Jeremy Corbyn mocked by his own MPs after claiming Russia should be given the right to test nerve agent itself

Jeremy Corbyn has been mocked by own MPs after saying Russia should be given a sample of the nerve agent used in the Salisbury attack so it can "say categorically one way or the other" whether it is responsible.

The Labour leader also said he would be happy to work with President Putin if he was Prime Minister and stopped short of blaming the Kremlin for the attack, despite his deputy John McDonnell doing so over the weekend.

It exposes a deepening split in the party's position on the nerve agent attack which has left Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia in a coma in hospital.

Last week Mr Corbyn was criticised for refusing to categorically blame Russia for the Novichok poisoning and his communications chief drew further ire when he claimed British intelligence cannot be trusted after the Iraq war dossier.

Responding to his latest remarks on the issue Mr Corbyn was roundly mocked by his own MPs including Ian Austin, a member of the Foreign Affairs select committee, who joked that Mr Putin would never accuse himself of having smuggled the nerve agent into the UK to use against the former spy.

He said: "Does anyone seriously think Putin will say: ‘Thanks for the sample. We have now examined it and yes, I'm sorry to say that it did come from Russia and was then given to one of our agents to murder Mr Skripal in the way we have murdered lots of other opponents’? Who thinks that?”

Speaking to the BBC's World and One programme Mr Corbyn said: "All fingers point towards Russia's involvement in this, and obviously the manufacture of the material was undertaken by the Russian state originally.

"What I'm saying is the weapons were made from Russia, clearly.

"I think Russia has to be held responsible for it but there has to be an absolutely definitive answer to the question where did the nerve agent come from? I asked the Russians be given a sample so that they can say categorically one way or the other."

In a move that is likely to spark further frustration among Labout MPs Mr Corbyn maintained there had to be a relationship with Russia and said he would still "do business" with president Putin if Labour came to power.


https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/03/20/jeremy-corbyn-russia-must-given-novichok-sample-would-still/?li_source=LI&li_medium=li-recommendation-widget

I think Austin put it best. Seriously, anybody who thinks Putin isn't a tyrant and a murderer with a huge chip on his shoulder against the West is not to be trusted.

Ben Mothafuckin' Reilly wrote:I think Austin put it best. Seriously, anybody who thinks Putin isn't a tyrant and a murderer with a huge chip on his shoulder against the West is not to be trusted.

Well based on your whitewashing, I guess you think its acceptable to hate and be prejudiced all Russians, if a majority support Putin.

Correct?

I replied to your whitewashing reply, defending antisemitism. Which is below

Which I was not surprised and have thus going to write also my reply here, as you are so crap at getting back to a report.

What Veya said

veya_victaous wrote:If the vast majority of Jews are Zionists
than Israel is a threat to world peace and Jews would be totally deserving of any prejudice or hate directed at them

GOOD thing most Jews are NOT ZIONISTS

What I replied


So in context, you are saying its absolutely fine to hate and be prejuice to all Jews, if the majority are zionists.
Based on the definition, that Zionism is a belief in having a historical home (which they now have) in Israel.

You think that is acceptable?

Wow

Even though no western nation classify Zionism, as extremism. Unless of course you take the Majority Arab view that does not accept the right of Israel to exist, thus appeasement to hate.

Now of course some Zionists are extremists, but based on your view, you have made it acceptable to hate and be prejudiced towards all Arabs. Based on a majority believeing in Islam. Where Islam has a fundemental doctrine to take over the world. I guess that is not a threat to world peace according to you. Even though I would never seek to be prejudiced or hate all Muslims because of this.

To back the view Israel is a threat to world peace and that by simple supporting its right to exist, is creating a threat to world peace, means that person sides with those that wish to see it cease to exist.

See what happens when you make something acceptable?

The reality is that the majority of Jews are zionists. Which means he thinks because of this, that Jews are deserving in hate and prejudice. And you dont think that is antisemitism.

Again, wow

This is why the far left have become the new racists and continually whitewash antisemitism

I suggest you actually research antisemitism, then write to the Simon Wiesenthal Center and let me know whether they agree with you, or rightly define you as a defender of antisemitism

http://www.wiesenthal.com/site/pp.asp?c=lsKWLbPJLnF&b=6212365

Even in your own country, they would class what he said as antisemitism

https://www.state.gov/s/rga/resources/267538.htm

I have absolutely no time for spineless people, who defend their mates, when they are blatantly in the wrong

You just rendered your own rules a joke

Even your new one with sassy posting links to sites that for one was a holocasut denier, thrown out of labour and other Far left fake news and conspiracy sites. Now I am against any site being banned, but it proves it was nothing more than a ruse by you

Frankly, I think you made up that rule, to simple push smelly out.

So again we find another person, who claims to stand for universal rights, but does not in the least. You are happy though as seen to allow people to be hateful and prejudice on your site, when it comes to Jews.

Idiots like you never learn from history

It's really nice if you stir just a pinch of black pepper into it.

Even better with a large pinch of truth !

Ben Mothafuckin' Reilly wrote:It's really nice if you stir just a pinch of black pepper into it.

How Left-Wing Thinking Leads to Ignoring, or Justifying, Anti-Semitism

The Anti-Defamation League publishes an annual report on incidents of anti-Semitism in the United States. This year’s audit, made available in November, showed a significant increase in relation to the previous year: 2017 saw a 67% rise in anti-Jewish hate speech, harassment, vandalism and violence.


It’s a disheartening measure of a terrible phenomenon. Yet in the three months since the audit was released, it’s garnered little attention.


Some public comments hint at why. In a video for Jewish Voice for Peace posted to Facebook in April, the anti-racism campaigner Linda Sarsour addressed the issue. “I want to make the distinction that while anti-Semitism is something that impacts Jewish Americans, it’s different than anti-black racism or Islamophobia because it’s not systemic,” she said. “Of course, you may experience vandalism or an attack on a synagogue, or maybe on an individual level… but it’s not systemic, and we need to make that distinction.”


Underlying this pervasive point of view is the notion that Jews, who are often conflated with whites, should “check their privilege,” because anti-Semitism just isn’t as bad as other forms of racism. On campus, where the ADL notes an acute rise in anti-Jewish hostility, alarmed Jewish students are sidelined for being white and middle-class and the Holocaust is trivialized as “white on white crime.” Elsewhere, Jews who protest anti-Semitism are dismissed for failing to ante up sufficient concern about people of color.


