems very convenient for the UK government being the major population centre nearest to Porton Down.

    Of course I have no proof or evidence of who dunnit, but given what I know about many members of this government having followed the money trails they have been involved in, they are some of the very last people that I would trust. There are far too many people jumping to conclusions, when there is no firm evidence to allege that Russian government backed agents carried out the misdeed.

    Not the view held by our MPs (apart from Corbyn) who were remarkably together across the parties today in the HOC, nor tonight in a statement from Donald Tusk or from the UN ex USSR
    The burden of proof rests with those making the allegations, ie the UK government. So far they've provided none to me that I'm satisfied with. So as much as I despise Mr Corbyn, I am with him in his assessment of the situation today.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 25,864

    hunchman said:

    More rabid Russian xenophobia on here tonight. Our government has offered no proof that Russia did it. Why did they fail to comply with the Russian response of handing over the substance concerned? The timing of the Salisbury incident bothers me in the run up to the Russian election. And Salisbury seems very convenient for the UK government being the major population centre nearest to Porton Down.

    Of course I have no proof or evidence of who dunnit, but given what I know about many members of this government having followed the money trails they have been involved in, they are some of the very last people that I would trust. There are far too many people jumping to conclusions, when there is no firm evidence to allege that Russian government backed agents carried out the misdeed.

    I know a few people who have worked for the government, they told me they were planning the false flag attack to take place on Finchley Road, but they realised you were watching them, so they switched it to Salisbury.
    "Confess, Spy Bastard! Confess!" :lol:
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 19,463
    kyf_100 said:

    hunchman said:

    More rabid Russian xenophobia on here tonight. Our government has offered no proof that Russia did it. Why did they fail to comply with the Russian response of handing over the substance concerned? The timing of the Salisbury incident bothers me in the run up to the Russian election. And Salisbury seems very convenient for the UK government being the major population centre nearest to Porton Down.

    Of course I have no proof or evidence of who dunnit, but given what I know about many members of this government having followed the money trails they have been involved in, they are some of the very last people that I would trust. There are far too many people jumping to conclusions, when there is no firm evidence to allege that Russian government backed agents carried out the misdeed.

    Someone needs a close shave with Occam's Razor.
    Or tablets for paranoia.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 27,476

    Back when I was a student I had to write an essay on who was the UK's top ally in Europe.

    I said it was Russia, we were the bookends of Europe that kept Germany in its place.

    So no one can ever call me a Russiaphobe.

    Isn't it the french we need to be most worried about?
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 9,629

    hunchman said:

    More rabid Russian xenophobia on here tonight. Our government has offered no proof that Russia did it. Why did they fail to comply with the Russian response of handing over the substance concerned? The timing of the Salisbury incident bothers me in the run up to the Russian election. And Salisbury seems very convenient for the UK government being the major population centre nearest to Porton Down.

    Of course I have no proof or evidence of who dunnit, but given what I know about many members of this government having followed the money trails they have been involved in, they are some of the very last people that I would trust. There are far too many people jumping to conclusions, when there is no firm evidence to allege that Russian government backed agents carried out the misdeed.

    Not the view held by our MPs (apart from Corbyn) who were remarkably together across the parties today in the HOC, nor tonight in a statement from Donald Tusk or from the UN ex USSR
    Our MPs were remarkably together across the parties in the HOC regarding Iraq, Libya, PFI and lots of other matters (apart from Corbyn).

    Corbyn was right about all of them.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 25,864
    hunchman said:

    More rabid Russian xenophobia on here tonight. Our government has offered no proof that Russia did it. Why did they fail to comply with the Russian response of handing over the substance concerned? The timing of the Salisbury incident bothers me in the run up to the Russian election. And Salisbury seems very convenient for the UK government being the major population centre nearest to Porton Down.

    Of course I have no proof or evidence of who dunnit, but given what I know about many members of this government having followed the money trails they have been involved in, they are some of the very last people that I would trust. There are far too many people jumping to conclusions, when there is no firm evidence to allege that Russian government backed agents carried out the misdeed.

    By my calculations, Porton Down is 7 miles from Salisbury.
  • Back when I was a student I had to write an essay on who was the UK's top ally in Europe.

    I said it was Russia, we were the bookends of Europe that kept Germany in its place.

    So no one can ever call me a Russiaphobe.

    Isn't it the french we need to be most worried about?
    Nah, they are a nation of collaborators, they'll give up.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 29,678
    edited March 14
    hunchman said:

    More rabid Russian xenophobia on here tonight. Our government has offered no proof that Russia did it. Why did they fail to comply with the Russian response of handing over the substance concerned? The timing of the Salisbury incident bothers me in the run up to the Russian election. And Salisbury seems very convenient for the UK government being the major population centre nearest to Porton Down.

    Of course I have no proof or evidence of who dunnit, but given what I know about many members of this government having followed the money trails they have been involved in, they are some of the very last people that I would trust. There are far too many people jumping to conclusions, when there is no firm evidence to allege that Russian government backed agents carried out the misdeed.

    I find your arguments to be a little haphazard - if you think it possible that the UK government is behind this, as you imply by it being 'convenient' it being close to Porton Down, well, why would they need it to be close to Porton Down anyway, why use a nerve agent at all when they could just claim it was a nerve agent since they are lying about so much else?

    And enough with the xenophobia stuff please. Assuming, for the sake of argument, that we trust the government enough to be telling the truth about the method used in this attack, why would it be xenophobic to suspect Russian involvement to some degree? If we believe the truth has been told about the agent used, then they are plausible to suspect, and even if that were incorrect, it would not be xenophobic to think it. Only if we think the government are lying, but still support condemnation of Russia, could that be considered xenophbic.

