Off Topic Political Debate

I presume that he does not force his presence on anyone Leo - he goes where he is invited, and that is more likely to be by left wing groups, and that applies whether they are Jewish or not. As for your second point - I guess he goes by the age old maxim that a person is innocent until proven guilty. It certainly makes sense that you are 100% sure of your ground before joining in with the sabre rattling hordes. I too am far from convinced about the Russian state's involvement in this.

 

You are not that naive Cologne. As leader of the opposition he will have tons of invites. He selects those he wants to attend. He has picked one which lends credence to those who doubt his sincerity on anti-semitism.
Well I hope he never becomes PM then because the day you wait till you have 100% cetainty of a hostile power's acts then you are lost. Please explain to me how exactly you believe that Russia would be unable to use diplomatic pouches etc to smuggle nerve agents into the country. Again - you are intelligent - you know that Russia are smart enough to know how to deliver nerve agent without leaving a trail. Macron and Merkel have been convinced by the security evidence they have been shown - and they were initially reluctant. Corbyn does not behave like he has the best interests of the UK in mind.
The voting public will judge him.

 

I will put this link here as although it relates to some of the more recent posts in the UK/EU thread it really does't belong there.

https://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/21801

This is a quite interesting piece and one of the many points is, by default, the current Palestinians aren't Semitic as they all arrived from elsewhere to benefit (as economic migrants) from the stability Israel brought, rather than remain in the more volatile Muslim nations. What is curious, however, is the lack of support for these new Palestinians from the governments of Arab nations, where the general population might see that a different way.

 

How do you know that we are talking about a hostile power Leo ? Apparently the British do not produce this nerve agent, have never produced it, have no stocks of it, and have never seen it before - yet can, apparently identify it and the government can pronounce (without any proof) where it comes from. If it is Novichok then it is a binary product which can be produced anywhere which has both the recipe and a normal chemical lab. The involvement of the Russian State in this involves 3 questions which haven't been answered - firstly what motives could they have had to murder someone who they had previously had in prison for 8 years and subsequently released ? Secondly, why choose a material which is so identifiable as Russian, when there were so many other possibilities ? And lastly - why was it not successfull ? Nobody has raised this last point, but it was obviously a botched job, or material was used which was old and did not have it's original potency. The British position relies upon nothing other than circumstantial evidence ie. the victim was Russian and the murder weapon was originally produced in Russia 40 years ago (and is, apparently only found there 40 years later ?). This is not enough to justify pointing the finger in the way May has done.

 

I struggle with the objectivity of an article on Palestinians written by someone with the name Mordechai Kedar.
"They all arrived from elsewhere" - really? - so did all those living in those lands just wither away?

 

First I did not say Russia - I said hostile power - in diplomacy the default position is always that a power that is not "friendly" (and even some that claim to be) are potentially hostile. Russia by our history fits that bill anyway.
Nobody doubts that Porton Down can identify nerve agents from around the world - it is their job.To suggest they might not be able to identify a Russian nerve agent takes a degree of incredulity that I doubt you possess. It is a long way from there to saying they have a stockpile for use when they like.
The government provided proof to 27 foreign governments - not though from Porton Down as that is not their job. You will use the smear "Iraq intelligence - WMD " to denigrate our security services and that is okay because you and I are nobodies but serious politicians and foreing governments are not so stupid.
All your other points are traditional "flak" as always used by Russia and their ilk. Throw up a bunch of unanswerable questions. NOt clever - an old trick and does not fool intelligent diplomats and decent politicians. Corbyn os not amonst the latter. He is really not an intelligent man and is denied access to some sensitive information due to his dubious past liaisons.

 

Surely people have been on the move for thousands of years seeking a better life. Often it has been climatic reasons, better food supplies, or just the need to move away from hostile "visitors" who have had an even worse life. As life has become more organized and regulated people have wanted their share of the better life. There is little difference between any race. You might be able to tell the difference between an Arab and a Jew by looking at them, but that has come about from selective breeding. Israel has been handed a great deal of help, especially from the USA, and when the Arabs see what is on offer there, it is natural that they would want some of it. It is just the same thing happening that has been going on for many years.

 

Nobody has said that the British have a stockpile ready for use Leo. The uncomfortable fact is that we do not know who has access to this stuff, or has the ability to weaponize it. We do know that this was originally produced in the USSR. and that immediately upon the disintegration of that state prevention of theft, and resale of stocks was more or less impossible - particularly so because much of it was produced in non Russian ex Soviet states such as Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan and the Ukraine - the Russians lost access to many of these stocks. You say the government provided proof to other governments - where is it ? and why haven't the Russians been officially presented with it, so that they can answer their corner ? If the evidence were incontrovertible then all the EU. states would have responded to it, not just half of them. You throw up the same old stuff about Corbyn's integrity - based on people he has met in the past. He actually believes that it is better to talk with people than to talk about them.