This erasure of anti-Semitism isn’t simply callous. It exposes a huge moral failure at the heart of the modern left. Under the enveloping paradigm of “intersectionality,” everyone is granularly defined by their various identities — everyone, that is, except white Jews, whose Jewishness is often overwritten by their skin color. Not simply a moral failing, this erasure is deeply hazardous, inasmuch as the fight against racism happens by and large in sectors where the left perspective dominates — the academy, pop culture and much of the news media.


But this failure of the left is less a result of malice rather than unconscious wiring. As I will argue, the left is doomed to erase anti-Semitism because it’s ill-equipped to understand it.


For in a key sense, regular racism — against blacks and Latinos, for example — is the opposite of anti-Semitism. While both ultimately derive from xenophobia, regular racism comes from white people believing they are superior to people of color. But the hatred of Jews stems from the belief that Jews are a cabal with supernatural powers; in other words, it stems from the models of thought that produce conspiracy theories. Where the white racist regards blacks as inferior, the anti-Semite imagines that Jews have preternatural power to afflict humankind.


This is also why the left is blind to anti-Semitism. Anti-Semitism differs from most forms of racism in that it purports to “punch up” against a secret society of oppressors, which has the side effect of making it easy to disguise as a politics of emancipation. If Jews have power, then punching up at Jews is a form of speaking truth to power — a form of speech of which the left is currently enamored.


In other words, it is because anti-Semitism pretends to strike at power that the left cannot see it, and is doomed to erase — and even reproduce — its tropes.*


At its most trivial, a conspiracy theory is the idea that a circumstance or event can be explained by the influence of an evil secret society. As the historian Norman Cohn has shown, European civilization has embraced this idea since the beginning. The “fantasy,” Cohn writes, “that there existed somewhere in the midst of the great society, another society, small and clandestine, which not only threatened the existence of the great society, but was also addicted to practices which were felt to be wholly abominable, in the literal sense of anti-human,” has targeted different groups — the Jews, in particular — ever since Christianity conquered Europe.


Of course, there are lesser species of anti-Jewish hostility. Think of Woody Allen riffing on the WASP’s disdain for loud, garlicky Jews bickering at dinner, or Ivy League schools using quotas to prevent Jews from denaturing their student bodies. No form of racism can escape its roots in simple xenophobia.
But the idea at the center of the long history of Jewish persecution is a conspiracy theory: that a wicked cabal of international Jews conspires to leech and destroy mankind.


In addition to the belief in a shadowy group with the power to affect large-scale outcomes, conspiracy theories also reflect a worldview in which reality is the product of a timeless and cosmic struggle between good and evil. These kinds of dualistic narratives are especially enticing to groups that view themselves to be under existential duress, and as Elaine Pagels has shown, this has profoundly shaped Western culture. Jews under Roman occupation and early Christians under Jewish ostracism and gentile persecution developed theologies of the oppressed in which the devil and his demonic host squared off with God and his angels.


To manage everyday problems, people also often turned to magic. The church did not look fondly on this competing system of knowledge. It reasoned that insofar as magic was believed to work, it must draw upon the power of demons. Unfortunately, Jews had also been associated with sorcery since antiquity. This closed a circle, linking magic, Jews and the devil together in the Christian mind.


The crude theology of the cosmic showdown between God and the devil, along with the stereotype of an anti-human, demonic collaborator, and life-and-death struggle over the forbidden knowledge of magic and heresy, fused to ignite the infamous persecutions of the European Middle Ages. These included the witch trials, the inquisitions of heretics, and the perennial persecution of Jews as child-murdering, blood-feasting, well-poisoning sorcerers and agents of Satan.


When Europe entered the modern era, Jews shed this company. Industrialization, urban migration, democracy, and the flourishing of science weakened the otherworldly framework many used to understand the world. Witches and heretics faded in relevance.


But the Jews survived, though the role they played in the gentile imagination changed to reflect the times.
As they were emancipated, Jews loomed as direct competition in economic and political life. As the pre-eminent historian of anti-Semitism, Robert Wistrich, writes, “Alongside the dominant cultural matrix of late-nineteenth-century nationalism, volkisch racism, and imperialism,” a new “populist social dimension” recast Jews as collaborators with the secular demons of laissez-faire capitalism and liberal democracy.
Thus, as the center of civilization shifted from church and king to the nation state, anti-Semitism, at least outwardly, lost its religious focus. Foes of the Jews who aspired to power cast them as diabolical puppeteers who controlled the state; anti-Semites in power libeled them as seditious parasites who undermined it. This was the milieu that produced the foundational document of political conspiracism, “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.”

Purporting to be the minutes of an international meeting of evil Jewish elites, “The Protocols” was a detailed outline of how the Jews would enslave and exploit humankind. First circulated in the Russian Empire, it was then exported by charlatans and military officers and spread throughout the world. Effectively the first “fake news,” the pamphlet, which Cohn memorably called a “warrant for genocide,” still flourishes today, especially in Arab and Muslim countries.


While it is a quintessentially modern document, “The Protocols” owes a clear debt to medieval thought. Murder, greed, warmongering, enslavement, false consciousness, opposition to the truth and betrayal of the good are all explicit in the work.


And the association of Jews and magic is there, too, implicit but central. The supernatural coordination by which a few international Jews command such vast power draws on the belief in witches’ flight. Though God was dead and magic moribund, both were now resurrected in the modern political life of conspiracism.
The Nazis furnish the best testament to the lethal power of this sinister little book. Look how indebted to it Joseph Goebbels revealed them to be:

“Jewry has so deeply infected the Anglo-Saxon states both spiritually and politically that they no longer have the ability to see or accept the danger. It conceals itself as Bolshevism in the Soviet Union, and plutocratic-capitalism in the Anglo-Saxon states. The Jewish race has always been an expert at mimicry, that is, the systematic ability to fade into its surroundings. We know that from our own past. They put their host peoples to sleep, they drug them, paralyzing their ability to defend themselves against the life-threatening danger from Jewry.”

*
Conspiracy theories are far from dead. Rather, they’ve mutated to address the realities of the day. And they’re not just about Jews, either.


Today’s conspiracist blends the mindset of the medieval magician with the viciousness of the inquisitor. The old fears about crop fouling and well poisoning, for example, are now directed at genetically modified organizms and fluoride in the water. The idea that doctors and sorcerers were one and the same surfaces in paranoia about AIDS and vaccines. And flat-earthers rehearse astrological debates about the cosmos.
But the Jews remain a primary target.


