Winseer:
Still no footage of perps ANYWHERE in Salisbury. FFS they’ve got a big Waitrose there, so you’d think they’d have some cameras about, especially with the tallest spire in the country, right there as a possible camera mount point?0
If they survive this I reckon they should get on to whoever sold them that “lucky” horseshoe and demand a refund…
Winseer:
I have yet to see a video of Putin threatening a nuclear attack.
I’m as open minded as any.But it’s bleedin obvious exactly what message Putin was sending to May here in the form of a totally disproportionate response to May’s accusations of a WMD attack.In which she in no way actually threatened Russia at all she just asked Putin for an explanation albeit in a typically stupid way.In which she then didn’t have the bottle,let alone the Trident launch codes and let alone a modern generation population with the bottle to return the threat and Putin,JinPing and his sidekick Fatman obviously all know it. 
standard.co.uk/news/politics … 89176.html
As opposed to if Putin really wanted to maintain some of the moral high ground then his reply would have gone along the lines of Russia isn’t looking for trouble it’s the EU and NATO which is making all the dodgy moves here.Or at least a climb down later apologising for the remark or at least again China calling on Putin to withdraw his comments and China expressing neutrality in the matter.
It really takes naivety,cowardice and appeasement to the extreme in not realising exactly where we now stand with these Eastern axis zb’s.Just as Trump’s appointment of Bolton seems to confirm and it’s now time to kick out all the Russian and Chinese fifth column and stop giving them the means to attack us and get back to a defence policy of deterrents,based on the only viable strategy of MAD,and directed at our clear enemies and not allowing Putin and Jinping jack flash to go on taking the ■■■■ in thinking that they have the upper hand over us and can threaten us with nukes at will. 
Carryfast:
Rjan:
[…]It’s clear that Corbyn is a closet remainer just like Johnson.
What a load of tosh! Corbyn has been a Eurosceptic for decades! Even the Blairites whinge that he campaigned half-heartedly for Remain (in accordance with party policy at the time, before the people had spoken in the referendum) because he simply didn’t believe in it himself. 
Which is why he appointed remainer Starmer as shadow Brexit minister not Hoey.
To be honest I think Starmer is a good choice for the job, because even though (or perhaps because…) he’s not a Corbyn loyalist, he’s wearing down the Blairite troublemakers with relentless logic and a solid commitment to democracy. He’s committed to ending free movement. And every time there is trouble, he reminds them that 2/3rds of Labour’s constituencies voted Leave.
While it’s equally clear that the only so called Brexit that Corbyn is all about is remain in all but name because the treacherous zb is ideologically opposed to anything which puts National Sovereignty above the EUSSR federal government system.
You’re right that Corbyn is not trying to smash the EU once and for all.
Neighbours frequently get on better as friends when one is not trying to destroy the other, even if they prefer not to be so close as to be in bed with each other.
Just as the Cons are.All based on the same project fear bs that a trading relationship,in which we are ruled by people like Juncker and pay a fortune for the privilege of being a net importer,is supposedly a good deal for us.On that note it doesn’t matter how big the EU market is if it isn’t buying our stuff at the same rate that we buy its stuff.Or for that matter Corbyn’s rabble moaning about lack of cash for the NHS while at the same time wanting to pay billions to the corrupt EU.
No matter how you cut the cake, the UK is not remotely on equal bargaining terms to the EU27 - even if the costs on their side were twice the costs on our side, that cost on their side would still be met by an economic group ten times our size.
Also, whilst the EU may (on your logic) be eager to preserve the current arrangements because of the disproportionate advantages to them (such as the supposed £4bn net contribution), it is not clear that they would be eager to enter into a new arrangement once those advantages are removed (i.e. once our net contribution is nil).
And “Corbyn’s lot” aren’t simply moaning about a “lack of cash for the NHS” - they reject the austerity narrative entirely. And I return to my point again, that Corbyn is a lifelong Eurosceptic, not a Remainer. Through the rubric of how you understand these things, he is and always has been on the Benn, Foot, Shore, Hoey side of the argument about the EU.