 

Cologne - you and I both know you are playing Devils Advocate for a good fun debate.
A jury convicts on "beyond reasonable doubt". I am quite sure Russia would lose on that count. I am sure apologists for Putin's folly can invent dozens of red herrings and smokescreens and thousands or puerile questions - but any intelligent juror would dismiss them. As someone said today - even China is not supporting Russia on this one.
The proof supplied will have been confidential and its distribution would alert others to the operations of our intelligence network. Surely you understand no country would allow that - as for giving it to the Russians - that is laughable - it would result in more deaths of British agents.
I said nothing about Corbyn's integrity. I question his intelligence - which is demonstrably low and his judgement. which is p*ss poor. Whoever has Easter with arguably an anti-semitic group while embroiled in controversy over his handling of anti-semitism? Answer - someone stupid with poor judgement.

 

Actually I'm not playing devil's advocate Leo. I am well aware that Russia is capable of acts of this sort - they are not alone in this, the CIA and Mossad have also performed executions abroad. But something doesn't fit on this one. What worries me is that what should be a criminal investigation has become a political theme. If evidence emerged that the Russian state was not involved in this then what would happen to this evidence ? May has burned all her bridges on this - she has to go through with it, and the evidence has to fit, because an official apology to Russia is not to be entertained. There are other possibilities - rogue elements in the Russian secret service acting autonomously, Mafia like structures in operation, other states/organizations which benefit from a collapse in Russo Western relations (The Ukraine springs to mind here), even accident or suicide cannot be ruled out - all spies would have had access to this stuff (or to similar substances). The problem is that if the Russian state wasn't behind it then their help would be invaluable in helping to find exactly who was behind it - but we have closed down all possibilities of this.

 

I don't really want to get involved in a subject that we as Joe Public are not privy to as much of it is pure speculation. Chatting to my friend in Dorset he had a job that involved sensitive defence information, a lot of which has never been published. He knows quite a lot about Porton Down, and believes that they could identify a substance from its chemical composition from just a grain of the material. They would not have to have examples that they could compare it with, it is already logged.
The Russians are clearly trying to divert attention from my point of view. The OPCW operates on a set of guidelines which state that the investigators are not named. The Russians are saying they want the guidelines changed, otherwise they will not accept any report they come up with. They have been defeated on this by world opinion and are now trying to split the UN.
Boris the terrible is a disgrace. For someone to make statements that are immediately question is not what we should expect of someone who holds one of the highest offices in the country. Under normal circumstances he would have been fired, but TM knows she is held hostage by him.
Corbyn as a PC should be trusted to know about sensitive material. He clearly has a problem with expressing his own ideology which is often different to the party that he leads. If, and I say if, he is being denied information, then one wonders why. He cannot say things on sensitive material to prove a point, but then he wants to show a different face to the government. He cannot pick and choose what he supports the government on when it comes to a matter like this. Time for Boris to go and for Corbyn to get off his fence.

 

No they are still there, there are many Palestinians living inside Israel who do not like either Hamas or Fatah.
Why struggle with the objectivity here when you accept say an opinion piece in a British newspaper about a South American nation written by an editor who has never been further south in the Americas than Disneyland.
And will you be so accepting of the situation when Britain loses its Anglo-Saxon majority?

 

Just on your points about Russia - couldn't agree more. There's a few countries on the list that could not really be described as friends at the moment. They are unlikely to be convinced by the metaphorical back of a *** packet. And I'm not really disagreeing but although you say France was reluctant I thought they acted quicker than many. It's a bit semantic but kind of reinforces your point!

 

It is incredible how some of these labs can detect things using such small samples. I used to do some work on animal disease control and the levels of precision they could get were phenomenal.
I do wonder how long the PM will put up with Boris. He isn't far off becoming a risk to national security - I don't think he cares about our national interest at times.

 

I don't think she dares to get rid of him. She has been careful to ensure that the cabinet is equally balanced between leavers and remainers. Some of the comments I read about him in the European press show that he has no respect from them whatsoever. He is regarded as a joke, and sadly people wonder if he is the best on offer, what does it say about the country? Keep your cabinet evenly balanced, and attacks against a member will be refuted by those on the other side. TM has safety from both sides with this method.

 

Definitely. When did you ever see an environment secretary in the news so much? Although much as I hate to say it he's doing a much better job than I expected! Shows the power of being a high profile minister with a terrified boss...

 

Gove is probably rather brighter than Johnson. I suspect he will try to look as if he is a better prospect for promotion than others around him.

 

Frighteningly bright by all accounts.

 

If he is that bright I hope he has a Sir Humphrey to keep him under control.

 

It pushes me even further away from this ****e when this clown has a position of such importance. He is the biggest joke there is.