And it’s anti-Semitism’s source in conspiracy theory that renders it so different from non-conspiracist forms of racism, like anti-blackness.


As with most racism, anti-black bias constructs an underclass to be exploited or avoided. It positions blacks as inferior to whites and charges them with stereotypes that signal weakness: They are libeled as lazy, stupid, lustful, criminal and animalistic.


The conspiracy theory of anti-Semitism turns this on its head. The Jew becomes a magical creature: brilliant, cunning, greedy, stealthy, wealthy and powerful beyond measure. Anti-Semitism imagines a diabolic overclass to be exposed and resisted.


Take it from the experts. In Article Twenty-Two of its charter, Hamas describes the preternatural power of the worldwide Jewish cabal:

“With their money, [the Jews] took control of the world media, news agencies, the press, publishing houses, broadcasting stations, and others. With their money they stirred revolutions in various parts of the world with the purpose of achieving their interests and reaping the fruit therein. They were behind the French Revolution, the Communist revolution and most of the revolutions we heard and hear about, here and there. With their money they formed secret societies, such as Freemasons, Rotary Clubs, the Lions and others in different parts of the world for the purpose of sabotaging societies and achieving Zionist interests. With their money they were able to control imperialistic countries and instigate them to colonize many countries in order to enable them to exploit their resources and spread corruption there.”

Above all else, anti-Semitism is a conspiracy theory about the maleficent Jewish elite. And it’s this that makes it easy to disguise as a politics of liberation, or, at least, to embed anti-Semitism quietly in efforts for social justice.


You can see this in the resuscitated efforts of groups like Black4Palestine and Jewish Voice for Peace to portray Israel and America as bastions of capitalist white supremacy that collude to brutalize people of color.
In the early part of the decade, Ethiopian-Israeli women charged that state-mandated health providers had used shady means to depress their fertility with the contraceptive Depo-Provera. The government denied coercion, but questions remain about the validity of its probe. This was not enough for Black4Palestine, which declared that “[Israel] has sterilized Ethiopian Israelis without their knowledge or consent.”
Narrowly, the effect of alleging sterilization invokes the Nazi specter of eugenics. But more broadly, the conspiracy theory [url=https://books.google.com/books?id=WlDzCwAAQBAJ&pg=PT502&lpg=PT502&dq=sterility+conspiracy+jews+magic&source=bl&ots=vPFA5D2n6q&sig=Jq-kk_htin3anPnCwMhH_GWHcq0&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjijrn8ofLYAhWQq1MKHQtDBj8Q6AEIUjAG#v=onepage&q=sterility conspiracy jews]summons[/url] medieval fears of Jewish magic harming sexual function, which live on in the Arab world.


For its part, JVP launched a national effort to promote the idea that Israel teaches U.S. law enforcement how to inflict “systemic” racism on people of color, “including extrajudicial executions, shoot-to-kill policies, police murders, racial profiling, massive spying and surveillance, deportation and detention, and attacks on human rights defenders.”


It’s critical to note that Americans are not accustomed to recognizing, let alone understanding, a sizable portion of anti-Semitism, because it typically doesn’t resemble anti-blackness — the horrific down-punching form of racism that haunts American history and reverberates into the present.


But this blindness doesn’t just make space for anti-Semites to operate domestically; it occludes our sense of the history of other parts of the world. (Do you remember the concept of conspiracy theory coming up during your education on the Holocaust? Me neither.)


Anti-Semitism is a poor man’s revolution. And so long as it doesn’t present as a far-right or “alt-right” cartoon, it often flies under our radar.
*
In the spring of 2016, the Stanford University Student Senate debated a resolution, undertaken in light of strident activism on campus against Israel, to condemn anti-Semitism, citing conspiracy theories about “the power of Jews as a collective — especially but not exclusively, the myth about… Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions.”


A student senator named Gabriel Knight objected that the resolution would “irresponsibly” stifle what he thought was a “very valid discussion.” “Questioning these potential power dynamics… is not anti-Semitism,” he admonished.


A week ago, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas delivered a rant of more than two hours to assembled Palestinian leaders. He alleged wild conspiracies, raving in what would have been news to Anne Frank that “[The Western powers] wanted to bring Jews here from Europe to maintain European interests in the region. They asked Holland, which had the largest navy in the world, to transfer the Jews.”


Abbas also declared that “Israel has imported frightening amounts of drugs in order to destroy our younger generation.” In response, the liberal Israel interest group J Street, after rejecting “the divisive and inflammatory rhetoric used by Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas,” complained that Trump had provoked Abbas to despair by recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of the Jewish state.


Neither of these episodes would have been likely if we primarily understood anti-Semitism as a conspiracy theory. If he had recognized anti-Semitism as a paranoid religion that offers vulgar salvation to the oppressed, Gabriel Knight might not have insisted on interrogating the privilege of Jews. If J Street’s leaders knew the classic tropes of conspiracism, they would have heard in Abbas’s drug-dealing canard and Holocaust denial echoes of something too big to be laid at the feet of an American politician — 2,000 European years of fanatical dualism, feudal fatalism, superstition, fear and cleansing violence.


Americans are — thankfully — tuned to detect and deplore racism that punches down. But we must broaden our perspective if we want to reverse the progress of anti-Semitism, which punches up toward mass murder and extermination.


So when the ADL reports that incidents of anti-Semitism rose by 67% in 2017, view it in this light. That’s what it means when white supremacists march and shout, “Jews will not replace us!” This form of hatred thrives in conditions where demagogues undermine the institutions of liberal democracy.


We live in a time of hateful rhapsody where truth is relative and fear prevails.
This is a conspiracist moment and it’s bad for the Jews.


John-Paul Pagano is a Brooklyn-based writer who examines extremism, with a special focus on anti-Semitism and liberal democracy (Twitter: @johnpaulpagano).

Read more: https://forward.com/opinion/393107/how-anti-semitisms-true-origin-makes-it-invisible-to-the-left/

I cant stand Corbyn and I haven't really followed this story that closely, but.....
would it not be reasonable if you accuse someone of doing something to show them the proof you have?

Didge wrote:

Ben Mothafuckin' Reilly wrote:I think Austin put it best. Seriously, anybody who thinks Putin isn't a tyrant and a murderer with a huge chip on his shoulder against the West is not to be trusted.