But just because Benn was a Eurosceptic, doesn’t mean he would have saw himself as being on the same side as the right-wing Brexiteers like Fox, Rees-Mogg, or any of the other Tory loons. The Tories’ reasons for leaving are not to get a better deal for workers, but to ensure that markets stay supreme and that workers (and national democracies) are sufficiently divided that they cannot unite against the marketplace and against the interests of the wealthy (such as clamping down on tax evasion, dirty money, and so on).
That’s why the Tories have been promising to reduce migration for years as electoral bait, and yet haven’t reduced non-EU migration one iota - because they don’t really want to, because then they’ll have to increase wages and offer more training to settled workers, and that’s exactly what the party of the rich don’t want.
While it’s no surprise that Corbyn chose to give Putin the benefit of the doubt with communist China weighing in all on the side of obviously still Soviet Putin.No surprise either that Corbyn would be happy for the west to completely surrender to that Chinese/Russian axis by removing what nuclear deterrent we have in the face of Putin’s clear nuclear threat no surprise obviously backed up by China and North Korea.
Well, it turns out today that Porton Down have decided to give Putin the benefit of the doubt too - it turns out there is simply no evidence yet. Are you really willing to put a rifle in your children’s hands, on the say-so of this Tory government? Do you really believe a word they say about Russia?
Do you really believe the Tory government has a shred of concern for the “national” interest (conceived in a way that includes ordinary working people), when they can make a fuss about blue passports being a national British symbol, then hand the production contract to France?
sammym:
A former Russian spy and traitor is attacked with chemical weapons which are only known to be made in Russia… A state which not that many years ago using radioactive substances to knock someone off in our capital - and which are not really that bothered about outraging the international community.I cannot for the life of me think why anyone would blame the Russians.
It shouldn’t be difficult to understand why anyone would think that we can’t trust our own government with examples like Blair’s WMD dodgy dossier and the EU’s and NATO’s aggressive moves on Russia’s borders and obvious aims towards Ukraine.Nor would anyone care less about James Bond type antics among the spy community on both sides which have been going on since the start of the Cold War.
But it all gets a lot more murky when May says they are supposedly using WMD’s which threaten the general population,just to take out a spy and we’ve got Putin saying he didn’t do it but if we don’t stop bothering him about the matter he’ll nuke us.
On balance that can only leave one conclusion.It’s a warning and a pretext for the threat of war on the part of Russia.Although NATO and the EU aren’t blameless in all this in pretending detente regarding Russia while doing the exact opposite and the West being happy to contribute to China’s ongoing military build up in the form of so called ‘trade’.
Which leaves the question of the west selectively applying a policy of appeasement against China’s obvious intentions.While at best provocation in the case of Russia.While at worse also inviting in possibly hostile Russian sleepers and internal Russian power struggles and infighting onto our streets also seemingly to create a pretext for aggro with Putin with the win win of a few bob in ‘payments’ of dirty Russian money into Tory party funds.
IronEddie:
This is a fairly stupidly sensationalized story. Unsurprisingly analysis of the chemical agent doesn’t give its location of manufacture, of course it can’t!
In some cases it could - because chemical impurities and signatures of particular production processes can sometimes be present.
Moreover, the Tories’ pressured Porton Down to say there was a link to Russia before they’d even done the analysis - it was only through back-channels in the media that we found out that Porton Down absolutely refused to go along with the government’s lies.
The guy went on to say thats where the government and intelligence agencies come in to broaden the picture.
Would you put a rifle in your child’s hand, on the say-so of this government about “intelligence”?
Hundreds of British soliders were killed in Iraq, thousands injured (many of whom will have permanent disabilities), and tens of thousands left with mental ill-health, and billions of pounds spent, to achieve nothing whatsoever, and based on pure lies about the WMD “intelligence”.
sammym:
A former Russian spy and traitor is attacked with chemical weapons which are only known to be made in Russia… A state which not that many years ago using radioactive substances to knock someone off in our capital - and which are not really that bothered about outraging the international community.I cannot for the life of me think why anyone would blame the Russians.
