Former Russian double agent seriously ill in Salisbury.

will be interesting to see how the Russian press report her video, looking amazingly well.
edit https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zN77GSVqZm0

'British man amazed that formerly ill woman looks "amazingly well" after two months of the best hospital treatment available.'

You think the UK hasn't/doesn't do the same?

The UK might, but I'd need evidence. In related news, 'we do it too' is not a justification for Russian assassinations.

Dr David Kelly would tell you his story if he could... But dead men tell no tales.

These journalists would tell you their story if they could. But dead men and women murdered by the Russian government tell no tales.
 
Strange how the focus shifts, was just a year ago islamic terrorists were all the rage. It was pretty much at the peak for us in the UK with the concert bombing. Now with boris johnson and theresa may screaming russia russia russia recently, half the population is now raging at Russia.

Ofc we weren't the first, our politicians followed americas lead as we always do.

Been living under a rock the past few years then
 
The UK might, but I'd need evidence. In related news, 'we do it too' is not a justification for Russian assassinations.

But equally you have zero evidence it was Russia who 100% conclusively did. They had nothing, zilch, nada to gain.

With Dr Kelly, he was leaking information that would potentially be extremely damaging to the government and its bloodlust and warmongering. The story changed repeatedly as to how he died, which the British State officially kept changing. To top it off they have the matter under lock and key for 70years!


These journalists would tell you their story if they could. But dead men and women murdered by the Russian government tell no tales.

Russia might, but I'd need evidence.

Your problem Evan is that even if it came from the horses mouth you would still fight tooth and nail to disagree. Prime example was our Clinton email scandal from a couple of years ago. That case was a fix. Because a mishandled investigation said she did no wrong you trust that dodgy investigation. And right now you are questioning how the investigation was mishandled. Even if the next round of special counsel finds it was mishandled and charges/indictments should be made you would still disagree. Clinton lied repeatedly as umpteen YT videos show. Comey let Clinton off the hook before even speaking to her.

Another fine example: Bernie Sanders had the primary rigged against him... You post drivel and opinion pieces from tainted sources pontificating your pomposity, while failing to acknowledge why the highest ranking stinkers in the DNC had to resign (then miraculously sucked up directly by the Clinton campaign).

There is literally no point arguing with you because you believe things spouted by dubious people who have repeatedly been caught doing wrong. But because they got off on a technicality its AOK.

I suppose you think the IRS did not target conservatives either. Actually don't answer as I would rather save a few neurons and a few seconds of my time.

Edit: To highlight my point, didn't you claim that the odds of election fraud in the US were 6 billion to 1?
 
Last edited:
But equally you have zero evidence it was Russia who 100% conclusively did. They had nothing, zilch, nada to gain.

With Dr Kelly, he was leaking information that would potentially be extremely damaging to the government and its bloodlust and warmongering. The story changed repeatedly as to how he died, which the British State officially kept changing. To top it off they have the matter under lock and key for 70years!

So you talk about no evidence, then insinuate things about the British government while using emotive and OTT terms like bloodlust and warmongering :-/

Can you not see how that can been seen and Hypocritical?

Also I think you post drivel as well, anyone blindly defending one side or the other is always going to be wrong ultimately.
 
So you talk about no evidence, then insinuate things about the British government while using emotive and OTT terms like bloodlust and warmongering :-/

Highlighting the double standard. I don't doubt Russia kills journalists. The difference is people on here think journalists have the Damocles sword over their head and are killed on a whim.

Warmongering and bloodlust... Very apt and accurate terms.

Can you not see how that can been seen and Hypocritical?

My intent is/was to highlight the double standard. A point you seem to have missed.

Also I think you post drivel as well, anyone blindly defending one side or the other is always going to be wrong ultimately.

I'll file your opinion for no response.

Anyone blindly following one side is always going to be wrong. Yes, you're pushing an open door there
 
Highlighting the double standard. I don't doubt Russia kills journalists. The difference is people on here think journalists have the Damocles sword over their head and are killed on a whim.

Warmongering and bloodlust... Very apt and accurate terms.



My intent is/was to highlight the double standard. A point you seem to have missed.



I'll file your opinion for no response.

Anyone blindly following one side is always going to be wrong. Yes, you're pushing an open door there

If you honestly think all that then I would watch out the secrete police might come and kill you

while I will never not say that all governments inc own own do shady stuff , to paint the Russian government in such a way they seem to do no wrong even with what they have and have not done in the past seems one sided .