Well based on your whitewashing, I guess you think its acceptable to hate and be prejudiced all Russians, if a majority support Putin.

Correct?

I replied to your whitewashing reply, defending antisemitism. Which is below

Which I was not surprised and have thus going to write also my reply here, as you are so crap at getting back to a report.

What Veya said

veya_victaous wrote:If the vast majority of Jews are Zionists
than Israel is a threat to world peace and Jews would be totally deserving of any prejudice or hate directed at them

GOOD thing most Jews are NOT ZIONISTS

What I replied


So in context, you are saying its absolutely fine to hate and be prejuice to all Jews, if the majority are zionists.
Based on the definition, that Zionism is a belief in having a historical home (which they now have) in Israel.

You think that is acceptable?

Wow

Even though no western nation classify Zionism, as extremism. Unless of course you take the Majority Arab view that does not accept the right of Israel to exist, thus appeasement to hate.

Now of course some Zionists are extremists, but based on your view, you have made it acceptable to hate and be prejudiced towards all Arabs. Based on a majority believeing in Islam. Where Islam has a fundemental doctrine to take over the world. I guess that is not a threat to world peace according to you. Even though I would never seek to be prejudiced or hate all Muslims because of this.

To back the view Israel is a threat to world peace and that by simple supporting its right to exist, is creating a threat to world peace, means that person sides with those that wish to see it cease to exist.

See what happens when you make something acceptable?

The reality is that the majority of Jews are zionists. Which means he thinks because of this, that Jews are deserving in hate and prejudice. And you dont think that is antisemitism.

Again, wow

This is why the far left have become the new racists and continually whitewash antisemitism

I suggest you actually research antisemitism, then write to the Simon Wiesenthal Center and let me know whether they agree with you, or rightly define you as a defender of antisemitism

http://www.wiesenthal.com/site/pp.asp?c=lsKWLbPJLnF&b=6212365

Even in your own country, they would class what he said as antisemitism

https://www.state.gov/s/rga/resources/267538.htm

I have absolutely no time for spineless people, who defend their mates, when they are blatantly in the wrong

You just rendered your own rules a joke

Even your new one with sassy posting links to sites that for one was a holocasut denier, thrown out of labour and other Far left fake news and conspiracy sites. Now I am against any site being banned, but it proves it was nothing more than a ruse by you

Frankly, I think you made up that rule, to simple push smelly out.



well, of course he did


So again we find another person, who claims to stand for universal rights, but does not in the least. You are happy though as seen to allow people to be hateful and prejudice on your site, when it comes to Jews.

Idiots like you never learn from history

cracking post didge

I agree

I agree with Syl, the Russians should have the chance to examine the stuff although, I they aren't going to admit its theirs because it'll then be admitting to the whole thing or to at least admit its been stolen or appropriated by a rogue element, either way they loose face.

gelico wrote:

Didge wrote:

Ben Mothafuckin' Reilly wrote:I think Austin put it best. Seriously, anybody who thinks Putin isn't a tyrant and a murderer with a huge chip on his shoulder against the West is not to be trusted.

Well based on your whitewashing, I guess you think its acceptable to hate and be prejudiced all Russians, if a majority support Putin.

Correct?

I replied to your whitewashing reply, defending antisemitism. Which is below

Which I was not surprised and have thus going to write also my reply here, as you are so crap at getting back to a report.

What Veya said

veya_victaous wrote:If the vast majority of Jews are Zionists
than Israel is a threat to world peace and Jews would be totally deserving of any prejudice or hate directed at them

GOOD thing most Jews are NOT ZIONISTS

What I replied


So in context, you are saying its absolutely fine to hate and be prejuice to all Jews, if the majority are zionists.
Based on the definition, that Zionism is a belief in having a historical home (which they now have) in Israel.

You think that is acceptable?

Wow

Even though no western nation classify Zionism, as extremism. Unless of course you take the Majority Arab view that does not accept the right of Israel to exist, thus appeasement to hate.

Now of course some Zionists are extremists, but based on your view, you have made it acceptable to hate and be prejudiced towards all Arabs. Based on a majority believeing in Islam. Where Islam has a fundemental doctrine to take over the world. I guess that is not a threat to world peace according to you. Even though I would never seek to be prejudiced or hate all Muslims because of this.

To back the view Israel is a threat to world peace and that by simple supporting its right to exist, is creating a threat to world peace, means that person sides with those that wish to see it cease to exist.

See what happens when you make something acceptable?

The reality is that the majority of Jews are zionists. Which means he thinks because of this, that Jews are deserving in hate and prejudice. And you dont think that is antisemitism.

Again, wow

This is why the far left have become the new racists and continually whitewash antisemitism

I suggest you actually research antisemitism, then write to the Simon Wiesenthal Center and let me know whether they agree with you, or rightly define you as a defender of antisemitism

http://www.wiesenthal.com/site/pp.asp?c=lsKWLbPJLnF&b=6212365

Even in your own country, they would class what he said as antisemitism

https://www.state.gov/s/rga/resources/267538.htm

I have absolutely no time for spineless people, who defend their mates, when they are blatantly in the wrong

You just rendered your own rules a joke

Even your new one with sassy posting links to sites that for one was a holocasut denier, thrown out of labour and other Far left fake news and conspiracy sites. Now I am against any site being banned, but it proves it was nothing more than a ruse by you

Frankly, I think you made up that rule, to simple push smelly out.



well, of course he did


So again we find another person, who claims to stand for universal rights, but does not in the least. You are happy though as seen to allow people to be hateful and prejudice on your site, when it comes to Jews.

Idiots like you never learn from history

cracking post didge

I agree

Smelly wasn’t pushed out. Smelly left, he hasn’t been banned.

eddie wrote:

gelico wrote:


cracking post didge

I agree

Smelly wasn’t pushed out. Smelly left, he hasn’t been banned.

Why then is Ben allowing multiple fake news site being posted by Sassy then?

She just posted another one

Syl wrote:I cant stand Corbyn and I haven't really followed this story that closely, but.....
would it not be reasonable if you accuse someone of doing something to show them the proof you have?

There is no proof, Syl...!


It's all bollocks!!!

Tommy Monk wrote:

Syl wrote:I cant stand Corbyn and I haven't really followed this story that closely, but.....
would it not be reasonable if you accuse someone of doing something to show them the proof you have?

There is no proof, Syl...!


It's all bollocks!!!

Except 3 people, two critical in hospital

Is that bollocks?