What you say is false. The poison in question is not only known to be made in Russia. It was merely in the class of chemicals invented by the Soviets about 40 years ago.
What you say is as absurd as arguing that because the internet was invented in America, therefore all cyber attacks today originate in America!
Rjan:
To be honest I think Starmer is a good choice for the job.While it’s equally clear that the only so called Brexit that Corbyn is all about is remain in all but name because the treacherous zb is ideologically opposed to anything which puts National Sovereignty above the EUSSR federal government system.
You’re right that Corbyn is not trying to smash the EU once and for all.
Neighbours frequently get on better as friends when one is not trying to destroy the other, even if they prefer not to be so close as to be in bed with each other.
And “Corbyn’s lot” aren’t simply moaning about a “lack of cash for the NHS” - they reject the austerity narrative entirely. And I return to my point again, that Corbyn is a lifelong Eurosceptic, not a Remainer. Through the rubric of how you understand these things, he is and always has been on the Benn, Foot, Shore, Hoey side of the argument about the EU.
While it’s no surprise that Corbyn chose to give Putin the benefit of the doubt with communist China weighing in all on the side of obviously still Soviet Putin.No surprise either that Corbyn would be happy for the west to completely surrender to that Chinese/Russian axis by removing what nuclear deterrent we have in the face of Putin’s clear nuclear threat no surprise obviously backed up by China and North Korea.
Well, it turns out today that Porton Down have decided to give Putin the benefit of the doubt too - it turns out there is simply no evidence yet. Are you really willing to put a rifle in your children’s hands, on the say-so of this Tory government? Do you really believe a word they say about Russia?
Do you really believe the Tory government has a shred of concern for the “national” interest (conceived in a way that includes ordinary working people), when they can make a fuss about blue passports being a national British symbol, then hand the production contract to France?
You haven’t answered the question if Corbyn isn’t a closet remainer then why appoint the clearly remainer Starmer and not Hoey as shadow Brexit minister.
It’s clear that you’re spouting exactly the same remainer bs as Starmer that if we ditch the EU federal government system by definition that means smashing Europe.So what you’re saying is exactly that of Corbyn’s idea of remain in all but name because you are ideologically opposed to the Nation State.Which is why you,Starmer and Corbyn are anything but the same as Benn,Shore or Hoey and it’s a typical Socialist lie,in trying to hijack the Labour Brexit vote,to suggest that you are.
As for the Russian issue.It’s obvious that Porton Down will say whatever the government tells it to say and it’s no surprise that May would now be looking for an exit strategy because she knows that it’s not a question of what happened in Salisbury.It’s a question of whether the western populations are up for replying,to Putin’s and Jinping’s escalation to that of a clear nuclear threat against us,in kind.With appeasement and cowardice obviously being her ( their ) answer.
Where have I ever said that I’d trust the stinking Tory party any more than Labour to do anything in our national interest.Whether it be delivering Brexit,or not selling us out to the Chinese Communist Party or knowing when to use diplomacy with Russia and when to threaten the zb’s with a just as big if not bigger stick than they threaten us with.The Salisbury incident having moved into defcon 1 or 2 territory in that regard as soon as Putin mentioned his nuclear power status in answer to May’s pointless accusations and ultimatum.As I said gutless cowards whether Labour or Con who’ve let down generations of those who’ve died for this country and which will only now embolden Putin and Jinping to go for more.Much more.
Rjan:
IronEddie:
This is a fairly stupidly sensationalized story. Unsurprisingly analysis of the chemical agent doesn’t give its location of manufacture, of course it can’t!In some cases it could - because chemical impurities and signatures of particular production processes can sometimes be present.
Moreover, the Tories’ pressured Porton Down to say there was a link to Russia before they’d even done the analysis - it was only through back-channels in the media that we found out that Porton Down absolutely refused to go along with the government’s lies.