    And why would the timing in the run up to the Russian election bother you? Putin is either genuinely popular enough, authoritarian enough, or both, to be assured of victory, and accusations like this won't change the outcome either way, so why would it matter in relation to his election.

    Scepticism of our government on a great many things is not, in itself, unreasonable, but there is a telling sign with the overly sceptical, in that they seek a level of proof that will never be attainable in any state, free or otherwise, due to the classified way governments work.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 2,675
    nielh said:

    A bit of light relief. Best response to an FOI request I've ever come across.

    https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/where_does_my_council_tax_go


    Haha, very good. Well done Zac of South Somerset District Council. Reminds there was someone on here who a few months ago who didn't think they should pay NI because they never used the Health Service.
  • ElliotElliot Posts: 975

    Elliot said:

    I can't imagine Corbyn is going to like the papers tonight.....

    The cult won’t care....Where as trump being Russia friendly, well that makes him a disgrace etc etc etc
    The cult will use it as justification that the press need to be controlled.
    What's all this crap about 'the cult'?

    It's strange how this Salisbury attack has brought out a rabid streak in some PB right-wingers.

    Is it wrong to question, to consider all the possible alternatives? I think the Russian state did this but I cannot be 100% certain and I do believe there are other potential plausible theories. Does that make me a member of 'the cult'?
    I voted for Blair, Brown and Miliband. I'm no right winger, but a genuine left winger who believes in democracy and human rights. That's why I think the democratic West is preferable to Putin's right wing autocracy. Sadly a bunch of radical anti-Westerners have taken over the Labour Party.
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 5,510
    DavidL said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    Elliot said:

    I can't imagine Corbyn is going to like the papers tonight.....

    The cult won’t care....Where as trump being Russia friendly, well that makes him a disgrace etc etc etc
    The cult will use it as justification that the press need to be controlled.
    What's all this crap about 'the cult'?

    It's strange how this Salisbury attack has brought out a rabid streak in some PB right-wingers.

    Is it wrong to question, to consider all the possible alternatives? I think the Russian state did this but I cannot be 100% certain and I do believe there are other potential plausible theories. Does that make me a member of 'the cult'?
    It is salutary to think back to 2003. Anyone claiming that they didn't think it was nailed on that Saddam had wmds, is to be regarded with suspicion.

    Having said that, I think it is nailed on that this was Russia. In 2003 I was saying that, ok, hes got em, but there is no excuse for not following due process. If Russia had responded in an adult manner and suggested some form of investigation without all the twattish sarcasm, I would be saying much the same. As it is, fuck em; if there is any injustice here they have brought it on themselves.
    I think, in fairness, that we did not expect a PM to so blatantly lie and fabricate. I, for one, was very inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt because I couldn't believe that a PM would behave like that. I assumed that he had evidence that he could not disclose.
    Likewise
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 13,179
    hunchman said:

    hunchman said:

    More rabid Russian xenophobia on here tonight. Our government has offered no proof that Russia did it. Why did they fail to comply with the Russian response of handing over the substance concerned? The timing of the Salisbury incident bothers me in the run up to the Russian election. And Salisbury seems very convenient for the UK government being the major population centre nearest to Porton Down.

    Of course I have no proof or evidence of who dunnit, but given what I know about many members of this government having followed the money trails they have been involved in, they are some of the very last people that I would trust. There are far too many people jumping to conclusions, when there is no firm evidence to allege that Russian government backed agents carried out the misdeed.

    Not the view held by our MPs (apart from Corbyn) who were remarkably together across the parties today in the HOC, nor tonight in a statement from Donald Tusk or from the UN ex USSR
    The burden of proof rests with those making the allegations, ie the UK government. So far they've provided none to me that I'm satisfied with. So as much as I despise Mr Corbyn, I am with him in his assessment of the situation today.
    I think you may find the vast majority in this Country will back the PM
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 29,678
    rcs1000 said:

    Can I just say...

    Larry Kudlow??? I know more (quite a lot more) about economics than he does.

    I believe you are next in line.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 25,864

    Back when I was a student I had to write an essay on who was the UK's top ally in Europe.

    I said it was Russia, we were the bookends of Europe that kept Germany in its place.

    So no one can ever call me a Russiaphobe.

    Isn't it the french we need to be most worried about?
    Nah, they are a nation of collaborators, they'll give up.
    40,000 of the 600,000 "German" soldiers at Stalingrad were actually Soviets.
  • ElliotElliot Posts: 975

    hunchman said:

    More rabid Russian xenophobia on here tonight. Our government has offered no proof that Russia did it. Why did they fail to comply with the Russian response of handing over the substance concerned? The timing of the Salisbury incident bothers me in the run up to the Russian election. And Salisbury seems very convenient for the UK government being the major population centre nearest to Porton Down.

    Of course I have no proof or evidence of who dunnit, but given what I know about many members of this government having followed the money trails they have been involved in, they are some of the very last people that I would trust. There are far too many people jumping to conclusions, when there is no firm evidence to allege that Russian government backed agents carried out the misdeed.

    Not the view held by our MPs (apart from Corbyn) who were remarkably together across the parties today in the HOC, nor tonight in a statement from Donald Tusk or from the UN ex USSR
    Our MPs were remarkably together across the parties in the HOC regarding Iraq, Libya, PFI and lots of other matters (apart from Corbyn).

    Corbyn was right about all of them.
    Bosnia, Kosovo, Sierra Leone and lots of others. Corbyn was wrong about them all.
This discussion has been closed.