That is evidence they were attacked by a nerve agent

Oh, Ben has logged off and run away for the night

What a surprise

Like i said, the whole thing was a ruse to push out smelly. Knowing he would never back down to being told what media sources he could or could not post.

Ben could prove me wrong of course and actually stand by his rule on such fake news sites

Again, I do not think any site should be banned and rather enjoy exposing how fake they are.

Night everyone

Syl wrote:I cant stand Corbyn and I haven't really followed this story that closely, but.....
would it not be reasonable if you accuse someone of doing something to show them the proof you have?

Actually, that is exactly what Internation Law says we are supposed to do.

This from a few days ago:

Independent technical experts from the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) will arrive in the UK tomorrow to kick off their investigation into the nerve agent used in the attempted assassinations of Mr Skripal and his daughter in Salisbury on 4 March.

The team from The Hague will meet with officials from the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory and the police to discuss the process for collecting samples, including environmental ones.

These will then be despatched to highly reputable international laboratories selected by the OPCW for testing with results expected to take a minimum of 2 weeks.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/investigators-from-chemical-weapons-watchdog-to-arrive-in-uk


The Police have said their investigations could take until the summer. But of course, some people like to pretend we know everything about it already lol

sassy wrote:

Syl wrote:I cant stand Corbyn and I haven't really followed this story that closely, but.....
would it not be reasonable if you accuse someone of doing something to show them the proof you have?

Actually, that is exactly what Internation Law says we are supposed to do.  

This from a few days ago:

Independent technical experts from the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) will arrive in the UK tomorrow to kick off their investigation into the nerve agent used in the attempted assassinations of Mr Skripal and his daughter in Salisbury on 4 March.

The team from The Hague will meet with officials from the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory and the police to discuss the process for collecting samples, including environmental ones.

These will then be despatched to highly reputable international laboratories selected by the OPCW for testing with results expected to take a minimum of 2 weeks.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/investigators-from-chemical-weapons-watchdog-to-arrive-in-uk


The Police have said their investigations could take until the summer.   But of course, some people like to pretend we know everything about it already lol

Ha ha

That does not state they have to give samples to the Russians

They do to the OPCW, which they have already said they are doing. Which I stated over a week ago, which your Craig Murray lied and said they were not

They will independently test this and either verify the results or disagree

Corbyn was saying we should give samples to the very person we suspect of doing this.

That is like handing over the murder weapon to the suspected murderer, who lives in a nother country. To see if he agrees that this was the gun that killed the victim. Who could then remove that evidence

Yeah, I am sure he is going to admit to this lol

Didge wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:



There is no proof, Syl...!


It's all bollocks!!!

Except 3 people, two critical in hospital

Is that bollocks?

That is evidence they were attacked by a nerve agent

No... that is not necessarily evidence that they were 'attacked'...


If they really have been exposed to some sort of nerve agent... then that is only evidence that they were in contact with some nerve agent at some point...


How this contact happened, is yet unestablished...


It is entirely possible that Skirpal and/or daughter were involved in some sort of trading/dealing in a shipment of whatever it was, and had contact with it because container was leaking while they passed it on to others...!?

Yeah many things are possible Tommy, including a cow jumping over the moon.

It shows you have no faith in our MI5, and more so back what the Russians claim

If some criminal element got their hands on this nerve agent. Its still  going to lead back to Russia, where it was made.

The Uk offered for this scenario to Russia, and they refused to cooperate.

That is telling in itself

You ignore that.

To say there is no evidence, is emphatically wrong

End of story and have no need to say anymore on the matter

Night

Show me the evidence of how they came in contact with this alleged nerve agent...?


And prove to me that the only country/place possible for manufacturing it, is Russia...?


If you cannot do this... then firstly, you cannot claim that any exposure was result of 'attack'... and secondly, you cannot claim that Russia was the manufacturer of whatever it was that was allegedly involved...!!!


Where is the evidence dodge...!?


Fact is... there is no evidence!!!

So you want high security clearance and again only want to believe, if you can see.

That does not mean there is no evidence

Doctors treating, as seen are dealing with patients for nerve agents

Its an agent only knonw to the Russians

To say that is not evidence when two people are critical in hospital agains proves how blind you are being

Your other scenario, will lead back to Russia, where it was made

You ignore the fact Putins enemies keep being eliminated

You offer no sound reason why anyone else would want to take out both father and daughter?

There is countless evidence, just some nobody like you, is not privy to this

Other nations are and back the UK. Or do you think they do so on a whim?

Fact is, there is evidence and only those blind and supporters of Putin/Corbyn, would claim otherwise.

Now I am not going to go around in circles of one of your merrygo rounds. You want to believe the Russians over our own intelligence service. Be my guest, but people in hospital from nerve agents is evidence. As such agents have signatures.

Dodgy didge said...

'So you want high security clearance and again only want to believe, if you can see.'


My answer...

No... basic evidence of where/when/how it is thought that Skirpal & daughter came into contact with this alleged nerve agent, should be established by now, and details/evidence should already have been made public... especially since the uk govt has charged ahead with the accusations they have made...


So, where is this evidence...?


What makes you think that 'high level clearance' is needed, to be able to see such basic evidence...!?



Dodgy didge said...

'Its an agent only knonw to the Russians'

And...

'Your other scenario, will lead back to Russia, where it was made'


My answer...

Both of your above claims are completely untrue!!!



Dodgy didge said...

'...people in hospital from nerve agents is evidence. As such agents have signatures.'


My answer...

Only evidence of some contact/exposure at some point... not evidence of 'attack'... not evidence of how contact/exposure happened... not evidence of origin of manufacture, as it could have been made by anyone...!!!




Show me some evidence of your claims...!!!???

Didge wrote:

Ben Mothafuckin' Reilly wrote:I think Austin put it best. Seriously, anybody who thinks Putin isn't a tyrant and a murderer with a huge chip on his shoulder against the West is not to be trusted.

Well based on your whitewashing, I guess you think its acceptable to hate and be prejudiced all Russians, if a majority support Putin.

Correct?

I replied to your whitewashing reply, defending antisemitism. Which is below

Which I was not surprised and have thus going to write also my reply here, as you are so crap at getting back to a report.

What Veya said

veya_victaous wrote:If the vast majority of Jews are Zionists
than Israel is a threat to world peace and Jews would be totally deserving of any prejudice or hate directed at them

GOOD thing most Jews are NOT ZIONISTS

What I replied


So in context, you are saying its absolutely fine to hate and be prejuice to all Jews, if the majority are zionists.
Based on the definition, that Zionism is a belief in having a historical home (which they now have) in Israel.