The guy went on to say thats where the government and intelligence agencies come in to broaden the picture.
Would you put a rifle in your child’s hand, on the say-so of this government about “intelligence”?
Hundreds of British soliders were killed in Iraq, thousands injured (many of whom will have permanent disabilities), and tens of thousands left with mental ill-health, and billions of pounds spent, to achieve nothing whatsoever, and based on pure lies about the WMD “intelligence”.
For sure intelligence can be wrong. Moreover the government might be playing one huge political game with some unknown motivation.
There is also much that doesn’t add up. I find it easy to believe Russia did this, they have form after all. But how does a military grade nerve agent fail to kill. Don’t think the Russians would leave it to chance like that.
Its all bizare and quite worrying however you add it up.
Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk
Rentadent:
For a bunch of drivers who have to ask what mode to put it on when you go for a dump or which sat nav will stop you from crashing a 15’ trailer into a 13’ bridge you sure seem to know a lot about Soviet spies and covert government tactics.
You lot are wasted as drivers but I await with baited breath the new wave of RDC stories about the time Teresa May knocked on your cab door to ask for your advice but you told her to clear off until you’d finished your 45.
Carryfast:
Rjan:
[…]You haven’t answered the question if Corbyn isn’t a closet remainer then why appoint the clearly remainer Starmer and not Hoey as shadow Brexit minister.
Let’s face facts, there are two main reasons why Corbyn and McDonnell are opposed to the EU, and always have been.
Firstly, it acts against industrial consolidation (of the kind that built all of our great corporations in the 20th century) and democratic ownership and control via the state. It compels privatisation of public services and force them to be broken up, and of course as a result costs go up and workers’ pay and conditions go down. France is being racked with months of rolling strikes over the issue as we speak. Secondly, free movement is being exploited by bosses to force down and hold down the pay and conditions of settled workers.
Labour couldn’t give a toss about bullsh!t issues like the colour of our passports (never determined by the EU anyway).
For Corbyn and McDonnell the problem with our current relationship with the EU is about hard economic issues and the interests of the working class in work, wages, public services, and democratic (instead of market) control of our economy.
If the EU made concessions on these issues - which it won’t in the short-term, if ever - then they would probably not be as Eurosceptic as they are.
Now, Starmer is a Remainer himself but he’s not been a Blairite troublemaker and he seems to be on-board with these key points, and is doing a workmanlike job of rebutting the Blairites so far.
Hoey meanwhile is simply far too controversial a figure for that role - although she is a Corbyn supporter, incidentally.
It’s clear that you’re spouting exactly the same remainer bs as Starmer that if we ditch the EU federal government system by definition that means smashing Europe.So what you’re saying is exactly that of Corbyn’s idea of remain in all but name because you are ideologically opposed to the Nation State.Which is why you,Starmer and Corbyn are anything but the same as Benn,Shore or Hoey and it’s a typical Socialist lie,in trying to hijack the Labour Brexit vote,to suggest that you are.
I don’t support your nonsensical views, but my point is that even if we leave, it is not the intention of the Labour government to smash the EU or run down the living standards of its workers (and our own) through low-road competition, in the way that the Tory right-wingers are really secretly hoping to do.
Have we reached a logical conclusion yet?
Is there a gender pay gap in Moscow?
IronEddie:
For sure intelligence can be wrong. Moreover the government might be playing one huge political game with some unknown motivation.There is also much that doesn’t add up. I find it easy to believe Russia did this, they have form after all. But how does a military grade nerve agent fail to kill. Don’t think the Russians would leave it to chance like that.
Its all bizare and quite worrying however you add it up.
Logically it’s a false flag carried out by one side or the other with the aim of sending a warning and creating a pretext at home for war sooner or later in the case of Russia.
Or it’s an EU/NATO/Ukrainian stunt to create a pre text for causing more aggro with Russia with the bonus of helping the remainers to keep us tied to the EU.