You trying to highlight a double standard if that was your aim came across as a double standard if I'm being honest.
 
If you honestly think all that then I would watch out the secrete police might come and kill you

Well we do have political policing. I'll watch my back.

while I will never not say that all governments inc own own do shady stuff , to paint the Russian government in such a way they seem to do no wrong even with what they have and have not done in the past seems one sided

I'm fine acknowledging all governments do bad. Some worse than others but to make the statement that Russia is ANY different is fallacy.

You trying to highlight a double standard if that was your aim came across as a double standard if I'm being honest.

When drawing that type of contrast it would invariably arrive at my statement being hypocritical. The difference is I've presented the balance to deliberately show double standards presented by the poster omitting the UK states actions
 
In that case could you tell us some shady stuff the Russian government have done if you acknowledge all governments do bad ?

I tried a similar approach in SC a few days ago with someone who claimed we didn't know Russia was hostile (back when they invaded Georgia and used a radioactive weapon in London). I asked him what made them hostile now that didn't apply before... I didn't get a response.

It would be nice to see if the pro Russian poster responds to your question. I'm not sure many other countries actively bump off journalists or cover up their armed forces shooting down an airliner... when the US did that to an Iranian one they admitted it (and bizarrely the officer in charge got to stay in the US Navy but there was no cover up, just an admission that they screwed up). For context they had entered Iranian waters after the US ship's helicopter had just been attacked by machine gun fire from Iranian speed boats and they did try to contact the aircraft they misidentified 10 times. They also paid compensation.

Would be nice if Russia admitted its mistake and paid compensation, then again that would also mean admitting it had invaded Ukraine.
 
In that case could you tell us some shady stuff the Russian government have done if you acknowledge all governments do bad ?

Exactly the same as us minus destabilizing a massive region known as the Middle East.

Russia do, but not limited to: Dodgy arms deals, supporting dictators, providing shady money, conducting cyber espionage, putting pressure on smaller states, threatening by their presence the sovereignty of smaller nations, using their resources and political influence to get a desired outcome.

Now from the above paragraph change Russia to the US or UK or France... Fits perfectly
 
Exactly the same as us minus destabilizing a massive region known as the Middle East.

Russia do, but not limited to: Dodgy arms deals, supporting dictators, providing shady money, conducting cyber espionage, putting pressure on smaller states, threatening by their presence the sovereignty of smaller nations, using their resources and political influence to get a desired outcome.

Now from the above paragraph change Russia to the US or UK or France... Fits perfectly

But if you were to say include, invading neighbouring states, annexing territory of neighbouring states, abducting border guards from neighbouring states, using a radioactive weapon in the middle of a major capital city in an assassination, using nerve agent as a weapon in an assassination attempt, actively killing journalists who write critical articles about the state, shooting down a civilian airliner then actively trying to cover it up/deny it ever happened....

Well you can't really say the same about the UK, US, France etc...
 
Is that the go to response now when you cant answer.

Oh are you feeling ok.
Youre ranting
Its not coherent (even though my reply suggests it is)

Just post the proof of your claims you ct nut.
 
Is that the go to response now when you cant answer.

Oh are you feeling ok.
Youre ranting
Its not coherent (even though my reply suggests it is)

Just post the proof of your claims you ct nut.

Claims of what exactly? I asked you to clarify what you're specifically referring to in the previous post.

For example are you completely unaware that Russia invaded Georgia or annexed the Crimea?
 
Lol im not the idiot who didnt know about the concert bombing last year and i provided proof when asked.

Now your turn. Proof of all your claims in that post
 
Lol im not the idiot who didnt know about the concert bombing last year and i provided proof when asked.

what are you referring to exactly?

Now your turn. Proof of all your claims in that post

That is potentially a big waste of time, can you answer my question and be more specific about what you're referring to please? For example:

Are you completely unaware that Russia invaded Georgia or annexed the Crimea?

You're avoiding the question and don't seem to be willing to engage, you appear to just be trolling:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_lioning

I suspect you're well aware of most of what I've posted about so there is little point in asking for links/evidence other than to waste my time. I'd ask you to be more specific, what specifically are you unaware of that I mentioned in my post?
 
Back
Top Bottom