You think that is acceptable?

Wow

Even though no western nation classify Zionism, as extremism. Unless of course you take the Majority Arab view that does not accept the right of Israel to exist, thus appeasement to hate.

Now of course some Zionists are extremists, but based on your view, you have made it acceptable to hate and be prejudiced towards all Arabs. Based on a majority believeing in Islam. Where Islam has a fundemental doctrine to take over the world. I guess that is not a threat to world peace according to you. Even though I would never seek to be prejudiced or hate all Muslims because of this.

To back the view Israel is a threat to world peace and that by simple supporting its right to exist, is creating a threat to world peace, means that person sides with those that wish to see it cease to exist.

See what happens when you make something acceptable?

The reality is that the majority of Jews are zionists. Which means he thinks because of this, that Jews are deserving in hate and prejudice. And you dont think that is antisemitism.

Again, wow

This is why the far left have become the new racists and continually whitewash antisemitism

I suggest you actually research antisemitism, then write to the Simon Wiesenthal Center and let me know whether they agree with you, or rightly define you as a defender of antisemitism

http://www.wiesenthal.com/site/pp.asp?c=lsKWLbPJLnF&b=6212365

Even in your own country, they would class what he said as antisemitism

https://www.state.gov/s/rga/resources/267538.htm

I have absolutely no time for spineless people, who defend their mates, when they are blatantly in the wrong

You just rendered your own rules a joke

Even your new one with sassy posting links to sites that for one was a holocasut denier, thrown out of labour and other Far left fake news and conspiracy sites. Now I am against any site being banned, but it proves it was nothing more than a ruse by you

Frankly, I think you made up that rule, to simple push smelly out.

So again we find another person, who claims to stand for universal rights, but does not in the least. You are happy though as seen to allow people to be hateful and prejudice on your site, when it comes to Jews.

Idiots like you never learn from history

Zionism is Jewish Extremism. If the vast majority of Arabs where Muslims Extremists then they would deserve the same treatment

Again I'm not a hypocritical little Bitch like You, FUCK RELIGIOUS EXTREMISTS I don't pussy about taking sides in Religious Extremism like you.

And I COMPLTELTY reject their claim to a historical home , Since that's not the way the world works for any other group of people that were disposed A HELL of a lot more recently that the Jews.
Like the Palestinians themselves for example          

anyway, I came to post memes before noticing Pussy little Bitch's pathetic post

veya_victaous wrote:

Didge wrote:

Well based on your whitewashing, I guess you think its acceptable to hate and be prejudiced all Russians, if a majority support Putin.

Correct?

I replied to your whitewashing reply, defending antisemitism. Which is below

Which I was not surprised and have thus going to write also my reply here, as you are so crap at getting back to a report.

What Veya said



What I replied


So in context, you are saying its absolutely fine to hate and be prejuice to all Jews, if the majority are zionists.
Based on the definition, that Zionism is a belief in having a historical home (which they now have) in Israel.

You think that is acceptable?

Wow

Even though no western nation classify Zionism, as extremism. Unless of course you take the Majority Arab view that does not accept the right of Israel to exist, thus appeasement to hate.

Now of course some Zionists are extremists, but based on your view, you have made it acceptable to hate and be prejudiced towards all Arabs. Based on a majority believeing in Islam. Where Islam has a fundemental doctrine to take over the world. I guess that is not a threat to world peace according to you. Even though I would never seek to be prejudiced or hate all Muslims because of this.

To back the view Israel is a threat to world peace and that by simple supporting its right to exist, is creating a threat to world peace, means that person sides with those that wish to see it cease to exist.

See what happens when you make something acceptable?

The reality is that the majority of Jews are zionists. Which means he thinks because of this, that Jews are deserving in hate and prejudice. And you dont think that is antisemitism.

Again, wow

This is why the far left have become the new racists and continually whitewash antisemitism

I suggest you actually research antisemitism, then write to the Simon Wiesenthal Center and let me know whether they agree with you, or rightly define you as a defender of antisemitism

http://www.wiesenthal.com/site/pp.asp?c=lsKWLbPJLnF&b=6212365

Even in your own country, they would class what he said as antisemitism

https://www.state.gov/s/rga/resources/267538.htm

I have absolutely no time for spineless people, who defend their mates, when they are blatantly in the wrong

You just rendered your own rules a joke

Even your new one with sassy posting links to sites that for one was a holocasut denier, thrown out of labour and other Far left fake news and conspiracy sites. Now I am against any site being banned, but it proves it was nothing more than a ruse by you

Frankly, I think you made up that rule, to simple push smelly out.

So again we find another person, who claims to stand for universal rights, but does not in the least. You are happy though as seen to allow people to be hateful and prejudice on your site, when it comes to Jews.

Idiots like you never learn from history

Zionism is Jewish Extremism. If the vast majority of Arabs where Muslims Extremists then they would deserve the same treatment

Again I'm not a hypocritical little Bitch like You, FUCK RELIGIOUS EXTREMISTS I don't pussy about taking sides in Religious Extremism like you.

And I COMPLTELTY reject their claim to a historical home , Since that's not the way the world works for any other group of people that were disposed A HELL of a lot more recently that the Jews.
Like the Palestinians themselves for example          

You see this is wy I think some of the left are completely delusional.

Show me which western Governement that classes Zionism as extremism?

Its simple the belief in a return to their historical homeland, which if this was any other indegeneous people you would support. Now Israel has its historical homeland. Which Zionism, thus has adpated to believe in supporting the right of Israel to exist. That is not extremism. To claim it is extremism, thus means you do not think Israel should exist. Ironically yours is a colonial made country, do you think Australia should exist?

The very fact you do not even understand that Zionists can be religious, athiests, right wing, left wing, socialists, conservatives, secularists, shows you have no idea what you are talking about. Thuus using this as many people do, to spout hate against Jews.

Whilst there maybe some extremist Zionists, that does not mean Zionism is an extremist belief. Its simple the belief in their historical homeland. Where they formed their genesis as a people. The Arabs Genesis, was within the Arabian Peninsula.

You can reject their historical home, that is up to you, but iff you reject their right to Israel existing and the peoples self determination. Then you are emphatically antisemitic. As do you deny any other single group the right to a nation and self determination. By doing so, you render then the Palestinians not having the right to a nation or home.