In which case Russia obviously never intended to use a full on Chem weapon because they only wanted to send a warning to the Brit government not wipe out Wiltshire.
Or it’s just a total lie and false flag charade in the case of it being May and NATO etc who did it.
However the former seems to have been confirmed by Putin then meeting May’s ‘request’ for information with the threat of his nuclear arsenal.Which doesn’t seem like the actions of someone who knows he is innocent and is being fitted up.
While ‘if’ it was a NATO false flag stunt then they knew exactly what Putin’s response would be anyway,to NATO looking for more aggro with Russia,so what was the point.‘Unless’ it was actually a test by Trump and Bolton in that regard to see which way China would go and now we know.
But strangely in all cases the point being that NATO then didn’t meet Putin’s nuclear threat in kind nor break off all ties with China and tell Jinping that China is also now in the frame as being an equal threat to us as Russia.You couldn’t make it up.
Deflection Deflection Deflection…
The real reason women are paid less than guys - is they let themselves be employed on that basis. If you forced everyone to get paid the same, then a lot less women would be employed to start with. “Can you do this job miss? - You’re 4’10” and this job involves extensive handballing… On second thoughts, I’ll give the job to one of these three strapping EE lads I’m interviewing this afternoon.!"
Winseer:
Deflection Deflection Deflection…The real reason women are paid less than guys - is they let themselves be employed on that basis. If you forced everyone to get paid the same, then a lot less women would be employed to start with.
That’s nonsense. Do women of 4’10 height and sleight build really get heavy handballing jobs because they accept 10% less?
The reality is that there are jobs where women happen to predominate, and employers simply pay them 10% less because they can and because women bargain less strongly (and are often the second earners in a household and subsidised by male partners), not because it represents some sort of trade-off in ability or productivity.
The idea that the boss is going to hire a “strapping EE lad” as his PA or secretary, if he has to pay the woman currently doing the job the same rate as a man, is ludicrous.
If we’re talking about traditional women’s jobs - we’re not going to be talking about “Equal Pay”, as what bloke gets a job as a secretary and then earns more than a woman doing the same job?
As for the use of “Strapping EE lads” - look at who’s delivering your next load of bulky and/or white goods… The delivery might even be from “Amazon” - but the people delivering will be nothing of the sort, left ■■■ intact, or no… 
Carryfast:
In which case Russia obviously only wanted to send a warning to the Brit government not wipe out Wiltshire.However the former seems to have been confirmed by Putin then meeting May’s ‘request’ for information with the threat of his nuclear arsenal.Which doesn’t seem like the actions of someone who knows he is innocent and is being fitted up.
Again this doesn’t seem like the actions of an innocent party wanting to maintain the moral high ground.
mirror.co.uk/news/politics/w … l-12311033
More like a bunch of belligerent threatening zb’s who need to be sorted out as Kennedy did in the case of Kruschev.No surprise Putin seems to be taking advantage of NATO’s obvious aversion to proper old school Cold War ‘negotiations’ and defence based on mutually assured destruction.Which in this case means telling Russia that we’re no longer interested in all the silly James Bond bollox.The British public needs to draw the line at being threatened regardless of the rights or wrongs of the case and May’s possibly treacherous leadership.But in which Russia has now totally blown any moral high ground that it might have had in that regard.
In which case if Russia really wants to get back onto a proper Cold War footing,in which we have no intention of wanting,let alone any stupid notion of actually winning,a war with Russia but we will take the zb’s with us if they try it,we’re up for it.
^^^^^ Carryfast is so determined to have the last word hes even resorted to answering himself!
The-Snowman:
^^^^^ Carryfast is so determined to have the last word hes even resorted to answering himself!
It was obviously an addition to the post not an answer.To the situation in which many here rightly gave Putin the benefit of the doubt and don’t want to trust May.So what does he do he threatens to nuke us all and tells us we’re playing with ‘fire’.Not exactly a case of innocence and the moral high ground.
Where’s the video of Putin threatening to nuke us?