Lets take a reality check here. Jews have been living there for well over 3,000 years.

After WW1. The League of Nations set up mandates throughout the Middle East. Which we have come to see form many of the nations that exist today (again you would have to deny their right to a homeland, as again the Arabs and Turks are colonialists through conquering these lands). Now in the British Mandate for Palestine. The area was promised to the Jews. This then changed and 72% of the Mandate for Palestine, was given to the Arabs. Many of which were recent migrants within the 18th century. The last 28% was meant for the Jews. The Arabs would not consider this and starting murdering Jews in a number of acts of violence, that went on throughout the 1920's and 1930's. This led to Jewish groups commiting acts of murders in the 1930's. 

In 1937, the British offered a Partitian plan through the Peel commision, which would have given the Arabs the majority of the land.



As you can see, this gave much of the land to the Arabs, and yet again the Arabs rejected this. They could not abide with Jews having the rightg to govern themselves in areas, that Jews were a majority.

This led to more violence by the Arabs, to lands, they had never ever been in control of as a Palestinian nation and only owned land there, by right of Turks. Who allocated land through conquering this land. Hardly a claim to actually owning the land. Of which many Jews legally bought land within the areas. (imagine people murdering immigrants today, simple for buying land and property in your country?) In 1939, the British white paper severely restricted the immigration off Jews to the mandate. This was to lead to hundreds of thousands of Jews being denied entry and thus dying in the Holocasut.

In 1947, we have the UN partition and again the Arabs rejected this and started a civil war within the British mandate. Again because they simple would not allow Jews to have self determination. The Jews agreed to this partition and as seen, later declared indepence, once the British had left. This led to Arab nations from all around the New state of Israel invading. With the sole intent to wipe out the Jews. Reminiscent of Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union invading Poland, not excepting that nations right to exist and self determination. Its the same situation. 

Against all the odds, the Jews defeated the Egyptians, Syrians and Held the Jordanians to a stand still. Now a ceasefire line was called by all nations. Which saw Jordan occupy, Judea (the actual area that formed the Jewish Tribe) and Samaria. What is now termed the West Bank. With Eygpt occupying Gaza. At no point during this time, did the people living there. Refer to themselves Palestinians or call for the creation of a Palestinian state within the West Bank Or Gaza.

This is evident by the creation of the PLO charter of 1964 that called for the destruction of israel. It never called for a state within Gaza and the West Bank. We have seen more wars against Israel, one which led to israel occupying the West Bank and Gaza. Israel later made peace with Jordan and Eygpt, which had israel make land concessions won during conflicts. Israel giving up land for peace. They withdrew from Gaza, again for peace and instead were subjected to a mass suicide bombing campaign from Gaza.

So clearly you are like the Palestinian authority, that would rather have conflict than peace and continued hate with israel. Simple as you do not want to recognise the right of this nation to exist.

That means its you that is the hater here. As I want the Palestinians to have a state, but 5 times its leaders have spurned the chance of doing so. They would rather hate Israel than have a state of their own and peace.

Even at best here, your hate of Israel, Zionists and Jews by extension is most definately xenophobic. Though clearly your hate of Jews and their right to self determination is antisemitic, as you back the right of others to self determination, like the Palestinians, but not the Jews.

Syl wrote:I cant stand Corbyn and I haven't really followed this story that closely, but.....
would it not be reasonable if you accuse someone of doing something to show them the proof you have?

Yes it would be reasonable. So far it's all speculation, so nothing will ever be proved one way or another.

Vintage wrote:I agree with Syl, the Russians should have the chance to examine the stuff although, I they aren't going to admit its theirs because it'll then be admitting to the whole thing or to at least admit its been stolen or appropriated by a rogue element, either way they loose face.

Yes, the right to confront your accusers implies the right to confront their evidence. But, in this case, there is no tribunal or court that is going to evaluate the evidence. That the Russians will deny it is theirs is a foregone conclusion...there are no evidentiary rules or standards to go by. So why go through the exercise?

Your so right Quill .

Original Quill wrote:

Vintage wrote:I agree with Syl, the Russians should have the chance to examine the stuff although, I they aren't going to admit its theirs because it'll then be admitting to the whole thing or to at least admit its been stolen or appropriated by a rogue element, either way they loose face.

Yes, the right to confront your accusers implies the right to confront their evidence.  But, in this case, there is no tribunal or court that is going to evaluate the evidence.  That the Russians will deny it is theirs is a foregone conclusion...there are no evidentiary rules or standards to go by.  So why go through the exercise?

Wrong Quill, it is going to be investigated by the OPCW - see https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/sshd-v-skripal-and-another-20180322.pdf

Very interested in this part of the evidence so far:

17.
I consider the following to be the relevant parts of the evidence. I shall identify the witnesses only by their role and shall summarise the essential elements of their evidence.

i) CC:
Porton Down Chemical and Biological Analyst

Blood samples from Sergei Skripal and Yulia Skripal were analysed and the findings indicated exposure to a nerve agent or related compound. The samples tested positive for the presence of a Novichok class nerve agent or closely related agent.

ii)
DD:
Porton Down Scientific Adviser

This was brought to court to allow for the taking of further blood samples so that the OPCW can investigate.


So, yesterday in an interview with Deutsche Welle (http://www.dw.com/en/boris-johnson-russias-position-in-skripal-case-is-increasingly-bizarre/a-43043873) Boris Johnson claimed directly Porton Down had told him they positively identified the nerve agent as Russian:

You argue that the source of this nerve agent, Novichok, is Russia. How did you manage to find it out so quickly? Does Britain possess samples of it?

Let me be clear with you … When I look at the evidence, I mean the people from Porton Down, the laboratory …

So they have the samples …

They do. And they were absolutely categorical and I asked the guy myself, I said, “Are you sure?” And he said there’s no doubt.

in fact they say, as above: The samples tested positive for the presence of a Novichok class nerve agent or closely related agent.

So now sassy is not linking the wackadoodle Craig Murray and his fake news website

https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2018/03/boris-johnson-a-categorical-liar/

Yet again, sassy as gullible as they come.

A conspiracist, who has no sources or links, and is known as a Russian stooge via wiki links and she still posts his views

sassy wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Yes, the right to confront your accusers implies the right to confront their evidence.  But, in this case, there is no tribunal or court that is going to evaluate the evidence.  That the Russians will deny it is theirs is a foregone conclusion...there are no evidentiary rules or standards to go by.  So why go through the exercise?

Wrong Quill, it is going to be investigated by the OPCW - see https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/sshd-v-skripal-and-another-20180322.pdf

Very interested in this part of the evidence so far:

17.
I  consider  the  following  to  be  the  relevant parts  of  the  evidence.  I  shall  identify  the witnesses  only  by  their  role  and  shall  summarise  the  essential  elements  of  their evidence.

i) CC:
Porton Down Chemical and Biological Analyst

Blood  samples  from  Sergei  Skripal  and  Yulia  Skripal  were  analysed  and  the findings indicated exposure to a nerve agent or related compound. The samples tested  positive  for  the  presence  of  a  Novichok  class  nerve  agent  or  closely related agent.

ii)
DD:
Porton Down Scientific Adviser

This was brought to court to allow for the taking of further blood samples so that the OPCW can investigate.


So, yesterday in an interview with Deutsche Welle ( http://www.dw.com/en/boris-johnson-russias-position-in-skripal-case-is-increasingly-bizarre/a-43043873 ) Boris Johnson claimed directly Porton Down had told him they positively identified the nerve agent as Russian:

   You argue that the source of this nerve agent, Novichok, is Russia. How did you manage to find it out so quickly? Does Britain possess samples of it?

   Let me be clear with you … When I look at the evidence, I mean the people from Porton Down, the laboratory …

   So they have the samples …

   They do. And they were absolutely categorical and I asked the guy myself, I said, “Are you sure?” And he said there’s no doubt.

in fact they say, as above:  The samples tested  positive  for  the  presence  of  a  Novichok  class  nerve  agent  or  closely related agent.

As dumb dumb has posted underneath me, I guess he doesn't like copies of the court papers or interviews with DW's Zhanna Nemtsova being circulated. After all, can't be true if it's on a British Court Judgement, can it.

You know exactly what i wrote sassy and yet again you post hearsay claims from that fake news site, a stooge of the Russians, from wiki links

Hence why Quill will rightly take with a pinch of salt

You see how you poorly tried to sneak such views in without any link and yet again I expose your deceit?

Not disputing the German media source, I am disputing the mentally deranged Craig Murray and his views

I mean this is what he is going off

"The samples tested  positive  for  the  presence  of  a  Novichok  class  nerve  agent  or  closely related agent."

What does he think closely related means?

It means we have the main signatures of this nerve agent, and this is one that is very closely related to ones we know of. It still of the same signature, just a variant, one we have not yet seen. Hence the desperation of this wackadoodle

He clearly missed out many important parts which I just read by the judge.

Tommy Monk wrote:

Didge wrote:

Except 3 people, two critical in hospital

Is that bollocks?

That is evidence they were attacked by a nerve agent

No... that is not necessarily evidence that they were 'attacked'...


If they really have been exposed to some sort of nerve agent... then that is only evidence that they were in contact with some nerve agent at some point...


How this contact happened, is yet unestablished...


It is entirely possible that Skirpal and/or daughter were involved in some sort of trading/dealing in a shipment of whatever it was, and had contact with it because container was leaking while they passed it on to others...!?

Reposted for didge...

Tommy Monk wrote:Dodgy didge said...

'So you want high security clearance and again only want to believe, if you can see.'


My answer...

No... basic evidence of where/when/how it is thought that Skirpal & daughter came into contact with this alleged nerve agent, should be established by now, and details/evidence should already have been made public... especially since the uk govt has charged ahead with the accusations they have made...


So, where is this evidence...?


What makes you think that 'high level clearance' is needed, to be able to see such basic evidence...!?



Dodgy didge said...

'Its an agent only knonw to the Russians'

And...

'Your other scenario, will lead back to Russia, where it was made'


My answer...

Both of your above claims are completely untrue!!!



Dodgy didge said...

'...people in hospital from nerve agents is evidence. As such agents have signatures.'


My answer...

That is only evidence of some contact/exposure at some point... not evidence of 'attack'... not evidence of how contact/exposure happened... not evidence of origin of manufacture, as it could have been made by anyone...!!!




Show me some evidence of your claims...!!!???

Reposted for didge...

Tommy Monk wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:



No... that is not necessarily evidence that they were 'attacked'...


If they really have been exposed to some sort of nerve agent... then that is only evidence that they were in contact with some nerve agent at some point...


How this contact happened, is yet unestablished...


It is entirely possible that Skirpal and/or daughter were involved in some sort of trading/dealing in a shipment of whatever it was, and had contact with it because container was leaking while they passed it on to others...!?

Reposted for didge...

Already answered, read back

Is this the best you can do, regurgitate points I already answered?

Can you show me any evidence that Skirpal amnd his daughter were involved in some sort of trading/dealing and had contact with, what ever form of crack you are smoking?

So explain this shady deal, that went wrong in regards to the reality, they were infected with nerve agents? Which would still lead back to the Russians. So now you think he is responsible for basically making himself a vegtable amnd his daughter?

Do you have intelligence of why they would need any such agents to then be infected themselves?

Sorry, but I draw the line at bat shit crazy and you Tommy, are one short of flying over the cuckoo nest

So how is it possoble they had dealings with what you claim dodgy people, using known russian nerve agents, based on intelligence?

Tommy Monk wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:Dodgy didge said...So you want high security clearance and again only want to believe, if you can see.'
My answer...
No... basic evidence of where/when/how it is thought that Skirpal & daughter came into contact with this alleged nerve agent, should be established by now, and details/evidence should already have been made 

So you think because two people who are now in critical condition, suffering from a nerve agent. Is not evidence, based on your view, its not known how and when it was administered?

Even though one just recently came from Russia, where she lived and the other lives in the UK?

Do you want me to dumb this down for you, on the where part?

Being the fact also another person, a Police officer, who came to the scene suffered from this in the UK?

Seriously, how many stupid pills do you take daily? Then explain to me why nobody on the plane she came on or in Russia is now suffering with this?

Not think of that stupid?  




I think, we can at least narrow that down to a few miles Tommy

You then end with more bollocks, claiming these details should be known by now

Guess, people missing for tens years should be known by now and any murder case unknown

You really are a prize dummy

The Russians know what happened now, this nerve agent was alive and well at Porten Down (quite possible) and got out in a cloud which travelled to Salisbury and just happened to settle on two Russians who happened to be in town.

Still no evidence...